The man Fiasco author Tom Ricks referred to as (I’m paraphrasing here) the worst tactician in modern military history is in the headlines for receiving a six-digit retainer from a veterans charity that only gives 25 percent of its income to the veterans it was set up to assist.
This from our friend Simon at ABC News:
Retired U.S. Army Gen. Tommy Franks, who led the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, was paid $100,000 to endorse a veterans charity that watchdog groups say is ripping off donors and wounded veterans by using only a small portion of the money raised for veterans services, according to testimony in Congress today.
Read the entire ABC News report here.
– Ward
{ 46 comments… read them below or add one }
Wasn’t Gen. Franks(Ret.) the one who “proudly” proclaimed that if we had another terrorist attack that our constitution(& all of its freedoms & liberties,including the freedom to state what I’m saying right now) was dead?
if you read the book jawbreaker. when the cia first went into the stan they asked gen franks for troops to block osama from making it to pakistan however he refused to do it.
Thanks Gen Franks, those vets sure dont.
100K for charity giving 25% away NOT to help Vets.
Patton would a cared for his men.
Not you.
Your Fired.
Thanks Gen Franks, those vets sure dont.
100K for charity giving 25% away NOT to help Vets.
Patton would a cared for his men.
Not you.
Your Fired.
Franks’ comments were made in Cigar Aficionado magazine in Nov/Dec 2003. The full text doesn’t appear to be freely available on the web only some excerpts. Some web commentary differs with Roy Smith’s assessment that Franks “proudly” made a proclamation concerning the future demise of the US Constitution. For example an alternative interpretation can be seen here:
http://stuartbuck.blogspot.com/2003/11/tommy-franks.html
This blog states:
His [Franks'] comments appear in an unlikely venue. Franks, who rarely accepts interview requests, has conducted one with an upscale men’s magazine called “Cigar Aficionado.”
It is in here that he defends the actions in Iraq, even if no weapons of mass destruction are ever found, by asking and answering the rhetorical question, what is the worst thing that can happen in our country. Franks telling the magazine that the worst thing comes in two steps.
“The first step would be a nexus between weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. That goes to step number two,” Franks continues, “which is that the western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment we call democracy.”
The general goes on. He fears a — quoting again — “massive casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world — it may be in the United States of America — that causes our population to question our own Constitution, and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass casualty-producing event.”
General Franks concludes, “Which in fact, then begins to potentially unravel the fabric of our Constitution.”
sintax-
The problem I have with Berntsen is that he doesnt seem to understnd the logistical and operational difficulties of a Army or Marine blocking force. There are significant issues with deploying and supplying large numbers of forces at high altitudes in the winter.
In his defense his aide stated that General Franks discontinued his association with the group when they learned that the ratio of money received to money distributed was less than 85%. That is the standard that he follows when making a determination to represent or be involved with a charitable organization.
The constant disparagement of General Franks is really uncalled for. As far as I can tell, he is a man of impeccable character who served his country with distinction. The invasion of Iraq was executed nearly flawlessly and resulted in a unprecedentedly low casualties. Gen. Franks should be commended. The fact that he was unable to foresee the troubles that would arise later, troubles that I feel are still largely due to signals we sent with our negativity here at home, should not be a strike against him. He was asked to execute a conventional war and he did so, counterinsurgency was never really on the table. As a matter of fact, it remains a relatively new and unproven means of waging war. Maybe if we had kept up general Franks’ momentum, and carried the fight against Jihadism into Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and all the other states waging undeclared war against us, we would be better off for it.
Actually,I’d say that Gen. Franks fought the Iraq & Afghan wars as directed to him by Sec.Def. Rumsfeld.It was Rumsfeld who refused to send in a sizable amount of troops to engage the Iraqis in battle.One can argue how much difference it would have made if Turkey would have let 4th Infantry Division invade Iraq from their borders,but Gen. Franks fought with what little forces Rumsfeld gave him.Also,the Iraq War did not end with those statues of Saddam being pulled down.It is still going on today.I sarcastically said that Franks “proudly” said that our constitution would be scrapped if an WMD is used against our nation.It seems that,unlike Colin Powell & Norman Schwarzkopf,Tommy Franks is a Neo-Con favorite & appears repeatedly on Fox News.
How on earth can the architect of the brilliant takeover of Afghanistan–a nation practically designed to be as far from traditional American military power as possible–be called “the worst tactician in modern military history”?
That’s just idiotic. The American conquering of Afghanistan will be studied until the end of time.
Am I saying this man walks on water? Of course not, and the infamous debacle of letting Osama escape might be his responsibility (a fact much debated, to put it mildly).
As other commenters have pointed out, his Constitution comment was taken out of context, as any fair-minded observer might assume just from the pure absurdity of the claim.
I expected more from this site and its commenters. I’m very disappointed.
Nessuno, I don’t know why you’d expect more from the commenters on this site. We’ve got an award winning array of cable-modem equipped retards.
HMM im wondering why every one loves picking on the brass. Heck what would you do for 100k?
Roy Smith,
You list a lot of obstacles to ultimate victory in Afghanistan and stupid things that are being done now, but you fail mention how these things relate to Franks.
He retired in July of 2003.
“How on earth can the architect of the brilliant takeover of Afghanistan–a nation practically designed to be as far from traditional American military power as possible–be called “the worst tactician in modern military history”?”
You should consult Andrew Bacevich about that. You might find that “brilliant” is, ahem, a bit generous when it comes to Franks. In fact, the guy used thoroughly conventional tactics, and remained determinedly, blissfully unconcerned about any broader strategic issues.
But he did get to publish his book, and do the usual media gasbag circuit, and indulge in “charity”.
It is absolutely absurb that Gen. Franks took this money to promote this organization. It is a disgrace. No matter how well he did as a commander, this shows his true feelings toward his men. He should me made to answer as to why he took this money that should have gone to the vets who done his dirty work.
“HMM im wondering why every one loves picking on the brass. Heck what would you do for 100k?”
Posted by: 22lr
I wouldn’t sell out my men, that’s for damn sure.
I know it has been reported that he distanced himself from this ‘charity’ (and I use that term loosely) but did he return the 100K that he took from them after this became public knowledge?
I really wonder when people are hailing Gen. Franks considering the mess we are left with five years on. While his performance demonstrated an aptitude for counter attacking through the Fulda Gap, his understanding of the strategic objectives behind the war in Iraq leaves much wanting. By not requesting adequate numbers of troops to secure the rear (which is everywhere in 4GW), Gen. Franks created the conditions by which the insurgency could be born. His tactical proficiency is bellied by his complete strategic blunder in failing to accomplish the objective of the mission.
This error on his part was only reinforced by his quick departure from the scene leaving others, equally incapable, to try and bring some order to the mess created. Alas, equal amounts of incompetence can found in the CPA’s involvement in the mess in Iraq.
One thing for sure everyone, we can’t always know what’s happening with the higher up’s. We can’t because, Our National Defense, is always first priority. Whether we know it’s happening or not!
As far as him taking money, if he did he did.
Almost all high ranking generals are politicians aren’t they?
When it comes to a commander of forces, (of any size), Especially An Army, he just as hundreds of others have done before him makes his decisions and lets the chips fall where they may! I challenge any of you to try it sometime. I know I wouldn’t want the job. And my dream was to become commandant of the Marine Corps.
Other than basic training, followed by breaking my neck, I guess I fell quite a bit short. But I’m sure that is quite hard to command even just a squad.
Has Ward got paraphrasing right when he says Ricks (author of Fiasco) called Tommy Franks “the worst tactician in modern military history”?
In Fiasco Ricks has a section “Franks flunks strategy”. Ricks states that “The inside word in the U.S. military long has been that Franks didn’t think strategically”….and then a little later on the same page quotes an unnamed officer as saying “He [Franks] was really comfortable at the tactical level”.
P.S. To my mind Fiasco is a “must read”!
Nessuno
The fact that Gen. Franks retired in 2003 shows that he had time to shore up Afghanistan with more troops.Maybe Gen. Franks could have waited until 4th Infantry Division was in place to attack Iraq,but I feel that the call of when to attack was out of his hands.He had to obey both the President & Sec.Def. Rumsfeld,who I understand was totally against building up the military to Desert Storm levels.It was brilliant watching the 1st Marine Division & the 3rd Infantry Division moving up the highway towards Baghdad,but they seriously needed,besides the 101st Airborne Division,the 4th Infantry Division & perhaps even the 1st Cavalry Division to mop up the forces that “evaporated.” I don’t think that all of 82nd Airborne division was involved in the Iraq Invasion.Like I said before,the Iraq war did not end with “Mission Accomplished” on the Lincoln Aircraft Carrier & Gen. Franks still had time before he retired to insure that enough forces were in Iraq to secure it.
It is a shame General Franks is making a living off veterans. 25% out of 100% is just a scam. If Franks was smart he would have checked into the program. Follow the money trail! What a disapointment! What a disapointment! CSM Ruley
Did you guys now that the red cross spends only a small fraction of there income on actually helping people. This veterans group is nothing new. Wake up and smell reality here, whats next you’ll find that the veterans they helped actually needed help. I’m guessing 25% is a good hunk of cash, and its a lot more than any one of you could shell out.
If you think that GEN Franks erred in taking the 100 Grand stop and ask yourself why he didn’t publicly protest when SecDef Rumsfeld sent him into Iraq with inadequate forces for post-war, i.e. occupation duties in a nation awash in weapons and explosives. Not to mention 2 Moslem sects that hate each other and non-Moslems in general. I have a unique perspective, having served in Vietnam in the 25th ID, Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. OIF was the worst managed and led of all 2 of my wars.
The answer to my retorical question is that Franks was looking out for number one at every level. That is why he did not buck Rumsfeld and blythly took a $100 rand retainer with out doing any due dillegence.
22lr, we’ve known that for decades. During WWII the Salvation Army gave away donuts while the Red Cross was selling donuts. Cold weather gear knitted by Americans and donated to the Red Cross so they could ‘get it to the troops’ didn’t give it to the troops unless the troops came through with some cash. The Red Cross isn’t what most people think that it is. If you want to donate to a good organization try either the Boy Scouts or the Salvation Army.
People who berate Gen. Franks for “obvious” strategic shortcomings rest far too comfortably in the cocoon of hind sight.
Who, in April 2003, foresaw the scale of the eventual insurgency?
Who, in Mar 1, 2003, anticipated that US troops would _not_ be attacked with chemical and biological weapons?
Would starting the occupation with a larger and unsustainable number of US troops have resolved the social and political factors that lead to the birth and growth of the Sunni insurgency, or would it just have had the effect of keeping the lid a bit longer on a boiling steam cooker?
Was Gen. Franks and the Department of Defense solely to blame for the debacle that was post war administration? Or were actors in the State Department and the CIA just as responsible?
Gen. Franks’ job was to invade Iraq and topple the regime. He did his job. He focused on the invasion effort while leaving post war strategic planning to others, who failed. As a regional level commander, he bears contributing responsibility for strategic level failures, but to not recognize his ability to execute the invasion while preventing large scale American casualties would be rediculous.
My wifes mother knited many sweaters for the Red Cross during WW11. They supplied the instructions and wool yarn and the woman spent hours upon hours doing the kniting .. free… My wifes mother had several of her nephews in the service at that time and she was praying that one of her sweaters would get to them. when nephew John came home on leave (10th Mountian Div) his answer to his aunt was hell Aunt Cel they wanted money for the sweaters . and I did not have it.
Semper Fidelis,
I think that says enough,
except those who’ve served should
be thanked.
In most all occasions
J. Whalen
Former U.S. Army, SGT
In my opinion,Colin Powell,Norman Schwarzkopf,& Max Thurmond(who commanded Southern Command during Operation Just Cause) are the last of the great Army commanders that we have had.Then Sec.Def. Cheney allowed them to do their job & “COMMAND.” Gen. Franks is nothing but a technocrat & it was Sec.Def. Rumsfeld with his Neo-Cons who during the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq was the “master tactician” of both wars.What purpose in life or even role that Gen. Franks had is beyond me.He was just a figurehead.
“the red cross spends only a small fraction of there income on actually helping people”
Based on what? There is at least one organisation that evaluates American charities – Charity Navigator. If I am reading their evaluation correctly the American Red Cross spent roughly $320 million in 2006 on administrative and fund raising expenses whereas the program expenses (i.e. programs to help people) totalled over $5,000,000,000. See: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3277 The American Red Cross gets the highest rating (4 stars) that Charity Navigator gives.
President Bush awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Tommy despite the fsct he [Franks} never gave second thought to developing any post invasion plans for Iraq. He retired from the army shortly after Bush announced on May 1, 2003 that major combat operations have ended and we and the coalition have prevaled. Since that time we, and ony we, have been engaged in “MINOR” combat operations in Iraq thanks in large measure to General Franks’ lack of foresight and failure to even consider post invasion plans. Re: FIASCO, a book by Tom Ricks.
But when one considers Bush awarded the PMF to the likes of former CIA Director Geroge Tenet and L. Paul Bremer, former Coalition Provisional Authority Chief in Iraq (CPA) it’s clear the only criteria to qualify was be a first-class screwup.
No question Tommy Franks qualifies, hands down. LOL.
“Based on what? There is at least one organisation that evaluates American charities – Charity Navigator. If I am reading their evaluation correctly the American Red Cross spent roughly $320 million in 2006 on administrative and fund raising expenses whereas the program expenses (i.e. programs to help people) totalled over $5,000,000,000. See: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3277 The American Red Cross gets the highest rating (4 stars) that Charity Navigator gives.”
My point exactly. It all how you look at something. Im not sticking up for this charity, and maybe what they are doing is wrong. However why go crazy over General Franks, I ya I remember hes a 4 star general and no one here ever made general so your just jealous. Let me tell you something, you dont get to be a 4 star by being stupid. Maybe this is not what is happening here and General Franks is actually guilty but here in America I think that your still innocent until proven guilty. And on a different note, his name if Franks not freaking Tommy. Lets at least show some respect for a 4 freaking star general.
I for one would like to hear the Generals side before I go calling a 4 star general names, but maybe thats just my sense of respect for those who are a higher rank than me. This is a military site and most of you are probably military yourself, so lets show some respect. If I offered 100k to you to represent my charity would you ask questions?
Shouldn’t this article belong on the discussion boards under Conspiracy??!! Getting a ‘star’ on the shoulder requires a bit of politicing. Getting four requires a lot, as well as being very good at the job you’re doing. Being a politician or flag officer, you unfortuneatly have to depend upon those under you to take care of the day to day task. Sometimes, the ‘staff’ doesn’t do too well and embarrassing photo’s are taken with morons who later turn out to be traitors, theifs, child molesters, then all heck breaks loose from the media. Some people better look into the mirror before making accusations about those who have climbed to the top of the ladder they are holding at the bottom.
Was the choice his, is it careless or selfless, if so that is a choice a knucklehead PVT would make. Making the descion & accepting the money is OK if the paramaeters of the so called charity organization were different than what they are now.
After 30+ years, I finally received my 100%. Over all the years since my first Hospital stay in Hawaii (the 60′s), I always remembered the craft kits I received when bed ridden. Again, I received them state side numerous times hospitalized off and on over the years (70′s, 80′s, 90′s, 2000). For many years I always sent what I could or couldn’t afford hoping another G.I. would benefit from them as I did. Six/Eight dollars each I thought was reasonable, considering how they helped me. Recently finding out that R.C. took a six figure salary for himself, quarter of a mill or more, . . . . I have since been looking for another charity that puts the VETERAN First! My personal prayer is that some of my money went towards fellow veterans. I still have several completed kits from back then to remind me that as a D.A.V., I can still so something instead of praying to die. Many,many times they were all I had to look forward to.
No, you become a General because of being a YES man. Yes sir we can invade Afganistian. Yes sir we can invade Iraq. Yes sir it won’y take hundreds of thousands of troops. Yes sir I’mgoing to retire right after the shit hits the fan! Remember what happened to the four star who told the truth! It has right watching the Apprentice “Your Fired”. Look at that other dip shit who just retired Gen Honour the Katrine General. I met that dip shit in person. The first thing you ask yourself how did that dip shit become a three star? When that’s all you got they get to the top! For all you folks who just love Tommay Franks, we have some rotations for you in Iraq and Afganistian! Maybe he ran out of cigars while he’s thinks what a great general he was! Does anyone out there want this dip shit to plan another war?
“Who, in April 2003, foresaw the scale of the eventual insurgency?”
Answer: Most people who saw from the beginning that the war was an epic strategic blunder. It didn’t take a Clausewitz to see that we were deluding ourselves about the magnitude of the task, and the reception we’d get.
War shills love to act put upon about this. Our glorious adventure in Iraq has turned out pretty much as war sceptics expected. The endless self-justifying, self-pitying whining (“Who could have known?”) is the reaction of children.
I don’t know where you people got your mi9litary training. Apparently your instructors left out the important parts of how to get ahead in the military.
In the days of Vietnam we attempted tp be able to do what the Army has seen fit to incorporate Forty years later. Enlisted personnel would not sew their rank on their sleeves we needed velcro, now they have it. As soon as you got rank most of the time you lost it in short order, unless you were a real suck -up. As far as Officers, they are taught in OCS, or West Point the faster you screw-up the faster you go up. You got promoted just to get you away from life threatening issues
hopefully without injuring someone else.
I find it amazing that not one of you arm chair “generals” ever served with GEN Franks.
(Yet are quick to denigrate him WITHOUT ever hearing from him – typical liberal uninformed position regarding anyone who happens to support President Bush)
I did.
He started as a field artillery officer who developed into a individual who understood what joint operations meant.
He was vulgar, crude, did not like the press, but understood what needed to be done and how to do it.
IF he was INVOLVED with a “bad” charity he will certainly distance himself from it QUICKLY.
He understands the common soldier and has great regard for them.
I am reluctant to criticize Grn Franks unless we get ALL the facts! who knows what promises were made to hime by dod & state dept about restoring law & order, etc.
We have a system whereby the civilians control the military: why aren’t we blaming the State Department? I think he did the best he could, with the resources he had!
The 1991 invasion is the one that screwed up!
Also the balfour agreement breaking up Kurds, putting shiites & sunnis together, etc.
We are trying to bring a medieval civilization into the 21st century!!!!!
Keep in mind that the American Institute of Philanthropy in 2006 rated Soldiers’ Angels a “D” in their 2006 survey (http://www.charitywatch.org/articles/soldiersangels.html).
In case you are interested in reading Soldiers’ Angels’ response to the AIP report, you may read it here —> http://soldiersangels.org/index.php?page=response-to-aip
The report from AIP regarding SA was myopic at best and completely libelous at worst. Therefore, I would take any report on General Franks, his involvement with the charity (charities) mentioned, and their standing with AIP with a VERY big grain of salt.
And arm-chair/Monday morning quaterbacking is one of the easiest sports known to man.
When Rumsfield asked Gen. Shinseki of how many boots on the ground to secure Iraq and the Chief of Staff replied 350,000. Gen. Shinseki was handed retirement papers and a more tractable general was found i.e. Gen. Franks. When you fight a war you go with overwhelming firepower and troops, the result is less causalities and a secure lines of supply. I guess Gen. Franks was asleep for that class at the War College. The axiom of “money talks and B.S. walks” has some bearing in Gen. Franks endorsing this charity.
This is what happens when you let business men run the military. War is not an on the cheap endevor. You either pull out all the stops and commit to whatever sacrafice is required or you don’t go. I would rather see 350,000 troops along with whatever support they need overwhelm an enemy with a minimum amount of casualties rather than the cheap version which ends coming back to bite you in the rear.
I am certainly not critisizing General Franks or his team for which I have the utmost respect for, but have absolutely no respect for the civilian leadership who think they know better that those who have dedicated their lives to the defense of this country and are the experts at what they do.
It seems that this nation has learned and perfected the lessons of BLITZKRIEGE very well but have forgotten what it took to secure and rebuild the occupied nations after the hard won victory.
WHY? Why is it that some people are so prone to judge General Franks? Is it that they are jealous or is it that they envy him? Well, I can imagine some of those officers that serve under him, doing what they were told even though they did not want to follow a man that time and again made them do their job. I met General Franks when he was a Colonel (1st CAV Division) while doing training at NTC. I was very impressed with his leadership skills, and since then I followed his career through out the years, including his tours in Afganistan and Iraq. He is a man with an impressive character as a soldier and as a leader, I can not find another General that I rather serve with (to include going to war).
To all that want to denegrade our leaders and heroes, quit quarter backing from your couch and become a real american —Fight the Fight.
Jose Carmelo Torres Leon
CSM (Ret)
Larry said
> When Rumsfield asked Gen. Shinseki of how many
> boots on the ground to secure Iraq and the
> Chief of Staff replied 350,000. Gen. Shinseki
> was handed retirement papers and a more
> tractable general was found i.e. Gen. Franks.
Can we dispense with this Rumsfield fired Shinseki over troop numbers MYTH once and for all?
Rumsfield undercut Shineski in April 2002 for reasons unrealted to Iraq. Shineski’s troop comments where made in February of 2003, almost a YEAR after the fact. PLEASE an we get the facts right.
Furthermore Rumsfield did not find a “more tractable general” in Gen. Franks. Franks was appointed Commander of USCENTCOM in 2000, well before Rumsfield.
In the end Shinsekie 350,000 troops would have made the same mistakes that Franks’ 170,000 troops made. The problem wasnt so much the number of troop, but the fact that the Army was not prepared for an insurgent war.
All you guys who sing the praises of Tommy Franks have got to be very proud of him now. He sits on the Board of Directors of Bank of America. As many know; the branch manager of the Bank of America Gaffney SC removed the American flags placed on the funeral procession route of Lance Corporal Fowlkes who was killed in Afghanistan.
Now, Tommy still hasn’t said a thing about the Company or branch manager he directs and takes huge payments from. At the moment when he had to decide to honor a Marine how died from combat wounds received in Afghanistan or support Bank of
America… Tommy turned his back on Lance Corporal Fowlkes memory and service. Any Marine out there who thinks Lance Corporal Fowlkes deserved better treatment? Any other vet? Obviously, not Tommy Franks.
Should Tommy Franks be held responisible for what a single employee did in a branch he had no control over?
I’ll agree what that Bank of America Employee did in small town SC is despicapable, but I dont see how Tommy Franks comes into play.
If we hold a General too such high standards, our Presidents fall way short. The guy we have in office wont even hold his hand over his heart during the pledge, but everyone is cool with that.
Why cant Franks earn some money when Bill Clinton is running around doing 1000k a plate speaking agagements and working for the DMC? Remember Somalia, the Rangers werent allowed to retrieve their own.
The charity thing is way overblown, more democratic underground bs.
Books, did Eisenhower, Bradely, MacArthur Colin Powell author write any. Did they take any private sector jobs?