Posted on 02/19/2007 1:01:10 PM PST by LM_Guy
BLUFFTON, S.C. (AP) -- Republican presidential candidate John McCain said Monday the war in Iraq has been mismanaged for years and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will be remembered as one of the worst in history. "We are paying a very heavy price for the mismanagement _ that's the kindest word I can give you _ of Donald Rumsfeld, of this war," the Arizona senator told an overflow crowd of more than 800 at a retirement community near Hilton Head Island, S.C. "The price is very, very heavy and I regret it enormously."
McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, complained that Rumsfeld never put enough troops on the ground to succeed in Iraq.
"I think that Donald Rumsfeld will go down in history as one of the worst secretaries of defense in history," McCain said to applause.
The comments were in sharp contrast to McCain's statement when Rumsfeld resigned in November, and failed to address the reality that President Bush is the commander in chief.
"While Secretary Rumsfeld and I have had our differences, he deserves Americans' respect and gratitude for his many years of public service," McCain said last year when Rumfeld stepped down.
On a two-day campaign swing in South Carolina, McCain fielded questions from the crowd for more than an hour and said the United States can succeed in Iraq with additional troops and a new strategy. McCain has been a strong proponent of using more troops and favors Bush's increase of some 21,500 U.S. forces in the nearly four-year-old war.
I have been saying for 3 1/2 years that we would be in this sad situation and this critical situation we are in today," he said.
McCain's bid for president was sidetracked in South Carolina in 2000 after..
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
The only problem with McCain's assessment is the usual one:
There is no way to know what outcomes would have resulted from different tactics. Things might have gone better, or might have gone worse. Even with the benefit of hindsight, we cannot be certain of alternate outcomes.
For example, more troops might have totally turned off the Iraqi citizens, and they might not have turned out to vote, and might have joined the insurgency in greater numbers.
None of this matters now. Just like our own lives, we learn, adjust, move forward and succeed.
Or not.
Whether we think we can succeed, or think we can't, we are correct.
I agree with you. I live in Arizona, but fortunately, McCain is usually absent. All talk, no action.
If they don't provide their alternate plan, they might as well be John Kerry.
Not accepting the surrender of Iraqi forces from Iraqi generals when offered and letting them melt away instead. Dissolving the Iraqi Army. Deferring to the Iraqi government when they protested our actions. Not treating Muqtada al-Sadr like he did Uday and Qusay. Not finishing the job during First Fallujah. Letting the Iraqis write their own constitution accepting Sharia law.
In other words, not being aggressive enough.
I don't think he was managing the war in order to win control of Congress, he was managing the war in order to win the War on Terror.
His decision to use a small force, as opposed to a larger one. It worked out fine for the actual invasion, but not for the occupation/pacification. And the small army approach was more a concession to reality than to a philosophical approach.
I disagree. Rummy was one of the brightest SecDefs we've ever had, and is the reason we today aren't trying to fight a 21st century war with WW II tactics and weaponry.
Lincoln "mismanaged" Grant and Sherman right into the top generalship and kicked butt. I'll take that "mismanagement" any time.
"what exactly did Rumsfeld 'bungle'?"
Isn't it obvious? He didn't agree with McPain.
McCain's mouth has been mismanaged for years.
There should never have been a vote before pacification was achieved. It was a gimmick to justify the war. A military governor was needed to hold the place together until some semblance of order was achieved.
My sentiments exactly, ESPECIALLY in time of war!!!
Hey maybe the demo/socialists can bring back McNamara as SECDEF.
You must be talking about something else?
"I think the bungling of the Iraq war by Rumsfeld is the #1 reason the GOP lost both control of Congress in 2006."
The post election and exit polls support your claim. Two key factos yielded the loss: Iraq and loss of independent voters, who shifted from voting Republican 2000 and 2004, to voting Democrat in 2006.
Rumsfeld led the war effort. He buck those who argued for more troops.
I recall Colin Powell stated: "you break it, you own it."
Rumsfeld owns the results in Iraq.
The idea to bring democracy to Iraq, while quite noble, was extremely naive.
Even without the meddling by Iran and Syria, the Sunnis and Shiites would still be blowing each other and us up.
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.