Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Iraq

Report: Rumseld Ignored Pentagon Advice on Iraq

2003-03-29

Sat March 29, 2003 06:39 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly rejected advice from Pentagon planners that substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in Iraq, New Yorker Magazine reported.
In an article for its April 7 edition, which goes on sale on Monday, the weekly said Rumsfeld insisted at least six times in the run-up to the conflict that the proposed number of ground troops be sharply reduced and got his way.
"He thought he knew better. He was the decision-maker at every turn," the article quoted an unidentified senior Pentagon planner as saying. "This is the mess Rummy put himself in because he didn't want a heavy footprint on the ground."
It also said Rumsfeld had overruled advice from war commander Gen. Tommy Franks to delay the invasion until troops denied access through Turkey could be brought in by another route and miscalculated the level of Iraqi resistance.
"They've got no resources. He was so focused on proving his point -- that the Iraqis were going to fall apart," the article, by veteran journalist Seymour Hersh, cited an unnamed former high-level intelligence official as saying.
A spokesman at the Pentagon declined to comment on the article.
Rumsfeld is known to have a difficult relationship with the Army's upper echelons while he commands strong loyalty from U.S. special operations forces, a key component in the war.
He has insisted the invasion has made good progress since it was launched 10 days ago, with some ground troops 50 miles from the capital, despite unexpected guerrilla-style attacks on long supply lines from Kuwait.
Hersh, however, quoted the former intelligence official as saying the war was now a stalemate.
Much of the supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles has been expended, aircraft carriers were going to run out of precision guided bombs and there were serious maintenance problems with tanks, armored vehicles and other equipment, the article said.
"The only hope is that they can hold out until reinforcements arrive," the former official said.
The article quoted the senior planner as saying Rumsfeld had wanted to "do the war on the cheap" and believed that precision bombing would bring victory.
Some 125,000 U.S. and British troops are now in Iraq. U.S. officials on Thursday said they planned to bring in another 100,000 U.S. soldiers by the end of April.

LINK: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=NLJDOMZ1OV4MICRBAELCFFA?type=politicsNews&storyID=2472167

Posted by:ISHMAIL

#2 This is chickenshit. "The former (unnamed) senior Pentagon planner" This is story is a classic. If the war was over in a week, it would be an unfair fight. If it takes some time, it's a quagmire.

Hersh if of course saying that we're doomed. I guess he thinks that Franks will order an infantry assualt with poorly equipped, lightly protected soldiers and send them headlong into the strongest part of Baghdad's defenses.

C'mon. So WHAT if it takes months to get the right forces in place, presuming as Hersh does, that we don't have them? We use the time to consolidate the south and suffocate the Republican Guard around Baghdad. We have supply problems? What about Saddam? He has NO outside power to resupply him.

If it takes a half-million to do the job, we'll get the half-million. There is NO way, ZERO that we are going to back off and give the Arabs a victory that will lead to the destruction of the United States. No chance.

But in a very important way, this story is useful. Let Saddam think we've been rope-a-doped. Let him think our guys are as ragtag and demoralized as his. Saddam is the master of miscalculation.

C'mon out and play.

Posted by: R. McLeod 2003-03-30 05:41:49

#1 It might ring true. But it's also Sy Hersh, who I usually take with a pound of salt.

Posted by: tu3031 2003-03-30 00:21:33

00:00