British general roasts US over Iraq

[rodeodance]

Source: (AFP)



British general roasts US over Iraq

34 minutes ago

LONDON (AFP) - The head of the British Army during the invasion of Iraq has blasted the United States for its handling of the aftermath, a newspaper reported Saturday.

..............

Jackson branded US policy after the March 2003 invasion "intellectually bankrupt" and slammed Rumsfeld's claim that US forces "don't do nation-building" as "nonsensical."

Jackson said Rumsfeld was "one of the most responsible for the current situation in Iraq."



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070901/wl_uk_afp/britainmilitaryiraqus_070901014259;_ylt=AgwE.7tqa.B7ottD4ow1XqcUewgF

[MissWaverly]

1. Keep it coming, Brits, we need to pull the curtain back

and expose this for what it is, an occupation that fails to provide stability for the Iraqi people.

Thank heaven that Tony is gone, truth at last.

[0007]

8. It does indeed appear to be good news. But as we all know

junior & his gang of thugs don't listen to anyone. For God's sake the whole world knows we aren't much different than the 1930's Germans. And the sheeple here in this country are kept in the dark by the controlled media. Whoopee .. .. Hooray .. Football season is here! And goody goody gum drops 'American Idol' is getting ready for a new season. Oh what a blessing to live in God's country, where freedom knows no end.

Tony Snow is such a putz and another one just like him will replaced the poor man. Dana Perino has a way of pissing me off for sure!

[MissWaverly]

10. If enough leaks out in Britain, it will be all over the internet

people will know despite the lock the Bush administration has on the press, Only Katie could go to Iraq and find
air conditioning and plasma tvs.

[MADem]

2. Well, they "owned" Basra, and that joint isa fucking mess right now.

They share in the blame, as they were part of the "Coalition of the Billing."

[Barrett808]

3. k & r

[tabasco]

4. At least it's only our first time trying to occupy Iraq.

The British were stupid enough to go along into a quagmire with a warmongering US administration. It's not the "handling" of the occupation - - it was the colossal strategic mistake to enter the quagmire in the first place. The British already proved they couldn't do it. The British should be examining how they let the Poodle get them into Cheney's oil war, rather than claiming they could do it better.

British generals think their shit don't stink and love to pretend they are somehow superior. I think they are all descended form Montgomery.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dutch]

9. Interesting how you blame "The British" for their country's participation in the war.

And, indeed, for actions taken by British governments before most of them were even born- yet you restrict your condemnation of US military involvement in the conflict to the "warmongering US administration".

I certainly agree that any mistakes made in Iraq pale before the diasatrous calamity of the decision to invade itself. Jackson makes some worthwhile criticisms, but it's an absurd fantasy that the occupation could have somehow been "managed" effectively.

Arrogance and an overbearing sense of superiority are pretty much a prerequisite for qualifying for the rank of General, in the UK, US and probably anywhere else, and blaming the other guy, especially when there's plenty of blame to go around, is always easier than turning the microscope on yourself.

[tabasco]

11. Huh? Where do I absolve the American people of blame?

With which of my statements do you disagree?

You have inputed statements or claims to me which I did not make, i.e., absolving the American people for blame for their government's actions. Having served as a military officer myself, I also take exception with your blanket statement about general officers.

Do you disagree that the British need to examine how they got dragged into this mess?

Just WTF is your issue, anyway? :wtf:

[dipsydoodle]

6. BBC News link with added detail

Gen Sir Mike Jackson, added that US strategy had been "short-sighted".

He said former US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld was "one of the most responsible for the current situation".

He criticised the decision to hand control of planning the administration of Iraq after the war to the Pentagon.

He also described the disbanding of the Iraqi army and security forces after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein as "very short-sighted".

etc.etc.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6973618.stm

Now then, to those of you firing flak , the real issue here is exactly with which of those statements do you not agree and why so ?

[Byronic]

7. Indeed.

General Jackson's comments were pretty much on the nail as far as I can see. Menzies Campbell, leader of the Liberal Democrats, agrees with him.

Jackson has eviscerated Rumsfeld, and the poor planning of the aftermath of the invasion.

Not many would disagree with that here, surely?

[Hissyspit]

13. Retired British Army Chief Says U.S. Iraq Policy "Intellectually Bankrupt"

Source: Associated Press

Retired British army chief says U.S. Iraq policy 'intellectually bankrupt'
2 hours ago

LONDON (AP) — The general who headed the British army during the Iraq invasion said in comments published Saturday that the current unrest there was caused by a U.S. decision to deploy insufficient forces and to scrap diplomats' post-conflict plans.

Retired general Sir Mike Jackson said former U.S. defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld's approach to the invasion was "intellectually bankrupt" and that his claim U.S. forces "don't do nation-building" was nonsensical, according to quotes excerpted from his autobiography and published by the Daily Telegraph.

- snip -

"All the planning carried out by the State Department went to waste," Jackson wrote. For Rumsfeld and his neo-conservative supporters "it was an ideological article of faith that the coalition soldiers would be accepted as a liberating army." Jackson, who retired in August 2006 as chief of the general staff, described Rumsfeld as "one of those most responsible for the current situation in Iraq."

In his book, which the newspaper will serialize starting Monday, Jackson criticizes the U.S. approach toward tackling global terrorism as inadequate, accusing Washington of relying too heavily on military power at the expense of nation-building and diplomacy.

Read more: http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5j1cUK68Z3mI0RhHBpkAwa1WNCqtg

[TygrBright]

14. Wow. We have an Iraq "POLICY"?!? Who knew?

I thought we were making it up as we went along...

mystifiedly,
Bright

[TomInTib]

15. Why can't these people just STFU and leave it to the historians?

Or Wikipedia?

[aquart]

16. Financially, too.

[Spinzonner]

17. If only that were the only problem with it