It is not that he is making inaccurate statements, it's that he bears some responsibility for these same things. He wasn't some lowly private unable to influence the situation.
It is not that he is making inaccurate statements, it's that he bears some responsibility for these same things. He wasn't some lowly private unable to influence the situation.
George B. McCellan, Redux
History tells us of another General, who after failing to adjust to a fast moving battlefield and always underestimated his enemy was replaced. General George B. McCellan resurfaced to become the Democratic nominee in 1864, running on an anti-war platform that sought negotiations with the Confederacy. He was forced to repudiate this position after the new strategies pursued by Grant and Sherman turned the tide of war. General Sanchez in becoming partisan, has diluted any arguement he presents, to a tepid gruel.
Ra...
... lot of great links, I'm sure. Also, your postings are quite busy and don't cut-to-the-quick. Can you boil it down to what you think and why? I might be able to churn out some type of response. Right now I'm not so inclined to. Thanks.
Partisanship
Let's be honest with ourselves, shall we? No one would be complaining if Sanchez had delivered the weekly Republican radio address. Let's not mask rank partisanship in the guise of sober reflections on Sanchez' credibility (or lack thereof).
You're right. Let's be honest. Let's also utilize the search device and take a look at how poorly this guy was viewed by his Soldiers well before this week's address.Originally Posted by ProfessorB
Example is better than precept.
To answer your posed question, I for one would be complaining if Sanchez delivered the same messages. I am neither Republicanas you assume nor Democrat My issues with Sanchez deal with his performance when it counted and his statements now on that period.
Tom
If he was doing that I would be dismissing him as a partisan fool like General Franks. It isn't what he said or where he said it. It is the fact that he is a least partly responsible. But just like the political bosses he now criticizes he pretends to be the victim excepting none of the responsibility.
Bad Idea for Sanchez? How About the Democrats?
I'm more disappointed in the Democrats for associating themselves with this guy.
They're so willing to embrace anyone who is anti-Bush or antiwar, especially if he wears a uniform so they can cover their perceived deficiency in national security (which is crap - Bush is no more qualified in national security and foreign affairs, and probably much less so, than Al Gore or John Kerry were), that they trot out Sanchez.
Very disappointing to me, and I've never voted anything other than Democrat (though I've only been voting for three years. . .)
Matt
"Give a good leader very little and he will succeed. Give a mediocrity a great deal and he will fail." - General George C. Marshall
I disagree I think Sanchez would be disparaged in any case. I would have been just as disappointed, but then again I like Gravel for a Democrat nominee.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
No...
I will be honest, very honest - I'd take issue with his remarks if he was delivering them from Mount Sinai.
The Reason Why
Frankly, I have to agree with a bunch of folks on here. He could have been giving this little anti-pep talk at the next Republican Convention and I'd still think he was playing dog in the manger.
1) He's a day late and a dollar short. COIN strategy appears to be working. Listening to his diatribe was like having someone shout "who farted" right in the middle of an EF Hutton commercial. (Pardon my crudeness)
2) Just by his words, I think the assumption that he would have instigated a counter-insurgency plan if not for the fear of being fired or from taking too much direction from Rumsfield, et al is bogus. It seems clear he is a "Powell Doctrine" kind of guy and really didn't want to be doing COIN or nation building. In fact, that he would have been the person in charge of giving information to Rumsfeld, et al on the war and a major source of input on the "how to" fight in that combat theater including numbers and strategy.
In short, he's a conventional warfare guy who got stuck with an insurgency and now wants everyone to believe, in the middle of a successful counterinsurgency, that we should back out and focus on conventional warfare planning for some other threat.
I am constantly amazed that we refuse to plan for and execute both.
Kat-Missouri
AMEN! This is one of my biggest pet rocks in the whole thing: the seemingly hard-wired "either/or" approach that we seem to take.
And as far as Sanchez goes...I have no use for his comments, no matter what podium he's standing behind when he utters them. Let's not mask questions of competence behind political grandstanding by any side.
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
Whatever.
I had held off commenting on the Sanchez threads because of my hard personal opinions on him, but can't resist anymore.
I was in 1AD under Sanchez, and I'll back up RTK an others and confirm that Sanchez's leadership left much to be desired in the eyes of his subordinates. I never saw anything positive come from him on any of my interactions.
My final straw was at the UN Bombing in August 2003 - elements of 1/1 AD and 2ACR had been pulling bodies and doing CASEVAC for 6 hours when he showed up in 140 degree heat. He proceeded to chew out the leaders on site for some minor BS and left the scene. Classic for him - seagull management - fly in, sh*t all over, fly out. I saw it back in Germany too many times to mention. (Fortunately, MG Dempsey (now LTG) was a 180 degree difference for 1AD)
The final straw started when he returned to Germany commanding V Corps and his "I was screwed out of a fourth star" narrative began. It started awhile ago inside of military circles, and only has come public recently. He is the epitome of what LTC Yingling talked about - there is more consequence for a PVT losing a rifle than a LTG losing a war. Yes, he wasn't set up fully for success, but the difference is in those who make their environments work and those who are dominated by their circumstances.
Sorry General, you were in charge, and therefore you are responsible for everything good or bad that occurs in your command. Drilled into me during ROTC, but somewhere he forgot that, as evidenced by his "wasn't me" Abu Gharib reaction (along with BG Kerpinski(sp?)).
Fred Kaplan's column in Slate the other day captures some of it as well.
It doesn't matter to me whether he speaks for the Democrats or Republicans, both positions have some intellectual merit. But his credibility is highly suspect in my eyes given his rant a few weeks ago.
Last edited by Cavguy; 11-27-2007 at 03:59 PM.
Well, he maybe can get a 5th star if Hillary wins the White House and be dubbed Commander of the Planets Free Forces and get a newly designed uniform with lots of gold braids and other fanciful things, though he ain't nearly as pretty as Wes Clark IMO.
This little post got more response in this thread, than the original comments by Sanchez. I agree, the Democrats should have known better than to hitch their hopes on a guy who had lost the credibility of the men he led, long before he retired.
As for former Flags jumping into politics, most made that leap, only after they were successful on the battlefield. IE, Washington, Jackson, Grant, T. Roosevelt, and Eisenhower.
Patton once said: "Americans love a winner, and will not tolerate a loser." This rule still applies.
I would and you should; the party is irrelevant.
Same applies to all the other Generals taking either side...
Posting Permissions
"A Sherman can give you a very nice... edge."- Oddball,
Bookmarks