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

Skip to comments.

Criticism from the old guard forces a rethink [Quagmire Alert]
The Herald - UK ^ | 3-28-03 | JAMIE DETTMER

Posted on 03/28/2003 7:22:12 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer

Massive reinforcements after retired generals question plan, writes JAMIE DETTMER

THE Bush administration's decision to order a massive reinforcement of 120,000 additional troops over the next few weeks amounts to an acceptance of the chorus of criticism from retired generals that the initial war plan was flawed.

Not that you will hear the White House, the Pentagon or Downing Street admit that. For the last 48 hours, and in the face of doubts also voiced in private by members of the congressional armed services committees, Bush officials have insisted the original plan has been working well.

Last night, Pentagon sources insisted that the additional troops being sent now were always part of the war plan. They say the plan finally envisages about 300,000 US troops being in Iraq.

However, critics, including General Wesley Clark, the former Nato commander, and General Barry McCaffrey, the Gulf war veteran who led the 24th Infantry Division in 1991, questioned the wisdom of deploying from the start only three army divisions and a US marines division and said more troops were needed on the ground from the beginning.

"Success breeds success," said General Clark, who believes Iraqi troops must be buoyed by holding off the coalition for so long.

Last night's announcement came after it emerged that analysts from the CIA and the Defence Intelligence Agency had warned that US forces would face significant Iraqi resistance, with Saddam Hussein exploiting guerrilla tactics like those seen in Chechnya. The advice was softened as it went up the bureaucratic chain to the White House, sources said yesterday.

Earlier this week, Victoria Clarke, defence department spokeswoman, was terse in her dismissal of the criticism, although she did concede that the "plan allows it to adapt and to scale up and down as needed".

The mixture of the forces being sent suggests that the White House does believe it was a mistake not to send heavy mechanised divisions to the war from the start. Pentagon sources said that, as well as the 30,000-strong 4th Infantry Division, the 1st Arm-oured Division would be deployed from Germany.

Significant "elements of other heavy divisions will be thrown into the mix" said a Pentagon source, including the 2nd Armoured Cavalry Regiment, which will leave within a couple of weeks from Colorado.

For all of the Pentagon's insistence that it was always in the plan to send more troops, the decision to double US ground forces in the region is being seen on Capitol Hill as a victory for General Tommy Franks, the allied commander, over Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary.

The initial war plan was very much in keeping with Mr Rumsfeld's thinking. He rejected severals pleas from General Franks for heavy divisions to be included in the invasion forces - he wanted to show that agile and lightly-equipped formations backed by tactical aerial firepower could do the job.

It was Mr Rumsfeld who wanted to break with the US strategy used in recent campaigns - weeks-long air war followed by the deployment of ground forces.

However, it will probably take several weeks for the 4th Infantry Division to join the combat. Other forces heading to the region could require even longer to move their tanks and other armour from their bases to Kuwait, said Pentagon officials.

It is not clear how the American public will take the doubling of forces . Support for the war has held up well in recent days, but the polls have also indicated that anxiety about the direction of the war is growing.

More troops may bolster public confidence but it could easily trigger Vietnam-style fears of a quagmire.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: handwringers; quagmire
Pack journalism is rampant.
1 posted on 03/28/2003 7:22:12 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
This planned pause to resupply after a 200 mile charge is the only chance the liars have to get in their criticisms before the next successful effort by the military.
They're taking every opportunity to exploit it.

What hurts them most is that we have been so successful without even the 4th ID- in fact we have prosecuted the war so far with the most minimal number of troops in any scenario I heard being floated for the war.

2 posted on 03/28/2003 7:31:05 AM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
Weren't General Wesley Clark, the former Nato commander, and General Barry McCaffrey both working for Clinton? As far as I am concerned that speaks for itself.
3 posted on 03/28/2003 7:35:39 AM PST by jospehm20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: mrsmith

This entire article is so much tommyrot.

The stand-by alert for Fourth ID, First Cav, First Armored, and 2nd and 3rd ACR's went out in February. They were always going to be the follow on forces. 4th ID is a little late in the game because we spent so much time hanging around the Turkish coastline. We should have cut bait March 1st.

But some mistakes are unavoidable as politics tends to intervene in military planning from time to time.

The Administration is not responding to criticism.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

5 posted on 03/28/2003 7:37:46 AM PST by section9 (You will all be shot unless you download the Saddam screensaver...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jospehm20
2nd ACR = Ft Polk, La.
3rd ACR = Ft Carson

Big difference in the way these units are equipped. 2nd is light, 3rd is a true ACR.
6 posted on 03/28/2003 7:38:17 AM PST by jospehm20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fullmoon
I've no clue but I'm not a 4-star general.
7 posted on 03/28/2003 7:40:46 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer (Let's Roll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fullmoon
Speaking of "quagmire". How are we going to handle Baghdad? What is the scenario you see leading to victory. I'm stumped.

Saddam expects us to go in by the thousands and engage in house to house fighting. I don't think we're going to do that. Rather, we'll expand our zone of control over the rest of the country while initiating large scale Special Operations in Baghdad itself targeted at the Leadership cadre. Once the RG's are depleted and destroyed, you'll see flying columns of fast moving Abrams and Bradley vehicles go into and out of Baghdad for quick raids and retreats.

Trust me, we will retain the tactical initiative in that battle.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

8 posted on 03/28/2003 7:42:19 AM PST by section9 (You will all be shot unless you download the Saddam screensaver...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
This stuff is making me sleepy. I suppose if I pass out, I might miss some valuable piece of new information. Nah.

It's all just sweaty defeatist drivel.

9 posted on 03/28/2003 7:45:02 AM PST by Stentor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jospehm20
My Son-in-law is in the Old Guard at Ft. Myer (Arlington VA). The Old Guard is normally supposed to stay behind to tend to Arlington National Cemetery and to guard Washington DC. He's been told recently that he may be going over there. Go figure.
10 posted on 03/28/2003 7:47:19 AM PST by COBOL2Java
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Wesley Clark as a critic worth listening to? The ultimate Perfumed Prince mustered the courage during the Kosovo campaign to bomb from high altitude and almost got us into war with Russia on two occasions - and in the end declared victory by parsing defeat in a truly Clintonian manner.
11 posted on 03/28/2003 7:53:50 AM PST by dirtboy (Rally For America - Steps of PA State Capitol, Harrisburg - March 29 at high noon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jospehm20
Oh yeah, they were Clinton buttboys.

McCaffery isn't so bad, here's some words from him from July 25, 2001:
"We have got some brilliant people, Vice President Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Steve Hallez -- people around the Pentagon that know what they're doing. "

"Old style" military don't like the idea of moving supplies by convoy- they want a secure, static supply line. IMHO to them the method being used in this war is as revolutionary-and successful- as the aircraft carrier or blitzkrieg were in their time.

12 posted on 03/28/2003 7:54:27 AM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
"Success breeds success," said General Clark

It sure does. That's why our forces continue to outfight, outwit and outkill Iraqis.

13 posted on 03/28/2003 7:57:44 AM PST by TADSLOS (Sua Sponte)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: section9
I was boiling and waiting to unload . . . but now I don't have to because you said what I wanted to better than I would've . . . and a helluva a lot more diplomatically. These pacifist leeches biting at the asses of those courageous enough to take on evil without worrying about polls is really starting to grate on me.

It never fails to amaze me how this cacca always gets turned around. Our POW's are executed and slime-ball Helen Thomas questions how the terrorists in Guantanamo are being treated. I don't know if it's posted on FR, it probably is, but Michelle Malkin wrote a great piece on Thomas today that I think you'll find interesting if you haven't already read it. We need more Michelle Malkin's taking on the feel-gooders because they dominate the alphabet-networks and the major newspapers.

14 posted on 03/28/2003 8:03:51 AM PST by geedee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
From www.naval-history.net:

10 May Germany invades Belgium
13 May Germans enter France at Sedan trapping armies in Belgium
17 May Germans enter Brussels
20 May Germans reach English Channel
26 May Germans take Boulogne and Calais
26 May - 4 June Dunkirk evacuation
5 June "Battle for France" begins
14 June Germans enter Paris
17 June Marshal Petain requests armistice terms
22 June France capitulates


So one of the most famed offenses (and military defeats) of the last century took 16 days to take Belgium, counting to the beginning of the evacuation of Dunkirk. It took another 9 days against almost no resistance to take Paris.

I guess around 17 May the journalists would have been talking about how the Germans were failing and the battle plan was all wrong etc.
15 posted on 03/28/2003 8:14:14 AM PST by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: m1911
Of course, Hitler never promised Belgium would fall in three days.
16 posted on 03/28/2003 8:15:58 AM PST by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: xm177e2
Who promised Iraq would?
17 posted on 03/28/2003 8:23:44 AM PST by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Uhhh... they can bring in most of the extra troops because their equipment is already there. Had Turkey let us move our troops through their territory, those troops would also already be there.
18 posted on 03/28/2003 9:13:40 AM PST by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: Oldeconomybuyer
it emerged that analysts from the CIA and the Defence Intelligence Agency had warned that US forces would face significant Iraqi resistance

It emerged?? Leaked??? Probably a single bullit item in a report under "Things to Consider". You'd think from the tone of the report that some CIA agent was making a big noise about it. The flatuance that passes as analysis from General Wesley Clark and General Barry McCaffrey is pathetic.

20 posted on 03/28/2003 9:30:19 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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