Former top general rips Bush’s Iraq policy.
Former top general rips Bush’s Iraq policy.
Retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez blasted the Bush administration today for a “catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan” and denounced the current “surge” strategy as a “desperate” move that will not achieve long-term stability. The New York Times reports that Sanchez is “the most senior in a string of retired generals to harshly criticize the administration’s conduct of the war.” More:
“There was been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders,” he said, adding later in his remarks that civilian officials have been “derelict in their duties” and guilty of a “lust for power.”
UPDATE: Sanchez said that in Iraq the United States is “living a nightmare with no end in sight.”
UPDATE II: In Nov. 2003, Bush hailed Gen. Sanchez’s “strong leadership.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
General Davie P, you got some ’splaining to do!!!
October 12th, 2007 at 9:08 pm“derelict in their duties†and guilty of a “lust for power.â€
translation = Impeachable Offenses.
October 12th, 2007 at 9:08 pmi’d call that the unvarnished truth.
October 12th, 2007 at 9:08 pmSo… does this make Ret Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez a “phony soldier” too?
Or is he a “troop-hater”, “anti-American”, and a “terrorist appeaser”?
I wonder what the right-wingers are going to label him in 3… 2… 1…
October 12th, 2007 at 9:10 pmJeez, can’t a swiftboater even have a weekend to watch football once in a while? Noooooo. Some stupid general has to voice his opinion on the “War Strategery” on a Friday and the poor swiftboaters gots to work the weekend again.
October 12th, 2007 at 9:12 pmthe poor swiftboaters gots to work the weekend again.
In their leaky dhows…
October 12th, 2007 at 9:13 pmGeneral Davie P, you got some ’splaining to do!!!
Comment by RUCerious — October 12, 2007 @ 9:08 pm
Didn’t know you and the General were on a first name basis. Could you pass him this message …
October 12th, 2007 at 9:14 pmI wonder what the right-wingers are going to label him in 3… 2… 1…
Comment by Gregor Samsa — October 12, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
Duh, all of the above.
October 12th, 2007 at 9:15 pmWhy do former generals hate our soldiers … sigh
October 12th, 2007 at 9:16 pmThey’re gonna come after Sanchez. It’s gonna be dirty.
October 12th, 2007 at 9:19 pmhttp://www.draftgore.com
October 12th, 2007 at 9:19 pmWell, fortunately for the American people, we have experienced, responsible individuals available to put this unpatriotic, “phony soldier” in his place… such as retired Five-star Generals Limbaugh and O’Reilly, and brilliant, active duty, Lt. Generals Hannity, Malkin, and Coulter!
October 12th, 2007 at 9:21 pmricardo sanchez perjured himself before the senate armed services committee in testimony you provided on 19 may 2004…
he may be able to create an effective smokescreen for some people, but it ain’t workin’ with me… he’s simply a liar trying to save his own ass…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
October 12th, 2007 at 9:22 pmThey’re gonna come after Sanchez. It’s gonna be dirty.
Comment by Badmoodman — October 12, 2007 @ 9:19 pm
he’s not twelve years old. how brave of them.
October 12th, 2007 at 9:22 pmGen. Sanchez should have spoken up over 3000 deaths ago. Too late Sir.
RIP
October 12th, 2007 at 9:25 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
[...]that civilian officials have been “derelict in their duties†and guilty of a “lust for power.â€
Gee! Ya, think so?
October 12th, 2007 at 9:25 pmComment by Shayne — October 12, 2007 @ 9:15 pm
Yeah, duh, what was I thinking? ;-)
October 12th, 2007 at 9:47 pmWell, TCDON, perhaps you are correct in that he has blue steel. But then again the truth usually only comes out when one is slighted
October 12th, 2007 at 10:04 pmYeah, duh, what was I thinking? ;-)
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Dunno. Lets ask a troll, they think they know what everyone else is thinking and only too happy to tell you what you think, albeit always contrary to what they think.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:07 pm“living a nightmare with no end in sight.â€
Hopefully Jan 20, 2009 will be the end, unless GW666 and Darth Dick have something else in mind before then.
Impeach the Fascist War Criminal Scum
Buck Fush
October 12th, 2007 at 10:12 pmOh yes, General Sanchez ret. is definitely an islamofascist, unserious, hippie, pinko-commie, liberal who hates America. Has to be, he has contradicted King George.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:19 pmSanchez said that in Iraq the United States is “living a nightmare with no end in sight.â€
***You can say that again.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:26 pmGen. Sanchez needed to find the nerve to speak out against the civilian authorities 3 years ago. I agree with his statements, but where was his nerve when his soldiers needed him?
October 12th, 2007 at 10:26 pmarguewithmydad
RU: I should think that this, coming from a General, would mandate that Congress begin impeachment hearings. Otherwise, it’s a derelection of duty on the part of the members of Congress. When clear evidence of impeachable offenses occur (how many is this now?? I’ve lost count myself) it is the “obligation” of their oath of office and not their “option” to do so. It’s part of their job description and anything short of immediate impeachment hearings would be grounds for the people to launch a abrogation of their duties as Congressmen.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:33 pmYes, I find it disconcerting that Sanchez, like George Tenet, didn’t speak out sooner and is probably using the excuse of the three year silence mandate by book publishers as his excuse for not doing the patriotic thing. Where the hell do these public servants get off using book deals as a cover to hide behind?
October 12th, 2007 at 10:34 pmI believe this was the guy in charge of the Abu torture nightmare as well. It’s time for him to spill hit guts about all of that as well.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:35 pmIn Nov. 2003, Bush hailed Gen. Sanchez’s “strong leadership.â€
That was before he became a lib’rul.
Cheers,
October 12th, 2007 at 10:38 pmI’ve lost count myself) it is the “obligation†of their oath of office and not their “option†to do so.
Comment by Veritas — October 12, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Yes, and so far, almost all ( not quite all ) are Oath Breakers.
There was a time when that really meant something.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:38 pmAnd it wasn’t good at all.
Maybe I’m an optimist, but I’m hoping that congress is waiting to file charges against Bush and Cheney until they’re out of the White House and can’t pardon each other.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:39 pmI don’t know Gregor, maybe they’re afraid to smear the General. Maybe they’re just going to stick to smearing kids for now.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:40 pmGood point, Shayne. Maybe that’s the only reason which makes sense in terms of the dems dragging their feet on this?
October 12th, 2007 at 10:43 pm#17 TCdon:
Isn’t this the General who headed the coalition forces during the Abu Ghraib scandal?
Actually, Sanchez was top military commander in Iraq in the early days of the occupation. Thomas Ricks rips him a couple new ones in his book “Fiasco”. Sanchez is hardly the most creditable source (although perhaps he’s acquired some 20-20 hindsight). And he may have a bone to pick with Petraeus and the folks that have been criticizing the early war effort. That being said, he’s not necessarily wrong here….
Cheers,
October 12th, 2007 at 10:43 pmWell you know about Bush pushing the UN for War Crimes exemption, don’t you?
If they haven’t done anything wrong, why do they need exemtion from Freaking War Crimes?????
So whats up with violating the law? Not just international law, but US Law
October 12th, 2007 at 10:49 pm2441. War crimes
(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
October 12th, 2007 at 10:51 pmIn their leaky dhows…
Comment by RUCerious — October 12, 2007 @ 9:13 pm
Extra points for you for the use of that word. Made me lol.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:08 pmThanks ms Candyce.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:33 pmEspecially since they’re Arab dinghys…
I don’t know Gregor, maybe they’re afraid to smear the General. -Shayne
I dont think they are afraid of that but the self-inflicted hypocrisy and the damage it would do.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:34 pmIt’s time for him to spill hit guts about all of that as well.
Wouldja bet that the CIA and NSA spooks were the ones doing most of the dirty work, and Sanchez was informed after the fact/??
October 12th, 2007 at 11:39 pmI think that, for now, the right-wing smear machine will continue bashing Vice President Al Gore over his Nobel Prize. (Congratulations, Al!) They don’t want any of his ideas gaining any more traction than they already have. It “would be bad for business.” Therefore, it must be evil. Going green will hurt corporate profits, and by law, profits must be maximized, so spending money will no immediate return (other than their own workers being healthier and using less sick time), and they can go on their merry way farting through silk and paying servants to do the responsible things in life (like raise their kids and pay their own bills). At least, that’s how I think they’ll see it. Your views may vary. Offer void in Texas. Some dissembly required. Price does not include dealer prep or taxes. Mean people suck.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:45 pmSo many smears, so little time.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:46 pmWhere the hell do these public servants get off using book deals as a cover to hide behind?
Comment by Veritas — October 12, 2007 @ 10:34 pm
While yer at it, don’t leave Colin Powell and Alan Greenspan off that list – ya know, the one of “Folks Who Could Have Spoken Up Sooner But Didn’t”…
October 12th, 2007 at 11:53 pmWhy do former generals hate our soldiers … sigh
Comment by Shayne
So you think this general hates our soldiers when he thinks that we need to get them out of Iraq and out of harms way because Bush’s failed policies in Iraq have caused this quagmire. But Betrayus loves our soldiers because he wants to keep our overdeployed and overworked soldiers in Iraq indefinitely to be cannon fodder for the Iraqi’s who are fighting a civil war.
Up is down, black is white….
October 13th, 2007 at 12:21 am#ricardo sanchez perjured himself before the senate armed services committee in testimony you provided on 19 may 2004…Comment by profmarcus
Proof please. Just because you say it doesn’t necessarily make it true.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:23 amGen. Sanchez should have spoken up over 3000 deaths ago. Too late Sir.
Comment by Tired Of Fighting
And how do you know he didn’t. He didn’t retire from the military until November, 2006. I’m not saying he’s not an opportunist (some people say he is writing a book), but we can’t judge him on what he did while in the military because we weren’t there.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:26 amThe rats are turning on the rats. Priceless..
October 13th, 2007 at 12:27 amWhere the hell do these public servants get off using book deals as a cover to hide behind?
Comment by Veritas
You are so right about that. We don’t know what Sanchez did while he was in the military. Perhaps he was working behind the scenes to change people’s minds. He didn’t retire until Nov. 2006. On the other hand, he got quite emotional in his speech about all of our troops who have died since the escalation started, criticizing the escalation, and he was out of the military when Bush started the escalation. Why didn’t he speak up back when Bush was pushing the escalation in the first place?
I think it’s great that all these people are speaking out now because it is putting the spotlight on Bush’s misdeeds, but I wonder how they sleep at night knowing that if they had stepped up to the plate sooner, they could have saved many lives.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:31 amFailure? I don’t think so. This was a pure profit-making venture that has succeeded beyond their wildest expectations thanks to an “opposition” Party that played it’s part to perfection and an idiot population that will not get off the couch to protect their own f#cking interests.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:37 amSo when is Rush Limpballs going to have Sanchez on his show, and then accuse the general of ignorance with regard to military matters?
October 13th, 2007 at 2:20 amWhat the phuck DOES a “war czar†do??
Comment by Arn Gunnutes — October 13, 2007 @ 1:38 am
He’s the idiot stooge who gets to take “the blame.”
October 13th, 2007 at 2:36 amimagine a front line soldier hearing this and wonder, if he can see it and the army command can see it, who is the idiot keeping him there and what for.
this sounds like hitler losing the core of the wehrmacht because he would not allow a retreat from the eastern front.
October 13th, 2007 at 3:00 amIt is good to see Sanchez speak out, because he will have some credibility with gullible fence sitters who still respect him for his uniform. But this guy has plenty of skeletons in his own closet and his motives are naturally suspect. Any way you look at it, though, this will create discomfort for the Bush gang and their propaganda mouthpieces.
October 13th, 2007 at 3:32 amSORRY, OFF-TOPIC HERE….
IDEA: “Constitution Lapel Pins†for Dem Leaders
Howdy. I really would appreciate your brief feedback on something I’ve thought about off-and-on for months. Not sure if it’s a great idea or Beavis & Butthead.
Let Republicans have their stupid flag lapel pins, because pins are lame. That said, I’m proposing an idea for…..yep, a lapel pin. How about encouraging Dem leaders to sport “Constitution Pins†on their lapels? They might appear as a gilded, partially unrolled scroll. This pin, like other pins, is meaningless in itself. But it would quickly become a talking point. Chris Matthews, George Stephanopoulos, Bob Schieffer and others will interview Dems and pop the inevitable question for many weeks, “So I see you are wearing one of the new Constitution pins. Explain what that means to you, and why.†This would be the perfect set-up for what Dems have been yelling anyway: “We have a president who, in his lust for executive power, has repeatedly undermined our nation’s Constitution in a brazen manner we would have never imagined not so long ago. Whether it’s illegally monitoring our citizens’ communications, claims that torture is something other than that, or outing our undercover intelligence agents for political gain, this is not only unacceptable to us, but it goes against the core democratic principals this republic was founded on. IF THE PRESIDENT WON’T DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION, THEN WE MOST CERTAINLY WILL.†Etc etc etc. The pins would not only provide a new talking point, but could come to visually symbolize everything that Dems have been passionately yelling about for the past 7 years.
SO, GREAT IDEA?……OR TOTAL BEAVIS & BUTTHEAD? PLEASE LET ME KNOW! THANK YOU.
October 13th, 2007 at 3:57 amCool your jets dootz . . . recess ain’t over and I still got frogs to ’splode.
October 13th, 2007 at 4:03 am[Frog splat]
“Dootz . . . you better shut up cause one day, “I’m gonna rule the world.”"
Day dreams of the delerious.
Mountain View Prison for the Insanely Disturbed
October 13th, 2007 at 4:05 amSO, GREAT IDEA?……
Comment by TC-12
I say YES !!
∞
October 13th, 2007 at 5:18 amWith statements like these, this general will not make it to any major network television screen. Netwroks prefer O’Hanlon type of opinion instead….!
October 13th, 2007 at 6:07 amA day late and a dollar short. Too many lives have been lost and too much murky water has washed under the bridge. The time for General Sanchez to speak courageously and effectively about this stinkin’ war has long since passed. If he’s trying to ease a guilty counscience so be it. He will never come close to matching the courage of those who served under him and those who were killed, maimed and/or wounded. He could have shown some real guts and said this while in command but lacking the gumption of his men he rolled over and played dead to Bush. General Sanchez it’s definitely time to fade away like a good soldier. Thanks for nothing.
October 13th, 2007 at 6:38 amUnless the dire economic problems are solved in Iraq, guns alone will not help us, when:
unemplyoment in Iraq is above 50%
Having electricity 2 to 3 hours a day for most Iraqis,except for the ruling elite, becomes a luxury,and as a result the industry is suffering too.
Never ending daily death toll,and destrcution,check point ,high concrete walls creating non business atmosphere in the whole country.
2.5 million refugees fled to neighboring countries mainly to Syria and Jordan.
2 millions are displaced inside Iraq.
Oil production still at 60% level of pre war.
The country is drained of capital and brains which left the country.
Different types of armed militias are ruling many parts of the country,specially in the south and many other neigborhoods all over Iraq.
Military alone will not solve the long term problems of Iraq..It is instead inviting and encouraging groups whom we supposed to defeat. The current situation now in Iraq is used instead as a recruit by groups who are opposing us inside the country.
The weak government of Iraq wants to survive,and wants us there..but we cannot play only the ‘body guard’ role in the country..this is not enough. There should be another look at the whole situation from all sides…not just the military one only in order for us to succeed.
Congress should step in and ask tough questions,instead of just preparing and issuing long list of checks to be spend in Iraq.
And now the same groups who planned this war in Iraq ,are pushing for another war with Iran. Congress must be careful not to let us get involved again in another bigger and more destructive war,without good solid grounds and reasons that justify it.
October 13th, 2007 at 6:51 amRemarkable that the Times chose to this story on a Saturday morning.
October 13th, 2007 at 9:15 amWe ain’t exactly talkin’ Klaus von Stauffenberg here. A quick word search through the comments on this story failed to turn up the word “resign.” As in what the censors of ancient China useta do: write a letter to the Emperor criticizing whatever ghastly action he was engaged in, then kill themselves. Yet another Duty-Honor-Country Fearless Warrior who waited until he was nice and comfy among the civvies before flaming the war. There’s what’s good for America and then there’s the pension.
Also, note that the story hit on Saturday when nobody reads anything. By Monday, this item will be as dead as an Iraqi woman driver and we’ll be back to the latest on Britney.
October 13th, 2007 at 9:16 amSounds to me like another rat deserting Bush’s sinking ship. Where was Sanchez years ago with this information? Did it somehow change for him overnight?
What we’re witnessing presently is a host of ex-generals coming forward to exonerate their own sins ahead of the tsunami against this administration with it’s potential war crime tribunals. These guys recognize that they are “part of the problem” instead of being “part of the solution” and they’re getting rather scared.
Sanchez must have known about the Blackwater abuses going on?? Where was his conscience then??
Sanchez’s sudden acquisition of a conscience may, in fact, have more to do with protecting himself from the fallout than anything of an altruistic nature.
Still, what these generals are saying provides evidence of “high crimes” and “impeachable offenses”. Let’s get on with the task at hand which is impeachment proceedings. Let’s quit dicking around with these thugs once and for all.
October 13th, 2007 at 9:37 amThis story has been brewing for days and was aired yesterday which was Friday as far as I can determine.
October 13th, 2007 at 9:38 amSanchez doing a “George Tenet” now – what the hell? At least Tenet hid behind a book deal and some cockamamie three year gag rule for publishing. Since when does a book deal trump national security? Since when is it okay to withhold serious evidence in criminal behavior simply because one is authoring a book? WTF is going on in this country?
October 13th, 2007 at 9:41 amC-span had a replay of Sanchez’s comments this morning, and their opening segment on Washington Journal was an openline about the General’s criticism.
October 13th, 2007 at 9:45 amCallers said he was right and late.
Did anyone see the coverage of this on MSNBC this morning by Alex Witt? More precisely, did anyone notice the facial expressions she had when introducing the story, first with a WH reporter, then with Col. Jack Jacobs?
In the [former] she had the narrow eyes of disdain and condescension, and with the colonel her mouth (amazingly with both corners instead of the usual one-sided) exhibited undeniable contempt.
I’ve never noticed this kind of display (to this degree), even on Fake News Channel where at least they hide their contempt behind their human masks.
She wasn’t even trying to hide her personal feelings. How unprofessional can you get!
And these weren’t ‘micro-expressions’ or whatever the technical term is, they were plainly visible without having to go frame by frame. I wish I had been able to capture screen shots or video.
I can’t be the only one who noticed..
October 13th, 2007 at 10:34 amLest we forget, this same guy that is now speaking of ‘incomptent leadership’ is the same one that – according to documents obtained by the WaPo and the ACLU – ordered the torture at Abu Ghraib. If that wasn’t incompetent leadership, I am at a loss to explain what is.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:48 amAnd to top off his “mission accomplished” version of affairs, bush still has no clue where Osama Bin Laden is. But then again, Bush has USED OBL to further his real mission, oil being one, total national and world destabization others. It’s the plan for the next century of rovian republican rule.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:50 amIt may be working and, as the Congress plays right along.
Codpiece, might you mean Gen Miller, of Guantanamo fame?
October 13th, 2007 at 10:53 amWill the rightwingers label Sanchez a phony soldier? You can count on it. Will the rightwingers blame him entirely for the Abu Ghraib scandal? Of course.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:57 amWill he be accused of treason along with MoveOn and others who claim Petraeus is a sycophantic mouthpiece for Bush? As long as the likes of Lintball, Mal-icious-kin, O’Lielly, Slanthead, Coulter-geist, and the rest are still bloviating.
Comment by TRDaggett — October 13, 2007 @ 10:34 am
You weren’t the only one that noticed. I thought her tone of voice was equally disdainfull. It was appalling.
October 13th, 2007 at 11:33 amWhat the phuck DOES a “war czar†do??
Comment by Arn Gunnutes
His job description is only two words: Fall Guy.
I suspect he is there so that if something goes horribly wrong (not knowing how much horrible Iraq could be), then Bush will blame it on the War Czar.
October 13th, 2007 at 11:58 amThis story has been brewing for days and was aired yesterday which was Friday as far as I can determine.
Comment by Veritas
It’s that “liberal media” Veritas. They plan on reporting bad news for George Bush on Fridays.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:01 pmIf you have the stomach for it, and access to it, go to redstate.com and read this article:
http://redstate.com/blogs/steve_foley/2007/oct/12/pessimistic_conservatives
It’s all about how those pessimistic Republicans are hurting the part and how if they all have a positive outlook, they can beat the Democrats in 2008. Talk about delusional. But, it’s interesting reading and won’t turn your stomach like their attack on Graham Frost.
My favorite comment was this one:
“Without restoring respect and sanity” by slapping down all those bad weed Democrats. There is no way the Republicans can restore “respect and sanity” to the office of President unless it was a Goldwater Republican who respected the constitution, the rule of law, our rights to privacy, and the fact that we need to be a team player in the world in general. That ain’t going to happen with any of their current picks.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:06 pmSO, GREAT IDEA?……OR TOTAL BEAVIS & BUTTHEAD? PLEASE LET ME KNOW! THANK YOU.
Comment by TC-12
Actually, I think that is a brilliant idea. The problem the Democrats have is that they don’t know how to “frame” issues. The Republicans find an issue and find a point they can “frame” and that frame is repeated endlessly so it somehow becomes a fact in people’s minds. The Democrats could learn from the tricks the Republicans use if they wanted to. Unfortunately they seem determined to keep the circular firing squad going instead.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:11 pmSo when will the GOP begin the character assassination of Lt. Gen. Sanchez?
October 13th, 2007 at 12:19 pmSanchez isn’t the best person to deliver this criticism, because he can be accused of having a personal agenda, and because he shares in responsibility for some of the worst excesses of this war. But just imagine how many active generals want to say these kinds of things. There is a quiet revolt brewing in the military’s highest ranks, you can count on it. Things will only get uglier for Bush from here on out. And when the Democrats take power, I expect that a new chairman of the Joint Chiefs will be selected from outside the clique of Bush yes men that Petraeus belongs too. Then I expect to see some serious payback. Petraeus and others who hitched their cart to Bush will have no future after that.
October 13th, 2007 at 12:23 pmGeneral Sanchez was responsible, from June 2003, for the chaos in Baghdad and Iraq in general which laid the seeds for the “no end in sight” fiasco we see now. And then there’s abu-Ghraib, and his perjury about it.
“They have unquestionably been derelict in the performance of their duty. In my profession, these types of leaders would be immediately relieved or court-martialed.‖Sanchez
If the bell tolls, it tolls for thee, Ricky.
October 13th, 2007 at 1:06 pmRemarkable that the Times chose to this story on a Saturday morning.
Comment by alexlerman
Not at all remarkable. Just business as usual by the “liberal media”.
October 13th, 2007 at 2:02 pmCue blogger “robroy” to claim that he knows more than Sanchez and Sanchez is just being “political”.
October 13th, 2007 at 2:51 pmAs much as I like to see the rats abandoning the ship, it would have been nice to hear more of this kind of talk earlier.
Sanchez “commanded the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq from June 2003 until July 2004″, he certainly must have seen some hint that Pres Bush’s Iraq “strategy” was less than ideal back then.
It’s not as if things all of the sudden went down hill after his departure. As a matter of fact, Abu Ghraib made possible precisely due to a deeply flawed, “with us or against us” pig-headed policy this administration has wallowed in.
And in related news (albeit a little off topic), things are getting tense for the Bushies on the Turkish front:
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has appealed to Turkey for restraint, both against Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq and in reaction to a genocide resolution approved this week by a U.S. congressional panel.
US Secretary of State Rice Urges Turkish Restraint
It should be interesting to see the Bush administration explain their saber-rattling against Iran and their efforts to appease the Turks, even as the Turkish government plans to launch an attack on the Kurds across their border with Iraq.
October 13th, 2007 at 2:55 pmAnd how do you know he didn’t. He didn’t retire from the military until November, 2006. I’m not saying he’s not an opportunist (some people say he is writing a book), but we can’t judge him on what he did while in the military because we weren’t there.
Comment by bilbobaggins
I was there, TWICE, and the General NEVER said a word even though he KNEW things were wrong.
I am tired of people who keep saying this BS that we must shut up when WE’RE in uniform, my job as a Soldier yes is to follow orders, but my job also DEMANDS that I STAND UP and SPEAK OUT when those orders are WRONG or will do harm to my Men/Women.
I didn’t do 21 years in the U.S. Army being some quiet go along to get along NCO. I wasn’t worried about getting some cushy government contracting job when I retired or some seat on some corporate board like these so-called military men.
My job was to accomplish my mission, and to take care of my Soldiers, and I did that, and if something was wrong I said so. I want A leader who will speak out when they should, not wait until the body count is too high to take.
If you have seen my writings on here, you would know that I close with my Soldier who was killed. He means alot to me because one I was rersponsible for him, and there was nothing that I could do to stop what happened, because we were on a mission sent down by those who only now say that this war is not right, NOW IT’S NOT RIGHT!! Seven of my Soldiers also lost a limb over in Iraq, so I get very upset when someone who we are supposed to respect waits us out to tell the truth, that IS NOT leadership, that’s BUSH-LEAGUE.
You may want to sit and wait for these politicians in uniform to speak out, but my fellow Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, and Airman (my daughter included) cannot wait that long until it is advantageous to do so.
So I disagree with you, respectfully of course.
RIP
October 13th, 2007 at 3:03 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
George W. Bush personifies the most malevolent, irredeemable and unholy aspects of mankind. Not only is he purposefully dishonest, knowingly destructive and shamelessly unremorseful, he defends his indefensible evil actions by hiding and perpetuating the destructive and deadly impact they have on the lives of innocent and defenseless human beings. Hundreds of thousands of guiltless men, women and children who never harbored a harmful thought toward another human being have been killed and crippled as a result of George W. Bush being the president of the United States of America. And his overriding priority is to perpetuate the carnage, not end it. He is an undeniable example of what man is capable of doing to his fellow man. The worst example possible!
October 13th, 2007 at 3:13 pmI never thought I’d see the day when LTG Sanchez would stand up and speak the truth about the idiots that are running this war, with the exception of Sec. Gates. I think Gates is doing the best he can with what’s been given him. After all he followed Rumsfeld, who is without a doubt the most incompetence Secretary of Defense the United States has ever had, dispite what Cheney says. Which by the way Mr. Cheney just said the other day that Sec. Rumsfeld did a great job and shouldn’t have been fired.
That shows the kind of leadership Sanchez is talking about. What fool thinks Rumsfeld did a good job. I mean come on guys, this idiot was the one who reduced the size of our military, although the Republicans blame Clinton. No it was Rumsfeld who had the stupid idea that you could fight a war with high tech weapons and didn’t need a large number of troops to do so. Where he got that idea is beyond me, and I said at the time, it was a huge mistake. Now the administration finds itself trying to increase the size of the Army and Marine Corps.
I had written some critical things about Gen. Sanchez in the past which I thought he deserved. I take most but no all of it back now. What he should have done was speak out sooner, perhaps while he was lying to Congress and the American people about having enough troops in Iraq. He was being a good soldier, but there’s such a thing as taking that too far. I spoke up several times when I was a soldier because remaining silence will troops die is beneath me and what I and the military stood for.
I was taught to “Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way”, when I went to Infantry training. That means exactly what it says too. If you are afraid to lead, then follow or just get the hell out of the way and let someone else lead.
October 13th, 2007 at 6:52 pmThe problem with Gen. Sanchez is the same one as the problem with Colin Powell. They were up to their eyebrows supporting the policy when we needed them saying “wait a minute”. Speaking out 3 years after the fact if far too late. It all reminds me of the Nixon era and blind ambition. When we most need leadership we are stuck with a bunch of toadys. I grieve for those who have died as a result of their cowardice in stepping forward when it could have counted.
October 13th, 2007 at 9:23 pm#61 Veritas,
“WTF is going on in this country?” should be the name of a blog or something.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:24 pmIs this the first time that the crimes of the powerful are laid on the hands of a representative minority? Did Gen. Ricardo Sanchez choose to invade Iraq, or, was he ordered to do his job and shut up? I believe you know the answer.
October 13th, 2007 at 10:24 pm#79 – Tired Of Fighting,
Any thoughts about how many officers have your commitment to their troops, and why so many don’t display what you espouse? Is it politics, peer pressure, fear for their careers, what?
October 13th, 2007 at 10:34 pmAnd is it mostly top-level officers, or does it go deeper than that?
Interesting. It’s been over 24 hours and no trolls on this one. Has it finally gotten to be too much for them?
I realize that the trolls don’t actually believe what they’re saying, but could it be that it’s just gotten too damned hard for them to keep smearing truth-tellers and defending a bunch of lying, treasonous cowards? Or were they just caught napping?
The criticism of Sanchez for his role in letting Abu Ghraib happen is justified, but I’m betting that the (concern) trolls will take that route to smear him instead of a frontal attack.
October 13th, 2007 at 11:05 pmWhat is WRONG with folks like General Sanchez:
http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/2007/10/trouble-with-folks-like-general-sanchez.html#links
October 13th, 2007 at 11:29 pmComment by TRDaggett
FEAR FEAR FEAR!!!
That is what’s stopping GOOD Men/Women from standing up for their Soldiers, because that’s what this is all about, to hell with not wanting to look disrespectful or not wanting to be called “phony” by some fat, rich, cut and runners from war. When you don’t stand up and speak your peace, not only dont you get any, you don’t deserve any, and everyone else has to rest in it.
There are some officers (mostly junior) who have spoken out, and have since left the Army because their superiors are too afraid to carry their/our concerns higher for fear of making the next rank.
The seniors see what happened to Shinseki, Zinni, and others and they dont want that to happen to them, to which I say they were never in it for the Soldiers they command, they’re in it to fatten up the ol coffers. NOONE joins the military to get rich, we join to serve, and te people we are sworn to take care of deserve people who will put themselves before any promotion, job, etc. But all of those leaders seem to be gone or choose to muzzle themselves.
You would be shocked if the so-called liberal media ever did an honest story about how many NCO’s and Junior Officers are leaving the Army, it would stop all of this talk about how high re-enlistment rates are. Its a lie, too many combat veterans are leaving and they’re leaving because they dont like what the Army has become, which is another political party. We fight wars, not build democracy’s, not bring political parties together, not form governments, WE FIGHT!! Now we’re politicians, and those of us who know better don’t like it, because when your a politician wearing an Army uniform you automatically become at odds with half of your Soldiers, thats why it is important to be able to put that shit aside. But now it seems that ALL of the Senior leadership have becomes muzzled, soulless, incompetent, obseqious, un-caring, sheep.
.
And the death toll climbs because of it.
RIP
October 13th, 2007 at 11:41 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
(Tired Of Fighting) I don’t know quite what to say after reading that but thanks for your honesty and your service, and the same to all that have served and died honorably.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:46 amI’m tired of writing and calling my senators and my congresscritter to hope for a change in Iraq, or anything domestically. I was so happy in November 2006 that change was coming with the new congress. Then, March 2007 hit and it was “election season”. We had a whole two months. Now, nothing will happen until 2009. So, for every two years, we get two months. Every four years, four months. I’m sick. Congress is now in a perpetual campaign state.
I brought three kids into this world in the hopes that they’d have a better life than the generations before them. I’m an independant who married a republican. Cripes, he had Ronnie Raygun’s mug plastered on the fridge. My oldest, a 26 YO daughter, is getting married to a Texas Republican who is looking for his Bic pen to re-up because he lost his job and is enticed by the “medical benefits” and “educational opportunities” the army is offering. He’s firmly convinced he’ll stay stateside doing IT work. She’ll be a widow in a year. My oldest son is draft age (24), likes Bush and is contemplating “the service”. With his ROTC training, guess where he’d go? Fortunately, I have a 14 YO boy at home who hates Bush and everything this admin has done, but his dad is dying. There is no happiness left; just an oppressive sense of dread.
I give up. My talking/pleading to the older ones won’t change their minds and I dread their calls: Hi mom; we’re in the army now. Writing my Senators and Congressman do no good. The Senators roll over and the Congresscritter is a stand by your Bush man.
If this retired general can make a difference, I pray for it, but I’m not counting on it.
October 14th, 2007 at 9:44 pm