'Too-slow' Marine Commander Relieved

News Max ^ | 4-5-03

[EternalVigilance]

I have a hunch there is still more to this story.

[meyer]

Something tells me there's a lot more to this story that what's reported. A LOT more!

[meyer]

Great minds....

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Any story that uses an LA times reporter as its source is suspect.

[Paleo Conservative]

Any story that uses an LA times reporter as its source is suspect.

Especilly Newsmax.

[thatdewd]

Next week the leftist media will incessantly harp about how the "stalled and bogged down" advance moved WAAAAY TOO FAST!

[speedy]

Exactly. This story should be judged just like the "quagmire" stories of a few days ago. The liberal press has no credibility at all in its war coverage. Or its coverage of anything else, for that matter.

[VaBthang4]

I personally thought the Marine advance was a bit slow. Granted I am not there but...we [Marines] had a shorter route to Baghdad than the US Army did...nevertheless, they [Army] got there first.

Could be alot of factors involved but it looks like a dirt slow commander was one of them. The article reads like a contrarian/anti-neocon/Hackworth-type trying to kick up dirt.

[Elkhound4]

"the Army's 3rd Infantry Division, which reached the outskirts of Baghdad late Wednesday -- ahead of the Marines."
Go Rock of the Marne!

[thegreatbeast]

LA TIMES. We've got a consensus here. Let's close this thread.

[sinkspur]

Shades of Patton's "we're going to beat Montgomery to Messina."

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

OFFICIAL BUMP(TOPIC)LIST

[cinFLA]

I have a hunch there is still more to this story.

I agree. Just thinking but there are a lot of officers that never wanted to buy into the "new" military BUT regardless, this Col. does not have the big picture - maybe his slowness would cost untold lives if he did fulfil his mission on time. In this "new" military, speed and timeliness are of utmost importance. When you get the call to go, you say "yes sir" as you are moving out.

[Ben Bolt]

Something as serious as this coming from newsmax in small caps .

[fightinJAG]

Yup . . . waiting for the paulharvery . . .

[Ben Bolt]

Yeah .. you are not . Blah gog blah . The article is 3 rd party and your reply is even deeper .

[Ciexyz]

The Times - newspaper of liars. Nuff said.

[Ben Bolt]

So will people who reply here and FReepers also . People take time and newsmax serious . I dont get it .

[Illbay]

I'm afraid this could mean more casualties," one enlisted man told the L.A. Times embedded reporter,...

I've a hunch this reporter walked around for awhile, trying to get a quote like this. Who knows what the guy really said.

Sort of like Gen. William Wallace's supposed comment that "the enemy we're fighting isn't the one we wargamed against." The quote was out of context; that isn't what he said at all.