Seven Days in April -- Generals Prepare to 'Revolt' Against Rumsfeld

Real Clear Politics ^ | April 18, 2006 | Tony Blankley

[jpsb]

When our president declared that we will treat nations that harbor terrorists the same as terrorist, I cheered, "finally! the usa was going to kick middle east a$$, I've still not forgotten the humilation of Iran during Jimmy's presidency. In fact I was ready to reenlist the momnet Jimmy declared war on Iran. But Bush never put the country on a war footing, Yasir Arafat, the biggest terrorist of them all, was untouched, Lebenon and Palistine (the mothers of all terrorist states) were untouched. It seems to me that (other then Afganistan) rather then waging war on the real terrorist states (Palestine, Syria, Iran) Bush decided to settle old family business and take out Sadam, yea Sadam needed to go but Iraq was far from being a first tier terrorist state that title goes to the 3 I mentioned plus Chechian. Now the opportunity to go after the real treat is lost. Now we will have to wait for another big attack before we have the polictical capital nesscessary to regain our allies and will. Very sad that thousands of American will have to die AGAIN.

[kabar]

Okay...what were the risks involved with including Baath Party members?

There were plenty of risks including the appearance of keeping in power the same murderous crowd that oppressed the vast majority of the people. I agreed with the decision to get rid of the Baath Party members. There is no doubt that many of them were not guilty of the crimes committed by the leadership, but Iraq needed a fresh start even if it caused some short term problems.

If you read my other posts, you will notice that I don't agree with the disgruntled generals and their unprecedented call for Rumsfeld's resignation.

[sinkspur]

We didn't leave Nazis in charge of Germany.

No, they weren't "in charge," but many former Nazis did operate the infrastructure during the period immediately following WWII, under Allied supervision.

[jpsb]

Bull, it took less than six months to go from civilan to combat vet in Veitnam.

[gogeo]

Exactly. Those who employ 20/20 hindsight with such assurance reveal their ignorance.

[Yasotay]

Actually it's far worse and my "uptake" hardly shows all the problems with Rumsfeld. We have had now longer then WWII to mobilize .... Rumsfeld's RMA and decisions are now to blame ...

[PISANO]

Can you tell me what is wrong with the statement "You go to war with the Army you have!

A perfectly stated TRUTH that ONLY a LEFTIST would have difficulty understanding or ACCEPTING.

It probably hurt their FEELINGS!!

[Yasotay]

"Stimson to Ike" To Be Continued ....

[NAVY84]

I think this is 1939. 911 was the Panay Incident. I fear 'Pearl Harbor' is yet to come. That will get us off our butts. (I hope)

[dfwgator]

No, they weren't "in charge," but many former Nazis did operate the infrastructure during the period immediately following WWII, under Allied supervision.

Patton was doing that, but wasn't that why Ike relieved him from Third Army?

[gogeo]

That's one way to look at it.

Another is that unless you want to take on the world all at once, you pick and choose which battles you're going to fight first. Afghanistan and Iraq were easily justified and have created a modest domino effect.

I don't follow those who say W didn't put the nation on war footing. What else should have been done?

[prognostigaator]

'

[kabar]

You are still flogging a dead horse. I believe Tommy Franks, you don't.

"In a speech to a business group in Washington, retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks said that when he gave Bush a status report on the war in Afghanistan on Dec. 28, 2001, he also presented the commander-in-chief with a plan for launching combat operations against Saddam Hussein."

"Franks said he told Bush he didn't like the plan and that he was ordered to put together another one, which he showed to the President in January 2002."

Nevertheless, Franks insisted the decision to invade wasn't made until March 17, two days before the war began.

[jpsb]

"I don't agree with the disgruntled generals and their unprecedented call for Rumsfeld's resignation."

Rumsfeld can not resign, the anti-war crowd would have a field day at conformation for a new SoD, but Runsfeld needs to realize he's no where near as smart as he thinks he is.

[kabar]

No, they weren't "in charge," but many former Nazis did operate the infrastructure during the period immediately following WWII, under Allied supervision.

The Nazi party comprised a much larger percentage of the German population than the Baathists, especially when you include the Hitler Youth.

[jpsb]

" I fear 'Pearl Harbor' is yet to come"

I agree, I'm afraid we are going to lose a city or two.

[Yasotay]

15 June 1944 Stimson to Ike:

Do you still have the memo in your pocket saying the failure is all your fault? ..... Remember it was your plan and you approved it! I'm glad I gave you the 29th ID ... even though they are so old army .... It's too bad the Rangers didn't find those guns .... ignore their reports about finding them. FYI, I canceled the Pershing tank development .... You will just have to use the Shermans you have against those Panthers and Tigers ... after all you have to fight with the army you have .... Why do you keep wanting Patton? He's so old army and SPIT and polish? Your staff continues giving me memos asking for more troops? WHY? Don't you know that you don't need them?

[jpsb]

draft to build 4 or 5 new Army divisions.

[kabar]

...but Runsfeld needs to realize he's no where near as smart as he thinks he is.

Take a gander at Rumsfeld's resume. Do you think that his impressive record in public service and private business reflects someone who doesn't know how to manage people and resources? The disgruntled generals are unhappy that we have a SecDef who actually runs the Department of Defense and doesn't act as a figurehead. They also have a personal agenda. It has more to do with the generals' egos than Rumsfeld's. He doesn't have anything to prove.

[Prokopton]

"but, according to the rumblings of many high-ranking officers as reported in the MSM,"

Nothing said after this makes any diference.