More quotes from General Anthony Zinni on the subject of Iraq. Quotes are presented out of sequence, but with no loss of meaning. Highlights: it is his patriotic duty to speak critically, the Pentagon has messed up royally and bears full responsibility for the outcome, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz should resign. His book, co-authored with Tom Clancy, comes out this week.
[Notes: (a) this is very lazy blogging, there is interesting context which I am not providing here and (b) the quotes below are out of sequence from the 60 minutes article, but who knows what the original sequence was. The meaning has been preserved in each case]
Zinni, who now teaches international relations at the College of William and Mary, says he feels a responsibility to speak out, just as former Marine Corps Commandant David Shoup voiced early concerns about the Vietnam war nearly 40 years ago.
"It is part of your duty. Look, there is one statement that bothers me more than anything else. And that's the idea that when the troops are in combat, everybody has to shut up. Imagine if we put troops in combat with a faulty rifle, and that rifle was malfunctioning, and troops were dying as a result," says Zinni.
"I can't think anyone would allow that to happen, that would not speak up. Well, what's the difference between a faulty plan and strategy that's getting just as many troops killed? It's leading down a path where we're not succeeding and accomplishing the missions we've set out to do."
“There has been poor strategic thinking in this,” says Zinni. “There has been poor operational planning and execution on the ground. And to think that we are going to ‘stay the course,’ the course is headed over Niagara Falls. I think it's time to change course a little bit, or at least hold somebody responsible for putting you on this course. Because it's been a failure.”
"In the lead up to the Iraq war and its later conduct, I saw at a minimum, true dereliction, negligence and irresponsibility, at worse, lying, incompetence and corruption."
“I blame the civilian leadership of the Pentagon directly. Because if they were given the responsibility, and if this was their war, and by everything that I understand, they promoted it and pushed it - certain elements in there certainly - even to the point of creating their own intelligence to match their needs, then they should bear the responsibility,” he says.
“But regardless of whose responsibility I think it is, somebody has screwed up. And at this level and at this stage, it should be evident to everybody that they've screwed up. And whose heads are rolling on this? That's what bothers me most.”
Should all of those involved, including Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, resign?
“I believe that they should accept responsibility for that,” says Zinni. “If I were the commander of a military organization that delivered this kind of performance to the president, I certainly would tender my resignation. I certainly would expect to be gone.”
| Anthony Zinni | Military |
At the risk of sounding like a Marine worshipper, I’d say his remarks indicate the difference between a Marine and a power-hungry bureaucrat. Only one has a sense of decency and duty.
My father, a lifelong Republican and career Marine, gave some indication recently that he might not vote in November because he can’t vote for Bush and wouldn’t vote for Kerry. Wishful thinking on my part, perhaps, but this goes deep.
Comment #1 :: link :: May 25, 2004 12:10 PMI'm not a big fan of Zinni's, but articulating why in a cogent fashion, in what is still a public forum, even with my identity obscured, was too onerous as task. Suffice it to say that I'm sure I will disagree with extensive sections of his book.
That said, Trip, you're right that Zinni is a Marine style straight shooter who speaks his mind. I just wish he had, as you put it, the decency to have spoken up before. I also wish he would speak more plainly -- he's putting the blame on Rumsfeld, whereas the buck should stop with the C-in-C himself.
Comment #2 :: link :: May 25, 2004 02:39 PMThe thing is, about blame, is that he’s looking at it from the practical operations POV rather than the political POV. As he says (to paraphrase), the Pentagon created this war, and they have prosecuted it poorly, so they are the ones at fault. “If I were the commander of a military organization that delivered this kind of performance to the president [emphasis added to show he is separating the POTUS from the Pentagon leadership], I certainly would tender my resignation.” Seems pretty plainly spoken to me.
Further, his presumption seems to be that the POTUS got bad advice. I would infer that Zinni thinks that Bush should say as much and bounce those who need to be bounced.
And whatever your reasons are for disagreeing in advance with the book, I will admit that I am skeptical of Clancy's influence in the project.
Also, as for speaking out earlier, he wouldn’t have spoken out while in the Corps, since that would be insubordination, and it takes a while to break the habits learned there, so it doesn’t surprise me that it’s taken him a while.
Comment #3 :: link :: May 26, 2004 12:27 PMOut of order: The Clancy thing is interesting. This is part of a series of books that Clancy has been writing with various generals, his name is big and Zinni and one other (a ghost-ghost-writer?) have their names small. I saw the book at the checkout counter of my local Walmart-clone and at the front door of the Border's, so I think it will get pretty wide readership. Clancy is a right wing figure who has clearly broken with the administration, which is also interesting.
(see: http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=express&s=wirzbicki052604 for an interesting take on this)
Zinni has spoken out in the past -- famously so about Somalia. The videotape of this speech is a classic. Further, he argues, following the line of H.R.McMaster, that it is an officers duty to speak quite clearly in opposition to politicians who are damaging the nation's defense.
This is why I find his prolonged silence, up till now, on Iraq cowardly. Furthermore, it's very convenient to frame this as "POTUS getting bad advice from SecDef", but where it's clear that they both share the same goals, why not come out and speak clearly about the problem? Zinni was the special envoy to the Middle East for Bush. He knows Bush's limitations as a leader. For some reason, he wont address them directly.
What annoys me about Zinni is that he milks the whole Marine thing to the hilt, but he's neither as forthright nor as self-sacrificing as he wants to make it seem. I give him credit for a clear step in the right direction in terms of speaking his mind. I just wont give him full credit until he stops playing games.
Comment #4 :: link :: May 27, 2004 01:01 AM
