|
War College Report: Iraq War an 'Error '
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ahlamalek |
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) - A report published by the Army War College calls the Bush administration's war on terrorism unfocused and says the invasion of Iraq was "a strategic error."
The research paper by Jeffrey Record, a professor at the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, said the president's strategy "promises much more than it can deliver" and threatens to spread U.S. military resources too thin. Record also wrote that Saddam Hussein (news - bio) 's Iraq did not present a threat to the United States and was a distraction from the war on terrorism.
Record is a visiting professor at the Army War College at Carlisle Barracks, Pa. The paper was published last month by the Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute.
Lt. Col. Merideth Bucher, public affairs officer for the Army War College, said Monday it is not unusual for students, mostly higher ranking officers, at the war college to be exposed to critical thought that might be contrary to current national policy. She said students are often exposed to speakers with varying views.
The director of the Strategic Studies Institute, Douglas Lovelace Jr., said it was originally founded by President Dwight Eisenhower to take a critical independent analysis of military issues from an academic perspective.
"Dr. Record is a noted national security specialist. It's not at all at odds for us to analyze a given mission and arrive at a conclusion that seems at odds with national policy," Lovelace said. He said in the past the institute has released studies analyzing U.S. policy in Haiti, Afghanistan and other hot spots. Record could not be reached immediately for comment Monday through Army public affairs offices and he did not immediately respond to e-mails from The Associated Press. He is the author of six books and is a former legislative assistant for national security affairs to Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Georgia, and former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, D-Texas.
Record's report concludes that the war on terrorism is too widespread and should focus on al-Qaeda and other terrorist threats to the United States.
"The United States may be able to defeat al-Qaeda, but it cannot rid the world of terrorism, much less evil," Record writes. |
|
|
| failsafe |
| i'm surprised that any military guy would actually write that and have it published. I guess even the military knows they shouldn't be in there. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| I find this whole story rather interesting considering the War College probably played a major role in drawing up the Iraq War plans in the first place!:confused: |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
i'm surprised that any military guy would actually write that and have it published. I guess even the military knows they shouldn't be in there. |
He's not, he's a liberal hippie professors, American campuses are full with them believe me. Guess they even filter into the military universities...:( |
|
|
| DaveSaenz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
He's not, he's a liberal hippie professors, American campuses are full with them believe me. Guess they even filter into the military universities...:( |
You label anyone who is against the war a "hippie."
:rolleyes:
I'm going to PS a photo of Pat Buchanan in hippie threads one of these days just for you Comrade.;) |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DaveSaenz
You label anyone who is against the war a "hippie."
:rolleyes:
I'm going to PS a photo of Pat Buchanan in hippie threads one of these days just for you Comrade.;) |
Quiet, Hippie!!!:D |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by DaveSaenz
You label anyone who is against the war a "hippie."
:rolleyes:
|
It's one of the oldest and most simple minded forms of propaganda.
http://www.propagandacritic.com/art...ct.wg.name.html
Much akin to stereotyping by religion, ethnicity or ideology; it's a display of ignorance that divides people, creating disunity and incohesion around the world. |
|
|
| anuneventrade |
I'm not really that suprised. There are many people who think that the war on Iraq is a complete strategic mistake. A professor and I discussed this in depth and he also thinks it was a mistake. He agrees with the person in this article... that although there is a possiblity that the military may conquer Al Queda, it is impossible to stop all terrorism. We both agree that the United States has begun to think of themselves somewhat as a "God" figure, believing that they can eliminate all that is wrong in the world.
Hmm, let me reword that, not "begun" to think that, since they have thought so for a while, but they are taking their mission of righteousness into places where it doesn't belong. With this type of thinking, it allows a large range of possiblity that we can be hit at a weak spot, because of the fact that we so thuroughly believe we are unbeatable. With this kind of military thinking, it provides a window of opportunity to strike. Just like in 1941, we might be hit when and where we think it is impossible.
The only true way to prepare for a war, in my opinion, is to understand that you might lose. Only then will you be able to guard yourself on all fronts. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| So is this just 1 guy talking, or is it a representative voice of the War College as a whole? The Army War College is a 2-4 year program ( I can't recall if it's 2 or 4--probably 2)that most (if not all) prospective Army generals must go through where they undergo intensive reading and strategic planning. The reason I question whether it is 1 person speaking his voice versus the entire college speaking is that obviously Generals are more independent minded in the military and many have differing opinions on battle strategies, etc. This could just be an administrative person speaking their political mind, or it could be an anti-Bush General, or it could be someone else. Hard to say. |
|
|
| Dj_Irish |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
So is this just 1 guy talking, or is it a representative voice of the War College as a whole? The Army War College is a 2-4 year program ( I can't recall if it's 2 or 4--probably 2)that most (if not all) prospective Army generals must go through where they undergo intensive reading and strategic planning. The reason I question whether it is 1 person speaking his voice versus the entire college speaking is that obviously Generals are more independent minded in the military and many have differing opinions on battle strategies, etc. This could just be an administrative person speaking their political mind, or it could be an anti-Bush General, or it could be someone else. Hard to say. |
From Washington Post:
| quote: | The report, by Jeffrey Record, a visiting professor at the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabam
Record, a veteran defense specialist and author of six books on military strategy and related issues, was an aide to then-Sen. Sam Nunn when the Georgia Democrat was chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
In discussing his political background, Record also noted that in 1999 while on the staff of the Air War College, he published work critical of the Clinton administration.
His essay, published by the Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute, carries the standard disclaimer that its views are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Army, the Pentagon or the U.S. government.
|
|
|
|
| Shakka |
So there you have it--certainly I won't say he's not a smart man without credentials, however as a visiting professor, I'd hardly say his statements echo the larger views of the War College itself. Sounds like the media might've gotten a little ahead of itself on this one.
Thanks for the news link. |
|
|
| failsafe |
| makes a bit more sense now. |
|
|
|
|
