Sanchez—another high-level military a__-kisser

I have noted repeatedly over the last few years how most of the commanders we’ve had in the Iraq theater—Abizaid, Sanchez, Casey come to mind—have been craven bureaucrats and politicos dishing out the administration line rather than honest and upright leaders. Interviewed today on radio by Edward “Captain Ed” Morrissey, Sen. McCain explains how Gen. Ricardo Sanchez said one thing while he was commanding the U.S. forces in Iraq and is saying another thing now. Note in particular what McCain says about a senior military officer’s sworn obligation to speak his mind when asked questions by Congress.

EM: What did you think about [General Richard] Sanchez’s speech?

JM: I honor and respect his service to the country. I respect anyone who spends their [sic] adult life in the military as he has, but I respectfully have to say, General Sanchez, why didn’t when I was in Baghdad, meeting with you and Jerry Bremer five years ago—well, four years ago—and I said, “You don’t have enough troops here. You’re going to fail. Looting is going on, Al-Qaeda is coming in, you’re going to have these problems. Why aren’t you settling the de-Ba’athification issue, etc etc.” And he defended the present policy [at that time], he said it was succeeding, and he testified before the Armed Services Committee, of which I am a member, the same way.

When we confirm a senior officer to a position in the military, there’s always a standard question that is asked, and that they always say Yes to, and that is “When asked, will you give your candid and personal opinion in answer to a question by a member of the committee?” They always say Yes. He said Yes. He was asked in several hearings about the strategy, and he not only didn’t complain about it—in all due respect again—but he supported it. And I wish he had done that back when he was on active duty.

EM: Active duty generals are able to have that sort of candor in dealing with members of Congress. It’s expected of them, isn’t that right?

JM: They are required to. They are required to, because when they are confirmed in their positions, when they are promoted to a high level, they are specifically asked in writing that question, and they have to answer in writing.

(The full audio file of this interview can be found here.)

And now try to remember the number of times you have heard George W. Bush say in that dead, transparently insincere tone of voice that he would give his generals in Iraq more troops if they asked for them, but that they hadn’t asked for them. Every time Bush said that, he was lying, because he knew that his top generals would never say anything that went against his policy, even when being questioned by a Congressional committee and required to give their candid and personal opinion.

Bush is not only, as I have said many times, witless and the cause of witlessness in others; he is also dishonest and the cause of dishonesty in others.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 15, 2007 06:16 PM | Send