Rumsfeld Says Success In Iraq Requires Patience, Progress
Goal is a peaceful, prosperous Iraq with representative government
By Merle D. Kellerhals, Jr.
Washington File Staff Writer
Washington -- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told congressional committees June 23 that it would be a mistake to set deadlines for changes in U.S. force levels in Iraq.
Changing force levels at this stage "would throw a lifeline to terrorists who in recent months have suffered significant losses in casualties, been denied havens, and suffered weakened popular support," Rumsfeld said. "Timing in war is never predictable. There are no guarantees."
Rumsfeld testified before the Senate and House Armed Services committees, which were conducting oversight hearings on military strategy and current operations in Iraq. Accompanying Rumsfeld was Air Force General Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Army General John P. Abizaid, commander of U.S. Central Command; and Army General George W. Casey, commanding general of Multinational Force-Iraq.
In answer to questions about the future of U.S. military presence in Iraq, Myers told the committees that leaving before the job is completed would be catastrophic, and Rumsfeld said the United States has made a commitment to finish the job in Iraq and success there will require both patience and progress.
"Coalition military personnel are in Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government and consistent with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1546," Rumsfeld said. "The objectives of the overwhelming majority of Iraqis and the coalition are the same: a peaceful and prosperous Iraq with a representative government. The amount of time this will take is not knowable."
But Rumsfeld also pointed to measurable progress, asking the legislators to "consider what has been accomplished in Iraq in 12 months time, not 12 years, but 12 months"; he cited free elections in January with nearly 8 million voters, emerging economic development with a stable currency and growing stock market, and an expanding and capable Iraqi security force.
Casey told the committees that the decisive factor in measuring success in Iraq will be the improvement of its political processes and the stabilization of its political system. The mission in Iraq is both realistic and achievable, he added.
Abizaid said that the number of foreign fighters infiltrating into Iraq has grown over the past six months, though the overall strength of the insurgency is unchanged. He said that foreign fighters are coming from around the region and North Africa, and almost all are passing into Iraq through Syria.
He added that "Syria has not done enough" to halt the infiltrations.
"We have no alternative but to succeed in achieving our goals and allowing the Iraqi people to take over a secure nation and run it themselves," said Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner.
The full text of Rumsfeld's prepared remarks can be found at the Senate Armed Services Committee's Web site.
Right Rumbag, because avoid the Vietnam problem and a quagmire would make to much sense now wouldn't it?
Setting a timeline would be a fucking mistake. We leave when it's done, not when almighty timeline written by State Department fucks who never even seen Iraq says we do.
"it takes two sides to end a war but only one to start one. And those who do not have swords may still die upon them." Tolken
I've long since faced the fact that as Spec Ops I will forever be rotated in and out of the damnedable desert for the rest of my military career. Such is life I suppose. Anyone got a good place to hide bodies? I've got a few guns I can get ahold of that are unregistered.
Saint Annihilus - Patron Saint of Dealing with Stupid Customers
Got to agree with frigid and Rummy (blah). If the US is going to stay until the job is done, they've got to stay until the job is done. Going by a deadline that is vaguely connected to reality isn't going to help anything and just cause morale issues (good for insurgents, bad for US) if it is missed.
While I don't disagree with Rummy on this one, I do disagree with the way that Rumsfeld, Bush, and others have mismanaged and misapplied our troops. Our forces have not been utilized to the fullest extent of our capability, nor have we been used in a totally efficent manner.
But again, this has to do with the upper echelon's decisions and are far removed from the hands of the lower tiers such as myself.
Saint Annihilus - Patron Saint of Dealing with Stupid Customers
You know the old say B4, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Just because he's right this once doesn't absolve him of any of his fuck ups and lies.
A deadline would also be happy hour for the insurgents. They would wait until the US had left, and then have free reign on the country. As much as I hate to agree with Darth Rumsfeld, one cannot know when this is going to end.
However, people need to listen to Gen. Abizaid too. These fucks are coming across the Syrian border with impunity. Somebody needs to stem the flow of foreign fighters coming across that border, not rely on the damned Syrians to do their part. However, with our forces stretched thin, having troops stand guard out there isn't a practical solution.
Hell, why not mine the border, it's uninhabited desert. As stupid and non-PC as that sounds, it may not be such a bad idea.
- Ra
Jonathan McKenzie
Half-Insane Snakehead | MSPaint Acolyte | Wierd TGOD'er
"Every time you stay abstinent...Kitten kills a god."
Cynical Cat wrote:You know the old say B4, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Just because he's right this once doesn't absolve him of any of his fuck ups and lies.
I never absolved him or forgave him for any of his misdealings, idiocies or stupid mistakes. I just said I agree with him on this instance about the deadline. Nothing more. Hell, personally I think they're both retarded when it comes to managing armed forces and utilizing their capabilities. But that's just me...
Saint Annihilus - Patron Saint of Dealing with Stupid Customers
