Comments on: Our New Man in Iraq (Updated Again)

By: Solomon

Solomon — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:09:28 +0000

I will be so happy when this CEO crowd disappears from our military. Purple Suiters??? Sorry this is the US of A! The Army has its culture, the Marines its own, Navy etc…This purple suit stuff is horse manure, and if I ever hear someone say “Customer” when talking about getting vital equipment to some warrior in the field I will puke! And their are weak links in the Reserve and Guard (not talking about the troops here but again the leadership). Gov. don’t want to release their units when activated by the Pentagon, the admin sections in the Reserve don’t even know who’s on their rosters! So get real with that load of camel dung. As far as Patraeus being observed rising through the ranks? Guess what — some SNCO took that snot nose LT, prevented him from ruining his career and got him on the path of greatness. The arrogance of the people who have never had dusty boots or seen the chaos of this folly that we’re involved in is breathtaking. If you want a wake up call, take the time to actually look at the men and women who are dying. Look at the pics of the dead and wounded and get a sense of perspective~!

By: John A. Whitney Sr

John A. Whitney Sr — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:59:15 +0000

Re; LTG Peteraus, saw him grow as an LT, field grade (MAJ), by some of the best Leaders. Many had been Squadorn, Regimental Commanders and they too made their stars. This soldier learned from the best.

By: John A. Whitney Sr

John A. Whitney Sr — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:56:21 +0000

Disagree with the statement of Joint Service, there is no turning back, the Armed Forces is moving forward, purple suiters have long been a necessity and will have to become a reality. Afterall there can be no weak link in the chain. It’s been proven with the Reserve & National Guard organizations. So, true it can be on the Active Force structure.

By: John A. Whitney Sr

John A. Whitney Sr — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:52:12 +0000

CENTCOM change????, ya gotta be kidding, the Leadership is fine through the ranks of the Commanders in uniform. Propblem has been elsewhere, fortunatly real world the commanders in the field have not failed.

By: John A. Whitney Sr

John A. Whitney Sr — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:48:46 +0000

Forget the WH, what matters is the descion through our elected officals, nothing from the WH, the lawn & rose garden has proven to be what it shoulda’/coulda’/woulda’ been at the inital stage of gulf war ii. Regroup, and maintain the troop level at 100K.

By: KragCulloden

KragCulloden — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 10:36:09 +0000

I think the more important issue is the CentCom change — anything Petraeus wants has to filter through CentCom, and its going to have a squid CinC…probably one of the dumbest moves I’ve seen so far.
With two ground wars in the region, the only responsible choice was an Army or Marine General, with experience on the ground in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.
No amount of “joint” service the Adm may have can replace an entire career serving in a ground combat branch of the military like the Marine Corps and Army. Without that career-long focus I fail to see what he brings to the position that is of any value. The Navy is known for two things — technical know-how and Naval Air. Neither of those have any real impact in Iraq or Afghanistan.
We need a dirty-boots infantryman at CentCom with both the in-country experience and historical perspective of COIN warfare. Adm Fallon is not that man.

By: Mrs Panstreppon

Mrs Panstreppon — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 20:16:24 +0000

The only thing I knew about General Petraeus before yesterday was what I read in a 8/25/05 Newsday story about corruption in the Iraq Defense Ministry. Petraeus at the time was in charge of training and equipping the Iraqi military and he was quoted as saying that corruption claims were a matter to be resolved by the Iraqi government.
Either General Petraeus is a frigging moron or he is on the take.

By: Robot Economist

Robot Economist — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 18:30:28 +0000

In defense of solomon, some of the great counterinsurgency writers (the great C.E. Callwell comes to mind) acknowledged that sometimes an occupier must take drastic steps (like depopulating entire areas of the countryside) to win against insurgents.
Sure, he also advocated campaigns to win the hearts and minds of the people, but he also recognized that such campaigns only work during the first year or so of the occupation.

By: Solomon

Solomon — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 18:13:42 +0000

David! I appreciate your sentiment but its misguided and naive. Our soldiers and Marines are involved in combat against irregular forces! You ask for civility during the most barbaric activity that we can ask anyone to engage in? I repeat– don’t forget the video of Nick Berg! Don’t forget the Blackwater contractors! Don’t forget the lads from the 101st ABN! Godless? Yes I personally believe they are. Am I sounding like them? Perhaps but our purpose was clear, our goals noble and the very citizens of that nation has stood on the sidelines while OUR people have died, been horrendously injured and wasted our national treasure. I don’t profess to be wise, but I am a moral realist and reject those who support the viewpoint of moral relativism . Oh and finally yes…Its from the crusades…I rather like that phrase because back then, just as today “they drew first blood.”

By: David

David — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 14:46:44 +0000

Solomon, you are most definitely not showing the wisdom of your eponymous king. Do you even know where and by whom the phrase “Kill them all; God will know his own” was originally used — or what eventually happened to those who did? It wasn’t pretty, believe me. This has nothing to do with political correctness; it’s pure folly, not to mention morally reprehensible.
While you may be on the other side of the fence, you’re sounding a whole lot like the very “Godless” people you’re railing against.