George Bush throws Tommy Franks 'Under the Bus'

[michael07bleu]

Yea damn, read up on someone's history before making an idiotic comment about their capabilities. No idea what you're talking about when you say he has no leadership and comptency.

[SupernautG]

Were they planning to use the Iraqi military for the occupation part? Because I recall t hat the Iraqi generals were waiting to serve the Americans and then the Bushies fired them all and decided to build the new Iraq army from scratch from people who were never linked to the Sadam govt. This created a huge number of unemployed and angry Iraqis from the military who t hen went on to join militias of all types. So, whatever Bush is saying it sounds like weasel words.

[silvermediastudio]

Gen Shinseki (Joint, Chief of Staff of the Army) recommended 250,000 troops minimum. He was forced to resign when the security council wanted to go in with a smaller force. Shinseki had more voice than Franks on the matter, but it's like going to doctors for a second opinion, keep going until you find one you like.

[UAL012]

Try reading Frank's book before making such a ridiculous claim about incompetence. There hasn't been a General that good since Eisenhower. Franks was a true leader and did his job with the tools and technology he needed. If you have the right weapons and technology, you reduce the manpower requirement and reduce the risk of more casualties.

[82ndAirborneTrooper]

@UAL012 try living, sweating, eating, breathing, and bleeding in real combat military missions - and you will learn what a true warrior and leader is all about. there are doctrines and standard operating procedures that any elite combat unit always - ALWAYS - adheres to, and follows - because it saves lives. General Tommy Franks chose to ignore these war proven doctrines that many of our nations greatest warriors have passed on through the generations. And yet, he chose to ignore them...

[82ndAirborneTrooper]

i agree.  tommy franks was an utter incompetent moron who should never have led warriors into combat - franks had neither the skill, the experience, or the courage to execute a combat mission successfully, neither at the strategic or the tactical levels...tommy franks was the worst of the worst in generals that our nation has ever had...

[silvermediastudio]

@82ndAirborneTrooper Franks was a distinguished Soldier in Viet Nam, and as an Officer did some pretty amazing things with modernizing the force, training, and integrating technology in times of cutbacks. What have you done?

[82ndAirborneTrooper]

@silvermediastudio I have participated Operation Just Cause, and Desert Storm/Desert Shield - my job duty was combat team leader...

now tell me...what have YOU done?

[silvermediastudio]

@82ndAirborneTrooper I didn't disparage one of our nation's most well-decorated military leaders, who is widely-recognized as one of the greatest modern military thinkers since Clausewitz. What I have or have not done is irrelevant.

[82ndAirborneTrooper]

@silvermediastudio it's very relevant...if you have been / are affected by the decisions of an incompetent wreckless if not careless commander, you have every reason and cause to be critical. if you have never been affected, never lived under duress or in combat because of another's decision, then you are simply attempting to discuss a matter you have no experience or reference point from which to understand - you are speaking from ignorance...

[silvermediastudio]

@82ndAirborneTrooper Which doctrines are these? GEN Franks is a true student of military history, the evolution of tactics, the science/art of warfare. His conceptual and final plans for Iraq, in particular, were innovative, and a departure from past conflict. They leveraged technology, deception/surprise, speed, and maximized the US forces' JOINT capability like never before. His planning and execution are taught at the war college.

[ronpaulsucks1]

tommy franks was a horrible general....

[TuNnL]

Dubya is so full of sh*t. Everyone knows it was Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz who SPECIFICALLY refused to send in an adequate number of troops to Iraq and publicly rediculed U.S. Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki when Shinseki recommended that "several hundred thousand" would be needed. All this took place in 2003 BEFORE the Iraq War had commenced. Was it Bush administration policy to throw general after general under the bus?! It sure seems that way.