SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: FJB who wrote (223894)10/13/2007 6:15:10 AM
From: LindyBill   of 794003
 
A comment on Sanchez from "The Captain's Journal" blog:

The Logic of General Sanchez
captainsjournal.com

Perhaps the General is conveniently ignoring the advances in Iraq of late, but rather than engage him on this level, let's turn our attention to the logic of Sanchez. As soon as he became top military commander, he says, he recognized that there were "serious challenges" to the strategy. Regarding his having stayed quiet to stateside command or the civilian authorities about this, the "last thing" we want is for general officers to "stand up against" political leadership.

But if he felt so strongly about these issues, could he not have at least spoken with leadership about strategy? Don't officers write doctrine and develop strategy? If not, then what do officers do in a war? He sounds more like a private than a Lieutenant General. But Sanchez knows that if he could have said more than he did concerning strategy, and even resigned his commission. Why, then, did he not?

Because "he feared that move could further jeopardize troops serving there." But wait. If he believed that such a move would jeopardize troops, what about a Lt. Gen. who cannot discuss doctrine or strategy and who even now has no original recommendations, believed the war to be a lost cause, and waited until he had retired to say to the remaining 160,000 troops in theater (and who are preparing to deploy) that they could die in vain for a lost cause?

Are his actions now placing the troops in any less jeopardy than bringing attention to what he believed to be a failed strategy? If he had taken the actions he said he was so reluctant to take, would the possibility not have existed in his calculus to effect a change for the better, thus ensuring the greatest possible likelihood of success in Iraq?

His own words appear to indict him for caring more about the success of his career and the exoneration of him from his own failures than about either the campaign or the men under his charge. Sanchez, for whatever he was during his tenure, appears to have become a bitter curmudgeon rather than a statesman and warrior in the twilight of a career.

Totally aside from past or current strategy or chances of victory in Iraq, his words are a sad testimony about him rather than one about Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext