George Bush insists the generals, not congress should be running the Iraq war. So why didn't he listen to military chiefs in the first place?

As pressure for yet another strategic change in Iraq grows in Washington and Congress's desire to withdraw troops grows more urgent, President Bush has been repeatedly falling back on one oft-repeated line of spin.

This time it isn't his never-ending line about needing to "defeat them abroad before they attack us at home" or his insistence that America will "stay the course" in the Middle East. Nowadays, Bush is warning his critics - indeed, everyone in the House and the Senate - that they should stop trying to "micromanage" the war. The president took another crack at lawmakers last Thursday, when he said: "I'll listen to Congress. But the idea of telling our military how to conduct operations, for example, or how to deal with troop strength, I don't think it makes sense . . . nor do I think it's a good precedent for the future."

Politicians, he keeps saying, do not have the experience and know-how of military leaders such as general David Petraeus, and it should be those "generals on the ground" who guide the strategy in Iraq, not the stuffed suits in Washington.

Coming from an administration whose most grievous errors in Iraq have come from ignoring military advice time and again, this is pretty rich. The Bush years have been dominated by a 'we know best' mentality and will be remembered for the hubris displayed by the president and his key advisors.

The assumption behind Bush's remarks - that all the military leaders in Iraq support the surge strategy - is dubious in itself. Senator John Kerry was reported in the San Francisco Chronicle on Friday saying, "No general, no administration official has come to us... in our secret briefings and said this is a winning strategy."

But the words that most damn this sudden faith in the "generals on the ground" as convenient at best and fraudulent at worst, come from the generals themselves.

Thomas E Ricks, the Washington Post's Pulitzer prize-winning Pentagon correspondent, has detailed numerous examples of military leaders being ignored by the White House in his excellent book, Fiasco.

The list of generals that the White House ignored runs all the way back to 2002, when the administration was still building its disingenuous case for war. The Joint Staff in Washington told planning officers on the staffs of senior US military commanders around the world (ie "on the ground") that the Iraq war was to be considered part of the war on terror. One of the responses from these officers questioned the order: "There is no link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. Don't mix the two. This is going to work hell with the allies. What is going on?"

Of course, those concerns weren't heeded in Washington.

"Watching the moves towards war [in early 2003], the Army community fretted, no one more than Norman Schwarzkopf," Ricks writes. Schwarzkopf, the man who had led the first gulf war, found it "scary" that Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith had "ignored" the advice of senior generals.

Most notably, the administration didn't accept advice from then-US Army chief of staff general Eric Shineski that the number of troops required to occupy Iraq would need to be bigger than the number required for a successful invasion. Shineski went to Capitol Hill and said he'd need "Something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers". Any number of generals, current and retired, said the same thing.

However two days later Wolfowitz described such predictions as "outlandish" and "wildly off the mark". He was confident that by August 2003 about 30,000 troops would suffice.

Come the invasion, the entire ground force numbered around 145,000, with 125,000US troops. It was around half of what numerous military leaders recommended. One officer from the Joint Staff told Ricks that, on troop numbers, "[the Bush administration] did not take the best military advice... I have angst every day about that. We didn't get it right and 1500 troopers [the number of US dead when at the time he was speaking] have paid a price for that."

Yet the president has the gall to say now that "the idea of telling our military... how to deal with troop strength, I don't think it makes sense". It would be nice to think that he's learnt his lesson from the invasion. Except that the same kind of mistakes were made when Fallujah exploded into insurgency in 2004. Ricks reports that "top military commanders in Iraq, including Lt. Gen. Sanchez, advised against" a swift, tough response. Marine commander major general James Mattis protested: "This is what the enemy wants." But the commander-in-chief ignored his commanders on the ground and ordered in his clobbering machine. The brutal response created more insurgents and more resentment.

Of course, generals can get it wrong. Sometimes the will of the people should take precedent over the will of the military; this is, after all, one of the reasons most democracies give civilian leaders the final say in military matters. The military has the expertise, but politicians have the mandate and are elected to exercise judgment. Bush's judgment was woeful in 2003 and again in 2004. Yet sometimes it remains a politician's duty to over-ride the military commanders for the sake of the nation, and the world. Which is exactly what congress is doing.

This post first appeared in the Guardian's Comment is Free section on July 16, 2007.

Comments (2)

by on May 18, 2012

people are pursuing for Louis vuitton handbags cool, unique, stylish and innovative. Whether it is discount Louis Vuitton or fashion accessories all means a lot for modern society of today. Same is the case with trendy looking burberry handbags. When these are, the excitement just gets doubled. Most chic looking burberry outlet are in fashion now. These are one of the favorite fashion abercrombie and fitch sale accessories for men and women long time ago. If you have not yet tried Louis Vuitton Outlet, it's time to own one and feel the difference it can make burberry bags to your personality. These are just brilliant and fabulous louis vuitton sale . They are most iconic and can provide burberry bags you with a new feeling and enhance confidence. The quality of louis vuitton online is just superior to what you have dreamt of. Today owning a new and trendy looking louis vuitton bagsare not only meant for the wealthy people. They are most iconic and can provide you with a new feeling and enhance abercrombie and fitch online confidence. The quality of abercrombie sale is just superior to what you have dreamt of. Today owning a new and trendy looking abercrombie outlet sale are not only meant for the wealthy people.

by on May 18, 2012

The newest style of Coach Purses Outlet offer ferragamo bags online. Coach Outlet have cheap Coach Diaper Bags, Coach Hobos Handbags ferragamo handbags, Coach Totes Handbags, Coach Outlet Online for cheap, Coach Poppy Handbags, Coach Outlet Online and Coach wallets. Coach Tote Bags are one of the most popular and versatile handbag styles.are well received by the females, especially the young. Stylish design, colorful painting, practical function attract the public's attention soon. All ferragamo outlet we offer here are stylish trims and innovative designs. Coach Outlet Store Online are mostly welcomed and loved by women and even men. Cheap Coach handbags use the unique and fine leather material which is extraordinary in the world. Take your time to select ferragamo sale our best Coach bags cheap for sale with discount wholesale and free and fast shipping. Online register as a member on this website and enjoy your online shopping. Welcome to enjoy shopping our salvatore ferragamo outlet! Our aim is Best quality top service. Just take action! Don't miss the opportunity to own one of these fasionable Discount Coach Handbags on discounted price. Free shipping and non sale tax! Buy ferragamo shoes now and enjoy the fashion world!

Post new comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.