Outspoken Army General (William Wallace) Upsets White House.. [Hitting the Fan Alert]

NY Times ^ | March 28, 2003 11:24AM | staff wire report

[ewing]

The war in Iraq is just about to get tougher for Lt. General William S. Wallace.

He ignited the ire of the White House by observing publicly tht Penatgon war strategists had misunderstood the combativeness of Iraqi fighters.

The miscalculation, he said, stalled the coalition's drive towards Baghdad.

'The enemy we're fighting against is different from the one that we wargamed against,' Wallace, Commander of V Corps, told the New York Times and the Washington Post Thursday.

Wallace's comments fueled the Bush Administration's frustration with media coverage that focuses on why the conflict isn't over. The war, the White House says daily, is going well and on time.

White House Press Secrtary Ari Fleisher would not say whether he agrees with Lt. General Wallace

[ewing]

Yes, he is distantly related to that Wallace of Scotland.

NY Times entry: name -hillary_clinton password-isaliar

[jnarcus]

hillary is a liar...I like it very good. This moron needs to be decommissioned immediately. Even if what he says is true he obviously have enough brains to say nothing during the battle...This stinks to high heaven

[tet68]

'The enemy we're fighting against is different from the one that we wargamed against,' Wallace, Commander of V Corps, told the New York Times and the Washington Post Thursday.

Doh! Of course they are!

[k2blader]

Anyone who thinks the conflict should be over by now is an idiot.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

I didn't hear the briefing. Is that what he really said?

"We underestimated"

Or is that the reporter's take on it. When it says "Things are about to get much tougher," that says we are expecting more resistance than what we have seen up to now.

Not
"We are surprised."

[gulfcoast6]

Transfere him to be General of the latrines.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

>>"Anyone who thinks the conflict should be over by now is an idiot."

Bu Bu But That's most of the "reporters" at the breifings.

[Coachm]

Don't want to read into it more than is said BUT, I saw a report on this web site that indicated we took high a much harder hit during the recent sandstorm than has been writte anywhere by the media. In fact, the report was posted here and then pulled.

[ewing]

I think Wallace may be been soundbited into a question about wargames by a reporter..(although I didn't see the breifing)

[JasonC]

He trained the 3rd Infantry division. Its present officers are all his proteges. He ran the national training center, running the Opfor that puts our men through their paces in training. If we are 50 miles from Baghdad, it is because he knows his job. You can't exactly maintain simultaneously that he is full of it and that we are winning, since he's the one who got us this far. He is in fact one of the best armor officers we've got.

We are way past playing Carvillian smash mouth, guys. The ground army has been saying we'd need twice the ground force for most of the last year, and they were flat right. You want me to dig out all the pieces I wrote on the subject myself, and post the "I told you so"s?

Doesn't mean we aren't winning, we are. Doesn't mean we aren't going to win in months at the outside, and cheaply, we are. But how fast and how clean the win is depends on the strategy used, and those pros who got it right are now telling those who got it wrong, trying to do it on the cheap, "I told you so". And they did. That's the reality. Deal with it.

[ewing]

Agreed, I will give Lt. Gen. Wallace the benefit of the doubt over a potential Al Jazeera reporter

[Stavka2]

I love the bushbots who can't stand any officer who does not tote the Rumsfeld party line. Agree or resign...yet they complained about the same thing with Klintoon. Arm chair generals second guessing military professionals...sickening.

[D Rider]

Doesn't this sound like what the press did to Patton in WWII?

This is his first lesson on keeping his mouth shut around the press, the press will never change, imbedded or not.

[A Simple Soldier]

I guess you are willing to step up to the responsibility of being the Corps CG then.

Please detail your resume detailing your military education and experience for this responsibility and I will endeavor to send forth your name for nomination to the Senate for both 3 stars and command of a corps in combat.

[k2blader]

Yep, I think most of us knew this war would be one against three fronts: 1) Saddam's evil regime, 2) chicken littles in the press, and 3) seditionists/America-haters worldwide.

This Lt. General sure doesn't help things.

[OldCorps]

Jason, I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Here is a post to a thread where I have maintained that we are in this situation because Secretary Rumsfeld ignored the advice of Army leaders.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/877308/posts?page=115#115

[strider44]

"Transfere him to be General of the latrines."

What a perfect solution. Shit-can the general for telling the truth. That's a great way to build the confidence of our military leaders. The upper staffs are already clogged with career-minded yes men. We need the generals to tell it like it is. I back him 100%. And one thing is for damn sure - Wallace has forgotten more about combat tactics and air-land battle than Bush will ever know.

[Blood of Tyrants]

But first, remember that this is from the NY Times. I can just about guarantee that they twisted his words to suit their anti-American agenda.

[bucephalus]

"`The enemy we're fighting against is different from the one we'd war-gamed against,'"

Why don't I find this quote that damning? I certainly don't want to send the man to the latrines, but I'm not gonna get uptight because a general is talking gruff. Generals are crusty old SOBs - that' what they're supposed to be. His complaint may not be that we are undermanned or undersupplied but that he's ready to take the gloves off and not be tied to PC/ political considerations. But isn't a general supposed to be something of a rebel against the political hierarchy?

[hobbes1]

But how fast and how clean the win is depends on the strategy used, and those pros who got it right are now telling those who got it wrong, trying to do it on the cheap, "I told you so".And they did. That's the reality. Deal with it.

Which borders on insubordination. The Reality is that Generals Fight at the Behest of the Civilian authority, and if they don't like it that is tough.....

The one that Needs to Be Dealing with It, is the General.

He is shielded from the Loss of his position, die to something as fickle as Public Perception, His bosses are not.And Being forced to downscale because of political pressure, which is a consideration, costs lives....

If it is not Insubordinate, it is unprofessional.