[kabar]

Baptiste did express some dissatisfaction in how the war was being conducted while he was in Iraq in April 2004.

"Two US generals in Iraq have criticised the policy of excluding senior Baath Party members - including Iraqi army officers - from jobs in the post-war administration

Maj Gen John Batiste - commander of the US First Infantry Division - told the New York Times newspaper that it would be a good thing to harness their energies. "

US game plan in Iraq questioned

[cookcounty]

Ok, I'll grant you that Baptiste apparently did make his views known, though I have a hard time accepting the idea that Baathists should have been given power and authority. We didn't let Nazis run Germany after WWII.

Still, it's a tactical matter, and open criticism at this time does nothing to move the mission forward. His obligation is to sit on it (at least for now).

So when the General was laying it on thick with his lavish praise for Rumsfeld, was he being honest? Couldn't he just have introduced him as "Our very energetic and experienced Secretary of Defense and former fighter pilot who has come see firsthand what's happening on the ground?" Why all this glorious "perfect man for the moment" crap if he didn't believe it?

[gogeo]

"Two US generals in Iraq have criticised the policy of excluding senior Baath Party members - including Iraqi army officers - from jobs in the post-war administration

Maj Gen John Batiste - commander of the US First Infantry Division - told the New York Times newspaper that it would be a good thing to harness their energies. "

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