I have a suspicion (at least I hope so) that General Zinni has done likewise.
This obvious dislike for Rummy and Wolfowitz in some military circles is a bit worrisome at times, but few people, including yourself, who has voiced dislike for these fellows have expounded on that view beyond the personal level. They just feel dislike and almost hatred yet have little beyond this to say.
Civilian managers of all stripes are not looking for loyalty and love from those they manage. They are looking for attention to the mission and performance. Also they want their desires met with a measure of compliance. It is not a popularity contest for sure.
I am sure that everything Rumsfeld has done or changed was in the best interest of the service and the country. No body has claimed anything that disagrees with this premise except for some very vocal ex-employees of the pentagon who have a direct line to the Washington Post.
To do this while we are up to our asses with State Dept. idiots who are doing likewise and an election barfathon underway is just plain treacherous to the mission and the goal of ridding this planet of the scum that has been ignored for so long.
If Zinni continues his tirade he is directly affecting the outcome of the war and people like him who have so much knowledge and connections with our military should not be openly displaying this cynical crap in the press. The first thing the American public and our servicemen hear is the parroting of these comments by the opposition people in the foreign press.
The New York Times and the Washington Post are the bibles for the America haters and highly placed experts like the General will be quoted by every enemy we have. Most of these critisisms will make it to these papers whether true or not.
He has nothing to gain by this and we have everything to lose. The actions have already been taken. The war has been procecuted and we are well on our way to reconstruction. His plan is at the very least a moot point and subject of dicussion.
Does he hope to change the minds of the Defense Dept or is he trying to position himself with the opposition?
I suggest you sit back and think about the motives for doing what he has done and don't just think it was a misquote. Some of the FReepers that you have been critical of, may not have hands on experience with the mission, but they do have a uncanny ability to peel away the facade and get to motive and truth.
It could be that your loyalties may be misplaced in this instance. It could be that Zinni has gone over to the other side for reasons that none of us know. Could all this be sour grapes over a damn artillery piece that did not make it through the funding process? Could it just be sour grapes for personal reasons?
At what cost?
Remember RightWing2?
Two points this one seems to ignore. He likes to defend Zinni's inexcusable actions regarding the USS Cole by claiming Zinni had other factors to consider, he was considering all the ramifications in a difficult situation, etc. Yet he denies the same qualifiers for the President and Secretary of Defence.
Secondly, he seems to also have a difficult time remembering his oath, the code of conduct and the UCMJ. His public PERSONAL accusations against the Secretary of Defense are in conflict with all three...but that doesn't seem to bother him.
I personally have a difficult time considering the qualifications of an planning officer or a pentagon flake that has so much time to dedicated to spreading accusations against the administration and Secretary of Defence on a public web site.