3 Generals Spurn the Position of War 'Czar'

Washington Post ^ | April 11, 2007 | Peter Baker and Thomas E. Ricks

[3AngelaD]

Consider the source, plus consider all the ex-Clintonistas they consulted for this story.

[NYleatherneck]

Let me guess... Clark, Zinni, and, and, and ... Who cares.

Semper Fi,
NYleatherneck

[ken21]

yeah, don’t kid yourself!

i live in a strong republican u.s. congressional district and state assembly district.

pubbies here are PISSED at bush and the war.

i can drive across a several cities and rarely do i see a “support our troops” bumper sticker.

“support our troops” were legion once.

[bnelson44]

Consider the source

[CharlesWayneCT]

Kurt Campbell, a Clinton administration Pentagon official who heads the Center for a New American Security, said the difficulty in finding someone to take the job shows that Bush has exhausted his ability to sign up top people to help salvage a disastrous war...

If I had to blame anything, I'd say it's more likely not wanting to take a job where you need real support from congress. The democrats have already shown that "supporting the troops" means denying the generals the stuff they need to do the job they were assigned to do. They appointed Petraous but won't fund the troops.

Given that, why would any other person want to step into a position where you were almost guaranteed to fail because the Democrats won't support the effort?

[steve8714]

When did Karpinski get the extra stars?

[Txsleuth]

Then your pubbies are not strong enough.

Do you have a support the troops bumper sticker?

[CharlesWayneCT]

First of all, “support our troops” should have nothing to do with being against Iraq.

Second, we have a burgeoning number of people who are putting up signs purchased on there own that say “Win the War — Victory in Iraq”.

A lot don’t support the way Bush was fighting the war, but are getting encouraged by the new tone and new tactics.

[3AngelaD]

Bin...Go!

[jveritas]

We should not give a damn if the war is popular or not. The independence war and the civil war were not popular. They were fought by a minority of patriots, supported by a minority of patriots, and won by a minority of patriots. It came to this in this war. We have a strong leader in President Bush, we have our brave troops, and we have a minority of patriots who are going to win this war despite the defeatists and traitors among us.

In regards to the article, the White House will find the General to take this czar role, faster than you can imagine. They probably already have one.

[JeeperFreeper]

Go get any E-5 grunt who has two tours under his belt, most of it outside the wire, doing the fighting. Let him make the decisions and rules of engagement. The war will undergo a dramatic improvement in a matter of weeks.

[AmusedBystander]

I really like President Bush, but that is his job.

[3AngelaD]

Yep, and we just might win, which would discourage the Democrats and people at the Brookings Institute.

[golfisnr1]

I nominate Ollie North.

[3AngelaD]

I suspect he is making way too much money to want to put up with all the grief that would entail. Why submit himself to daily whipping by the Dems when he can continue to get the word out via TV and radio? But I would remind you that Warner is to blame for Ollie losing the last time. I have had no respect for that giant elected Gasbag ever since. I have seen Warner in action up close and personal, and he gives “pompous” a bad name.

[theFIRMbss]

>a high-powered czar to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with authority to issue directions to the Pentagon, the State Department and other agencies, but it has had trouble finding anyone willing to take the job

Could be generals
wonder if the new post is
constitutional.

The military
might expect to get orders
from elected pols,

not appointed guys
who might be military
themselves. Seems troubling.

[theFIRMbss]

>Go get any E-5 grunt who has two tours under his belt

Pick any Freeper . . .
(Well, maybe not all those gals
chatting ANS . . .)

[rwrcpa1]

This is one of Newt Gingrich’s suggestions.

[drjimmy]

The White House wants to appoint a high-powered czar to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with authority to issue directions to the Pentagon, the State Department and other agencies...

Isn't that job already taken, by the President and Commander-in-Chief?

[kimoajax]

Not surprised. To even get to be a general in today’s US military requires you that you be a political hack at heart.