Posted on 05/14/2004 5:11:53 PM PDT by RWR8189
Bush expresses confidence in him--for now.
THE MOST OMINOUS MOMENT for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last week came in an exchange with Republican senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Near the end of Rumsfeld's appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Graham suggested that "the worst" of the prison abuse scandal "is yet to come" in photos and videos of mistreatment of Iraqi detainees. And Rumsfeld seemed to agree. "There's a lot more pictures and many investigations underway," he said.
Despite this, President Bush insists Rumsfeld will keep his job. Bush took Rumsfeld aside at the White House to chastise him for not informing him of graphic photos and an official report on the scandal. The president intended to leave the Rumsfeld matter at that. But aides leaked word of the "mild rebuke" by Bush to the press, thinking this would make Bush look better. The leak was not ordered (or expected) by the president or his chief political adviser, Karl Rove.
Nonetheless, the leak required a response by Bush the next day when he and Jordanian King Abdullah met with reporters in the Rose Garden. Bush had planned to apologize for the prison abuse but he also had to prop up Rumsfeld. "Secretary Rumsfeld has served our nation well . . . [and] has been been the secretary during two wars," he said. "And he's an important part of my Cabinet and he'll stay in my Cabinet." But isn't there a remote possibility Rumsfeld will have to go? "There is no way," a senior Bush aide said.
But there is a way--in fact, more than one. The first is the Graham scenario of a scandal that gets much worse with more evidence of abuse becoming public. That would increase pressure for Rumsfeld's departure, prompting some Republicans to join the opposition. For now, the cries for Rumsfeld's head are coming from Democrats and the media. The Democratic attacks are actually counterproductive. They make the scandal a political matter, and the effect on Bush is to make him all the more stubborn about keeping Rumsfeld at the Pentagon.
Another way is the Tony Blair scenario. The British prime minister's commitment to the effort in Iraq is critical. Bush is deeply in his debt. Blair has been steadfast but his alliance with Bush is not popular in England. Nonetheless, he declared in an address to Congress last July that Iraq is "a battle worth fighting." Then he offered an eloquent explanation of why America must be involved in Iraq:
I know it's hard for America, and in some small corner of this vast country, out in Nevada or Idaho, or these places I've never been to but always wanted to go. I know out there there's a guy getting on with his life, perfectly happily, minding his own business, saying to you, the political leaders of this country, "Why me? And why us? And why America?" And the only answer is, "Because destiny put you in this place in history, in this moment in time, and the task is yours to do."
The point is Blair is in a unique position that would allow him to ask Bush to fire Rumsfeld. True, this would be presumptuous and it's highly unlikely. But what if Blair's domestic political problems deepened and he needed some sacrifice by Bush to show he's not the president's poodle and thus to maintain the alliance. It's not inconceivable Rumsfeld could be that sacrifice.
The third way that Rumsfeld might be doomed is a lingering scandal. Bush's apology for the prisoner abuse followed by Rumsfeld's failed to quash it. And though Rumsfeld, in his testimony before the Senate and House last week, was well prepared and contrite, he left too many questions unanswered for the scandal to die quickly. This wasn't entirely Rumsfeld's fault. Some of the questions can only be answered by investigations that aren't completed--questions like what were the precise instructions given to the soldiers to prepare detainees for interrogation and who gave the orders at the prison. When serious questions remain, scandals linger.
If it drags on for weeks, Rumsfeld's trouble will deepen. The president is to travel to France for a celebration of the 60th anniversary of D-Day in June. That is followed by a meeting of the G-8 summit at Sea Island, Georgia, bringing together leaders of the industrial democracies. Bush doesn't want to be peppered with questions about the scandal or Rumsfeld at those events. By then, he needs the scandal to have ebbed.
It probably will have. Certainly it should have. After all, Rumsfeld's only mistakes were ones of process, failing to alert Bush or Congress about the photos of abuse and the existence of a report on the prison wrongdoing. At the White House, it's hoped the president's radio address and his visit to the Pentagon this week will further douse the scandal. "That will dampen it down," a Bush aide said. For Rumsfeld's sake, the aide better be right.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard.
If Rumsfeld goes, Bush is finished.
Rummy Salute! A man I really respect.
Get a clue, Fred.
We, the people, want Rumsfeld.
Enough said.
Rummy is sticking, like a fly on $hit.
Barnes, eat $hit...... 90,000,000 flies can't be wrong!
Fred's head is starting to look as inflated as buchanan's was before he disappeared from public view.
GW's first response would be who, what, when, where and what is going to be done about it. The answers to those questions were being worked out at the appropriate organizational level. I sure wouldn't go to my Commander with a problem without answers to those type questions.
And both of them know it.
Fred's been spending too much time with that little weasel billie kristol.
Rum is our War Minister. If we are done, if we definitely aren't going to thrust into Syria, or Iran, if North Korea isn't going to go critical on us, if we definitely ain't gonna war no more, then sure, let Rum return to a well-heeled retirement. Replace him with someone the Dems and the French and the Muslims would be happier with, so that they can finally relax and stop worrying what America is going to do next.
But do we really want the French and the Arabs to be that sure of what we will and won't do? Do we really want Kim Jong Il to get his nerve back? Do we want Bashir and the mullahs to feel free to get back to business as usual?
If so, let the Starched Uniforms take over, put Clark in the Sec Def's chair, send the rangers to artillery school, and cross-train the Seals as mechanics mates.
I'll feel better, though, if we leave the warriors in charge for at least a couple more election cycles.
'cuse me, should have said what the sam hill.
That is HIS problem, he worries about the politcal fallout and how to minimize it. Most of us want the President to do the RIGHT thing for the country, and HE has and will continue to do so EVEN if it means he loses the election. Politicos suck but as X42 proved, STYLE over SUBSTANCE wins the day.
If Rumsfeld is sacrificed, our enemies all over the world will rejoice. Bush had better hang tough.
hey GW -- I've got some dirty pictures I want to show you that no-one outside of the investigators conducting the Abu Ghraib court-martials has seen -- including me.
If you are old enough, do you recall anyone asking for the SecDef's head after My Lai?
I pray that President would never dismiss Rumsfeld. The Rats hate Rumsfeld but they are insignificant. When people think of the President, then they think of Rumsfeld too. That is the way I hope it goes into the election and we will win by a landslide.
Aside from the media and the Dems' being out and out fifth columnists - what really annoys me is these generals going on tv and saying that Rumsfeld should resign. I saw this McPeak guy (who I believe is a retired air force general) on John Gibson's show today saying that Rumsfeld should resign. When he said this, Gibson interrupted him and asked why Rumsfeld should resign for what these prison guards did. McPeak responded that Rumsfeld has said he is responsible so he has to go. I'll tell you, I wish I coulda been there to Q&A this guy cuz my next question would have been whether McPeak had ever had any enlisted guy under his command commit a crime. And if McPeak did have that happen did McPeak offer up his resignation? Somehow I suspect not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.