Posted on 04/15/2006 8:14:44 AM PDT by churchillbuff
Unless, of course, their agenda is less obvious than they publicly advance.
Exactly.
Truer words were never written. You must be a Marine.
From the article:
It is hard to recall a situation in history where retired U.S. Army and Marine Corps generals, almost all of whom had major commands in a war yet under way, denounced the civilian leadership and called on the president to fire his secretary for war.
I find it amazing that these general's - who got their stars under Clinton - and failed to resign while implementing Clinton's "blow up the aspirin factory's" foreign policy have such credibility now that they have turned against President Bush.
Semper Fi,
TS
Whose agenda?
The president?
Ever notice that generals who act out of concern for the lives of their troops, the success of the mission; who see the flaws in the plan and the planners, never mouth off until AFTER they retire and get the pension? Not one of these birds resigned in protest, or challenged Rumsfeld's theories [unlike Shishenski (p/s)]before the sh*t hit the fan. These clowns are no better than the generals we had in 'Nam. Damn bunch of ticket punchers. And no, I'm no fan of the Donald, either.
If 6 retired Generals per week come out against Rumsfield in a couple of weeks we may be up to 2%.
I think it is just as disturbing for Reagan, Bush 41, and Clinton and those in Congress to profit from their government service. Their examples have now stimulated the idea among career government employees that they deserve a piece of the pie as well, witness Richard Clarke, Joe Wilson, and a host of other dim bulbs who are making money off their "inside" information.
I have no dislike of senior military officers as a group. Along with almost 8 years in the Navy as an officer, I participated in the Capstone Program and got to know plenty of flag officers. I hold the vast majority of them in the highest esteem. They are the kinds of people USG employees should aspire to be. Their sense of duty, honor, and country is admirable.
What I find disturbing is the growing trend toward politization of the military, CIA, and the diplomatic corps, which both parties, but primarily the Dems, have fostered along with the willing cooperation of some in those organizations. It weakens the credibility and advice they provide to policymakers and creates some distrust between political apppointees and career employees.
...and like my 1sg hubby says...that he bets each one of these generals have some kind of axe to grind...
Limbaugh brought up a good point about Rumsfeld. He knows how the people in the Pentagon think and behave. He knows that they will try to get him to go one country or another, or some type of ceremony, etc. The reason for this is that if he makes a decision, the Pentagon people consider it open to interpretation. However they can't tinker with a decision because when he's physically present, he won't let them stray from his decision. They chafe at his "micromanagement." I love it!
"Does he have a choice; What is he going to do admit to backing the wrong guy?"
________________________________________
Easy....he convinces Rumsfeld to resign on his own initiative. And yes, he does have a choice.
Second guessing is easiest thing in the world to do, but the fact is, there is no way of knowing if the alternative would have worked out better. We can only know the results of what we have actually done....and can only speculate what might have happened if a different path were taken.
Its possible the generals are right....but their public ranting is useless and only emboldens the enemy.
They sowed the wind and reaped the whirlwind.
LOL - Go RUMMY go!
The German High Command, Brauchitsch told Rommel, still planned no decisive strike in North Africa, and he could expect no reinforcements beyond the ones already promised. (Unknown to Rommel, there were prior demands on available German forces.l Hitler was about to send troops to aid Mussolini against Greece and was secretly planning an invasion of the Soviet Union.)
...
On his return [Rommel] ordered that the attack should proceed. His rationale for defying the High Command's cautious directive was that British patrols from El Agheila had been harassing supply columns bound for a German-Italian outpost at Marada, 90 miles to the south. To maintain this outpost, he had to throw the British out of El Agheila.
As I put my Eric Shitsacki-approved Black Beanie on and ponder his idea that 'the Army will never need tracked vehicles again'.....
When I look at the dumb-ass Stryker vehicle with the superstructures of steel added on 'cuz nobody ever thought of RPGs....
When I ponder PFC Lunch and her jammed weapon....
When I put a cigarette in my mouth and 'do the Lynndie' pointing at my passed-out friend as a joke....
When I hear any speech by Weaselly Clark....
I realize that Sec Rumsfeld has good reason to scourge the Army in particular: It's been F'ed up for a while now. He's right. We have to do better. We have to be more effective.
I've been in 14 years now--my first enlistment into ROTC was 1986--I had a break in service--Sometimes I'm not very proud of the Army. I think it needs to be shook up.
Watching these perfumed princes sniping at the Sec. after the most successful military campaign in human history looks real stupid.
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.