HOME | BIO | MUSIC | JOURNEYS BY DJ | STUDIO BLOG | POLITICAL BLOG | BOOKING INFO | CONTACT

Time:

Senior and mid-level officers — all of whom either fought in Iraq or were involved in operations there, and none of whom were willing to be identified by name — are beginning to assert privately that Abizaid and other top generals must inevitably share responsibility for the setbacks in Iraq. Many of those officers have lost men on the battlefield in Iraq and saw their requests for more troops go unheeded. Others worked in positions where they saw the planning for Iraq or the execution of the war go wrong. "Iraq will go down as the greatest military and strategic blunder since Vietnam," says a former officer who dealt with Iraq planning. "And no one has ever been held accountable — including senior military leaders."

In a culture that values accountability and leadership, the military has been slow to look inward on Iraq. The fact that no senior officer has admitted to any serious mistakes, or been reprimanded or sidelined for tactical, operational or strategic errors, is troubling to many officers. In contrast, they point to the example of Israel, which had barely withdrawn all its troops from southern Lebanon before it launched investigations into the conduct of the war against Hizballah[...]

But in the past few months, a growing number of officers have expanded their criticism to the way the generals have conducted the war. Gen. George Casey, who has been in command in Iraq for more than two years, has been the target of some of these complaints. But he came to Iraq when the situation had already degenerated into a complex insurgent fight. More criticism is being directed at Abizaid, who was a key military planner for the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Pentagon before becoming Director of the Joint Staff, and then No. 2 at CENTCOM to Gen. Franks.

Thomas Ricks, A01, Sunday WashingtonPost:

October 2006 may be remembered as the month that the U.S. experience in Iraq hit a tipping point, when the violence flared and shook both the military command in Iraq and the political establishment back in Washington.

Plans to stabilize Baghdad collided with a surge in violence during the holy month of Ramadan. Sectarian revenge killings spread, consuming a town 50 miles from the capital. U.S. officials spoke of setting benchmarks for the Iraqi government to take on more responsibility, only to have the Iraqi prime minister call that suggestion election-year grandstanding. Bush compared the situation to the 1968 Tet Offensive -- often seen as a turning point in the Vietnam War -- and urged Americans not to become disillusioned[...]

In Iraq, meanwhile, the key moment was the realization by top commanders in mid-October that sending 12,000 U.S. troops back into Baghdad did not have the calming effect that had been hoped for. As Shiite-Sunni tensions erupted in the city, civilian casualties doubled in a matter of months, with 2,660 deaths in September alone.

"Operation Together Forward has made a difference in the focus areas, but has not met our overall expectations of sustaining a reduction in the levels of violence," Army Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV said Oct. 19, using the U.S. military name for the Baghdad operation. In other words, the U.S. military had played its ace in the hole -- it had asserted itself in Iraq's most important city -- yet had not been able to improve deteriorating security in the capital.

A Marine colonel said he is seeing a major shift even inside the military. "There's a concern now that there wasn't previously," said the colonel, who remains on active duty and is not authorized to speak publicly on political matters. "Folks that took things at face value in the past are asking more questions."

CBS:

SCHIEFFER: We keep hearing from people who say the American military is turning against the war. Now, you have a lot of contacts in the military community. Do you think there is anything at all to that?

MURTHA: Well, there is no question about it. They’re frustrated. They realize — listen, the plan has changed from weapons of mass destruction to al Qaeda to topple Hussein to stabilize Iraq to democratize Iraq. We need an achievable plan. We don’t have that. The military operates best when it has an achievable plan. These folks are going back in less than a year. There is no question about the hardship on this small proportion of people, and we’re spending $8 billion a month, $11 million an hour.

VoteVets:

– 63 percent of all Iraq and Afghanistan veterans believe the Army and Marine Corps are overextended at this time. 67 percent of Army and Marine veterans believe their forces are overextended.

– 53 percent of respondents said they “did not always know who the enemy was” when they were engaged in the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.

– 42 percent of the veterans said their equipment was below the military standard of being 90 percent operational. 35 percent said their Humvees and trucks were not up-armored when they arrived in-country.

When the Dems retake power, bring the troops home, refocus our efforts on Afghanistan, and rebuild the damage done to our military through this disastrous war, the long-term implications for our domestic politics will be profound. And yes, it will be the Dems who do it, because this war will always be remembered as a Republican war.

They used a war to divide the nation. History will neither forget nor forgive. Or in their language:

Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. -- Galatians 6:7