Let the military run the war

As I cited on a previous post (IMHO) the success of Desert Storm in 1991 was do in fact that it was ran by military men in both Generals Swartzkoph and Powell. A lesson obviously learned from the military quagmire made by politicians in regards to the flawed Vietnam war, but now in this war once again as with McNamara we have Rumsfeld and his political civilians as the field generals in ultimate charge of the final decisions of strategy which so far have been counter to the opinions and veiws of those men who are dedicated their lives to the military and the strategy of war, Whose concerns are coming into fruition in recent deployment issues and numbers.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030407fa_fact1

I realize many have said the one thing that Bush has done right is surround himself with "smart" people, I just sure hope he bases his decisions on the advice of all of them rather than a few. However, it sure like we all know who's running the show in regards to this war, and in all the press conferences so far, the head honcho wears a suit.

D1st

Today at 08:32 AM cenimo said this in Post #2

It wasn't the military that stopped Schwatrzkopf just short of Baghdad.
Think about that one.

Click to expand...

  

Agreed 

And think about this one. When Saddam first invaded Kuwait and in response Bin Laden in his hate for Saddam wanted the support of Saudia Arabia to drive him out, it wasn't the military who voluteered themselves to do it. Just think, Al-Qaida would have never come into existance and we could have gotten two birds with one stone. That was a scenario blown....... 

1st April 2003 at 05:04 PM ksen said this in Post #6

President Bush is no LBJ, even though they are both Texans.

Click to expand...

I hope not.

I hate to see Americans lose their lives in any President's desire to save face.

I just heard on the top of the hour news that President Bush has left the decision of when to go into Baghdad in General Franks hands.

Click to expand...

And that' the way it should be, let Rumsfeld keep track of the paper work end of war and let the military decide strategy and tatics.

1st April 2003 at 10:06 PM blindfaith said this in Post #12

I was getting an update on what's been going on, and a reporter asked a General (sorry, don't recall his name) what he thought of the critics of the war plan (kind of like what we have here).

He answered very calmly, and very nicely; "for those who haven't seen the war plan? It's pretty audacious to criticize it".

Perfect.

Click to expand...

Agreed, but I'm sure he was refering to reporters, for in the article I linked these guys doing the critique are "senior Pentagon planners on the Joint Staff, the operating arm of the Joint Chiefs of Staff." and I'm sure have seen the war plan. For example Rumseld's plan of minimal troops didn't anticipate the amount ot Iraqi resistance while those in the military thought otherwise, and low and behold, last week they paused to wait for more troops. Rumsfeld is an adminstrator, he should adminstrate to ensure an enviroment that gives the military what they want to do the job right, rather than vetoing their views.