Posted on 05/03/2004 4:53:43 PM PDT by elfman2
Freepers have been hotly debating whether politicians or military commanders made the decision to cancel the Fallujahn offensive.
Today Fox News Live’s Jon Scott (I believe) interviewed Jim Michaels (USA Today Reporter) just back from Fallujah. I transcribed the relevant portion of the interview. In summary he said that the Marines were told to stop the attack by Administrator Bremer under pressure from the Iraqi Governing Council.
MICHAELS – “No one [in the Marines] was happy with the cease fire. The American contractors were killed.
“They got the order to go in, as we know, on a big offensive. They were in the offensive for whatever, seven or eight days and boom the politicians said no, hold back, there’s too many casualties.
“The governing council, the Iraqi governing council, was really upset. They went to Mr. Bremer. Mr. Bremer in turn sort ‘a put in the order to hold back.
“While they were in this cease fire meanwhile the insurgents were in there, the insurgents were in there rearming re-supplying you know, taking advantage of of the lull in activities, so they were in a real bind here, and they really had no choice, they say, except to come up with the idea for a Fallujah Brigade.
“Otherwise these guys would still be in there and the ceasefire would still be going on, and these talks that they were having were going nowhere. The sheiks (sp?) were just kind ‘a sipping tea with coalition officials and were nowhere, It was just getting nowhere at all. “
SCOTT –“So very quickly Jim, Do the bad folks in Fallujah think that they’ve won?”
MICHAELS – “They do indeed! They’re running around the past couple of days, celebrating and saying you know that they’ve fought things to a stand still. They’re really taking a propaganda victory out of this. “
“They’re really running around saying, you know, they fought the American forces to a standstill. You know they’re pushing it for all it’s worth.”
SCOTT –“So how does that effect their overall strategy to win the hearts and minds of the the Iraqis - the fact that they’re claiming a victory in Fallujah?
MICHAELS – Well pol… It doesn’t help. And it’s one of the biggest fears that the Marines have is that a week, 10 days down the road, this things going to continue to snowball, and and these guys are going to claim victory, and it presents a BIG propaganda problem for the American forces there. It its a big risk.
"The Marines said that they had no choice, that they were in a stand off and the ceasefire whas going nowhere."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
You follow the order of Mr. Bremer when the CIC’s word is filtered down to you that you cooperate with him. If his wishes morph into your orders, whatever the path, you take orders from Bremer.
Maybe I missed something. This is what I get from this sentence and the entire post you made: the Marines would have fallen into a military catastrophe had they went into Fallujah, and thatnk God for the politicians getting involved?
Time is on AMERICA'S side here.
Say that around November if we don't make some headway here, i.e. taking care of Fallujah. The Marines could have already done this had it not been for politicos sticking their claws where they don't belong.
You are right on with that comment.
Really, I read them all the opposite.
Politicians preventing the Marines from a large scale offensive is all that I’m focused on. It was a forced cease fire that they could not lift.
When the Marines were not allowed to fight the way they believe is right, they did just about what I speculated the other night with you. They said screw this, prematurely brought in this force that’s only appropriate for policing a pacified city, and pulled back.
I acknowledged many times that the Fallujah Brigade was a Marine creation. I have little problem with it as long as the Marines are allowed to resume the offensive. They can lead with it and have it whipped out in the first 30 minutes for all I care. Just unhook their leash.
I am seeing some pretty negative things going on in Iraq, but I have to agree with you. Bush has done some amazing work in a very short period of time. I am just concerned now that we have politicians getting involved in battles for cities. We cannot do that. It never worked in the past until after a war had been won and then the military had to be 'reigned' in. Until there is absolute victory, you have to let the military do what they do best; fight and win wars. They did not clear Fallujah, and now it is apparent, as many of us have said, that the politicos have gotten involved. I do not have faith in our politicians fighting our wars. I do have faith in the military.
Regardless of how many good things Bush has done, if he starts tying the hands of the military, he is making an unwise choice.
The military is an instrument used, when necessary, to secure political objectives. End of story!
I've been trying to figure out what happened and who told whom to do what. Very perplexing.
Concur
I find it incredible that someone so articulate could say such a thing. Are perhaps you, like WOSG, under the impression that this is about who created the Fallujah brigade, rather than who ordered the cease fire?
I’m only concerned with who ordered the cease fire. I said back in post #1 that, " we now have un-contradicted information on who made the decision to halt the attack on Fallujah." A cease fire which can’t be restarted on their own terms is a halting of an attack. I’m only focused on the cease fire.
You then passed me this quote that you consider a contradiction, " "Consultations about the new force went to the upper echelons of the US command in Iraq (news - web sites) but not as far as the Pentagon, he said.""
This is speaking of who was “consulted" for empowering the “Fallujah Brigade”.
It’s not speaking of who “decided” to switch off power to the “Marine Brigade”.
That’s the ceasefire. It prevented their full scale attack on Fallujah, the only way Marines are trained to take a city.
Are we clear now? Have we been arguing about two separate decisions?
Considering the military to simply be an “instrument” implies that the decision of how to play it should reside with another. To a very large degree, a military campaign has to be planned from within. Politicians decide on objectives and parameters. The military plans strategies and methods. There is much back and forth between the two, but each has their expertise.
Problems erupt when the military is attempted to be played from the outside like “an instrument” while in action. Inserting unexpected rules of engagement or objectives can cost more lives as the military scrambles to accomplish an objective that they prepared for with other means. This is indicative of Vietnam, Lebanon, Somalia, and now Fallujah.
Respecting the military’s autonomy as a division of an organization, subservient to the CIC, is critical to their effectiveness and their future.
On second thought, I need to add “subservient to the Constitution” to that.
Succinct, well said.
Last night at a rally in Michigan, President Bush stated to a crowd of thousands & assembled media that FALLUJAH & NAJAF will be dealt with by American forces if necessary, but we're first giving Iraqis a chance. His words were very careful, explicit & clear.
The politician president is in charge of the plan and he explains the plan succinctly -- as it should be -- and it's a good plan too.
Now, back to the propaganda bought into by some on the right -- hook, line and sinker.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.