ther been dismissed by administration officials, who by the way are not military personnel and have no experience actually fighting a war. Gen. Shinseki famously remarked in the Congress before the war that “"something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers would probably be required for post-war Iraq”, a claim dismissed by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. He also said that Bush admin deployed far less troops than needed for the war. Gen Shinseki, a four star general, was chief of staff until 2003.

Along with failure of leadership and breakdown of factual communications with the public and Congress, Lt also talks about the failure to “visualize the conditions of combat in Iraq”, a critical failure which seriously limited the military’s ability to battle the Iraq forces in the early days of war and now the growing insurgency which has religious, sectarian and historical roots.

Yes the article is inf

With Iraq war critics getting stronger and more persistent on the issue of mismanagement of war and issue of troop morale, the latest attack on war policy by currently serving and retired high ranking military officials is adding strength to the anti-war movement here in the United States.

General John Batiste, a retired officer of US Army, who worked along side Paul Wolfowitz in planning Iraq war, appeared on a TV ad sponsored by VoteVets.org last week where he criticized the Bush administration for its management of Iraq war. It took everyone by surprise when this respected General who once worked closely with White House insider like Wolfowtiz went out in public and criticized the President.

While the conservative quarters have come out swinging against the general, some take the General's move as a sign of rising dissatisfaction among the military ranks on the Iraq war and its handling; there speculation strengthened by an in-depth article by Lt. Paul Yingling, a currently serving officer, on the mismanagement of the Iraq war.

Lt Yingling 's article has attracted much attention in the cyberspace and also in the media, mainly because it is very unusual for a serving officer to criticize the higher-ups, especially in case of Iraq war and also because he offers an honest, in-depth assessment of the war from a soldiers perspective.

Lt. Yingling is currently serving as the deputy commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry. He is an Iraq war veteran, having served two tours of duty. He has Masters in International Relations from the University of Chicago.

Armed Forced Journals published a featured article by the Lt “A failure in Generalship” last month. The article comes at a time when the US President has vetoed a spending bill sponsored by Democrats to curtail war spending and to have a timeline for troop withdrawal. Clash between White house and the democrats in senate and the house is dominating the war debate, instead of hard debate on how the war is being managed, troop morale, is the surge really going to work and about the US willingness to try diplomacy to bring in the fighting factions in Iraq to talk peace and nation re-building.

Lt says with regards to the war,” These debacles are not attributable to individual failures, but rather to a crisis in an entire institution: America's general officer corps. America's generals have failed to prepare our armed forces for war and advise civilian authorities on the application of force to achieve the aims of policy” His criticism of the American Generals shows that there is a leadership crises brewing inside the military. The reason this does not come out in the open is because of deeply entrenched culture of careerism, and code of silence in the organization. While the military is trying its best to make it work, cracks within is having serious impact on America’s war in Iraq.

Yingling draws a parallel with failure of generalship in Vietnam and compare with the current situation in Iraq, saying, “America's generals have repeated the mistakes of Vietnam in Iraq. First, throughout the 1990s our generals failed to envision the conditions of future combat and prepare their forces accordingly. Second, America's generals failed to estimate correctly both the means and the ways necessary to achieve the aims of policy prior to beginning the war in Iraq. Finally, America's generals did not provide Congress and the public with an accurate assessment of the conflict in Iraq”. Failure to adequately to prepare for the war and not having enough means to fight the war is something retired generals have accused the administration of but sadly their calls have either been dismissed by administration officials, who by the way are not military personnel and have no experience actually fighting a war. Gen. Shinseki famously remarked in the Congress before the war that “"something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers would probably be required for post-war Iraq”, a claim dismissed by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. He also said that Bush admin deployed far less troops than needed for the war. Gen Shinseki, a four star general, was chief of staff until 2003.

Along with failure of leadership and breakdown of factual communications with the public and Congress, Lt also talks about the failure to “visualize the conditions of combat in Iraq”, a critical failure which seriously limited the military’s ability to battle the Iraq forces in the early days of war and now the growing insurgency which has religious, sectarian and historical roots.

Yes the article is info

culation strengthened by an in-depth article by Lt. Paul Yingling, a currently serving officer, on the mismanagement of the Iraq war.

Lt Yingling 's article has attracted much attention in the cyberspace and also in the media, mainly because it is very unusual for a serving officer to criticize the higher-ups, especially in case of Iraq war and also because he offers an honest, in-depth assessment of the war from a soldiers perspective.

Lt. Yingling is currently serving as the deputy commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry. He is an Iraq war veteran, having served two tours of duty. He has Masters in International Relations from the University of Chicago.

Armed Forced Journals published a featured article by the Lt “A failure in Generalship” last month. The article comes at a time when the US President has vetoed a spending bill sponsored by Democrats to curtail war spending and to have a timeline for troop withdrawal. Clash between White house and the democrats in senate and the house is dominating the war debate, instead of hard debate on how the war is being managed, troop morale, is the surge really going to work and about the US willingness to try diplomacy to bring in the fighting factions in Iraq to talk peace and nation re-building.

Lt says with regards to the war,” These debacles are not attributable to individual failures, but rather to a crisis in an entire institution: America's general officer corps. America's generals have failed to prepare our armed forces for war and advise civilian authorities on the application of force to achieve the aims of policy” His criticism of the American Generals shows that there is a leadership crises brewing inside the military. The reason this does not come out in the open is because of deeply entrenched culture of careerism, and code of silence in the organization. While the military is trying its best to make it work, cracks within is having serious impact on America’s war in Iraq.

Yingling draws a parallel with failure of generalship in Vietnam and compare with the current situation in Iraq, saying, “America's generals have repeated the mistakes of Vietnam in Iraq. First, throughout the 1990s our generals failed to envision the conditions of future combat and prepare their forces accordingly. Second, America's generals failed to estimate correctly both the means and the ways necessary to achieve the aims of policy prior to beginning the war in Iraq. Finally, America's generals did not provide Congress and the public with an accurate assessment of the conflict in Iraq”. Failure to adequately to prepare for the war and not having enough means to fight the war is something retired generals have accused the administration of but sadly their calls have either been dismissed by administration officials, who by the way are not military personnel and have no experience actually fighting a war. Gen. Shinseki famously remarked in the Congress before the war that “"something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers would probably be required for post-war Iraq”, a claim dismissed by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. He also said that Bush admin deployed far less troops than needed for the war. Gen Shinseki, a four star general, was chief of staff until 2003.

Along with failure of leadership and breakdown of factual communications with the public and Congress, Lt also talks about the failure to “visualize the conditions of combat in Iraq”, a critical failure which seriously limited the military’s ability to battle the Iraq forces in the early days of war and now the growing insurgency which has religious, sectarian and historical roots.

Yes the article is inf

for troop withdrawal. Clash between White house and the democrats in senate and the house is dominating the war debate, instead of hard debate on how the war is being managed, troop morale, is the surge really going to work and about the US willingness to try diplomacy to bring in the fighting factions in Iraq to talk peace and nation re-building.

Lt says with regards to the war,” These debacles are not attributable to individual failures, but rather to a crisis in an entire institution: America's general officer corps. America's generals have failed to prepare our armed forces for war and advise civilian authorities on the application of force to achieve the aims of policy” His criticism of the American Generals shows that there is a leadership crises brewing inside the military. The reason this does not come out in the open is because of deeply entrenched culture of careerism, and code of silence in the organization. While the military is trying its best to make it work, cracks within is having serious impact on America’s war in Iraq.

Yingling draws a parallel with failure of generalship in Vietnam and compare with the current situation in Iraq, saying, “America's generals have repeated the mistakes of Vietnam in Iraq. First, throughout the 1990s our generals failed to envision the conditions of future combat and prepare their forces accordingly. Second, America's generals failed to estimate correctly both the means and the ways necessary to achieve the aims of policy prior to beginning the war in Iraq. Finally, America's generals did not provide Congress and the public with an accurate assessment of the conflict in Iraq”. Failure to adequately to prepare for the war and not having enough means to fight the war is something retired generals have accused the administration of but sadly their calls have either been dismissed by administration officials, who by the way are not military personnel and have no experience actually fighting a war. Gen. Shinseki famously remarked in the Congress before the war that “"something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers would probably be required for post-war Iraq”, a claim dismissed by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. He also said that Bush admin deployed far less troops than needed for the war. Gen Shinseki, a four star general, was chief of staff until 2003.

Along with failure of leadership and breakdown of factual communications with the public and Congress, Lt also talks about the failure to “visualize the conditions of combat in Iraq”, a critical failure which seriously limited the military’s ability to battle the Iraq forces in the early days of war and now the growing insurgency which has religious, sectarian and historical roots.

Yes the article is inf

organization. While the military is trying its best to make it work, cracks within is having serious impact on America’s war in Iraq.

Yingling draws a parallel with failure of generalship in Vietnam and compare with the current situation in Iraq, saying, “America's generals have repeated the mistakes of Vietnam in Iraq. First, throughout the 1990s our generals failed to envision the conditions of future combat and prepare their forces accordingly. Second, America's generals failed to estimate correctly both the means and the ways necessary to achieve the aims of policy prior to beginning the war in Iraq. Finally, America's generals did not provide Congress and the public with an accurate assessment of the conflict in Iraq”. Failure to adequately to prepare for the war and not having enough means to fight the war is something retired generals have accused the administration of but sadly their calls have either been dismissed by administration officials, who by the way are not military personnel and have no experience actually fighting a war. Gen. Shinseki famously remarked in the Congress before the war that “"something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers would probably be required for post-war Iraq”, a claim dismissed by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. He also said that Bush admin deployed far less troops than needed for the war. Gen Shinseki, a four star general, was chief of staff until 2003.

Along with failure of leadership and breakdown of factual communications with the public and Congress, Lt also talks about the failure to “visualize the conditions of combat in Iraq”, a critical failure which seriously limited the military’s ability to battle the Iraq forces in the early days of war and now the growing insurgency which has religious, sectarian and historical roots.

Yes the article is inf

ther been dismissed by administration officials, who by the way are not military personnel and have no experience actually fighting a war. Gen. Shinseki famously remarked in the Congress before the war that “"something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers would probably be required for post-war Iraq”, a claim dismissed by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. He also said that Bush admin deployed far less troops than needed for the war. Gen Shinseki, a four star general, was chief of staff until 2003.

Along with failure of leadership and breakdown of factual communications with the public and Congress, Lt also talks about the failure to “visualize the conditions of combat in Iraq”, a critical failure which seriously limited the military’s ability to battle the Iraq forces in the early days of war and now the growing insurgency which has religious, sectarian and historical roots.

Yes the article is informative, provocative and enlightening but are the people who actually need to read it doing so? I mean the Generals, people in the administration and the new “war czar”?? If not then this is going to be yet another page in a big stack of papers with educating details about the war which is ignored by the “decision makers”.