Posted on 03/26/2003 8:08:17 PM PST by KQQL
The former supreme allied commander of Nato has accused US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of putting allied troops at risk through poor planning.
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.
Troops had been tied up in "messy fighting" around Nasiriyah and Baghdad, he said, leading to "logistics problems".
He added that hopes of a quick victory spurred by a popular revolt against Saddam had been dashed.
"The simple fact is that the liberation didn't quite occur. They didn't rise up."
Other war veterans have also spoken out against the early stages of war planning.
Miscalculations
Ralph Peters, a military scientist and former Army officer, wrote in the Washington Post that a coalition victory would be achieved "despite serious strategic miscalculations by the office of the Defence Secretary".
The "shock and awe" strategy of aerial bombardment had failed to shatter the will of Saddam's regime, he said, and if anything had encouraged greater resistance.
"It delayed essential attacks on Iraq's military capabilities," said Mr Peters. "This encouraged at least some Iraqis in uniform to believe they had a chance to fight and win.
"Now our forces advancing on Baghdad face the possibility of more serious combat than would otherwise have been the case."
Coalition commander General Tommy Franks's draft invasion plan proposed using four or five heavy divisions moving slowly towards Baghdad.
New warfare
Mr Rumsfeld is said to have rejected this, complaining that it was too similar to the strategy used in the 1991 Gulf War. Instead he insisted on a smaller, lighter force relying heavily on special forces and air power.
Retired US Army General Barry McCaffrey, commander of the 24th Infantry Division 12 years ago, said Mr Rumsfeld had ignored warnings that he was underestimating the number of troops needed.
"I think he thought these were generals with feet planted in World War Two who didn't understand the new way of warfare," he said.
"If the Iraqis actually fight it's going to be brutal, dangerous work and we could take a couple to 3,000 casualties."
Mr Rumsfeld insisted his strategy was working.
"It's a good plan everybody agrees to, and it is a plan that in four and a half or five days has moved ground forces to within a short distance of Baghdad."
A screw up would entail some catastrophe. Right? NO Iraqi military unit has been able to seriously disrupt the supply line. What we see are local militias that take pop shots on our convoy which do little more than delay the line at times. Nothing is PERFECT especially in WAR, and from everything I have heard and read there are no major problems on the front line with supplies and fuel. And like I said, more reinforcements are coming in all the time to protect our supply line.
FOX showed a clip of a reporter asking Clark a question.
Clark used his cell to call CNN for permission to answer.
CNN told Clark not to answer, so he walked away from the reporter.
Not only does he kill hundreds of civilians, hit the Chinese Embassy, lose to the Russians (badly), but he's a CNN puppet.
Perhaps a RPG seeking self propelled round that they can fire from a chain gun!
Not in this administration. they bend over backwards to give factual and verified info.
You are wrong.
So are the rest of them.
Dear armchair on-the-dole retired military experts, shock and awe was designed to replace carpet bombing with prescision bombing. The book, if you take the time to stop counting your dole money and read it, is a blue print for how to use the new precision guided munitions without killing lots of innocent civilians. Are you suggesting that carpet bombing Baghdad would have been 'essential attacks on Iraq's military capabilities' ? How would old fashioned brute strength carpet bombing performed better here then prescision guided shock and awe ? Apparently you have also failed to notice that an uprising did ocur in Basra, which preceded a pullout of Iraqi troops. That small uprising apparently forced the Iraqis out into the open for another turkey shoot. Now 'Saddam' has ordered all his thugs to shoot any Iraqi who does not fight Americans. How long do you armchair on-the-dole retired military experts think the Iraqi people will put up with that ?
Who cares what is said by an 'military officer' who couldn't tell the difference between real and cardboard-cutout tanks?
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.