NEWS: Study By Army Criticizes War On Terror, page 1

The US military may be streched by so many missions around the world that planners are reccommending scaleback of war on terror.

---

A scathing new report published by the Army War College broadly criticizes the Bush administration's handling of the war on terrorism, accusing it of taking a detour into an "unnecessary" war in Iraq and pursuing an "unrealistic" quest against terrorism that may lead to U.S. wars with states that pose no serius threat.


www.washingtonpost.com


"This development could have strong political ramifications for the current administrations global war on terror"



[Edited on 12-1-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

This study/report, as per your article, may sound condemning but in truth, it is "advice".
Here's what was further commented:

"The report, by Professor Jeffrey Record, of the war college at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, warns that as a result of those mistakes, the US Army is "near breaking point".

The report recommends scaling back the scope of the war on terrorism and instead focusing on the narrower threat posed by the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

"The global war on terrorism as currently defined and waged is dangerously indiscriminate and ambitious, and accordingly . . . its parameters should be readjusted," Professor Record said."


I think that the below link goes to that "report":

"Bounding the Global War on Terrorism
Dr. Jeffrey Record
December 2003"
Link:
www.carlisle.army.mil...

*NOTE* Will need Adobe Acrobat to read.

Excerpt from link:

"The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government."

SUMMARY

The author examines three features of the war on terrorism as currently defined and conducted: (1) the administration's postulation of the terrorist threat, (2) the scope and feasibility of U.S. war aims, and (3) the war's political, fiscal, and military sustainability. He believes that the war on terrorism--as opposed to the campaign against al-Qaeda--lacks strategic clarity, embraces unrealistic objectives, and may not be sustainable over the long haul. He calls for downsizing the scope of the war on terrorism to reflect concrete U.S. security interests and the limits of American military power."



regards
seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
This study/report, as per your article, may sound condemning but in truth, it is "advice".
Here's what was further commented:

"The report, by Professor Jeffrey Record, of the war college at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, warns that as a result of those mistakes, the US Army is "near breaking point".

The report recommends scaling back the scope of the war on terrorism and instead focusing on the narrower threat posed by the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

"The global war on terrorism as currently defined and waged is dangerously indiscriminate and ambitious, and accordingly . . . its parameters should be readjusted," Professor Record said."


I think that the below link goes to that "report":

"Bounding the Global War on Terrorism
Dr. Jeffrey Record
December 2003"
Link:
www.carlisle.army.mil...

*NOTE* Will need Adobe Acrobat to read.

Excerpt from link:

"The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government."

SUMMARY

The author examines three features of the war on terrorism as currently defined and conducted: (1) the administration's postulation of the terrorist threat, (2) the scope and feasibility of U.S. war aims, and (3) the war's political, fiscal, and military sustainability. He believes that the war on terrorism--as opposed to the campaign against al-Qaeda--lacks strategic clarity, embraces unrealistic objectives, and may not be sustainable over the long haul. He calls for downsizing the scope of the war on terrorism to reflect concrete U.S. security interests and the limits of American military power."



regards
seekerof

Thanks Seekerof, your point is well taken in that I agree a focus on Al-Qaida is the prime concern at this time.

My ending comment spoke of the "Political" damage that will be done with this report.

The Media will fail to report the information you quoted in the summary.

I've seen some stories in liberal media spinning this report
and the dem websites are all over it.

So even though I agree with your analysis, the general public is easily swayed by the initial headline - hence the political fallout.

Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 6 days ago with 83 member flags

Google announces privacy settings change across products; users can\'t opt out
  Posted 19 days ago with 78 member flags

BREAKING: Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran\'s nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC
  Posted 3 days ago with 74 member flags

Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 7 days ago with 72 member flags

Renowned Geophysicist Says Strange Sky Sounds Are Real
  Posted 1 days ago with 68 member flags

Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 19 days ago with 67 member flags

FDA\'s New Claim: "Your Body Is a Drug—and We Have the Authority to Regulate It"
  Posted 10 days ago with 53 member flags

Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 7 days ago with 49 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: