Posted on 04/11/2004 9:52:47 PM PDT by Doctor Raoul
Right now, The Drudge Report has a link in red titled, "TIME MAG QUOTES RETIRED ARMY GENERAL: 'THERE ARE NO MORE AMERICAN TROOPS TO SEND TO IRAQ'..." (Click here to see the Time story.) When you get there, it's: C O V E R Here's the part by Barry McCaffery:
There are no more U.S. troops to send to Iraq. That's why we need 80,000 or more troops added to the U.S. Army. Congress is allowing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to dig in his heels and try to maintain a foreign policy based on a grossly undermanned U.S. military. The key question isn't whether the 1st Cavalry Division is going to get run out of Baghdad—it's not. The key question is, if you've got 70% of your combat battalions in the U.S. Army deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, South Korea and elsewhere, can you maintain this kind of muscular presence in that many places? The answer is no. But if we take action now to increase the size of the Army by 80,000 soldiers, we'll be able to handle this global reach. The key would be to activate nine National Guard brigades in the next 18 months and convert them into active-duty soldiers, allowing the reservists to go back to their communities. The transfer of political authority on June 30 is extremely premature. By that date, there will not be a sovereign government with any political legitimacy. And here's another challenge we face: we need to put the training of Iraqi security services—the police, army, border patrol and others—solely under the control of the U.S. military instead of the Coalition Provisional Authority and give these Iraqi recruits more money. Iraq is costing us $4 billion a month, and only a tiny percent of that has gone directly to support the creation of Iraqi security forces. We should also transfer authority for security policy in Iraq from Rumsfeld to Secretary of State Colin Powell because the most important tasks are now diplomatic. We need to invest two to 10 years in Iraq, and we'll have a good outcome. But if we think we're dumping this responsibility in the coming year, we're going to end up with a mess on our hands that will severely impair our international role for the coming 20 years.
— Morton Abramowitz headed the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana chairs the Foreign Relations Committee. Barry McCaffrey, a retired four-star Army general, was wounded three times in Vietnam.
Do you think Time Magazine doesn't recall that Barry McCaffery was Clinton's Drug Czar, or do you think that Time Magazine failed to include that information on purpose? I believe that knowing that Barry McCaffery was a member of the Clinton White House is important for the reader to understand his opinion and THAT'S why Time Magazine left that out.
What Should Bush Do?
The President must decide how to stabilize Iraq. A
diplomat, a Senator and a general weigh in on the options
By MORTON ABRAMOWITZ, RICHARD LUGAR AND BARRY MCCAFFREY
Monday, Apr. 19, 2004"We need 80,000 or more troops added to the U.S. Army."
When a grass fire first starts, you can jump right in the middle of it and stomp it out. But if you wait too long, it just becomes uncontrollable. We should immediately jump onto the opposition and end it, and then launch smart diplomatic moves to get NATO and the U.N. and other Arab forces involved in a bigger way.
— By Barry McCaffrey
He became drug czar due to his performance in Desert Storm when he attacked Iraqi tanks after the cease fire.
Did that really happen? figures.
Here are some links.
McCaffery (Goliath) v. Hersh (David)
Roger that.
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.