Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ex-army officers attack 'chaos' of Iraqi regime
Belfast Telegraph ^ | 29 September 2005 | Patrick Cockburn

Posted on 09/29/2005 1:41:21 PM PDT by jmc1969

It was meant to be a moment of reconciliation between the old regime and the new, a gathering of nearly 1,000 former Iraqi army officers and tribal leaders in Baghdad to voice their concerns over today's Iraq. But it did not go as planned.

General after general rose to his feet and raised his voice to shout at the way Iraq was being run and to express his fear of escalating war. "They were fools to break up our great army and form an army of thieves and criminals," said one senior officer. "They are traitors," added another.

General Salam Hussein Ali sprang to his feet and bellowed that there was "no security, no electricity and no clean water and no government". The only solution was to have the old Iraqi army back in its green uniforms, not those supplied by the Americans.

General Sammarai had called for criticism but seemed dismayed at its ferocity, at one moment exclaiming "this is chaos," though he later apologised and said he supposed it was democracy. He said most of the trouble in Iraq was caused by foreign terrorists such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, prompting another officer to mutter: "I don't think Zarqawi will threaten us because we are against occupation."

In conversation, the officers made clear that they considered armed resistance to the occupation legitimate.

The past three years have been a disaster for the old Iraqi army. The US viceroy, Paul Bremer, disbanded the army and security forces in May 2003. In a single stroke, hundreds of thousands of professional soldiers were out of a job.

General Sammarai concluded: "All the officers are against the American occupation. But when they come to my office they say that if the Americans leave there will be civil war."

(Excerpt) Read more at belfasttelegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: iraq; iraqiarmy; iraqiofficers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 09/29/2005 1:41:23 PM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Oh yes, what a great Army that was. . .for our Army to use as target practice. No really, how the former Iraqi officers long for the days of a professional Army of tortures and rapists, dems were the good ole days.

On a serious note, disbanding the Iraqi Army was a mistake IMO, but even if it were kept in tact, getting rid of the hardcore Baathists within it would have been a bitch.


2 posted on 09/29/2005 1:45:50 PM PDT by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
The US viceroy, Paul Bremer, disbanded the army and security forces in May 2003. In a single stroke, hundreds of thousands of professional soldiers were out of a job.

There is some truth to this statement - Many Operators on the ground were against this decision / plan - (yet higher-ups pushed it through).

With that said, it was obvious to all that a certain level of cleansing was surly needed within the ranks of the former Iraqi Army before allowing others to stay on the job.

This was a tough call from the start. But it was definitely made farther up the chain of command then it should have been (at least in absolute terms).

3 posted on 09/29/2005 1:48:00 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

"They were fools to break up our great army and form an army of thieves and criminals," said one senior officer. "They are traitors," added another.


These comments are from the same army officers that cut off hands, murdered thousands, raped and tortured scores of Iraqis. Comments like this make me wish I was back in the game. I would have a special delivery for each and every one of these animals.


4 posted on 09/29/2005 1:50:36 PM PDT by 7thOF7th (Righteousness is our cause and justice will prevail!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Take all of them out and shoot'em. Starting over would be more productive.


5 posted on 09/29/2005 1:50:46 PM PDT by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

Wolfawitz was behind disbanding the Army mostly because Chalabi convinced him it was a good idea.


6 posted on 09/29/2005 1:52:37 PM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
They were fools to break up our great army

"Great army"? Which "great army" would that be? We kicked their a$$es and the remnants melted away.

7 posted on 09/29/2005 1:53:08 PM PDT by SIDENET (Yankee Air Pirate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
But it did not go as planned. General after general rose

Yeah we should really pay a lot of attention to Ex Bathists that helps Saddam fill all those mass graves.

8 posted on 09/29/2005 1:53:30 PM PDT by MNJohnnie (Don't get stuck on stupid now, reporters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
Wolfawitz was behind disbanding the Army mostly because Chalabi convinced him it was a good idea.

Agreed. Duffawitz and Chalabi were two of the bigger problems / distractions early on -

Chalabi caused a number of unnecessary problems (if you'd call them that) for a couple of our ODA units very early on.

9 posted on 09/29/2005 1:55:52 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
In a single stroke, hundreds of thousands of professional soldiers were out of a job.

This is a total crock the overwhelming majority of the soldiers were conscripted shia muslims who were forced into the military, they would simply lay down their weapons and surrender or leave the battlefield and go home. They had zero allegiance to Saddam and his army.

That left the officers who were sunni's who were nothing but yes men, because anything but being a yes man would get you executed. Officers seen as too powerful by Saddam were routinely rounded up and shot.......

10 posted on 09/29/2005 2:02:23 PM PDT by federal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: federal
they would simply lay down their weapons and surrender or leave the battlefield and go home. They had zero allegiance to Saddam and his army.

It was no longer Saddam's Army by that time - It was becoming the *new* Iraqi Army - And keeping these people paid and off the streets (along with giving them a sense of purpose and responsibility for the *new* Iraq) could have helped tremendously.

The majority (vast majority) of SOF in Country early on were against the plan that was implemented to completely disband the old (defeated) Iraqi Army.

11 posted on 09/29/2005 2:13:26 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

Well perhaps you are right about giving them something to do but the article said "professional soldiers". The fact is most of them didn't want to be in the army to begin with and left on their own accord.

And the officers were the slime of the Baath party for the most part, There is no way of knowing if keeping the army would have made one iota of difference. All this is a exercise in second guessing and revisionism.........


12 posted on 09/29/2005 2:31:21 PM PDT by federal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FlipWilson

I actually think that disbanding the army was the best thing to do. The Iraqi army has a record of being just a group of thugs and incompetents. I'm not convinced that keeping it intact would have put us in a better position than just scrapping it and trying to create a healthier core of decent soldiers.

Just my opinion, however.


13 posted on 09/29/2005 2:35:17 PM PDT by DeuceTraveler (Freedom is a never ending struggle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: federal

I wonder how many war crimes these professional officers have committed over the years?

A professional military doesn't surrender to CNN reporters.


14 posted on 09/29/2005 2:35:57 PM PDT by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Wristpin

Man there is no telling as to the war crimes question, but with hundreds of thousands in mass graves it surely is a large number.

As far as the surrender stories the one that I still laugh at was during the first Gulf War. The one where the predator UAV was flying over a large garrison of soldiers and they came out waving a white flag.

I laughed until I cried the great Saddams army had surrendered to a unmanned, unarmed spy plane. I'll never forget the soldiers talking who were flying the Predator. The first on said "hey what are they doing" then someone answered "I'm not sure what does he have in his hand". Then they both started laughing and said "they are surrendering".

Yeah what a "professional army".......


15 posted on 09/29/2005 2:46:08 PM PDT by federal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FlipWilson
Purging an army is difficult.

After WWII we disbanded the Wehrmacht and the Japanese Armed Forces.

Years later we started out fresh with new armed forces in both countries.
16 posted on 09/29/2005 2:57:20 PM PDT by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Professional soldiers????


17 posted on 09/29/2005 2:59:14 PM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Doesn't Wolfowitz have his own brain ?


18 posted on 09/29/2005 3:48:06 PM PDT by Grzegorz 246
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Grzegorz 246

Of course he does, I am just telling you that the word has long been that he was up in the air on the matter until Chalabi convinced him it was a good idea.


19 posted on 09/29/2005 4:06:22 PM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: federal
There is no way of knowing if keeping the army would have made one iota of difference. All this is a exercise in second guessing and revisionism

This is just not an accurate statement - The fact is there are correct principles that need (and can) be applied to help either fight an insurgency or help to stop one from occurring.

Many of these same people we through out (and caused ill will with) who were part of the Iraqi Army we have since brought back in to the new Iraqi Army...only we did this 6,8, 12 months later and asked them to do what they could have been doing from the very beginning.

Another principle that was broke was the notion that higher-ups (way away from the actual battle field) know better then the operators working in Country (many of these operators mind you, who were working in Iraq prior to the actual war beginning). Those operators knew more about the actualities on the ground then those higher-ups could dream of.

Duffawitz didn't have a clue what he was talking about yet he was pushing policy down the military's throat! (bad move!).

20 posted on 09/29/2005 5:54:33 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson