Retired US Iraq general demands Rumsfeld resign

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

those were GENERALS (Subject Matter Experts in their fields) Fighting a War, NOT a Civilian (and one without real experience or expertise) telling the Generals how to do their job, over their objections, experience and expertise.....

So, you're saying that no civilian is ever qualified to be Secretary of Defense?

[racer42 0]

Quote

Quote

And still the Bush Administration doesn't get it.

Gen. Grant had lots of critics in the Civil War. Did President Lincoln "not get it"?

Likewise, with Generals such as Halsey, Lemay, Montgomery, Patton and MacArthur.

But they all won battles and wars.

Just because you can find someone that criticizes them, doesn't mean that their methods won't work to win the war.

No they still don't get it. And most likely won't.
.

Don't you find it the least bit unusual that this many general officers directly involved with the conflict at hand would come out publicly and so soon after retirement and openly criticize the very Administration they were just workng for?

L.A.S.T. #24
Co-Founder Biscuit Brothers Freefly Team
Electric Toaster #3
Co-Founder Team Non Sequitor
Co-Founder Team Happy Sock

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Don't you find it the least bit unusual that this many general officers directly involved with the conflict at hand would come out publicly and so soon after retirement and openly criticize the very Administration they were just workng for?

In a way I do. Because of that, I also question the veracity with which some of these generals make their stand. I don't believe that all of these generals stand 100% behind their remarks.

SecDef Rumsfeld is not ignorant of military life, issues and circumstances. I know this for a fact. What I think many of these generals are weary from is the expansion that occurred within their divisions. I'll use my own division as an example.

Every division within the U.S. Army was formed with three brigades (or BDE, each composed of three infantry battalions, or BN) with separate supporting elements (separate company, battalion and brigade) under their own command.

One of the many changes that they instituted with the expansion with the Army was the idea of single "Units of Action", meaning that instead of coordinating commands of infantry and all related support units, incorporate them under a single command. So, the 101st Airborne's 4th Brigade consists of infantry, and all supporting units under one commander. This changes the way deployments and training and even life in garrison are handled. Basically, it changed everything, and it didn't make it necessarily easier for the division commanders either (all Major Generals, or two-stars at the time).

Now, add to that, when these "4th Brigades" were created, other BDEs were tasked with giving up some of their personnel to help fill them, in addition to new guys out of basic training to fill the lower enlisted ranks. Do these other BDEs give up their star NCOs and officers? Hell no. They call the 4th BDE in our division the "turd BDE" because they flushed the turds out of their own ranks. That's not 100% of course, but you have a lot of people suddenly confronted with a clean slate, some of them taking advantage of that.

As they say, in the military, the griping goes up, not down. The generals received a lot of gripes, and their own gripes to the civilian policy makers weren't received at all.

So, these former 2 stars and the like, I think, in some ways are placing the blame for the growing pains on SecDef Rumsfeld. That is correct, since he's managing the growth, but incorrect in the sense that it matters.

Six generals' criticism may be notable, but it doesn't make them right. Former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Meyers said the criticism is misplaced, and he fully supported the SecDef.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[likearock 2]

Here's my prediction.

This is the perfect wedge issue for congressional Republicans to distance themselves from the President and shore up their currently dismal prospects for the '06 elections. It also aligns them with the consensus of the electorate who are dissatisfied with what's going on in Iraq. They may not bring it up now, but some time before November many of them will come out against Rumsfeld.

[Skyrad 0]

Quack

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Don't you find it the least bit unusual that this many general officers directly involved with the conflict at hand would come out publicly and so soon after retirement and openly criticize the very Administration they were just workng for?

Rumsfield is changing the Army - for the better. Some of the "old Army" guys don't like the change. That's perfectly natural. Every organization has people in it that dislike change from their old established structures and processes. Six dissenting generals means nothing.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

This is the perfect wedge issue for congressional Republicans to distance themselves from the President and shore up their currently dismal prospects for the '06 elections. It also aligns them with the consensus of the electorate who are dissatisfied with what's going on in Iraq. They may not bring it up now, but some time before November many of them will come out against Rumsfeld.

Bingo! It's all politics. Some Republicans may want a scapegoat. Democrats need someone to attack to make Republicans look bad, and Tom Delay isn't available any more.