Previous Entry | Main | Next Entry

February 04, 2003

The Officer and I, Part II

Continuing my Sunday conversation we turned to Iraq, the brass at the Pentagon and Rumsfeld. We also talked about family but I know you're not interested in that.

SPK: "Will this be Desert Storm Two? Will it be as easy as it was last time."

GO: "I certainly hope so. But we are not planning on that. If we thought it was going to be that easy we'd be going in with far fewer troops. Of course the Air Force part of the war will be pretty straightforward. Unless we have to fight block to block in any of the major cities. It will get nasty if that's the case."

SPK: "How nasty?"

GO: "Anytime a military has to fight in an urban setting we loose a few key advantages, maneuver and precision for us, to be exact."

SPK: "That doesn't sound promising."

GO: "I don't think it will come to that, however. I'm anticipating 'political developments' to help us out in that area. But it all depends on how we are received by the Iraqis. That's a big wildcard I'm not willing to bet the ranch on."

SPK: "There are a lot of rumors floating around in the press that the military brass, like yourself, sees Korea as the most imminent threat and that you disagree with and are reluctant to go into Iraq first. Is there any truth to that."

GO: "I'd rather not say."

SPK: "Ok, let me try that again. Which is more imminent?"

GO: "Korea. Much more important than Iraq. Containment is working. The problem with containment is that it is becoming increasingly unworkable. Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, not to mention Turkey are all flouting the sanctions regime. It is only a matter of time until Hussein is successful. But I think that is three to five years out. So does our best intelligence."

SPK: "That is what Kenneth Pollack is saying as well, I mean, about containment being unworkable in the long run."

GO: "Yeah, Ken is a smart cookie. He's one of a very select few that was able to point out that Sadaam was going to invade Kuwait. He was right. He's right again. But I think if you listen to him carefully, he's for this, but not in the way we are doing it now."

SPK: "Excuse me? You're saying he thinks we should delay this a bit?"

GO: "That's what I think. He hasn't said it, but it is a subtle undercurrent in the things he says."

SPK: "I guess I'm going to have to read his book again."

GO: (Laughing) "That's not necessary."

SPK: "You mentioned our best intelligence as saying one thing but from what I read, Bush is saying something altogether different. Is this administration secretive?"

GO: "That's a silly question."

SPK: "That's not an answer."

GO: "Some things I just can't talk about it. But some of it disturbs even me. And I think being secretive is a necessary evil at times."

SPK: "Care to comment on Rumsfeld?"

GO: "I'll pass."

SPK: "Oh, come on. Who will know you said it?"

GO: "Well, ok. He's a brilliant, obsessive workaholic. He's doing some good things for the services. But he's wrong on this one. I can't believe he's bought Cheney's argument. He's insensitive to the brass and pushes them around to much. I don't care for him. Do you recall what Kissinger said about him?"

SPK: "Yeah, the most ruthless man he'd ever met."

GO: "Pretty good. Kissinger is right."

SPK: "What is the Pentagon like now with Rumsfeld as Secretary?"

GO: "If you are in is inner circle it's great. If not its like artillery raining down on you in the form of nasty memos every day."

SPK: "Ever been on the receiving end?"

GO: "I'd rather not."

SPK: "Come on?"

GO: "Sorry."

SPK: "Ok, so in summary what you are telling me is that the brass doesn't like Rumsfeld and the idea behind Iraq, that you guys feel Korea is much more urgent from a proliferation standpoint and that life in the Pentagon isn't real rosy under an Administration that was supposed to be 'military' friendly? Does that sum it up about right?"

GO: "Sure does. Military friendly? That's a joke. Look at how they are treating our veterans. This makes me sick. It's galling. It's unconscionable. But the grunts think these guys are the greatest. The politicians see us as a means to an end. Of course, that is their prerogative. We ARE a means to an end, in a certain twisted sense. That's the role I've chosen for my life. I just think this 'end' isn't so important when there is another huge problem out there. We should be much more concerned about Asia. Much. They are proliferating. They are doing all those things we say we fear Hussein is doing. And we still have time to rememdy the situation in Asia."

SPK: "Wow. You sound angry."

GO: "I am angry. The whole veterans thing is a slap in the face to us. And frankly I can't understand why they weren't called to account for it. I won't tell you what I think of their foreign policy. But you can imagine for yourself."

SPK: "Yeah, I'm angry about it too. But you know I am a liberal."

GO: "Yeah, you and your father both. But there is still hope for you."

SPK: "Will Powell have a 'smoking gun'."

GO: "It might not be smoking but there will be a gun."

The things that were said in this conversation weren't things that I wasn't already aware of through press reports. What I found shocking was here sat a very important officer in our nation's military establishment telling me these things outright. I'll be posting some more on this tomorrow. It will be kind of an analysis of what we talked about because I am still not sure what to make of what I heard. It was the things left unsaid, the body language and the knowing smiles of this dear friend that gave me the most concern. I'll be writing about that in my wrap-up analysis.

Posted by Sean-Paul @ 02/04/2003 09:22 AM | TrackBack




Comments:


sounds like war to me.

Posted by: terry on February 4, 2003 12:57 PM




Great interview. I've also been surprised at the willingness of current (and former) military officers to speak out on these affairs. More warplans have been leaked than I would have anticipated given the usually tight-lipped military (of course, the leaks could be intentional).

Similarly, Norman Schwarzkopf, Wesley Clark, Anthony Zinni have all made some fairly candid observations about the Bush Administrations plans.

All of the comments seem to echo the same idea -- because civilian planners (read Rumsfeld) are don't have the experience of the battlefield, they often overlook the military difficulties of implementing political strategies.

Posted by: Paul on February 4, 2003 01:21 PM



Good job on the interview, well done. Do I fully agree? No. But this is a very solid, thoughtful contribution to the debate and I'm glad to see it out there.

Posted by: Joe Katzman on February 4, 2003 06:33 PM



Can you explain what he meant by "how the veteran's are being treated"??

Posted by: Appelbaum on February 5, 2003 12:58 PM



"How the veteran's are being treated" refers to cut backs in veteran's benefits by the current administration. Particularly for carreer military personnel, part of the bargain they thought they were making was provision of medical care throught the VA for their entire lives. It was one of the things that made low incomes and unpleasant duty tolerable. For a representative piece on this issue, check out Dave Hackworth at http://www.military.com/Resources/ResourceFileView?file=Hackworth_012903.htm

Posted by: Fred on February 5, 2003 05:55 PM






Post a Comment:

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?