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

Skip to comments.

Americans `conned' into backing war, ex-general asserts
Chicago Tribune ^ | Dec. 31, 2003 | Thomas Ricks

Posted on 12/31/2003 8:12:13 AM PST by Rennes Templar

Edited on 12/31/2003 8:50:26 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]

Former Central Command chief Anthony Zinni denounces `ideologues' in Bush administration

Anthony Zinni's opposition to U.S. policy on Iraq began on the monsoon-ridden afternoon of Nov. 3, 1970. He was lying on a Vietnamese mountainside west of Da Nang, three rounds from an AK-47 assault rifle in his side and back. He could feel his lifeblood seeping into the ground as he slipped in and out of consciousness.

He had plenty of time to think in the following months while recuperating in a military hospital in Hawaii. Among other things, he promised himself that, "If I'm ever in a position to say what I think is right, I will. . . . I don't care what happens to my career."

(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: anthonyzinni; armchairgenerals; zinni
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 281-283 next last
To: BDavis
"Was the order to dock in Yemen lawful?"

It was utter insanity and demonstrated a gross callousness for the safety of this ship and it's crew.

121 posted on 12/31/2003 9:44:11 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: BDavis
For example, why has the Bush administration failed to make the same links between anti-American terrorist attacks (i.e., Salman Pak) and Iraq as you?

They know we have many enemies who are actively defending the Axis of Evil and Islamic terrorists trying to kill millions of us. They know we have envious and ambitious rivals who want to topple Bush so they can take back the reins of power and are perfectly willing to play the stooge for the enemy.

Some of the war will be fought publicly and some of it privately. Fortunately we have a President now that understands the threat and will act before there is a mushroom cloud.

122 posted on 12/31/2003 9:45:08 PM PST by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: BDavis
You sure are doing a great song and dance trying to cover Zinni's arse for his gross negligence in CAUSING the Cole disaster.
123 posted on 12/31/2003 9:45:09 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
He is doing a song and dance. I wonder who calls the tune.
124 posted on 12/31/2003 9:46:22 PM PST by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

Comment #125 Removed by Moderator

Comment #126 Removed by Moderator

To: af_vet_1981
The Zinni two step? Zinni was pretty good at that himself. At the Senate hearings on the USS Cole, when he was asked about the thread that swimmers and suicide boats could present to a ship sitting tied to a dock, utter defenseless, he said he would have to defer to someone with more knowledge them him on that.

No Shite!

127 posted on 12/31/2003 9:49:55 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: BDavis
And cost us seventeen lives in the long run

Yes it did, and what did we do to correct it?

Nothing. We hired lawyers!

GWB is a totally different president. he is taking this animal head on and is winning.

Though, likely we will be looking over our shoulder for a generation, we are not laying down and taking it on the chin.

This is a good thing.

Now, to your questioning of motives, you have all the information you need here in the archives.

Many of the relationships that you claim the administration has not made and should have made are in deed in evidence.

The fact that the admin has not publically made them is expained by the nature and type of evidence. The evidence, while actionable intel, is not the kind of thing that you can take to a court.

Fortunately for you and I, and our loved ones. Actionable intel is all we need. We do not fight our wars in the courts or in the court of public opinion.

We fired those lawyers when we got rid of Clinton.

Lawyers and courts will lose this war if we let them get involved.

We cannot give animals rights. All they will do will be to dirty the court room and kill the witnesses.(after they crap on the floor)

128 posted on 12/31/2003 9:54:41 PM PST by Cold Heat ("It is easier for an ass to succeed in that trade than any other." [Samuel Clemens, on lawyers])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: BDavis
Just because some higher level administration officials hadn't read an outdate plan doesn't mean that the military wasn't aware of it.
129 posted on 12/31/2003 9:55:06 PM PST by PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Blue_Ridge_Mtn_Geek
Americans are a people unwilling to kill enough of our mortal enemies to ever win decisively before domestic politics assures ugly outcomes.
130 posted on 12/31/2003 9:55:38 PM PST by SevenDaysInMay (Federal judges and justices serve for periods of good behavior, not life. Article III sec. 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Comment #131 Removed by Moderator

Comment #132 Removed by Moderator

To: BDavis
Nukes, contrary to democrat BS were never cited as a critical concern.

Due to Iraq's past and the absence of inspectors, some theorized that they could reconstitute what the inspector had removed within a years or so.

We had no Intel to prove or disprove the theory but we knew they were trying to get equipment for the purpose.

Saddam, on the other hand, went to North Korea on a shopping trip. Too bad the Koreans screwed him royal. {hehehe}

133 posted on 12/31/2003 10:00:55 PM PST by Cold Heat ("It is easier for an ass to succeed in that trade than any other." [Samuel Clemens, on lawyers])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: BDavis
What had changed in Iraq from 1999 to 2002?

For one thing, a whole bunch of US ground troops were on their way to the region.

134 posted on 12/31/2003 10:03:26 PM PST by PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

Comment #135 Removed by Moderator

To: BDavis
What had changed in Iraq from 1999 to 2002?

Iraq did not change, our military capabilities and assets changed.

Our knowledge that bombing from 40,000 ft changed.(after the total waste in Kosovo, because they did not hit squat except civillians and the Chinease embassy)

136 posted on 12/31/2003 10:04:53 PM PST by Cold Heat ("It is easier for an ass to succeed in that trade than any other." [Samuel Clemens, on lawyers])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

Comment #137 Removed by Moderator

Comment #138 Removed by Moderator

Comment #139 Removed by Moderator

To: BDavis
And they were wrong.

And they figuered they might be so they never pressed nukes as a main issue. It was a side concern and no intel to prove it.

140 posted on 12/31/2003 10:06:57 PM PST by Cold Heat ("It is easier for an ass to succeed in that trade than any other." [Samuel Clemens, on lawyers])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 281-283 next last

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