Skip to comments.
RUMSFELD UNDER FIRE(Wesley Clark has accused Rumsfeld of putting troops at risk )
SKY NEWS ^
| 03/26/2003
| SKYNEWS
Posted on 03/26/2003 8:08:17 PM PST by KQQL
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 481-485 next last
To: WRhine
Agreed- in fact- I would call the number of coalition casualties simply amazing since we are engaging tougher resitance than we did in the first Gulf War. I saw Al Haig on TV last night and he was responding to some ridiculous question about the "unexpected resistance" from Iraqi forces. He smirked and camly replied to the 30 something news girl that 20 dead in a week of fighting with 2/3's of a country controlled is nothing to 500 dead a week at the height of the Viet Nam war. Perfect perspective.
To: WRhine
I completely agree. Cut off the head and the periferal problems will resolve themselves.
To: DoughtyOne
We're fifty miles from Baghdad, and the couch potatoes are falling appart. Good Lord, we only started this one week ago. On the other hand, we knew that resistance was going to be light in the south and that the bulk of Iraqi defense was going to be closer to Saddam's power base. What we didn't account for was the 30K fedayeen - who are essentially Saddam's Special Forces - doing what SF traditionally does: disrupt the lines of communication.
Yes, we will win, but it will be longer and more costly than we thought.
103
posted on
03/26/2003 8:53:11 PM PST
by
Archangelsk
(No battle plan survives first contact.)
To: KQQL
While I am for overwhelming force and a bottomless supply line supporting our troops, Wesley Clark is a Klinton era whore who is much more a political slut than a soldier.
That said, I'll be unforgiving if our troops are stupidly endangered or not 400% supported.
There's thin reporting at maximum supporting Clark's contentions.
104
posted on
03/26/2003 8:53:13 PM PST
by
jimt
To: KQQL
I think Wesley is gay; no joke.
105
posted on
03/26/2003 8:53:47 PM PST
by
Porterville
(Screw the grammar, full posting ahead.)
To: AaronInCarolina
Wesley "The Slime" Clark is Clinton's Slut, bought and paid for.As is General McCaffrey, who served a Clinton's drug czar. Just accept it. All of the nay-saying of the so-called expert analysts really just boils down to one thing... whether they voted for Bush or whether they voted for Gore. It's that simple. This truism is also valid in all of anti-war demonstrations. I wager you'd likely never find one of the demonstrators who didn't vote for Gore or someone even further left. We just have to hang in there and bear the naked politics, and we will be proven right in the end.
This could be printed onto card stock and handed out at demonstrations as well as taped above television screens.
The same media machine which lied that Florida polls were closed and sought to prevent servicemen and women voting now moans doom and gloom.
106
posted on
03/26/2003 8:55:37 PM PST
by
PhilDragoo
(Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
To: KQQL
Wesley Clark said Mr Rumsfeld's insistence on a smaller invasion force had left troops vulnerable and the 300-mile oil supply line between Kuwait and Basra open to guerilla attack. Why does Clark assume that he knows the final size of our invasion force?
107
posted on
03/26/2003 8:55:47 PM PST
by
FreeReign
(V5.0 Enterprise Edition)
To: WRhine
>> I think Rummy has been right on this. This blitzing run towards Baghdad has caught Saddam & Co. off guard. Maybe this is why our forces have been able to cross just about every
No, they anticipated and prepared very well, heeding the lessons of GW1. Our heavy armor charged up the open dessert through hostile territory, and now has a ~300 mile supply line heavily exposed to enemy action. This is a complete screw-up.
To: KQQL
Retired Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey started this UPRISE AGAINST Rummy....and Clark piled on.. After McCaffrey did such a splendid job winning the war on drugs.
What.
109
posted on
03/26/2003 8:56:54 PM PST
by
PhilDragoo
(Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
To: info_scout
The 101 is reported to be on station now. yes, they were needed for extra protection from the technicals, but that is what they do dummy!
The 4th was to go into turkey, but that got screwed. As it turns out, a lighter force was all that was needed. if fact, they have not needed anything up to now. We now have ability to put assets there if needed and the 4th is deploying to back up the southern cities that have cased problems while the 3rd and 101 go to Bagdad.(plus many others comming in from the southeast.
Everything is just fine! The food aid is being unloaded. The Iraqis will really appreciate this and the dummies in Basra will fold soon.
The weather is georgeous for shootin fish in a bucket! The Iraqis are out gunned to the max! We own the air and space above!
I see nothing to worry about.
To: KQQL
Iraqi Dead - 25,000 - 35,000
U.S. Dead - 24
Yep, this strategy just isn't working.
More people die in accidents in California in an average week than died in the first week of Iraqi Freedom. California, surrender your cars before its too late!
111
posted on
03/26/2003 8:59:44 PM PST
by
Russell Scott
(Iraqi soldier, is it really worth dying for the Butcher of Baghdad?)
To: wirestripper
What are you, one of Clarks bunkie buddies? This statement is total BS! The following is another of Bozo's comments from another thread! Makes you wonder where his sympathies lie!
"Might better follow the example of cooler heads in the Islamic world with prayers for peace."
112
posted on
03/26/2003 9:01:25 PM PST
by
F-117A
To: gov_bean_ counter
The interesting thing is that few know how many troups are in the field. Clark certainly doesn't. He doesn't know the plan. He doesn't know where they are deployed. Yet, this doesn't stop him from taking challenging positions based on very little information, like a lot of politicians. I concur with others about his less than stellar military career. He's another Clinton crony that was promoted WAY past his ability and competence.
113
posted on
03/26/2003 9:02:34 PM PST
by
WRhine
To: wirestripper
First, no need for personal attacks and name calling. It's really insecure.
Bottom line, it's not all coming up roses. Way too light a force was sent up north. The eastern line of advance has been abandoned. Mobile comabat units (i.e. 101st) originally intended to be available up north are now redeployed to protect supply lines.
This was a very risky plan. Just two days ago the spin doctors were heralding this as a 'brilliant plan'. Obviously it's NOT.
To: info_scout
~300 mile supply line heavily exposed to enemy action. This is a complete screw-up. Yes indeed, that sure would be a problem if the so called enemy had arty or even a friggin Army, which they don't.
These technicals are nothing but a bunch of worked up Islamist idiots with AKs and grenades.
They are at best a damn nuisance.
To: F-117A
>>> The following is another of Bozo's comments
More name calling. We all have opinions, but personal attacks betray insecurety.
Comment #117 Removed by Moderator
To: info_scout
First, no need for personal attacks and name calling. It's really insecureI was actually being nice!
:As to the spin doctors, you answered your own question. What spin are you believing now?
To: Archangelsk
"we knew that resistance was going to be light in the south"
As Rumsfeld has pointed out, we DONT KNOW that, and we didnt know it. Nothing about the future is "knowable". It is all speculation.
Enough of this media echo chamber of demanding speculation, then assuming it is knowledge and then demanding heads roll when 'expectations' that are unreasonable were not met.
We DID KNOW that war is uncertain. We do know Saddam would play tricks. He has. Leaving fedayeen in southern Iraq should NOT be unexpected, since he organized many thousands of them. Fortunately, his tricks wont change the outcome and have inflicted only a few casualties so far. His WMD may be played - it may not. The "urban stalingrad" card maybe played, maybe not. WE DONT KNOW.
We do know that victory is certain because our will and our strength is overwhelming. That is ALL we know.
119
posted on
03/26/2003 9:08:57 PM PST
by
WOSG
(Liberate Iraq! Lets Roll! now!-)
To: wirestripper
>>>They are at best a damn nuisance.
For a 'damn nuisance', they are effecting major overall of our strategy. The proof is in the pudding.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 481-485 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson