Hackworth on Larry King Live: Rumsfeld Screwed Up

Larry King Live ^ | 3/29/03 | CNN

[FreepnDeacn]

KING: Colonel Hackworth, have you been proven right based on your criticism the last two nights because the reports are contradictory?

COL. DAVID HACKWORTH, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Well, my sources are there and they're not the spinners that belong to the liar's club, and I check with them and they tell me what's going on and it's not like being on the battlefield but my sources are young officers who really know what's going on and they're only interested in one thing is keeping their troops alive.

The bottom line is Saddam is saying, said years ago publicly he was going to fight this war differently. He told his people to arm themselves and prepare for guerilla warfare and that's exactly what he's doing. Our own CIA presented this intelligence to Secretary Rumsfeld at the Pentagon and it was just totally ignored.

KING: But, Hack, a week ago you thought this was going to be a slam dunk.

HACKWORTH: If we had the combat force that we were supposed to have. The president of the United States authorized eight divisions. Of those eight divisions, less than half of them are there. Rumsfeld thought he could go on the war on the cheap.

The end of result of that, Larry, is that we don't have sufficient forces to do the job. And so, it is right now, we're between a rock and a hard place. We don't have the forces to keep our supply lines open and we don't have the forces to give our troops a rest.

You can't take combat troops, infantry and tankers, and work them night and day and that's what's happening. They've got to have a rest.

[sam_paine]

So the first time we try out that lighter force, ....

Well, in any case, why would we be "experimenting" when decisive victory is absolutely required to show pan-Arabia who's boss?

The only thing I can think of is if we are trying to show-off to some larger potential foe: like maybe China.

If we can defeat a medium-sized country with a relatively small force, then perhaps we can take on a jumbo-sized country with a large force? I dunno, but there is really no excuse for skimping, is there?

I mean, I really hate to read the "touching" article about Iraqi refugees feeding MY "hungry" Marines!! WTF!?!?!

[AmericaUnited]

KING: But, Hack, a week ago you thought this was going to be a slam dunk.

In other words... SHUTDOWN, YOU WERE AS WRONG AS THE PEOPLE YOU'RE CRITICIZING!

[SERE_DOC]

Hack what an apporprate name for someone who resigned his commission or retired during the war because he didn't agree with the superiors and moved to Austraila. There is no doubt he is a warrior but IMO he is too conflicted to be considered.

[verity]

I opine that the tight turtle neck sweaters are cutting off the blood flow to his brain.

[BOBWADE]

He is also a Demacrat Liberal. nuff said about his credability.

[UncleSamUSA]

I agree with you about the Larry King show last night. I usually never watch LK, but I sat through the entire program last night transfixed by the incredible amount of America bashing going on. They had the anchor of some Arabic TV station, some woman author who claimed that this operation will be as unsuccessful as Afghanistan (that's right she felt Afghan was not a success), they had Hack and another "retired General" who both felt this war plan was a travesty...

but to me anyway, the biggest surprise was Arthur Kent. You remember, the Scud Stud from the Gulf War. AK was in London and he sounded like a paid mouthpiece for Saddam Hussein, or he sounded like he was on the al Jazeera payroll. He is so against this operation and so against the US, that at the end even Larry King was speechless, and threw up his hands in exasperation saying "Wow, this whole panel seems to be so negative!"

The only semi-sane voice was some writer for the Wash Post who kept saying that while things may look cloudy now, he was convinced that when the masses of Iraqi citizens were SURE Saddam was gone, they WOULD rise up and help us and that the whole thing would look different.

But Arthur Kent so thoroughly disgusted me with his virulent anti-Americanism that he even made the moronic Hackworth look like a Rummy buddy.

[omniscient]

Hackworth is starting to sound a little like that paragon of loyalty, Scott Ritter.

[JimRed]

I did not see it (CNN is at the top of my sh*t list, and ol' Larry is just an entertainer) but I'll bet Hack did not mention Turkey and how that part of the plan was screwed up by third party involvement.

[UncleSamUSA]

I forgot to mention that the absolute highlight (i.e. lowlight) of the entire hour was when that idiotic woman author actually won the Antiwar Daily Double by using the words "QUAGMIRE" and "MOGADISHU" [both meant in an Anti-US sense] within 30 seconds of each other in response to two different questions.

[Pa' fuera]

HACKWORTH: If we had the combat force that we were supposed to have. The president of the United States authorized eight divisions. Of those eight divisions, less than half of them are there. Rumsfeld thought he could go on the war on the cheap.

He knew how many divisions had been deployed as of last week, and he still predicted a slam dunk. Did he expect five divisions to deploy in one week?

[JimRed]

...some woman author who claimed that this operation will be as unsuccessful as Afghanistan

In her eyes, it WAS unsuccessful; the bad guys didn't win and Bush looked good.

[Helms]

As soon as his book was entiltled "Steel My Soldiers Heart" a red flag went up.

[TrueBeliever9]

"Boorda went home for lunch and took his own life." your quote

OK if Boorda took his own life - why did he fire 2 shots and why shoot himself in the chest while preparing to get in his car. Strange actions for a highly trained military man.

[A2J]

What's up with Hack, anyway?

I saw the show as well and all I can say is that both Hackworth and some fat former special ops colonel were trashing the strategy being used in Iraq.

It would appear that these "second-guessers," as Rumsfeld put it, refuse to acknowledge that wars can be fought differently than when they were in the military.

[shrinkermd]

"So I'm flipping through the news channels and see this guy, supposedly an old war hero, saying Bush authorized eight divisions and Rumsfeld only sent half that? Is that true? What's up with Hack, anyway?"

Answer: One facet of Hackworth not mentioned is that he is an old man criticizing younger men. Anyone as old as I am can attest envy of the young often leads to unrealistic expectations and criticisms of the young. Not the total answer but part of it. Another small part is the certainty that Hackworth becomes less and less marketable as a TV celebrity and pundit as his age passes such that he has to try harder and harder to be noticed and relevant.

[fatrat]

exactly, it is time for Hack to do what old soldiers are supposed to do, fade away.

[akron]

from Hackworth's own web page

Hack is an advocate of military reform and a believer that the big fire power -- "nuke-the-pukes" -- solution won't work anymore, but that doesn't mean war will go away. He sees big and little fights ahead and urges military reform. He believes passionately that "America needs a streamlined, hard hitting force for the 21st century" and beyond.

http://www.hackworth.com/biography.html

[savedbygrace]

my sources are young officers who really know what's going on and they're only interested in one thing is keeping their troops alive.

Although this is vitally important, if it's the only thing they're interested in, they need to resign their commissions.

[FreepnDeacn]

Have we not DEPLOYED a "streamlined, hard-hitting force?" So what's Hack hacking about? Good point, akron.

My favorite bit in this thread is still this one from LS...

He reminds me of the French generals in WW I who cling to the bayonet charge in the face of machine gun fire while Churchill is screaming, "the TANK, you idiots, the TANK!"

LOL

[albertabound]

I am sad to report that Kent is a Canadian and was criticizing Bush for not widening the coalition with more substantial allies and next door neighbours like Mexico and Canada. As a Canadian, if more time would have gotten us on board, I would be a lot happier today.