More Retired Generals Call for Rumsfeld’s Resignation
WASHINGTON, April 13
He’s already tendered his resignation twice. They should fire the idiot that didn’t accept it.
if he steps down, what will he do? any guesses as to his next job?
i think he is well-suited to be the next care-taker at Arlington National Cemetary. I think it would be fitting, seeing how he is responsible for a fair share of the permanant residents there…
"President Bush Expresses Full Support, Appreciation for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld:
‘Earlier today I spoke with Don Rumsfeld about ongoing military operations in the Global War on Terror. I reiterated my strong support for his leadership during this historic and challenging time for our Nation. . . .’ "
[color=blue]Wehrmacht Redux:[/color]
“The military evaded political meddling during most of the Third Reich’s history. Most of its leadership was politically conservative, nationalistic and hoped to reconquer territories that had broken away from Imperial Germany. Hitler had promised to rebuild Germany’s military strength and officers were mostly sympathetic towards the National Socialist movement. Political influence in the military command began to increase later in the war when Hitler’s flawed strategic decisions began showing up as serious defeats for the German army and tensions mounted between the military and the government. Not only did Hitler appoint unqualified personnel to lead his armies, but also gave to his commanders impossible orders, such as to shoot all officers and enlisted men who retreated from a front line. These tensions culminated in the July 20 plot (1944), when a group of Wehrmacht officers led by Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg tried to assassinate Hitler and overthrow his regime. Following the attempt, Hitler distrusted the Wehrmacht and many officers were executed.”
I agree with Rumsfeld’s assessment regarding troop levels. We do not need to babysit Iraq. We need to force them to be responsible and mature. That will occur and is occuring despite the difficulties. A smaller footprint is what we need, not an open commitment for 15 years. I believe the plan to get our troop levels down to 35K to 50K but permanently placed was a good one and in hindsight it will be seen as the right choice.More would not have been then answer.
What I disagree with is selling this war as against one nation. But that is Bush’s fault. He should have clearly told the American people that we were in a war that included all actors that support terrorism and seek to disrupt our efforts in Iraq, that includes namely Iran and Syria. Until these actors are knocked out of the picture… we will have proxy battles with various sides funding and supporting various parties: sunnis for sunnis and shias for shias in the hopes of developing greater regional clout. Let’s rachet up the pressure on Iran and infiltrate it as it is infiltrating Iraq. Two can play this game and that goes doubly so for Syria.
Wow Fred, that’s almost exactly what John Kerry said.
[quote=“Kerry”]Kerry said the administration should set May 15 as the deadline for forming a government. If the Iraqis miss the deadline, he said, the United States should immediately begin withdrawing forces.
“If Iraqis aren’t willing to build a unity government in the five months since the [December] election, they’re probably not willing to build one at all. The civil war will only get worse and we will have no choice anyway but to leave,” Kerry said
[/quote]
His plan calls for leaving 30,000 troops there.
Kerry and Fred on the same wavelength? Maybe it’s a good thing they didn’t count all those Ohio votes after all.
“Hi, my name’s Donald and this is my friend George. We’d like to introduce you to a new business concept that will make you incredibly wealthy while making your clothes smell fresh and lemony…
Have you heard of Amway…?”
Note: Humour inspired by Richardm
Next stop, war crimes tribunal:
“I admire those who have stepped forward, and I agree with the arguments they are making,” retired Marine Lt. Gen. Paul K. Van Riper said in an interview yesterday. “I count myself in the same camp.”
Van Riper, a lifelong Republican who voted for Bush in 2000 but did not vote in the 2004 election, said Rumsfeld has failed in a number of ways, including “disastrous” war planning and execution and fostering a poor command climate.
Retired Army Brig. Gen. Charles Brower, a military historian and deputy superintendent at Virginia Military Institute, said it is unusual to see such a group of retired generals issuing public criticism.
“Officers now feel that there is almost an obligation to speak more openly about policies that they disagreed with once they have retired,” Brower said. “There is now a group of officers who feel an obligation to speak more aggressively, and I think that has to have been influenced by the Vietnam experience,” during which miscalculations by the civilian leadership caused a military defeat and a years-long erosion in military morale.
“It’s an important thing happening right now, an important phenomenon that’s going on,” Brower said.
What makes the recent criticism more threatening to the Bush administration is the sense that it represents an unspoken strain of thought among active-duty personnel. A poll of 944 troops serving in Iraq released by Zogby International and LeMoyne College did not ask about Rumsfeld but found that 72 percent think the United States should withdraw within a year and more than a quarter think it should leave immediately.
“That and other questions lead to the obvious conclusion that they’re not sure they’re doing anything positive over there anymore,” said pollster John Zogby. “When it comes to the leadership, there seems to be a disconnect.” . . .
Longtime Rumsfeld critics said the generals were speaking from genuine concern. “They really are acting out of patriotism,” said William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard. “This is not fun for them. They’re reluctant to step forward in this way, and for good reason. . . . But I believe they’re doing it because they believe that Rumsfeld is endangering the course of U.S. foreign policy.”
I’m hoping that his role in the eventual movie will be played by Adam West.
In the Department of Defense there are:
34 - four star generals/admirals
124 - three star generals/admirals
278 - two star generals/admirals
439 - one star generals/admirals
Throw in the U.S. Coast Guard and you have 900 generals and admirals on active duty today.
This is roughly the same number of generals/admirals who were on active duty in WWII when
our military was 12,000,000 strong.
Given that on any given year 15-20% of those generals/admirals will retire each year it
doesn’t take much figuring to realize that the number of generals calling for Secretary
Rumsfeld to resign is laughable.
Yeah, it’s like how many schools haven’t been blownup? How many US soldiers haven’t been killed this month?
How many generals don’t think Rumsfeld is an incompetent idiot?
And how many know what would happen to their careers if they did say that.
Edit: That didn’t make any sense.
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]
…you have 900 generals and admirals on active duty today.
Given that on any given year 15-20% of those generals/admirals will retire each year it
doesn’t take much figuring to realize that the number of generals calling for Secretary
Rumsfeld to resign is laughable.[/quote]
OK, most of these generals asking for his retirement probably did not come out of the coast guard, but had at least some connection to the mess in Iraq. So let’s say 15%, or 60 generals retire every year, what percentage of them have connections to to the Iraq invasion. Right now 6 retired generals are calling for his resignation, that doesn’t seem so laughable. Rumsfeld simply ignored the people who he was sending over there.
Rummy has the unmitigated support of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, and that’s all that matters to him.
Hurrah for the 101st keyboardists. Hurrah for Rumsfeld.
Do you have a unit song? Any unique traditions? Perhaps distinctive berets that are half-black, half-leopardskin?
The people of Iraq love him too. After all, he’s their liberator. He’s regarded as the George Washington of Iraq by the people there.
They’ve long ago forgiven and forgotten the “stuff happens” remark. That was just the Kool-Aid talking.
Well, of course the media, liberal Forumosans, and other nattering nabobs of negativity don’t include the names of the retired generals and foreign policy experts who support Rumsfeld.
Retired generals such as John Crosby, Thomas McInerney, Burton Moore and Paul Vallely said Rumsfeld was "arguably one of the most effective secretaries of defense our nation has ever had."
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, the four generals said that as long as Rumsfeld retains the confidence of US President George W. Bush, he will make the important calls at the top of the Department of Defense.
“That’s the way America works,” the generals said. “So let’s all breathe into a bag and get on with winning the global war against radical Islam.” :bravo:
The late president Richard Nixon’s secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, speaking on CNN television’s Late Edition program, hailed Rumsfeld as “a distinguished public servant who has done an outstanding job.”
There’s always that retired general and former colleague of Rumsfeld’s who worked shoulder-to-shoulder with him during his most difficult challenges and probably knows him better than anyone else on the miltary side – General Colin Powell.
General Powell offers this ringing endorsement of his former colleague:
" ."
Powell starts to add to the choir:
[quote]Against a backdrop of rumors of a pending resignation, more deadly terror attacks in Iraq, and sinking popularity for the war, Mr. Powell over the weekend said bluntly that missteps were made during the war that led to the current level of the insurgency.
Speaking Saturday to the annual conference of the National School Board Association, Mr. Powell said,“We made some serious mistakes in the immediate aftermath of the fall of Baghdad,” the Chicago Sun-Times reported. “We didn’t have enough troops on the ground. We didn’t impose our will. And as a result, an insurgency got started, and … it got out of control.”[/quote]
The real question is why did the Bush White House think they could ignore the only people who had any real experience conducting wars? I guess only the brilliant and highly ideologically driven members of the elite 101st Fighting Keyboardists can explain how they ended up with such a quagmire on our hands.