Critics and Fans Alike as Navy Chief Steps Down

NY Times ^ | July 17, 2005 | THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT

[neverdem]

WASHINGTON, July 16 - Adm. Vern Clark is stepping down next week as the longest-serving chief of naval operations in a half-century, having spent five years revamping the fleet and trimming Navy budgets in an unusual sacrifice to help pay the Army's bills in Iraq.

He has increased the Navy's readiness, improved pay and benefits, accelerated the retirement of outdated ships, and submerged parochial Navy interests as a team player on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And what thanks does he get?

He has been pilloried by the ship-building industry and members of Congress, and not just those representing districts with shipyards or Navy ports. Within his own branch of the service and among retired officers, it is easy to find people who wish he had fought harder for the Navy's share of the pie.

But he also got an unusual second term, granted by Donald H. Rumsfeld, the most hands-on defense secretary in a generation. Even more important, he has been given much leeway in organizing, training and equipping the Navy, a liberty that has been the envy of those leading the other armed services.

When confronted by critics who count success by the numbers and believe that only size matters, whether in ships, personnel or budgets, Admiral Clark says the friction proves that the system works.

"The people that would criticize are again performing a specific role that they've been given to play inside the system that we have," Admiral Clark, 60, said in an interview looking back over his last five years. "A congressman that represents a district where they build ships, I expect them to speak strongly in support of their region and their shipyard and the economic imperatives that go with that. And I decided that I wasn't going to lose a lot of sleep..."

[ARCADIA]

Adm. Vern Clark is stepping down next week as the longest-serving chief of naval operations in a half-century, having spent five years revamping the fleet and trimming Navy budgets in an unusual sacrifice to help pay the Army's bills in Iraq.

Let's hope his replacement is more adept at fighting war then counting beans. It is time to undo the damage done by this clown.

[nathanbedford]

It is time to undo the damage done by this clown

Howso?

I know this is a puff piece, and we certainly got to be wary of the source, and the guy fits into the anti-military bias of the Times against force size, but what specifically went on?