Is it fair to call for Rumsfeld's resignation?
A whispering campaign against Donald Rumsfeld has burst into the open with two generals who helped him plan the Iraq war denouncing his leadership and calling on him to resign.
Maj Gen John Batiste, who commanded a division in Iraq last year, became the fourth recently-retired general to attack the defence secretary for his handling of the war and demand new faces at the Pentagon.
"I believe we need a fresh start at the Pentagon," he told CNN, adding that many of his peers agreed.
"It speaks volumes that guys like me are speaking out from retirement about the leadership climate in the Department of Defence." Read the whole article here: Generals call for Rumsfeld's resignation over Iraq
Mark Alexander
10 comments:
Bld:
Happy Easter to you, too.
Thanks for your good wishes. This is the first day that I have commented for a while now. This past week has been a week from hell!
Today, however, Good Friday is much more serene. I hope things will getter better from here on.
Did you read the ridiculous statement by President Bush on Islam? I read it over at Jihad Watch: "I believe that the terrorists have hijacked a peaceful religion in order to justify their behavior."
As I expected, the WaPo is giving this story saturation coverage. I'd like to see that same kind of coverage with regard to certain Islamic tenets.
But I have in my mind's eye an image I'll never forget--that of Donald Rumsfeld on 9/11, rushing INTO the Pentagon as he stripped off his coat and tie. At the time, I didn't know who he was and said, "Who is that old man?" Later, Rumsfeld was interviewed on one of our local stations and called a "hero." He refused to accept the accolade and asked that all stations not hold him up to admiration.
Maybe Rumsfeld isn't perfect, but I respect the man. I saw with my own eyes on 9/11 what kind of person he is. Furthermore, in his office at the Pentagon, he keeps a remnant of that airplane because he "never wants to forget who did this."
We could do a lot worse that Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense.
Another topic here...
Did you hear that Comedy Central caved and didn't post their cartoon of MTP (South Park). The dhimmitude of Comedy Central, generally an irreverent channel, is astounding.
PS: I saw that statement over at JW. Dhimmitude on the part of the President of the United States! ARGHHHH!
AOW,
But I have in my mind's eye an image I'll never forget--that of Donald Rumsfeld on 9/11, rushing INTO the Pentagon as he stripped off his coat and tie. At the time, I didn't know who he was and said, "Who is that old man?" Later, Rumsfeld was interviewed on one of our local stations and called a "hero." He refused to accept the accolade and asked that all stations not hold him up to admiration.
I remember reading and hearing the same thing reported on TV.
As former military (USNAVY) he would be expected to do no less. You never leave a wounded buddy behind. I don't think he deserves (and to his credit, he recognized this) any more accolades for what he did than the many others who did the same.
We will have to agree to disagree on this one.
I don't think Rumsfeld has shown competency to lead the war. He has been known for (repeatedly) not listening to the leaders on the ground in Iraq, who know, much better than he, what needed to be done to win this war.
In my mind I will always remember a
memo from 2003 which I think shows his mindset. To him, it's an academic game--much like a professor living in his ivory tower, not aware or caring about the real world around him.
At this point in the game, it would be a very hard job for whoever would replace him.
I wish he would have listened to the military advisors at the start of this war--especially in regards to troop strength, and post-Saddam planning.
Heather,
Yes, I think we disagree on this.
Of course, at the same time that Rumsfeld was trying to save some of the 9/11 victims, our politicians were beating tracks from the Capitol Building. Not that I expected better from them, of course. But they looked truly frightened, not just running from their lives.
I'm not sure that anyone would have done any better than Rumsfeld. The war in Iraq is truly a different kind of war and, IMO, an experiment which will fail.
But whatever Rumsfeld's failings, open-air discussion right now is not good. It feeds the enemy's ego.
One thing I have always admired in Rumsfeld is his ability to be outspoken.
But as to whether he is good at his job, I don't know. I can imagine that such a man would ruffle many people's feathers. Rub them up the wrong way, so to speak.
You know what I feel about the war in Iraq, anyway. It was a big huge mistake. And for reasons I have mentioned so many times before.
It's destined to fail, I'm sorry to say. Moreover, now we have Iran to contend with. They are behaving like recalcitrant children! Something will have to be done about them, unless we want to allow them to develop into a superpower. Perish the thought!
Mark,
I think this blogger stated what many people feel about
Rumsfeld
Heather:
Thanks for that link. You always come up with such good ones.
It's a good and interesting link, Heather; but the writer suggests that things are going well in the Iraqi theatre of war. I doubt that. I really do. They may have improved. But that says nothing.
You know what I feel about the idiotic idea of bringing democracy to the Middle East: It's a hare-brained idea which is destined to fail, especially because of the inherent nature of Islam.
GWB has shown us all, repeatedly, that he has absolutely NO understanding of the nature of Islam. Anyone, today, 'leading' the strongest, most powerful country in the world, without a sound understanding of the nature of our adversaries, and an understanding of their way of thinking, goals and aspirations, is not fit to be elected to lead and make decisions on our behalf.
As we all know, this is a very dangerous world. We have no time to play around.
Bush's platitudes about Islam prove to me that he understands nothing about Islam. No thinking person can rest well at night anymore, knowing that our 'leaders' are weak and clueless. In many cases, they are also corrupt.
The West is on the skids. We need far better leadership than we have, and far more honest people, too. People committed to the survival of our civilization. We have none of these.
Rumsfeld is better than many, but obviously is also clueless as to the nature of Islam. If he isn't, then he is Bush's poodle, for we should never have engaged in this war.
Mark,
I think the writer said things are getting better in Iraq, not that they are going well. There is a difference.
The Iraqi army and police are taking over more of the day to day operations with backing, as needed, from coalition troops. This is progress. Progress comes in stages, sometimes painfully slow.
My point is that things could have gone so much better if Rumsfeld listened to the military advisors and had a much larger troop strength at the outset.
So many of the problems we have endured the last 3 years could have been crushed at the outset and greatly lessened. Now the enemy is entrenched, emboldened and experienced.
Both my husband (a retired field grade officer) and I thought this war was ill-advised.
However, we both think our military is the best in the world, and that it was possible to "win" this war--if we'd had leadership who listened to the advice they received.
The "democracy" we would've ended up with would probably more closely resemble that of Turkey than any Western idea of democracy.
Heather:
I agree with your assessment in large part. I, though, doubt that we'd end up with even a Turkish-style "democracy" there. It is far more likely to be that their vote would be for Shariah. As has happened in Afghanistan and Palestine.
Perhaps I'm splitting hairs here.
Post a Comment