Posted on 12/17/2006 5:14:36 PM PST by STARWISE
The former secretary of state Colin Powell said Sunday that badly overstretched U.S. forces in Iraq were losing the war there and that a temporary U.S. troop surge probably would not help.
In one of his few commentaries on the war since leaving office, Powell quickly added that the situation could be reversed. He recommended an intense coalition effort to train and support Iraqi security forces and strengthen the government in Baghdad. Powell was deeply skeptical about increasing troop levels, an idea that appears to be gaining ground as President George W. Bush weighs U.S. strategy options.
"There really are no additional troops" to send, Powell said, adding that he agreed with those who say that the U.S. Army is "about broken."
He said he was unsure that new troops could suppress sectarian violence or secure Baghdad.
He urged the United States to do everything possible to prepare Iraqis to take over lead responsibility; the "baton pass," he said, should begin by mid-2007.
"We are losing we haven't lost and this is the time, now, to start to put in place the kinds of strategies that will turn this situation around," Powell said on CBS-TV.
(snip)
Powell endorsed .... group idea: opening talks with Syria and Iran.
He has kept a low public profile since leaving office in January 2005, but has emerged at points in the debate over Iraq to weigh in, as when he said that Iraq was embroiled in civil war.
(snip)
A troop increase, he said Sunday, "cannot be sustained." The thousands of additional U.S. soldiers sent into Baghdad since the summer had been unable to stabilize the city and more probably could not tip the balance, Powell said. The deployment of further troops would, moreover, impose long-term costs on a badly stretched military.
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
Here is a quote from General Abizaid's comments on November 15th-
"Precisely how we do this continues to be worked out with the Iraqis and with our own staffs, but we believe that ultimately, capable, independent Iraqi forces, loyal to equally capable, independent Iraqi government, will set the conditions for the withdrawal of our major combat forces."
Does that make him cut-n-run?
http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom1/Press%20Briefings/Nov%2015%2006%20-%20Senate%20Armed%20Services%20Committee%20Holds%20Hearing%20on%20Current%20Situation%20in%20Iraq%20and%20Afghanistan.htm
I think that Colin Powell is the real deal when it comes to his medals and other accomplishments.
I also think that it takes quite a bit of political acuity in order to achieve the rank of General.
There are a plethora of people out there wearing honors that are not exactly deserved.
How to know me? Hmm, I ain't got no medals, but I do pay attention to a few folks that have been around some that do.
I think that General Powell is a great man but I would not want a politician to be quarterbacking my team.
So what is the definition of deserved honors and undeserved honors? Do those who agree with you deserve their's while those who disagree with you do not?
I have no interest in being contentious with you.
Have a nice day.
Well, I guess by making these remarks publicly, he's answered the question whether he's more loyal to the troops and the Army he once led - or to his own media legacy.
Merry Christmas!!!!!!!
I will ditto that! Those here who choose to defend his publicly disgraceful comments put themselves in the boat with his kind.
His comments may or may not be accurate - there are respectable people on both sides of the issue. What is inexcusable is making the comments publicly, where our enemies listen, while troops are fighting in the field.
FTN 12.17.2006, part 1: Bob Schieffer talked to Former Secretary of State General Colin Powell about the war in Iraq and what it will take to win.
Colin Powel was on TV saying "his sources in the pentagon" were confirming his negativity.
This confirms my belief that Colin Powel was "Mr. Leaky". If he had a southern drawl, he would be the twin brother of Jimmy Carter in the nutty department.
And wiki is not a credible source.
Or General Pershings command.
Tonight, the White House insists there's no big disagreement on Iraq between President Bush and former Secretary of State Colin Powell. As Jack mentioned, Powell is throwing cold water on a proposal being considered by the Bush administration right now to send even more troops into Iraq, at least in the short-term. Listen to Powell's pointed comments for yourself.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: I think it is important before a decision is made to send more troops to Iraq, if the president is considering that, you've got do a very serious analysis of what mission it is that they are being sent to accomplish and is it something you can do? If the mission is go secure Baghdad, you can't do that. And no amount of American force structure will be able to do that.
So, I think you have to look carefully at what the mission is. Is it something that can be accomplished? And then do we have the troops to do it? And when we talk about surges, all we're talking about is putting more people into the cue faster. It's not as of the Army has grown suddenly. It's just putting more people into the cue faster and keeping those who were there now a little longer. And so that analysis has to be made.
My concern is that we have surged previously. In the summer of this past year, 2006, we had operation forward together. Phase one and two, where we surged thousands of additional troops, U.S. troops and Iraqi troops into Baghdad and where the prime minister said he was going to dig a ditch around Baghdad. And the situation has deteriorated further. So I would have to hear a persuasive argument as to what more troops would do, and would they make a significant enough difference to undertake the expense and the turmoil within the forced structure for additional troops.
QUESTION: Do you know how we win in this war?
POWELL: No. That's what Mr. Gates said, we're not winning, and the Hamilton/Baker Commission described it as grave and deteriorating. And it is grave and deteriorating, so it doesn't mean we have lost. And it doesn't mean it is not winnable. But it is not appropriate to say that we're winning when I think we're not winning.
QUESTION: Do you have any (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?
POWELL: I was part of it. I'm glad Saddam Hussein is gone. I'm glad that he is now about to face ultimate justice. I regret that we did not do a better job in phase two in stabilizing the country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: The retired chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Colin Powell, the former secretary of state speaking bluntly. And to back up those words in effect, a Pentagon report sent to Congress today says attacks against U.S. troops, Iraqi troops and Iraqi civilians, those attacks now have reached their highest level in two and a half years. The report shows the weekly average of attacks is now up to nearly 1,000 -- 1,000 attacks each week.
Meantime, by most estimates, the number of civilians killed in Iraq's unrest doubled in the past year to about 25,000 civilians dead. Thousands more have fled the country as sectarian slaughter continues. More than a million Iraqis have fled into Jordan and to Syria or other neighboring countries. Another million or so, according to the United Nations, have been displaced internally within Iraq, meaning they have had to flee their own homes.
Our senior international correspondent Nic Robertson is in Baghdad with a closer look at the relentless violence and its affects on ordinary Iraqis.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(SOUNDS)
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Turn on the TV in Iraq and this is what you can see. Insurgent videos showing in minute detail mortar attacks, rockets and roadside bombs, even sniper fire aimed at U.S. soldiers. The station that shows them Sadr was banned by the Iraqi government last month but within days it was back on air. Sadr has become part of Iraq's inescapable tapestry of decline.
Violence is the war paper of life here. No one escapes. Not even the children. Just ask these youngsters at school in Falluja.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)
ROBERTSON: There is no security, he says. When we go home to sleep, we don't know what's going to happen. They know kids outside Iraq are having better lives.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)
ROBERTSON: I envy their peaceful life. We have no peace here, he says. They have no Americans. We have killing here. The hope of a better future, amid the chaos of Saddam Hussein's overthrow three years ago is long gone. In the Baghdad of today, religious identity, Sunni or Shia, divides communities. Militias control neighborhoods by day. Gun toting vigilantes control streets at night.
(on camera): A new normal is being imposed. For now (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to visit many of Baghdad's neighborhoods requires permission from which ever armed gang controls it. And even then, there are no guarantees a rival faction won't grab you. Kidnapping is big business for Sunni insurgents and Shia militias alike.
(voice-over): For Iraqis, living in these increasingly divided and isolated communities, life is far worse. Religious extremists on both sides are in the ascendancy and women suffer twice over.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I cannot take my kids to visit friends or to visit my family, I cannot go, cannot go, even if there is a private car. Even in my car I cannot because nowadays, even the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the woman who are driving.
ROBERTSON: Walking in Baghdad is almost too dangerous for many women. They fear kidnapping and rape. The only way to minimize the risk is to wear the old shrouding black chador, a symbol of subservience to religious edicts. Hundreds of thousands are better off, better educated. More progressive Iraqis are leaving. Iraq's creaking health care system strains under the twin burdens of sectarian bloodshed and the flight of its doctors.
Iraq is hemorrhaging it wealth and talent. And when you turn on the TV, the insurgents parade their latest exploits; on the TV channel no one seems able to close down.
Nic Robertson, CNN, Baghdad.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0612/18/sitroom.03.html
Missed ya today!
They have been considered. They suck, for they refuse to fight for their freedom. 50% go AWOL when ordered into combat. Syria, Iran, and the KSA are not going to be subject to any US military action. To place the US in to the center of a strategic cesspool is sheer lunacy. I am not running away from anything. Missed you during the Wintergarten talks in Bonn. The Stern Hotel was fabulous. By the way, I was there on September 11th, 2001. And went back outcountry on September 22nd through January 2002. Where the heck were you? The breakfast was excellent at the hotel, but all of the candy@sses were in Dusseldorf at the consulate, or Bad Godesburg whining in the US embassy. Yeah, I am a big isolationist. You have never been outcountry sissy boy.
"U.S. Not Winning War in Iraq, Bush Says for 1st Time
President Plans to Expand Army, Marine Corps To Cope With Strain of Multiple Deployments"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/19/AR2006121900880.html
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.