Since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Gens. George Casey, David Petraeus and Ricardo Sanchez have not heeded the requests of their subordinate officers for more resources and more troops. Instead, these top commanders have consistently misrepresented to Congress the strength and number of Iraqi Security Forces as Iraq falls deeper into civil war. Their misrepresentations should be grounds… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (2)Page 1 of 1 pagesNot giving them more troops?
The incompetence is top down and of long duration. A series of massive cuts to our military has made several administrations look more solvent. Cuts to our navy has hampered our ability to move massive numbers of troops and equipment. This is a pattern we’ve followed following all wars.
The greatest cause of shortage now is due to the arrogance of Bush’s key advisors. Bush is sort of programable (Notice his verbal repetition, not unlike Chatty Kathy.) Rumsfeld canned anyone in the military who balked at his plan to conquer on the cheap and we are now paying a huge price for an amateur military de facto commander in chief.
Read Douglas Feith’s book “War and DEcision,” for a series of weak excuses for the misadventure called The Iraq War. For example: When asked at the Hudson Institutes’ book discussion on C-SPAN if we used too few troops, the answer claims no one foresaw the possibility of the insurgency! (Another great line was the 9/11 attacks showed terrorists can attack and leave no address! Has anyone there ever read a mystery novel?)
Those who have been left as the clean-up committee must make do with still too few troops along with too little replacement vehicles, parts and a whole lot more.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 22, 2008 at 9:39 AM I remember a lot of treason rubbed in our face to make this Iraq war look like the success being sold to the American people. I remember people predicting it would cost over 300 billion right before being fired for that opionion. I remember Generals relieved of duty for suggesting we send in at least 400,000 troops. This war is a war profiteering swindle, which I see as directly connected to why we have such a small US Army to send on these missions. The swindle begain in the 90’s at the end of the cold war when US Military boots were retired along with Military bases from coast to coast. Now we don’t have enough troops and have supplemented our forces with 150,000 over-priced, mission crippling, mercenaries. What a scam, and a waste of my China loans. We all have watched this and now that Admiral Fallon who who has been critical of Bush’s awful ideas of world conquest has been replaced by General Betrayus we can at least comfort ourselves to know that we will be viewing this epic humanitarian desaster through rose colored glasses. We will be winning these wars for the next hundred years at this rate.
Posted by dajson on Jul 23, 2008 at 1:07 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Luis Carlos Montalvan
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2008 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
