Indeed.
Posted on 09/23/2008 9:28:01 PM PDT by flyfree
Although the conventional narrative about the Iraq war is wrong, its persistence has contributed to the most serious crisis in civil-military relations since the Civil War. According to Mr. Woodward's account, the uniformed military not only opposed the surge, insisting that their advice be followed; it then subsequently worked to undermine the president once he decided on another strategy.
In one respect, the actions taken by military opponents of the surge, e.g. "foot-dragging," "slow-rolling" and selective leaking are, unfortunately, all-too-characteristic of U.S. civil-military relations during the last decade and a half. But the picture Mr. Woodward draws is far more troubling. Even after the policy had been laid down, the bulk of the senior U.S. military leadership -- the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, the rest of the Joint Chiefs, and Gen. Abizaid's successor, Adm. William Fallon, actively worked against the implementation of the president's policy.
If Mr. Woodward's account is true, it means that not since Gen. McClellan attempted to sabotage Lincoln's war policy in 1862 has the leadership of the U.S. military so blatantly attempted to undermine a president in the pursuit of his constitutional authority. It should be obvious that such active opposition to a president's policy poses a threat to the health of the civil-military balance in a republic.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
More than that...its treason.
Stopped reading right there.
CJCS Mullen is a great example. He opposed the surge and our entire foreign policy, but wasn't marked for replacement until his media interviews showed him to be at odds with the President.
And don't get me started on a permissive atmosphere for leaking classified information. This administration has been overly permissive on everything. It's no surprise that strong willed people have done their own thing, given the slack leadership they've been getting.
I seem to recall Robert E Lee writing that McClellan was his most skilled adversary, but what would he know. Lincoln did a fine job of sabotaging his own war policy by insisting that Washington be surrounded by thousands of troops, and by constantly replacing the head of his army.
Remember this is based on Woodward. IMO he is riding on his Watergate coat tails, thinking he is impervious and can make it up as he goes along without question. He has pumped out three books on Bush in seven years. Scumbag Alert
Lee knew McClellan, he didn’t know Grant. Lee knew McClellan was someone who would retreat if pushed. Lee beat McClellan, he didn’t beat Grant.
He ended up knowing them both. IIRC Shelby Foote quotes Lee praising McClellan as the ablest of Union generals. McClellan fought Lee when the ANV was strong and Jackson still lived. Grant didn’t show up until after Gettysburg when the ANV was a shadow of what it had been and Jackson was long buried.
One consistent trait of George W Bush is that he ‘welcomed’ traitors, treason; he absolutely ‘love it’ when secret info was being leaked one after another from his administration.
Personally, George Bush has hurt me as a conservative more than Bill Clinton. Because we all knew what Bill Clinton was. But George Bush - I really don’t know what history is going to write about him, apart from the fact that he appointed the right judges, he cut taxes, he doesn’t retreat from the Iraq war, there have been screw up after screw up. It’s just too painful to watch him, I am glad he’s gonig off the stage soon.
“One consistent trait of President Bush is that he’s unwilling to cut away Clinton appointees...”
DING DING DING!!!!!!!!!!
He should have gutted the intel services of the evil, traitorous clintoonies!
If I recall Foote correctly, Lee praised McClellan before he fought Grant.
Fact of the matter is though that Grant (and Sherman) won the war, McClellan, for whatever reasons, did not.
Absolutely. I saw the Woodward interview on 60 Minutes..pedaling his newest book. If what he said was true..it is treason to report it. This is not Watergate. We have troops on the ground. If not true..it was still treason, by creating doubt and reporting what maybe a security breach.
All to make a buck.
Heck, the people I am thowing under the bus lately equals....
“McClellan, for whatever reasons, did not.”
Lincoln’s impatience and interference were a good deal of the reason. Lincoln insisted on ringing Washington with forts and thousands of troops. He insisted his generals keep an army between Lee and Washington, a fact Lee and Jackson exploited. McClellan had his army well trained and capable of fighting. Lincoln replaced him after Antietam and then provided Lee with a series of punching bags until Meade.
Grant simply used raw numbers to grind down a weakened opponent. He was willing to sacrifice the lives of his troops in a manner reminiscent of soviet generals, Cold Harbor being a prime example.
General Petraeus and his philosophy are scarce commodities. NATO, Pentagon, Department of State and intelligence bureaucrats, many masquerading in military uniforms, have consistently ignored and depreciated counterinsurgency warfare. Successful career development worldwide requires resumes applying advanced technologies to planning conventional warfare in Europe and blue water seas. For the 15 years prior to 2006 successful careers were build on proposing ways to do more with fewer military resources as the Congress, Bush #1, and Clinton tore the military apart for the “peace dividend”. There was no way these bureaucrats were going to allow another career path.
Counterinsurgency warfare receives scant attention for being low tech (patrol, patrol, patrol), labor intensive (daily face to face with locals by social, economic, and military people), and unspectacular (Murderous attacks decrease as local and national political friction increases, and some tribal regions remain stubbornly lawless. There are no victory parades and no statues are torn down).
When General Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne in Iraq in April 2003 he said, “Now the hard part begins”. However, he had only two stars and did not co-author Army’s counterinsurgency field manual until 2006. The Marine Corps, not Army, has unpopular distinction for embracing the culture of counterinsurgency warfare.
As the first Marine Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace had the watch for internal political battles allowing General Petraeus to come to the fore. Seldom would such a gifted, experienced soldier obtain prominence needed within ossified intelligence and defense bureaucracies to implement proven counterinsurgency tactics; tactics proven as far back as the British Empire and 19th century U.S. involvement in Central and South America.
Indeed.
What is the synopsis of “No Exit From Vietnam”?
Our generals are just a bunch of contemptible, disloyal cowards... Our generals are the scum of the German people! Not a shred of honour! They call themselves generals. Years at military academy just to learn how to hold a knife and fork! For years, the military has hindered my plans! They've put every kind of obstacle in my way! What I should have done... was liquidate all the high-ranking officers, as Stalin did!
Alas, one supposes the perfumed Princes can point to cologned Colonels who were sabotaging their best efforts as well, and the chain of command being what it is, I expect some eau-de-toiletted Lieutenant somewhere in Mesopotamia is being read the riot act for failing to surge himself back in 2003 to nip the insurgency in the bud, as it were.
We really should set it up so there's no question that one person is in charge of the whole deal, who would own responsibility for his failures as well as his successes, thereby avoiding the squalid spectacle of denial of responsibility, attempts to shift blame, and the issuance of counteraccusations.
<sigh>
There, there, Sergeant, it's not your fault - your team leaders failed you.
You really mean that Sergeant Major?
No. You're fired.
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.