Posted on 05/22/2004 5:41:40 PM PDT by b4its2late
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Zinni: 'They've Screwed Up' May 21, 2004
Accusing top Pentagon officials of "dereliction of duty," retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni says staying the course in Iraq isn't a reasonable option.
"The course is headed over Niagara Falls. I think it's time to change course a little bit or at least hold somebody responsible for putting you on this course," he tells CBS News Correspondent Steve Kroft in an interview to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, May 23, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
The current situation in Iraq was destined to happen, says Zinni, because planning for the war and its aftermath has been flawed all along.
"There has been poor strategic thinking in this...poor operational planning and execution on the ground," says Zinni, who served as commander-in-chief of the U.S. Central Command from 1997 to 2000.
Zinni blames the poor planning on the civilian policymakers in the administration, known as neo-conservatives, who saw the invasion as a way to stabilize the region and support Israel. He believes these people, who include Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defense, have hijacked U.S. foreign policy.
"They promoted it and pushed [the war]... even to the point of creating their own intelligence to match their needs. Then they should bear the responsibility," Zinni tells Kroft.
In his upcoming book, "Battle Ready," written with Tom Clancy, Zinni writes of the poor planning in harsh terms. "In the lead-up to the Iraq war and its later conduct, I saw, at minimum, true dereliction, negligence and irresponsibility; at worst, lying, incompetence and corruption," he writes.
Zinni explains to Kroft, "I think there was dereliction in insufficient forces being put on the ground and [in not] fully understanding the military dimensions of the plan."
He still believes the situation is salvageable if the United States can communicate more effectively with the Iraqi people and demonstrate a better image to them.
The enlistment of the U.N. and other countries to participate in the mission is also crucial, he says. Without these things, says Zinni, "We are going to be looking for quick exits. I don't believe we're there now, and I wouldn't want to see us fail here."
Also central to success in Iraq is more troops, from the United States and especially other countries, to control violence and patrol borders, he says.
Zinni feels that undertaking the war with the minimum of troops paved the way for the security problems the U.S. faces there now, the violence Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently admitted he hadn't anticipated.
"He should not have been surprised," says Zinni. "There were a number of people who before we even engaged in this conflict felt strongly that we underestimated...the scope of the problems we would have in [Iraq]."
The fact that no one in the administration has paid for the blunder irks Zinni. "But regardless of whose responsibility [it is]...it should be evident to everybody that they've screwed up, and whose heads are rolling on this?"
Zinni was responsible for the Bay of Pigs II in northern Iraq when he sold out Chalabi to Saddam.
You have specific cites for that contention?
Nope, but this thread does have the primary ingredient that always brings him out...hatred of President Bush.
I don't want to win the "hearts and minds" of the Arab world. I want them to fear us and worry for the rest of their lives about what we might do to them if they tick us off.
Thought so.
GREAT post, Pukin Dog. I can always count on the F-14 pilot to set the record straight!!
As you appear to know about Zinni, his ego is too big for his love for America and caution regarding the Soldiers in theater ... if it's between feeding his massive ego or keeping his mouth shut in order to not harm our Soldiers' current mission, Zinni's ego always wins.
Look xzins it is Gen. Anthony Zinni!
Relentless, aren't they?
Folks, the China Daily and Chinese Central Television are more objective than CBS. How these people can call themselves journalist is beyond me.
A journalist would have balanced this presentation with at least an opposing view and throw in a third perspective. But, again, journalism is not what these people are practicing.
The Marine Corps' Wesley Clarke spews.
Armchair experts.
Not in DC.
Holding down a LazyBoy.
Impressive.
It's revenge of the patsies.
I don't know him well enough to know why he insists on saing things that hurt troop moral during a war. I just cannot figure out what some of these old Generals are thinking about.
EVERY soldier and Marine I have spoken with, or heard from first or second said we were indeed greated with flowers and hugs by the vast majority of Iraqis. Even if 90% of the people were in support of us, that means there are 2.5 million that are pissed off. Not to mention foreign terrorists from Syria, Iran, etc.
Not to say there were not problems with the post war planning...there obviously were....but to say that Iraqis were not happy about us removing Saddam is foolish.
My exposure was from earlier years. He was somewhat outspoken at Quantico prior to the Centcom positions. His position under Clinton, I suspect, wasn't enviable for any flag rank, however, if he still associates himself whatsoever with Democrats, then I would tend to agree with the 'sold the soul' perspective.
They had their chance. Dump all incumbents who won't bring back outsourced America.)
Please explain how the incumbents are going to do just 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.