Interesting. Another try by the Democrats and the media to hurt the Bush administration’s efforts in the War on Terror. The New York Times and The Washington Post yesterday published similar articles using leaked portions of The National Intelligence Estimate which purportedly concludes that the War in Iraq has caused the Islamic insurgency in the world. The headline reads Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Hurting U.S. Terror Fight
The war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat, U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded.
A 30-page National Intelligence Estimate completed in April cites the “centrality” of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the insurgency that has followed, as the leading inspiration for new Islamic extremist networks and cells that are united by little more than an anti-Western agenda. It concludes that, rather than contributing to eventual victory in the global counterterrorism struggle, the situation in Iraq has worsened the U.S. position, according to officials familiar with the classified document.
I suppose the leak, the testimony and Bill Clinton’s interview on Fox News were supposed to be a triple hit against President Bush and the Republicans in this political season. It didn’t quite work out that way for Clinton.
Retired military officers today bluntly accused Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld of bungling the war in Iraq, saying U.S. troops were sent to fight without the best equipment and that critical facts were hidden from the public.
“I believe that Secretary Rumsfeld and others in the administration did not tell the American people the truth for fear of losing support for the war in Iraq,” retired Maj. Gen. John R. S. Batiste said in remarks prepared for a hearing by the Senate Democratic Policy Committee.
A second witness, retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, assessed Rumsfeld as “incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically ….”
“Mr. Rumsfeld and his immediate team must be replaced or we will see two more years of extraordinarily bad decision-making,” he added in testimony prepared for the hearing, held six weeks before the Nov. 7 midterm elections in which the war is a central issue.
I’ve written about John Batiste before as he was my husband’s roommate at West Point. My husband served in the Army with Paul Eaton for several years. John Batiste told my husband when they were at West Point that he wanted to be a four star general. He was very ambitious and wanted to beat his father’s rank. My husband, however, only wanted to graduate from West Point.
Batiste writes: My name is John Batiste. I left the military on principle on November 1, 2005, after more than 31 years of service. I walked away from promotion and a promising future serving our country. I hung up my uniform because I came to the gut-wrenching realization that I could do more good for my soldiers and their families out of uniform.
Batiste was offered a third star serving in a position which every Army officer knows is a “retirement slot.”
In addition, Batiste claims to be a Republican. I have no idea whether that is true or not but his behavior since his retirement from the military explains why he didn’t rise any higher in the general ranks.
I consider both Batiste and Eaton’s behavior unforgiveable in a time of war. By appearing at a hearing run by Democrats they are both declaring that they are not supportive of the Bush administrations running of the war.
Trackback URL for this post:
2 Comments »
No comments yet.
Leave a comment
Trackback URL for this post: