Can Rumsfeld withstand backtalk of former commanders? - Rumsfeld flunking, ex-generals charge

ap on San Diego Union Tribune ^ | 4/13/06 | Tom Raum - ap

[NormsRevenge]

This article is also on the net titled

Analysis: Criticism Mounts Vs. Rumsfeld

[Huck]

thanks for looking into that. now i dont have to bother reading the article :-)

[jeffers]

General Tom Franks made this line of BS clear in his biography.

The "Title Ten Motherxxxxxxs" on the JCS wanted control of Iraq, Franks and Rumsfeld told them to screw off, and ow that they have retired and can't be made to suffer, they get even with lies.

Face facts, "Generals", the US Military is now a Joint Operation, you are dinosaurs, and nobody wants to hear your whining and crying.

Get lost.

[Swiss]

I would love to see these candy ass generals deal with Lincoln's Sec. of War Edwin Stanton.

From what I read Stanton could arrest anyone without reason and did including military officers.

When pressure was exerted to remove the unpopular secretary from office, Lincoln replied, "If you will find another secretary of war like him, I will gladly appoint him."

[HawaiianGecko]

MOST POPULAR

• E-Mailed
• Blogged
• Searched

1. How the Gospel of Judas Emerged
2. David Pogue: Run Windows and Mac OS Both at Once
3. Stilt Walking Into Spring
4. Nascar Fans Trade the R.V. for a Condo
5. Eye Infections May Be Tied to a Solution for Lenses
6. A Crystal Ball Submerged in a Test Tube
7. The DNA Age: Seeking Ancestry in DNA Ties Uncovered by Tests
8. Shanghai's Boom: A Building Frenzy
9. In India, Maoist Guerrillas Widen 'People's War'
10. Read It? Watched It? Swap It

I've noticed this list in the New York times of the top 10 most emailed articles doesn't include anything about Secretary Rumsfeld and the rampaging X-Generals. Guess it's not really an important item among readers of this newspaper.

 

[OldFriend]

The ankle biters are in need of rabies shots, IMO.

Since when does our military cut and run. I thought that when the going gets tough the military steps up.

[NormsRevenge]

I'd be checking out 4 myself. ;-)

[JLAGRAYFOX]

Every one of these Generals is a low life, spineless piece of vermin. Not one of them had the "you know what" to speak their mind when they wore the uniform of the US Military. They all whimped out and waited until they retired. Rumsfeld rained on their cute little tight parade of they way they ran the military, and the bastards did not like it. So, now comes the long knives for Rumsfeld. Well, weak sisters, it won't work!! Rumsfeld has more brains in his behand than any of these misfits and losers!!! They should be charged with Treason, tried, and treated acccordingly (Especially that moron Zinni). They could all become Democrats, then they would be traitors and America haters too. When will the American people wake up destroy these malcontents and haters of America!!!!

[Bombard]

You are right. The current SecDef has stepped on a lot of toes with the changes he is making in military branches. Most of these generals have grudges against the people who are making the changes and Rummy is their number one target. Also none of these generals really had a hand in the planning of the war. I for one am getting tired of their back stabbing.

[SuziQ]

He was blamed for committing too few U.S. troops

Weren't he and the President taking the Generals' lead on how many troops would be committed? I seem to remember the call srom many in the media for more troops a couple of years ago, and the Generals on the ground in Iraq said that they didn't NEED any more troops. So what's the deal here?

Is this just some personal thing with these Generals?

[rlmorel]

Yup...he's DA MAN!

I have found that people who get results often make the bitterest enemies.

And the bitterest enemies are often the ones who couldn't get anything done.

Coincidence?

[SuziQ]

In other words, he is a paid shill.

And if he worked for a conservative leaning think tank and were supporting Rummy,I can guaran-damn-tee you that they'd be calling him a paid shill!

[Jorge]

Looks like it's Rumsfield's turn to be "Target of the Week" again. They keep trying, hoping to find a weakness somewhere. I don't think they're going to succeed in drumming him out of Washington.

I agree. The left is just flailing wildly at Bush and anybody in his administration they think is vulnerable..and they've been doing it ever since he was first elected.

Remember how Rumsfeld was the toast of Washington and media back when EVERYBODY including the Dems supported the war in Iraq?

Now that they sense public support for the war dropping, Rumsfeld is now the enemy...they are hypocrites and cowards.

[HawaiianGecko]

I may be wrong, but I don't recall a single Admiral complaining about the Secretary or for that matter an Air Force General. Seems like the whiners are from the Army and Marines and unless I'm mistaken again, isn't the Secretary's reorganization building upon the Air Force and Navy assets and decreasing the importance of the boots on the ground services? 

BTW for any grunts sharpening their flame sticks, I'm not denigrating either the Army or Corps.

 

[Badray]

Ditto. I completely agree.

This is the one area that I agree with Bush and I trust Rumsfeld.

[Grut]

For all you folks who missed the point, the Iraq war isn't the GWOT, it's what's replaced the GWOT. It's as though, after D-Day, we stopped the war until we got France straightened out.

The Bush administration has fallen into the classic error of letting the alligators distract them from draining the swamp. I expect we'll eventually succeed in Iraq but it won't matter because the focus of the war will have been lost.

[thisiskubrick]

First fire all O-6s and above (Col/Capt and Gen/Adm). Then promote warriors. Any officers above O-5 (LTC/CDR) got their on politics.
Sort of like when Stalin executed all of his generals.. and colonels.. and majors.. and then promoted everyone below that. Works wonders for morale.

[HawaiianGecko]

"Practically every mistake made during this war can be traced back to Rumsfeld's errors in judgment. Too few troops, failure to provide security in the country once major combat was over, failure to provide proper equipment."

You are guilty of petitio principii  here, and it is the most classic example of circular logic, because it directly presumes the conclusion which is at question in the first place, hence, your argument simply fails.  Your conclusion may very well be correct but your form and content fail to prove it.

 

[al baby]

I think we have a insurgency proplem here at free republic of late?

[NormsRevenge]

Oh yeah, on many topics too. :)