| bradclark1 |
10-19-07 01:24 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradclark1
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Sanchez - He's a simple tank commander, nothing more. This is the guy speaking out in the article.
|
You don't become a lieutenant general in todays army by being just a simple tank commander. Then again they made Rick Lynch a major general and I thought he sucked when he was a lieutenant colonel. And there is no 'simple' to being a tank commander.
|
Yes you do. He was not, nor has ever had any training or experience to deal with what he had to deal with. His former commanders did, but thought the job was done. His boss said he made a mistake by putting him in charge and takes full blame for it.
Don't get me wrong, Sanchez is a good tank commander, and he is exceptional at tank warfare, but he is not good at urban combat and has never had any real training or experience in it. Tack on an insurgency, and you have a brewing pot of mistakes - one right after the other.
-S
|
You would have to provide a link to this interesting information you are getting. Your concept of army leadership is somewhat flawed. When you make colonel and up you are commanding infantry and armor. On top of that you have have operations officers who by position is a registered hotty who is tracked for higher things, and when you are at Corps level also have two or more division commanders who won't hesitate to tell you your thinking is screwed up. At Corps level you are not going to micromanage any Division, Brigade or Battalion operations. A Corps commander oversees the overall battle and will issue operations orders to the Division commanders and will not tell him how to do that job. I have no idea how anybody would know if a lieutenant general is any good at urban warfare because the army has not trained for that environment until the Iraq invasion was well on the way. The last major urban combat was Hue IIRC.
As far as his boss, I have utter disdain for Franks because if he was worth a s#!t he would have looked pass the taking of Baghdad and take control of the country after the battle. Not have units standing around with their fingers up their arse unsure of what do and have the commander say "Oh well guess I'll retire now". Or if you are talking about Gen. John Abizaid I don't remember him doing any stellar job worthy of mention. Abizaids claim to fame was that he had an Arab heritage. That more then anything put him in a commander position. Lets be clear on something. Sanchez was relieved for the prison debacle not for tactical reasons. I will grant that no Iraq commander until general Petraeus knew how to deal with the insurgency properly and Petraeus is what the fourth commander. |
