RUMSFELD UNDER FIRE(Wesley Clark has accused Rumsfeld of putting troops at risk )

SKY NEWS ^ | 03/26/2003 | SKYNEWS

[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."

[info_scout]

There mission is to further the objectives of the campaign, and rightly so. It is absolutely NOT to provide you or I or anyone else factual information. Welcome to reality.

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ping list.

[Cold Heat]

I am afaid that it is you who have no grasp of reality. You have pre-determined opinion that does not fit the facts or what your own eyes see.

That's about it!

[nopardons]

No, dear, using YOUR stated position, re THIS war, D-Day WAS a debacle; that's my point. You don't know much history, war tactics, logicical reasoning, nor the meaning of debacle. Get yourself a GOOD dictionary and many books about past wars/conflicts/battles.

Neither you, nor I, nor anyone outside of Saddam's inner circle, knows if he is alive, dead, seriously wounded, and far less about those who were with him. Yet and all, YOU ( oh wonder brain ) claim that this first 7, s-e-v-e-n , days of this war, and all that has ensued during this time ( 24 American dead ) is some sort of a debacle. WHY IS THAT ? Are YOU being briefed,privately, by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Rummy, and President Bush ? Are YOU an " authority " on battle manuevers, at one of the academies ? Are YOU in the field, right now ?

You're nothing but a little " armchair warrior ", who thankfully is in charge of NOTHING. info_scout ? You scout info ? Okay, then give info and refrain from backing those whose ONLY wish is to see us fail.

[info_scout]

>>>I talk with a accent.

No problem, I proudly speak with a southern accent, and shouldn't have made the grammer jab. Let's be civil.

[Grampa Dave]

WESLEY CLARK, YOU A$$HOLE!

[WOSG]

You are proving my point!

" The strategy was to ... Further, the plan ..."

Really? Where was this plan published? How do you know? How are you aware of the timeline?

Unless you are a Pentagon planner you are *guessing* and/or relaying media (dis)information and guesstimates.

Pentagon says the plan is 'on track'. You nor I have any basis to dispute that.

[nicollo]

Thank you!

Btw, Sec. Powell said something diplomatically unkind in his interview last night about all the criticism coming from "retired Generals who used to work for me."

[OldFriend]

General Shinseki (of beret infamy) is behind this negative bullship coming out of the Pentagon. There are a few generals who know their days are numbered so they are doing what dems do best. LIE, DISTORT, DESTROY, ETC.

[info_scout]

>>> Getting your info from the N.Y. Slimes and CNN, only, are you ?

No, actually I'll listen to anyone's point of view. It's up to each of us to weigh the facts and form an opinion. According to one network, 'we report, you decide'. Nice concept, but objective and qualitative sources are rather scarce. Regards.

[nopardons]

Is English NOT your mother tongue ? Now, you don't even know the meaning of " screw up "> Is your REAL name William Jefferson Blythe Clinton ? Do you also have grave difficulty with the word : IS ?

You don't know what you're talking about; however, you jjust keep jabbering away. ROTFLMSO

[OldFriend]

Rummy was referring to McCaffrey. Powell also mocked those generals who used to work for him, now out there on TV with NO knowledge of the plan.

[OldFriend]

And dont' forget that soon after Clark left the military he discovered he had jewish roots.

[Cold Heat]

I am being kind tonight!

I love to have a reasoned discussion about things, ideas of all kinds. But, there are some folks who make statements that are so far off base that I challenge their metal.

All I am getting is plastic so far!

[nopardons]

Thanks for some much needed corroboration, re W. Clark, the self aggrandizing egoist, who lashes out at everyone else's capabilities.

[WRhine]

They have forced significant changes in force deployment and timelines. It is a major srew-up.

I'll tell you what is "significant", "significant" is when a Panzer division completely busts up your line and isolates your advanced forces for WEEKS. Time to get real. It's a shame you aren't leading this war effort. We could use you. You KNOW everything. Let's just forget that Tommy Franks said our military expects that events will never go exactly as planned and that as things change adjustments will be made.

[TLBSHOW]

I am all right, thanks. I am glad you had a chance to read it, I thought it showed the treason media really good.

And Clark for what he is, a commie rat!

[OldFriend]

78 days to bring Serbia into submission from the air, and this ba$tard is complaining about the amazing week in Iraq????????????

[info_scout]

>>> Nobody-- nobody predicted this. It's only being used now as a criticism.

It's their (military strategists) freaking job to predict this, or more accurately to identify risks and assign confidence factors. Their obviously out of plan at this point.

[swheats]

Scout who's info are you listening to? Al Jazeera and other Arab tv has nothing good to say about this mission. Never will.

How can you explain the facts, of 3 airfields seized, the port is demined and aid is coming through, and Saddam's Republican Guard coming out of their dug out positions only to be taken out of commission?

Now, who's been forced where?