Senior Flag Officers (including Generals Batiste and Odom) Applaud Congressional Action on Iraq

[flpoljunkie]

Take that, snarling Dick "five deferments" Cheney!

Flag Officers Applaud Congressional Action on Iraq
04.24.2007

Washington, DC

Senior flag officers today commented on the Iraq supplemental conference report pending passage in the House and Senate.

"This important legislation sets a new direction for Iraq. It acknowledges that America went to war without mobilizing the nation, that our strategy in Iraq has been tragically flawed since the invasion in March 2003, that our Army and Marine Corps are at the breaking point with little to show for it, and that our military alone will never establish representative government in Iraq. The administration got it terribly wrong and I applaud our Congress for stepping up to their constitutional responsibilities."

--Maj. Gen. John Batiste, USA, Ret.

"This bill gives General Petraeus great leverage for moving the Iraqi government down the more disciplined path laid out by the Iraq Study Group. The real audience for the timeline language is Prime Minister al-Maliki and the elected government of Iraq. The argument that this bill aides the enemy is simply not mature - nobody on the earth underestimates the United States' capacity for unpredictability. It may further create some sense of urgency in the rest of our government, beginning with the State Department."

--Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, USA, Ret.

"We must commence a coordinated phased withdrawal of U.S. combat troops and condition our continuing support of the Iraqi government on its fulfilling the political commitments it has made to facilitate reconciliation of the contending secular factions. Otherwise, we will continue to be entwined in a hopeless quagmire, with continuing American casualties, which will render our ground forces ineffective."

--Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, USA Ret.

"Supporting the Iraq Supplemental Bill not only reflects the thinking of the Iraq Study Group but puts teeth to the phrase "Supporting the Troops". By establishing timelines it returns the responsibility of self preservation and regional sovereignty to the people of Iraq and their government."

--Maj. Gen. Mel Montano, USANG, Ret

"The bill gives the president a chance to pull back from a disastrous course, re-orient US strategy to achieve regional stability, and win help from many other countries -- the only way peace will eventually be achieved."

--Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, USA, Ret.

http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/138

[Spinzonner]

1. Well, are all these people Treasonous ?

:sarcasm:

[SpiralHawk]

9. No. They actually served America, unlike republicons

republicon chickehawks like Cheney, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity are happy to send us and our sons and daughters off on Nation Building missions to boost republicon crony war profits.

But they have not -- and will not -- serve America in uniform for even five minutes.

[patrice]

2. Thanks for these! What's the source please? nm

[flpoljunkie]

3. Thanks. Edited the original post to add the link. I read only Odom's comment in a WaPo article.

[patrice]

4. I want to refer the Sens and Reps I write with a correct cite. Thanks. nm

[flpoljunkie]

5. You are more than welcome, patrice.

[JeffR]

6. K & R!

:kick:

[Mnemosyne]

7. knr

:kick:

[babylonsister]

8. Will dimson listen to the military now? nt

[Thothmes]

10. Terminology

Not a single one of the sources cited are Flag Officers. The are General Officers. The term Flag Officer refers to those officers above the rank of Captain(O6)in the United States Navy or Coast Guard.

[flpoljunkie]

11. I thought it was rather odd, but it was their terminology, not mine.

[flpoljunkie]

12. This has changed. Now both general and admirals are referred to in this way.

In recent years in the American service there is a tendency to use "Flag Officer" and "Flag Rank" to refer to generals and admirals of the services collectively.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General