George W. Bush = The "WRONG" man!

[Gimpy]

Let's see if those fellows can drum up some support to undermine and discredit the most decorated military veteran of the Vietnam War, Col. David Hackworth. It wasn't so long ago that just about every single one of the "Compassionate conservatives" around here were singing the praises of "HACK" when he was lambasting Clinton. Don't bet your farm that they'll do the SAME now that he's come out "bashing" Bush & Rimsfeld!

Let's see, ok?

*************************************

Bring What On?

By David H. Hackworth



On May 1, George W. Bush landed in a military jet on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln with all the pomp and ceremony of Caesar returning to Rome after conquering Gaul. In the background ? as our commander in chief proclaimed "major combat operations in Iraq have ended" ? was a huge banner reading ?MISSION ACCOMPLISHED,? probably conjured up by White House flacks.

There was just one problem: No one told the guerrilla enemy the war was over.

Since the president played Top Gun, hundreds of our troops have been killed or wounded, and dozens of major combat operations have been launched or are ongoing all over that unfortunate country.

A lesson presidents JFK, LBJ and RMN learned the hard way was not to jive the people when they found themselves stuck in the Vietnam quagmire ? because all the double talk in the world won't disappear the truth of the casualty lists.

But we?re still not getting much straight talk about what?s really going down in Iraq, especially from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who recently announced that we weren?t facing a guerrilla war there.

Hello?!

Whatever Rummy wants to call it, we?re still stuck in a classic Phase I Guerrilla War (G-War). And every day, Iraq becomes a more dangerous place, with the potential of becoming even worse if our brass don?t start understanding the enemy and the nature of the same sort of G-type ops that crippled Napoleon in Spain, bloodied the Brits in Northern Ireland and postponed the peace process in Israel.



This won?t be the first time I?ve crossed swords with Rumsfeld over his assessment of ground operations in Iraq ? which I?ve come to believe he and his principal Pentagon advisers know frighteningly little about. During the invasion, I took a lot of heat over my evaluation that we were going into Iraq too light and with the wrong mix of troops. It was clear to me that we needed more line doggies, combat MPs to restore order and engineers, civil-affairs and psychological-warfare people to get the country up and running soonest to start winning the hearts and minds of the millions of Iraqis who wanted the coalition to rebuild Iraq and then go home, thank you very much.



Don't get me wrong. For a G-War to succeed strategically in Iraq, it would have to evolve from the Phase I hit-and-run attacks we?re seeing now to Phase II battalion and regimental attacks to Phase III ? a full-blown army taking Baghdad as Giap?s force took Saigon in 1975.



To escalate the ongoing G-War, insurgents need sanctuaries like Giap had in Laos and Cambodia for much of the war, as well as the resources of a significant power such as the Soviets and Red Chinese, who provided billions of dollars in arms to our enemies during the Vietnam War.



Fortunately, Syria and Iran are cowed.



But the main task for our leaders is to cut the spin and deal with the G?s: a lethal mix of street gangs, Islamic crazies, Arab mujaheddins and hardened criminals released from Iraqi prisons by Saddam, all stirred on perhaps by the Mustached Monster and certainly by many of his crew, who lost their cushy deal when our warriors put them out of the repression biz.



The way to do this is, of course, to win the people. As Mao proved long ago, the people are the supportive water and the G?s are the fish. Disappear the water and the fish will flop around on parched riverbanks, easy pickings for a barbecue.



This conversion won?t be brought about by U.S. armor brigades doing ?shock and awe? to peasant villages or a U.S. Army soldier killing a 12-year-old boy as he stood on the roof of his family?s home. The soldier said the boy was holding an AK-47. His family insists he had no weapon and was on the roof to escape the heat. Now his family ? newly manufactured water for the G?s ? has vowed revenge by a factor of 10.



Pentagon propagandists might prefer to categorize our serious daily losses in Iraq as non-guerrilla related and ?militarily insignificant.?



Tell that to the grunts down-range from the G's. Or their loved ones sweating them out.



Http://www.hackworth.com is the address of David Hackworth's home page. Sign in for the free weekly Defending America column at his Web site. Send mail to P.O. Box 11179, Greenwich, CT 06831. His newest book is ?Steel My Soldiers? Hearts.?

? 2003 David H. Hackworth.

*******************************

[Gimpy]

07/10/2003 @ 1:17pm [permalink]
E-mail this Post
One Army soldier was shot dead Wednesday outside Baghdad, another was killed hours later by a rocket-propelled grenade outside Tikrit -- becoming the 211th and 212th combat deaths, respectively. (The Washington Post has put faces on those statistics here.)

So today the President -- some 77 deaths and two months after having declared victory -- finally allowed as how things aren't going so well. "There's no question we've got a security issue in Iraq," he says. "And we're going to have to deal with it person-by-person." (Person-by-person? What the heck is he talking about?) "It's going to take more than 90 to 100 days for people to recognize the great joys of freedom and the responsibilities that come with freedom," the President adds. As if the Iraqis are just dizzy with great joy and freedom, and have started firing rocket-propelled grenades at us out of "irresponsibility."

Back in Washington, meanwhile, the Pentagon has finally started reporting wounded in Iraq, instead of just deaths, and it turns out more than 1,000 US troops have been wounded there so far. That's a ratio of about five wounded per death -- unusually high by modern combat standards, and yet another indicator that, as our President might put it, we've got some security issues.

* * *

'Help Is On the Way'?

The Army Times, in an editorial headlined "Nothing but lip service," complains: "President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress have missed no opportunity to heap richly deserved praise on the military. But talk is cheap -- and getting cheaper by the day, judging from the nickel-and-dime treatment the troops are getting lately."

What has Army Times upset? They don't like the White House's griping and opposition to a proposal to double the $6,000 now paid to families of troops who die on active duty. (An additional $6,000 multiplied by 212 dead so far works out to $1.27 million -- or, for perspective, about 0.00032 percent of the nearly $4 billion per month the war is costing us.) They also want to cut monthly imminent-danger pay to $150 from $225, and cut the family-separation allowance down to $100 a month from $250. The anti-tax Administration is doing nothing for the military -- it won't even step up and ease residency rules to help frequent-traveling service members who sell a home qualify for capital-gains exemptions. The Administration plans to cut more than a billion dollars out of next year's budget for military housing. "The chintz even extends to basic pay," Army Times fumes, noting that Bush's proposed 2004 budget would cap raises for some ranks at 2 percent.

All this from an Administration that came to power declaring: "To all of our men and women in uniform, and to their parents and families: Help is on the way!"

***************************************

Yeah, right! Better get out the "vaseline" boys---cause YOUR help is gonna come from BEHIND!

[HARDCORE]

"As usual friend Gimpy, you calls 'em as you sees em!"

[blues clues]

the real slap in the face to our men in uniform came today it looks like the 3ID the very ones who fought it's way to bagdad will not be coming home anytime soon maybe this administration will have to admitt that we are spread to thin.
razz

[SuperScout]

And, pray tell, if you can, why a change in mission is a slap in the face? Did every mission you were ever on go exactly as planned, or any close to how it was planned? Has life's situation never been presented to you in a manner that failed your expectations? Are you happy, being so consumed with hatred and animosity towards the President, and all he stands for, or, as I suspect, simply a miserable, embittered person?

[Gimpy]

Not that I have to speak for RAZZ---he does an excellent job of speaking for himself!
But????????? How in the HELL is it when someone (anyone) around here speaks out against GEE-DUBYA and his cheap-labor-neo-conservative horse-patooty, bull$hit right-wing nonsense---Those folks are "labeled"---"being so consumed with hatred and animosity"---or"simply a miserable and imbittered person"!

And, yet---the behavior and language used by the "SuperSquawkers" when defiling, demeaning, degrading, and demonizing folks who "disagree" with THEIR viewpoints is at LEAST as "miserable" and "consumed with hatred and animosity" as is the retorts or responses in question??

But, I suppose that's OK because they're ALWAYS right, huh??

NOW I GET IT! How silly of me!

[blues clues]

SS I don't hate dubby true I don't like him, but when you tell the troops one thing and then do something else that my friend ANT GOOD and it will cause problems down the line as you well know.as far as being a miserable,embittered person, you could could not be ferther from the truth, I get about one or two hours sleep a night what more could anyone want I haven't had a nightmare in a couple of weeks hell life is good I hope your is just as good. no really scout you guy's be careful out there in the lone star state try to keep your feet dry,stay safe.
razz

[Gimpy]

Notice how Senor'Super has chosen NOT to respond to Col. Hackworths article and the article from the Army Times?? Typical Ultra-wing-wing, neo-cheap-labor-conservative approach---change the subject and use angry, hate-mongering, dodge-the-issue tactics in order to steer the arguement(s) away from the REAL TRUTH!

It sure as hell didn't suprise me, did it you?

[reconeil]

...save your breath my Friend. After all, when one can't distinguish between The French, German, Russian, UN, and even American nay-sayers and/or Staunch Leftists except for accents,...why bother? You're gonna-get their very same perverted and religiously held beliefs and/or Party Line every time. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Then too, you must know that for such politcal oneupsmanship ABOVE ALL ELSE types, that The Great Warrior Clinton (of Somalia, "I despize The Military", and Monica fame) was the greatest Commander-In-Chief in America's History,...even though I personally don't believe: "Old Slick" would make a pimple on the ass of any REAL Commander-In-Chief, and even ones from Fiji or Antarctica.

Also, and since liberals in general (especially those CONNECTED) aren't into any realities or agendas not favoring liberals (if there actually are any for the vast majority?),...why waste your breath? Life's too short to debate with ideologically brainwashed zealots.

Besides, it's well known that: "Anyone at age 20 not a liberal has no heart" and "Anyone still a liberal at age 30 has no brain". Granted, such only portends to foolish followers, since those achieving power, control, good jobs and great pensions with such nonsense most certainly have brains. After all, demanding as much of The People's Money as is possible, and still getting them to vote for you,...does at least take brains at minimum. Good liars do well also.

Neil

[Gimpy]

I guess you're sayin Col. Hackworth and the Army Times are "brainwashed zealots", HUH?

Now I GET IT.

ANYONE or ANYTHING that don't FOLLOW the "mantra" or "propaganda" of the "right", neo-cheap-labor-conservatives are ALWAYS-------------"brainwashed zealots"!

How could I have POSSIBLY not known that?

:cd: :cd: :cd: