Posted on 09/24/2003 1:31:23 PM PDT by Shermy
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq was "a perfect example" of military domination while failing to achieve victory, retired general and Democratic presidential hopeful Wesley Clark wrote in a new book.
Clark, who joined the 2004 race last week, also said he learned in November 2001 that the Bush administration's plan for invading Iraq and ousting President Saddam Hussein had been part of a broader five-year military campaign in seven countries that Washington accused of supporting terrorism.
He believed that would be a mistake, Clark wrote in "Winning Modern Wars. Iraq, Terrorism and the American Empire" to be published by Public Affairs next month.
Clark wrote that a senior military officer told him on a visit to the Pentagon in November 2001 that the U.S. was planning to go against Iraq but there was more to it. After Iraq, the plan called for targeting Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.
"He said it with reproach -- with disbelief, almost -- at the breadth of the vision," Clark wrote. "I moved the conversation away, for this was not something I wanted to see moving forward either.
"What a mistake! I reflected -- as though the terrorism were simply coming from those states," said Clark, whose book is a military, diplomatic and strategic analysis rather than a personal account of his long military career. Clark, a four-star Army general, was Supreme Allied Commander in Europe from 1997 to 2000.
Clark, 58, said that speculation during the summer, when he was still writing the book, that he might participate in the 2004 election against Republican President Bush "had no bearing on my analysis."
TACTICS AND LEADERSHIP
He argued in the book that by pursuing Iraq, the U.S. war against the al Qaeda global network of Islamist militants blamed for the Sept. 11 attacks was subordinated.
Of the Iraq military campaign, Clark wrote that the "brilliancy of the tactics and leadership" in the battlefield "disguised fundamental flaws in strategy."
"Needless risks were taken with the force structure; there was inadequate planning for the postconflict phase; and vital international support was carelessly disregarded.
"It has thus far been a perfect example of dominating an enemy force but failing to secure the victory."
If this is classified information from the Pentagon .. then Clark is a complete moron
If it's not .. Clark is still a complete moron to being printing this kind of stuff
That's so funny, I could almost laugh.
The military is not supposed to develop policy, it is supposed to implement policy. The President is the one who (with Congress) decides what to do. When that is decided, the military better be ready to do it.
That's because his long military career doesn't account too well: frying the civilians at Waco, getting fired in Bosnia, getting fired at NATO....he's a lot better off justing taking cheap b.s. shots at the guys who know what they're doing.
I don't know that it's so much classified information...I'd say going up against Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan is pretty much a no-brainer.
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.