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

To: Mr. Silverback
We held off on Fallujah because commanders on the scene felt it would work to our advantage

Where did you come up with this, please give your references. Below you will find the position of the military responsible for taking Fallujah. You will find this on page 191 of No True Glory by Bing West.

When Toolan and Mattis were holding their separate meetings, at the MEF Conway had received a phone call from Sanchez with a blunt message. The White House, Sanchez said, would never give the Marines the green light to take the city. The White House was under too pressure from too many directions. However, the Marines could remain in a cordon around the city.

If you're going to make a statement about crap prove it.
28 posted on 11/27/2006 3:34:09 AM PST by Recon Dad (Marine Spec Ops Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Recon Dad
See America's Victories by Larry Scweikart (aka Freeper LS), pages 52-57. He quotes No True Glory extensively.
33 posted on 11/27/2006 6:07:08 AM PST by Mr. Silverback (Welcome Freepers! Pull up a groove and get fabulous!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Recon Dad
I read No True Glory, and verified the details with Marines.

Initially, Bush demanded they take the city, and the commanders on the scene resisted. They thought a policy of "attrition" would soften up the enemy---right or wrong, it was their initial call. Not long afterward, both the Brits and the Iraqi interim government said they would not support a full frontal assault---the Iraqis, because they said their government would fall apart. Bush THEN instructed Sanchez to hold up.

The Marines transferred out within, as I recall, a month, and the Airborne came in. They maintained the cordon policy, then, a couple of months later, the Marines rotated back in. For those months, both military forces used the "attrition" strategy favored by the Marines the first time around.

West is NOT clear on whether this was the best approach. He concedes that the "attrition" likely saved hundreds of Marines, and probably kept the coalition together, not to mention keeping the Iraqi government in place. Nevertheless, at the same time, he seems to favor the "scorched earth" policy.

If you read "No True Glory," and come to a different conclusion, please let me know.

42 posted on 11/27/2006 9:29:51 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Recon Dad

I thought President Bush said, He was allowing his generals to call the shots?


44 posted on 11/27/2006 1:05:37 PM PST by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

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