Dems are the party of National Security?

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

My point being, though, that if Armadillos saw Franks last weekend and thought he was being Rumsfeld's mouthpiece and wanted to quit...he's badly mistaken, as Franks doesn't "want to" quit, he has. 

 

But on the subject of pulling the wagons together...how many people are going to notice that the retired generals during the mid-term elections are going to be divided precisely down partisan lines?  Good thing generals are unbiased, apolitical creatures... 

651052[/snapback]

Amen, both parties do their absolute best to recruit them, especially Dems because of the perception that they are militarily soft. Obviously there is history and some truth over the last 40 years, but now it is more a left over lie from the 60s and the die hard anti-war gang. You are who you associate with I guess, just like we like to paint all GOPers as right wing religious fanatics. Good politics, not always true.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

No we aren't.  Your just being obtuse.

651046[/snapback]

 

Uh, no, we really are. Because once again, you can't discuss US command and control issues within the theater of operations without blowing it off with "Well, the theater's !@#$ed up."

[Scraps]

I was thinking more along the lines of who was where when. Politics can make for strange bedfellows.

651057[/snapback]

 

I'm not following you. Zinni was a Republican. He was courted by the Democrats during the last election and rebuffed them. He made it pretty clear that while he did agree with many of the decisions Bush made, but he thought Kerry would be worse. So, where are you going with this?

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

I'm not following you.  Zinni was a Republican.  He was courted by the Democrats during the last election and rebuffed them.  He made it pretty clear that while he did agree with many of the decisions Bush made, but he thought Kerry would be worse.  So, where are you going with this?

651064[/snapback]

There are rumors out there and they are only rumors at this point, but some think Zinny may be gunning for the Dem nomination. Man that would be interesting and Dems might just go for it if he is not too right wing on their core issues.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I stand corrected, he was trotted out to give a rebuttal to Zinny this weekend, shoot thought he was still there, sounds like it, he keeps acting like things are going well and that only small mistakes have been made.

651053[/snapback]

 

From his point of view, it probably did. The things that CENTCOM was supposed to do, they generally did well. But certain aspects of operations - regime change in Iraq, for example - are arguably not in CENTCOM's purview. Should Franks and CENTCOM be held responsible for the !@#$ed up post-war occupation plan that had? Or just for the excellent invasion plan?

 

Open question, I think. I feel CENTCOM shouldn't take too much blame, if any, for post-war conditions (though I reserve the right to change my mind. ) Others would obviously disagree with me...which is fine, if they can do so intelligently with an understanding of issues that runs deeper than "Well, Bernstein told me so..."

[Scraps]

There are rumors out there and they are only rumors at this point, but some think Zinny may be gunning for the Dem nomination.  Man that would be interesting and Dems might just go for it if he is not too right wing on their core issues.

651067[/snapback]

 

I'll see if I can dig up some articles on him, but from what I've read in the past, he describes himself as a Richard Lugar type of conservative. I can't see him being nominated. He simply isn't liberal enough.

[Ghost of BiB]

There are rumors out there and they are only rumors at this point, but some think Zinny may be gunning for the Dem nomination.  Man that would be interesting and Dems might just go for it if he is not too right wing on their core issues.

651067[/snapback]

 

I also have a lot of respect for Zinni. I'm just looking at timing. Might not have much to do with anything besides his new book. But, Clark is out there, Zinni is out there and even old Colin has been rumbling a bit. I don't buy that something isn't in the wind. I had envisioned something more like SECDEF, rather than President, though.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

From his point of view, it probably did.  The things that CENTCOM was supposed to do, they generally did well.  But certain aspects of operations - regime change in Iraq, for example - are arguably not in CENTCOM's purview.  Should Franks and CENTCOM be held responsible for the !@#$ed up post-war occupation plan that had?  Or just for the excellent invasion plan?

 

Open question, I think.  I feel CENTCOM shouldn't take too much blame, if any, for post-war conditions (though I reserve the right to change my mind.  )  Others would obviously disagree with me...which is fine, if they can do so intelligently with an understanding of issues that runs deeper than "Well, Bernstein told me so..."

651068[/snapback]

Got you, except both Zinny and he I thought were focusing in on Afganistan and whether enough forces were committed, Zinny felt not and thought we missed a huge opportunity to get Osama.

 

Then the issue switched to Iraq. Hard to separate the two, I know but they are different even if stated in the same breath.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

I'll see if I can dig up some articles on him, but from what I've read in the past, he describes himself as a Richard Lugar type of conservative.  I can't see him being nominated.  He simply isn't liberal enough.

651072[/snapback]

Like I said, only rumors and a Lugar style conservative, Dems might be able to stomach, methodist from what I remember and a gentleman all the way. He was chairman of the Senate Ag Committee when I was part of reforming Crop Insurance. That was a joke, but he always treated everyone well.

[Scraps]

From his point of view, it probably did.  The things that CENTCOM was supposed to do, they generally did well.  But certain aspects of operations - regime change in Iraq, for example - are arguably not in CENTCOM's purview.  Should Franks and CENTCOM be held responsible for the !@#$ed up post-war occupation plan that had?  Or just for the excellent invasion plan?

651068[/snapback]

 

Well, they were in previous CENTCOM plans.

 

GEN. ZINNI: Well, I—first of all, I saw it in the way the intelligence was being portrayed. I knew the intelligence; I saw it right up to the day of the war. I was asked at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing a month before the war if I thought the threat was imminent. I didn’t. Many of the people I know that were involved in the intelligence side of this, or, or in the military felt the same way. I saw the—what this town is known for: spin, cherry-picking facts, using metaphors to evoke certain emotional responses, or, or shading the, the context. We, we know the mushroom clouds and, and the other things that were all described that the media’s covered well. I saw on the ground, though, a sort of walking away from 10 years worth of planning.

 

You know, ever since the end of the first Gulf War, there have been—there’s been planning by serious officers and planners and others, and policies put in place. Ten years worth of planning, you know, were thrown away; troop levels dismissed out of hand; General Shinseki basically insulted for speaking the truth and giving a, an honest opinion; the lack of cohesive approach to how we deal with the aftermath; the political, economic, social reconstruction of a nation, which is no small task; a belief in these exiles that anyone in the region, anyone that had any knowledge would tell you were not credible on the ground; and on and on and on. Decisions to disband the army that were not in the initial plans. I mean there’s a series of disastrous mistakes. We just heard the secretary of state say these were tactical mistakes. These were not tactical mistakes. These were strategic mistakes, mistakes of policy made back here. Don’t blame the troops. They’re the ones that perform the tactics on the ground. They’ve been magnificent. If anything saves this, it will be them.

 

They were in Frank's original plans. Pity he let Rumsfeld erode that away.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Well, they were in previous CENTCOM plans.

They were in Frank's original plans.  Pity he let Rumsfeld erode that away.

651084[/snapback]

 

Among other things he said this weekend, exactly.

[Scraps]

Like I said, only rumors and a Lugar style conservative, Dems might be able to stomach, methodist from what I remember and a gentleman all the way.  He was chairman of the Senate Ag Committee when I was part of reforming Crop Insurance.  That was a joke, but he always treated everyone well.

651078[/snapback]

 

 

I'd be shocked but former former SEC NAV James Webb is challenging George Allen in Virginia. I could understand it in a state race like Virginia but have a hard time imagining NY or California Democrats going for Zinni.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

I'd be shocked but former former SEC NAV James Webb is challenging George Allen in Virginia.  I could understand it in a state race like Virginia but have a hard time imagining NY or California Democrats going for Zinni.

651091[/snapback]

Dems are desperate, I just don't know Zinni's slant on other issues to comment on whether he would have a chance. Still I see the Dem nomination as wide open for an outside to take.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

When I say Dems, I mean the establishment Dems, not the lefties. Don't think Hillary can cut it, Warner doesn't have enough charisma, Richardson is seen as too much of a hustler, not sure who else out there would gain moderates' enthusiasm. The real left is looking for red meat, but Hillary has disappointed them, Obama is not ready and knows it, Biden is a Democratic version of McCain without the credentials...arrogant and testy. Not sure anyone jumps out that can do it at this point.

[BB27]

That assumes that they get the resources they need to do the job.  I've questioned whether or not they have received those resources.  I've based that upon Bernsten, Naylor and some other authors.  But Jeez o Flip if you suggest anything negative about Bush on this board some people go nuts.  Bernsten is actually profuse in his praise of Bush and considers the Ranger issue a blemish on a masterpiece but if the guy finds one flaw he is dismissed or piloried.

I wasn't trying to deflect things to Clinton.  I don't even like the guy and used examples of his "leadership" as to why I didn't buy into the Democratic documents.  I was, however, pointing out that he has frequently been criticized for not providing assetts that were requested on a military mission.  There are many ways to deal with this.  One could disagree that Clinton was responsible in Somalia and remain consistent.  One could come up with a rational on why Clinton's mistake was more egregious. There may be others, but to say that one administration can be blamed and another can not seems two faced to me.

650958[/snapback]

 

Not trying to hijack the thread, but,

 

I recently had the honor of listening to Colonel Daniel McKnight speak at a conference I was at. McKnight was the Colonel in charge of the Rangers that were in Mogadishu during the multiple day battle depicted in the movie "Black Hawk Down." McKnight blames Clinton for the outcome of those days, and also states that the people in the streets of Mogadishu that were directing the battle against the US Forces were predominately ARAB, not somali. Here is someone with direct and personal knowledge of the situation, and he says it was Clinton that screwed it up.

[Ghost of BiB]

Among other things he said this weekend, exactly.

651090[/snapback]

 

That's also not "exactly" what occurred. I fully understand what he's saying, and in the context of the conversation. But as far as actual "plans" go, 1003V didn't address those issues to any degree nor was it intended to. The part about "troop strengths" is another matter. The 1003V TPFFD was a running macabre joke for quite a while. But all the "post war plan" comments are a little misleading - and again, I don't think they were meant to be. I just get the impression that some people might think there already was a comprehensive plan for "rebuilding" Iraq in place, and it was scrapped. There wasn't. He comes from that world, and anyone familiar with that world catches what he's saying, but it could be misconstrued.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Not trying to hijack the thread, but,

 

I recently had the honor of listening to Colonel Daniel McKnight speak at a conference I was at.  McKnight was the Colonel in charge of the Rangers that were in Mogadishu during the multiple day battle depicted in the movie "Black Hawk Down."  McKnight blames Clinton for the outcome of those days, and also states that the people in the streets of Mogadishu that were directing the battle against the US Forces were predominately ARAB, not somali.  Here is someone with direct and personal knowledge of the situation, and he says it was Clinton that screwed it up.

651104[/snapback]

Yeh you are trying to hijack the thread, and Yeh probably Clinton did screw up, Clinton bad, think everyone has blamed him for Somalia, hence why he did what he did with the Serbian situation, he learned from his mistakes. When is W going to ? learn?

[Ghost of BiB]

Not trying to hijack the thread, but,

 

I recently had the honor of listening to Colonel Daniel McKnight speak at a conference I was at.  McKnight was the Colonel in charge of the Rangers that were in Mogadishu during the multiple day battle depicted in the movie "Black Hawk Down."  McKnight blames Clinton for the outcome of those days, and also states that the people in the streets of Mogadishu that were directing the battle against the US Forces were predominately ARAB, not somali.  Here is someone with direct and personal knowledge of the situation, and he says it was Clinton that screwed it up.

651104[/snapback]

 

Welcome to the world of Al Quaida. They were the ones who taught the somalis how to down helicopters with rpgs.

[Ghost of BiB]

Yeh you are trying to hijack the thread, and Yeh probably Clinton did screw up, Clinton bad, think everyone has blamed him for Somalia, hence why he did what he did with the Serbian situation, he learned from his mistakes.  When is W going to ?  learn?

651112[/snapback]

 

You want to tell me again why we were even in the Serbian situation?

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

You want to tell me again why we were even in the Serbian situation?

651117[/snapback]

Now there is a useless discussion thread. I won't bite except that I have Croatian roots and I highly approved and probably what should have been done in Iraq given the sectarian hostility.