Just imagine what Iraq would be like today if we had secured the peace immediately after defeating Saddam.
Kerry yesterday reported that General Shinseki had told Congress in FEBRUARY 2003 (a month before the war) that it would take "hundreds of thousands" of U.S. forces to secure that peace.
News stories throughout 2003 raised the issue of General Shinseki's statement, and the adverse consequences he faced in the Bush Administration for that statement:
Here is a letter to the editor of the Idaho Statesman of July 5, 2003
Iraq, Vietnam
If the Bush administration wants to prevent Iraq from becoming another Vietnam, it must follow the advice of the recently retired Chief of Staff, U.S. Army General Eric K. Shinseki, and station 200,000 to 300,000 or more U.S. troops in Iraq to pacify the country and protect the infrastructure.
If Bush doesn’t deploy sufficient soldiers quickly, we should immediately get out of Iraq before hundreds of primarily working-class sons and daughters come home in coffins.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was so livid about General Shinseki’s Iraq manpower recommendations, he told the general s boss, Secretary of the Army Thomas White, to order the general to lower the number of troops. When White refused, Rumsfeld secured the army secretary s resignation. When Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, General Shinseki’s manpower estimates will prevail.
If we are going to stay in Iraq, the United States needs to involve the United Nations and NATO more, and step up delivering humanitarian aid, restoring basic services, reconstructing damaged infrastructure and nation-building.
Bill Kibble, Captain USAF retired and Vietnam veteran, Boise
Interview on This Week on ABC News on July 13, 2003
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
Before the war, General Shinseki, the outgoing army chief of staff, said that he thought it would take several hundred thousand troops in Iraq for a long time.
DONALD RUMSFELD Yes.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS Both you and your deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, were very dismissive of this and said it would only take 50 or 60,000.
DONALD RUMSFELD Never said 50 or 60. Neither Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld ever has said 50 ...
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS I believe Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz did say 50 to 60.
DONALD RUMSFELD Well, I can say never Rumsfeld. I can assure you of that.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS Okay. But he did, and ...
DONALD RUMSFELD I don't think he did.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS And General Shinseki was closer.
DONALD RUMSFELD I think not. Look, Shinseki is a fine officer and had a distinguished career and, very able man. He was pressed in a hearing and he said, over and over they pressed him, question this, question that, finally he said, maybe several hundred thousand US troops. Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld said we think that's wide of the mark. What have we got in there? 148,000. Is that several hundred thousand?
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS It's three times 50 to 60.
DONALD RUMSFELD We didn't say 50 to 60. That may have been someone in ...
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS That was not the plan going in?
DONALD RUMSFELD Absolutely not the plan going in. I never ever made a conclusion as to how many forces it would take because I didn't know what Iraq was going to look like at the end of a war. Why would I think I was wise enough to look into the future and know an answer like that? I never did.
[Is this an admission they didn’t plan for the peace?]
Christian Science Monitor, May 20, 2003
In February, however, the Rumsfeld team criticized as "wildly off the mark" General Shinseki's estimate that hundreds of thousands of US troops might be required to occupy postwar Iraq.
The Sunday Telegraph (London), March 23, 2003
His [Tommy Franks] announcement of the retirement of Army Chief of Staff General Shinseki was widely felt to be a humiliation for the man, compounded when Paul Wolfowitz publicly slapped down Shinseki over his estimates of how many troops would be required to garrison Iraq.