Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I don't know how the process works, but the president has a say in making decisions for flag officer promotions. There is some kind of an interview process to make general that doesn't occur with other officers. This is where a president can decide who to promote as new general, admiral, etc. Most promotions just stand on record with little insight to a persons political beliefs. He may have been another Bush hater, but we don't really know. I'm not trying to imply he is, just that we don't know.
He was a new president when the whole planning after 911 started. President Bush had to learn fact and put people in place for this trusting the upper military people he didn't really know, and rely on their judgement.
I don't know that any of these people need their asses covered except for the constant negative bombardment of the media and liberals. If Sanchez is trying to cover his ass, then sham on him. However, in dong some reading, I am starting to believe we really need to read all his words to place them in context.

There is little anyway we can ascertain from the quotes in the article. I stopped looking for the full quotes. I would like to see those quotes in their full context. I did find the complete sentences of some of the quotes from another link.

What do the Sanchez quotes really mean? I have seen too often out of context quotes arranged to appear as meaning something else. The stand-alone Sanchez quotes:


OK, what did he say after that last comma? Could he have been referring to not having a government in Iraq as democratic as we wanted, or that part of the win is that Iraq stay united, and that it may split to three countries?
Now the remarks after the comma, I found at Paul Burka's blob:

I haven't found am article that says what his belief of a victory is, Some people consider defeat if you don't achieve all of your objectives. My thought is:

Victory = stable government and violence decreasing.

Stalemate = government, but constant internal strife, or a country as bad as it was under Saddam.

Loss = total chaos by the time we pull out.

Yes we do, but who created the crisis? We have democrats undermining the president at every step of the way. That could be what he considers the crisis. America is not united enough for this war. Now the remarks after the comma, I found at Paul Burka's blob:
Sorry to nitpick, but I don't like it when statements are broken down. This too is a form that can alter their meaning. I see too often reports of only the bad things occurring over there when there are even more positive things happening and going unreported.

All we can do is hope the traitorous democrats don't shake the will of us so much that we pull out before we stabilize Iraq.

So this whole mess is the fault of the 'Democrats'?

Ok Cobra the mess in Iraq and the lack of post war planning is the fault of the Democrats... As far as the will of the people most of the country has now realized that Iraq is ,and was, not worth the trouble. It is clear to the public that Iraq was not a threat to the US and the war should not have been waged. I believe most feel that enough blood and treasure has been sacrificed for an ill planned war. Pardon them for that..