BUSH SAYS IRAQI WAR WAS EXTENDED BECAUSE OF TURKEY

menewsline.com ^ | 04/28/2003 08:59:42 | MENL

[Destro]

This is the first such statement I have read from the White house regarding the nature of the difficulties encountered in the drive from the south up to Baghdad.

We had enough troops to spearhead the drive to Baghdad but fewer troops available to secure supply lines and to take towns and cities away from the local militias.

Fewer troops available also meant our troops could not patrol the cities to keep order and conduct operations against Saddam's forces.

[johniegrad]

failure of the Pentagon's "shock and awe" strategy

Odd use of the word "failure".

[Post Toasties]

I imagine the hope was that it would lead to a quick surrender. With the Turks not cooperating, it probably appeared to the Saddamites as if things were worse than they actually were for the Coalition troops.

[Semper Paratus]

Sounds like this is going to cost Turkey.

[Mamzelle]

Did Bush really say such a thing? Doesn't ring true. Is there another source?

[Grand Old Partisan]

Don't forget that it also saved the U. S. taxpayer $25 billion in aid to Turkey.

[Destro]

Not really. Shock and awe did fail--the man who "invented" the shock and awe concept for the pentagon (at least that's what his bi-line said) said so in a series of NY Post articles on the subject.

[putupon]

BUSH SAYS IRAQI WAR WAS EXTENDED BECAUSE OF TURKEY

That should be "turkeys". There were quite a few of them involved in sandbagging us, both foriegn and domestic.

[Cicero]

Well, the "shock and awe" was not what people were let to expect--awesome bombing campaigns. Instead of arising from the first, it popped up its head toward the end of the campaign, when Arabs around the Middle East suddenly realized that the Mighty Saddam had fallen in 3 weeks.

If there had been a northern front, perhaps he might have fallen in 2 weeks or even 1 week.

In any case, the point is well taken. We whipped Saddam with one hand tied behind our back by Turkey, and courtesy of the French a major sandstorm that probably delayed operations by 1 or 2 days.

[Destro]

Actually we won with one hand and leg tied behind our back.

[DainBramage]

Those Baster'ds

[Cicero]

Of course, there's a big difference between having France, Belgium and Turkey tie your hand behind your back (where they have just stabbed you) and doing it yourself.

In Vietnam JFK and LBJ tied the military's hands by constantly restraining and micromanaging the fighting and by ruling out hitting the enemy where they were vulnerable. By contrast, in Iraq GWB supported the troops and gave the generals free rein, with only one (admittedly) major limitation--don't kill more civilians than you can help.

I think that was a reasonable limitation, for this campaign. Probably that was what prevented "shock and awe" from operating at the first.

[jwalsh07]

You forgot the quagmire alert.

[dixiechick2000]

IIRC, Bush said this in his interview with Tom Brokow that was aired Friday night.

[js1138]

Odd use of the word "failure".

Definitely a previously unimagined use or the word failure. I suppose the original plan might have succeeded in one week rather than three, and might have prevented some of the high level officials from escaping.

[TheCrusader]

I think Iraq was shocked and awed. They fell in just three weeks inspite of America being hogtied by Turkey in the North, and inspite of France's advance information of our attack given to Saddam. Russia couldn't take Afghanistan in ten years, and Iran couldn't take Iraq in ten years. Defeating a country like Iraq in just three weeks, inspite of the fact they had all the time in the world to build a defense, is truly awesome.

[johnb838]

Now is the time when the emphasis on avoiding civilian casualties pays off. And I would have to admit that if we'd killed a few thousand more civilians, there would be a great deal more anger and unruliness, and it would probably be costing us more casualties in this phase of the campaign, as well as putting fuel on the Iranian Shi'a fire.

The trouble with calling the campaign S&A was that it is antithetical to the goal of preserving civilian lives and infrastructure. Sure, a few hundred Willy-Pete incendiaries on B-daddy would have ended things quicker,and looked more spectacular, but I don't think we'd like what we'd be dealing with now.

[HighRoadToChina]

Time to boycott the Turks!

[LS]

If this was a "failed" strategy, I'd hate to see a successful one. This "failed" the way Sherman's March to the Sea "failed."

[Destro]

The specific strategy of "Shock and Awe" can be said to have failed not the overall strategy of "liberating" Iraq.

Since Iraq had working telephones and television service till the last week of the war I would say "Shock and Awe" fell short of shocking and awing the Iraqi regime into quitting resistance until we enetred Baghdad (in fact Baghdad fell faster than Basra or Um Qasr-citie we thought would be in coalition hands by day one).