|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
Meet the Press - Gen Zimmi..
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| Meet the Press - Gen Zimmi..
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| GeoDaddy |
Good interview. Agree with pretty much eveything Zim had to say - even his disagreement with how the war was prosecuted.
My only reservations:
#1 It's all 20-20 hindsight. Had the Iraqis been able to take over after Saddam was disposed, going in with too many troops and too authoritatrian force might have squealched any truly democratic movement that Chalabi assured US was a no-brainer. Turned out Chalabi was a no brainer and a crook.
#2 50,000 troops, 100,000 troops, 700,000 troops - if you are not willing to actual USE THEM then you only give the enemy more targets to shoot at and IED. People who advocate (now) we needed more troops have to make a case that a homicide bomber, not detered by 100,000 troops... might be detered by 700,000 troops. I ain't buy that noe.
#3 We have NEVER go into a war with the miliary we needed...
In the Revolution - we didn't have an "army" - same for 1812. In the Civil War , while we had an army, the Union was not trained and the Confederacy - much better trained - did not have materials. In WWI we barely could scrap together an amry, had to but defective French machine guns and fly knock off British biplanes. In WWII - after Pearl Harbor - we didn't have a Pacific Fleet! And skipping to Gulf War Part I - we didn't have but 30,000 antidotes for anthrax, less for botulium and chemical suits for less than 10,000 troops. Little wonder Bush Sr decided to cut it off w/o finishing the job.
Years from now, the sober assessement of the complete war is that the US delayed taking out Saddam until we had enough counter measures to bio/chemical agents to protect a 50,000 man force... then finished the job.
And the politicall charged WMD question will be as discussed Hilfe Poland!
g |
|
|
| GeoDaddy |
"Hilfe Poland" for those not up on their WWII History...
Was the British French Cassus Belli that stated they would declare war if Germany went beyond the annexion of Chechzslovakia... when Hitler invaded Poland, the Allied declared that war was necessary to "Free Poland" - an accomplishment that wasn't achieved 'til the 1990s!
(For those who care about how real wars and fought and won... and why)
g |
|
|
| otherone4life |
| It's ZINNI, not ZIMMI ...and no one made us de-baathify the army after we invaded. Zinni is a thoughtful and experience general whose opinion, along with many others (Shinseki) was ignored by the morons running our govt. |
|
|
| GeoDaddy |
Um, who cares?
And I actually agee with the de-Baathification...
Again - it's great to speculation on what wasn't done and assume that there are no negative consequences associated with that! But the Baathist party was the Arab version of the Nazi Party (and still is in Syria) It's an amalgam of Soviet Socialsm, Fascist Militarism and Arab Nationalism... started by Nassar. The idea that these people - after 30 years of leadership - should form the core of the new country seems painfully naive. It's like putting Nazis back in charge of Germany adfter WWII and expect them to promote jews and gypsies.
Now, the Allies DID use ex-Nazis in managerial positions after WWII - but you have to factor in that the Russians were breathing down our necks and we had to get something up and running or just be over run by the far larger Red army.
Also, let's face it, after WWII we had a GREAT advantage, 40% of the male population between 20 and 30 were wiped out in the war! That left far fewer ex-nazies and ex-tojos to deal with after the war.
And, to be fair and balanced, we have to be careful in comparing post WWII Germany and Japan to Iraq in that both our WWII adversaries had highly sophisticated, technological and advanced civilization before we defeated them... Iraq was never more than a basket case going back to the 1st Arab empire... and those arabs relate as much as today's arabs... as the Persians in "300" relate to the Iranians..
g |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Before taking everything Zinni says today at face value. Its instructive to look at what he was saying in 2000. In testimony to the Senat Armed Services Committee he said:
http://armed-services.senate.gov/st...00/000229az.pdf
Quote: - Iraq remains the most significant near—term threat to U.S. interests in the Arabian Gulf region. This is primarily due to its large conventional military force, pursuit of WMD , oppressive treatment of Iraqi citizens, refusal to comply with United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR) ...
- Despite claims that WMD efforts have ceased, Iraq probably is continuing clandestine nuclear research, retains stocks of chemical and biological munitions, ... Even if Baghdad reversed its course and surrendered all WMD capabilities, it retains the scientific, technical, and industrial infrastructure to replace agents and munitions within weeks or months.
- The Iraqi regime's high regard for WMD and long—range missiles is our best indicator that a peaceful regime under Saddam Hussein is unlikely.
- ... extremists may turn to WMD in an effort to ...overcome improved U.S. defenses against conventional attack. Detecting plans for a specific WMD attack is extremely difficult, making it likely such an event would occur without warning.
- Extremists like Usama bin Laden ...benefit from the global nature of communications that permits recruitment, fund raising, and direct connections to sub—elements worldwide. Terrorists are seeking more lethal weaponry to include chemical, biological, radiological, and even nuclear components with which to perpetrate more sensational attacks.
- Three (Iraq, Iran and Sudan) of the seven recognized state—sponsors of terrorism are within this potentially volatile area [CENTCOM], and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan has been sanctioned by the UN Security Council for its harboring of Usama bin Laden . |
So when he says today, that he never saw any evidence of Iraq WMD, it might be worthwhile to ask him if he was lying to the Senate Armed Services Committee in 2000? |
|
|
| Glenda Yenta |
| Zinni should be called before the Senate again and asked if he saw evidence or not and to explain this serious discrepency. |
|
|
| GeoDaddy |
Again, I qualified my statement "20-20 Hinhsight"
I'm really sick and tired of all this "what was said and when (s)he siad it... let's investigate"
Used to work for EDS, Ross Perot's old company, and we had a saying,
"We trust that what you did - at the time - was with the best information you had (at the time) so let's stop the finger pointing and concentrate on fixing the problem."
Wish that politicians could embrace the same...
Starting wit' - IF you are REALLY against this war and think there is NO consequnce in pulling out... DO IT! Cut off the funds. And then accept responsibility for what happens as Bush is accepting responsibility for going in there.
And - if you are afraid of taking responsibility, admit to the American people that you do not want to take that cut off funds vote because you SHARE the same concern of what happens next and can not assure the American people that we won't end up having to back in... under far worse circumstances.
g |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
| Facts are facts, and the discrepancies between what he said then, and what he is saying now, are real. I think the question that needs to be asked is why are HIS 2 versions so different. Is it politics? |
|
|
| Kill Van Kull |
Jesus Christ.
He arguing with himself now.
I'm sure that's not the only thing he does exclusively alone.
:D |
|
|
| Glenda Yenta |
| Going to war is a serious matter and we need have faith in both our civilian and military institutions. General Zinni needs to explain this discrepency. The people deserve to know what's going on. The General's a big boy and can take the heat. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Facts are facts, and the discrepancies between what he said then, and what he is saying now, are real. I think the question that needs to be asked is why are HIS 2 versions so different. Is it politics? |
I believe its like your GOD said.
STAY THE COURSE ! You fucking hypocrytical idiot! |
|
|
| GeoDaddy |
"Going to war is a serious matter and we need have faith in both our civilian and military institutions"
Yup! I took the cold blooded murder of 3,000 people, personally watching them jump from the North Tower rather than burn to death, kinda personally.
I was heartened when GW Bush said "The Whole World Will Hear US" after a decade of appeasement, ignoring the threats and giving Saudi express VISAs and flight school training that Liberals - w/o 9/11 - would make a joke of...
"Our government refuse to let some poor Arab student learn to fly a plane... what's he gonna do? Fly a plane fulll of people into a building? We are SO paranoid!!!"
And I fully agree with taking the war BACK to the ME - the breeding ground of these people and their nihlistic ideology - not Afghanistan as Osama would have hoped - but right to the fuckers in the Middle East so they are forced to fight amongst each other for their right to create a Caliphat... or face defeat by Modernity, if not Western Civilization.
Got no problem with what we are doing. And, while I was hoping for better post Saddam success, I' am not shocked that it is a long though slog given the intransigence of these people and the lack of "civilization" that any decent person would call "civil"
I won't be happy until Sunni and Shai Arab men are paying child support and alimony and have to deal with gay marriage and statues of a nake Mohammed made of Chocolate to titilate the homosexual commmunity...
But I guess I won't live THAT long, so I'll settle for a colilition govt, sporadic bombings (like the one that just happened in Algeria and has happened continuously since Pakistan got its independece from India) and the Iraqi army/police hunting down and killing Islamists as thet currently do in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
g |
|
|
| Glenda Yenta |
Quote: Originally posted by GeoDaddy
"Going to war is a serious matter and we need have faith in both our civilian and military institutions"
Yup! I took the cold blooded murder of 3,000 people, personally watching them jump from the North Tower rather than burn to death, kinda personally.
I was heartened when GW Bush said "The Whole World Will Hear US" after a decade of appeasement, ignoring the threats and giving Saudi express VISAs and flight school training that Liberals - w/o 9/11 - would make a joke of...
"Our government refuse to let some poor Arab student learn to fly a plane... what's he gonna do? Fly a plane fulll of people into a building? We are SO paranoid!!!"
And I fully agree with taking the war BACK to the ME - the breeding ground of these people and their nihlistic ideology - not Afghanistan as Osama would have hoped - but right to the fuckers in the Middle East so they are forced to fight amongst each other for their right to create a Caliphat... or face defeat by Modernity, if not Western Civilization.
Got no problem with what we are doing. And, while I was hoping for better post Saddam success, I' am not shocked that it is a long though slog given the intransigence of these people and the lack of "civilization" that any decent person would call "civil"
I won't be happy until Sunni and Shai Arab men are paying child support and alimony and have to deal with gay marriage and statues of a nake Mohammed made of Chocolate to titilate the homosexual commmunity...
But I guess I won't live THAT long, so I'll settle for a colilition govt, sporadic bombings (like the one that just happened in Algeria and has happened continuously since Pakistan got its independece from India) and the Iraqi army/police hunting down and killing Islamists as thet currently do in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
g |
I was referring to Zinni's self-contradictions actually. |
|
|
|
|
|
