Ret. U.K. Army Head Slams U.S. Iraq Policy
The head of the British army during the Iraq invasion described former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's approach as "intellectually bankrupt," according to comments published Saturday.
Gen. Sir Mike Jackson, who retired in August 2006 as chief of the general staff, said Rumsfeld was "one of those most responsible for the current situation in Iraq," in excerpts from an autobiography, "Soldier," that were published by The Daily Telegraph.
He writes that Rumsfeld refused to deploy enough troops following the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime to maintain law and order, and rejected the State Department's plans for post-invasion administration of the country. Jackson is also critical of President Bush for handing control of post-invasion Iraq to the Pentagon. "All the planning carried out by the State Department went to waste," he writes.
For Rumsfeld and his supporters "it was an ideological article of faith that the coalition soldiers would be accepted as a liberating army," Jackson wrote.
In his book, which the newspaper will serialize starting Monday, Jackson also criticizes the U.S. approach toward tackling global terrorism as inadequate, accusing Washington of relying too heavily on military power at the expense of nation building and diplomacy.
In "Soldier," Jackson also writes how he and other senior officers in the British military doubted the Blair government's charges of Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction in 2002, or the claim that the U.K. was directly threatened with attack.
"We all knew that it was impossible for Iraq to threaten the U.K. mainland," he writes. "Saddam's Scud missiles could barely have reached our bases on Cyprus, and certainly no more distant target."
Jackson's comments were the most outspoken criticism of U.S. policy in Iraq yet by a senior British officer. Previously he had warned that British troops faced fierce combat in Iraq and Afghanistan without adequate resources or government support.
Last year, Gen. Richard Dannatt, the current head of all three of Britain's armed forces, called for his troops to be withdrawn from Iraq soon, saying their presence was provoking rather than preventing violence.
Rumsfeld stepped down as defense secretary in November, one day after midterm elections in which opposition to the war in Iraq contributed to heavy Republican losses. Later at his goodbye ceremony, he took a slap at advocates of an early withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Iraq war.
"It may well be comforting to some to consider graceful exits from the agonies and, indeed, the ugliness of combat," he said. "But the enemy thinks differently."
In an interview with the Telegraph on Saturday, Jackson also defended British forces' performance in southern Iraq, dismissing charges made by a U.S. general last month that Britain had allowed deteriorating security in southern Iraq to get worse.
"I don't think that's a fair assessment at all," Jackson was quoted as saying.
He said Britain's mission was to hand security responsibilities to Iraqis once the coalition and Iraqi authorities were satisfied they were capable of taking over.
Britain has successfully handed over three of four southern provinces to Iraqi forces, he said. Officials say London hopes to pass control of Basra, the remaining district, to local forces by the end of the year.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Gen. Sir Mike Jackson, who retired in August 2006 as chief of the general staff, said Rumsfeld was "one of those most responsible for the current situation in Iraq," in excerpts from an autobiography, "Soldier," that were published by The Daily Telegraph.
He writes that Rumsfeld refused to deploy enough troops following the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime to maintain law and order, and rejected the State Department's plans for post-invasion administration of the country. Jackson is also critical of President Bush for handing control of post-invasion Iraq to the Pentagon. "All the planning carried out by the State Department went to waste," he writes.
For Rumsfeld and his supporters "it was an ideological article of faith that the coalition soldiers would be accepted as a liberating army," Jackson wrote.
In his book, which the newspaper will serialize starting Monday, Jackson also criticizes the U.S. approach toward tackling global terrorism as inadequate, accusing Washington of relying too heavily on military power at the expense of nation building and diplomacy.
In "Soldier," Jackson also writes how he and other senior officers in the British military doubted the Blair government's charges of Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction in 2002, or the claim that the U.K. was directly threatened with attack.
"We all knew that it was impossible for Iraq to threaten the U.K. mainland," he writes. "Saddam's Scud missiles could barely have reached our bases on Cyprus, and certainly no more distant target."
Jackson's comments were the most outspoken criticism of U.S. policy in Iraq yet by a senior British officer. Previously he had warned that British troops faced fierce combat in Iraq and Afghanistan without adequate resources or government support.
Last year, Gen. Richard Dannatt, the current head of all three of Britain's armed forces, called for his troops to be withdrawn from Iraq soon, saying their presence was provoking rather than preventing violence.
Rumsfeld stepped down as defense secretary in November, one day after midterm elections in which opposition to the war in Iraq contributed to heavy Republican losses. Later at his goodbye ceremony, he took a slap at advocates of an early withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Iraq war.
"It may well be comforting to some to consider graceful exits from the agonies and, indeed, the ugliness of combat," he said. "But the enemy thinks differently."
In an interview with the Telegraph on Saturday, Jackson also defended British forces' performance in southern Iraq, dismissing charges made by a U.S. general last month that Britain had allowed deteriorating security in southern Iraq to get worse.
"I don't think that's a fair assessment at all," Jackson was quoted as saying.
He said Britain's mission was to hand security responsibilities to Iraqis once the coalition and Iraqi authorities were satisfied they were capable of taking over.
Britain has successfully handed over three of four southern provinces to Iraqi forces, he said. Officials say London hopes to pass control of Basra, the remaining district, to local forces by the end of the year.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Boat hijack stokes tension between N. Korea, China
- China probes rice tainted with cancer-causing cadmium
- Visitors evacuate after suicide at Paris' Notre Dame Cathedral
- Lebanon reportedly stopping Syria refugees at border
- Hezbollah suffers heavy losses fighting inside Syria
- Egypt troops in Sinai sweep mistakenly hit funeral
- Syria activists: 31 Hezbollah fighters killed in Qusair
- Russia shows accused U.S. spy heading home
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/jun1999/jack-j19_prn.shtml
,, Gen. Sir Mike Jackson,,, Happens to have a list of military credentials longer than General Douglas MacArther & far more experiance in fighting terrorists than any of our Generals,,, He led the British when we invaded Iraq.
No connection with Barbersol, though I am cleanshaven. I shaved off the beard in 1981, as my sons delighted in comparing me with the Yorkshire Ripper!
Posted by Nancy_Naive at 08:44 AM : Sep 02, 2007
I should be offended, but that is too funny - and at least partially true. You only have to look at the PNAC web site to see some truth in it.
NONE OF US IS FREE UNLESS ALL ARE FREE!!!
None Of Us Are Free - Lynyrd Skynyrd
http://www.lyrics007.com/Lynyrd%20Skynyrd%20Lyrics/None%20Of%20Us%20Are%20Free%20Lyrics.html
WHY IS IT NOT ONE MUSLIM COUNTRY GRANTS EQUAL RIGHTS TO NON MUSLIMS???
FASCIST NAZI TERRORISLAM SAYS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATES ISLAM LAW...
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
For example, in 1981, the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, articulated the position of his country regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by saying that the UDHR was "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law.
http://www.un.org/terrorism/
But the accepted assumption in India is that most of India''s Muslims were converted to Islam through the sword. Meaning the Indians were given an option between death or adopting Islam. The third option was getting examined in Islam religion along with heavy taxes- Jeziya (poll tax) and Kharaj (property tax).
http://adaniel.tripod.com/Islam.htm
this is what fascist nazi islam calls peace....
are you ready to live under islam rule as a non muslim???
apartheid fascist nazi islamic style
Rights of Non-Muslims in an Islamic State
http://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/islamic_state.htm
nobody wants to go to live under fascist nazi terrorislam empire haji girl...
Swiss expulsion proposal draws criticism
The campaign poster was blatant in its xenophobic symbolism: Three white sheep kicking out a black sheep over a caption that read "for more security." The message was not from a fringe force in Switzerland''''s political scene but from its largest party.
Under the plan, entire families would be expelled if their children are convicted of a violent crime, drug offenses or benefits fraud.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070901/ap_on_re_eu/switzerland_deportation_campaign
and what will be said of the fascist nazi terrorislam impire haji girl...
the war Muhammad ali baba started rages on 1400 years later...
623 - Battle of Waddan
623 - Battle of Safwan
623 - Battle of Dul-''Ashir
624 - Muhammad and converts begin raids on caravans to fund the movement.
624 - Zakat becomes mandatory
624 - Battle of Badr
624 - Battle of Bani Salim
624 - Battle of Eid-ul-Fitr and Zakat-ul-Fitr
624 - Battle of Bani Qainuqa''
624 - Battle of Sawiq
624 - Battle of Ghatfan
624 - Battle of Bahran
625 - Battle of Uhud. 70 Muslims are killed.
625 - Battle of Humra-ul-Asad
625 - Battle of Banu Nudair
625 - Battle of Dhatur-Riqa
626 - Battle of Badru-Ukhra
626 - Battle of Dumatul-Jandal
626 - Battle of Banu Mustalaq Nikah
627 - Battle of the Trench
627 - Battle of Ahzab
627 - Battle of Bani Quraiza
627 - Battle of Bani Lahyan
627 - Battle of Ghaiba
627 - Battle of Khaibar
628 - Muhammad signs treaty with Quraish.
630 - Muhammad conquers Mecca.
630 - Battle of Hunsin.
630 - Battle of Tabuk
632 - Muhammad dies.
http://www.carm.org/islam/islam_chronology.htm
http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/articles/show/138504-Suicide+Bombings - A Favourite US Counter-Insurgency Tactic
While you''re certainly not up there with Field Marshal Hague when it comes to murderous incompetence...Rumsfeld and Bush are easy targets to criticize...Of course the Brits look good compared to a military and nation run by Laurel and Hardy!
Your comment was posted at 5.44a.m. your time, so you must feel very strongly about things!
You''ve obviously had some really bad experiences on this side of the Atlantic, and that''s a shame.
But please don''t judge all of we "tedious" British by the boorish attitudes of some that you''ve met. We number 60 million - you can''t have met everyone - and we''re certainly not all "American-haters".
Many of us greatly admire the U.S. and enjoy personal friendships with Americans. The Iraq/Afghanistan business doesn''t change our basic attitude.
British and American generals, especially retired ones, love to spout their opinions, but surely the rest of us don''t have to dance like puppets to their discordant tune.
If there are differences between our two countries, these can and will be sorted out - but insulting each other doesn''t help.
Posted by bluestardad at 07:22 AM : Sep 02, 2007
ARE PRESIDENTS ABOVE THE LAW???
wow, the president says he has the right to perjury????
President to Senate: Perjury is my right...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_199901/ai_n8836610
PARDONS FOR SALE PARDONS FOR SALE
PARDONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT CLINTON
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm
My Reasons for the Pardons
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/18/opinion/18CLIN.html?pagewanted=all&ei=5070&en=66ba82eaf117b24b&ex=1183521600
Do the Clintons Now Support Jail Time for Perjurers?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288392,00.html
In a bone-chilling chapter of her new book "The Final Days," late heroine-author Barbara Olson warned that ex-president Bill Clinton''s pardons of terrorists who had repeatedly bombed buildings in New York City "send a signal" that the U.S. isn''t serious about fighting terrorism.
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/olson.htm
Bill Clinton pardons controversy
FALN Pardons of 1999
On August 11 1999, Clinton commuted the sentences of 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group that set off 120 bombs in the United States usually in New York City and Chicago, convicted for conspiracies to commit robbery, bomb-making, and sedition, as well as for firearms and explosives violations.
http://www.answers.com/topic/bill-clinton-pardons-controversy