Posted on 06/15/2007 10:02:30 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Pace says he refused to quit voluntarily
By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer 11 minutes ago
In his first public comments on the Bush administration's surprise decision to replace him as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Peter Pace disclosed that he had turned down an offer to voluntarily retire rather than be forced out.
To quit in wartime, he said, would be letting down the troops.
Pace, responding to a question from the audience after he spoke at the Joint Forces Staff College in Norfolk, Va., on Thursday evening, said he first heard that his expected nomination for a second two-year term was in jeopardy in mid-May. Defense Secretary Robert Gates on June 8 announced Pace was being replaced.
"One thing that was discussed was whether or not I should just voluntarily retire and take the issue off the table," Pace said, according to a transcript released Friday by his office at the Pentagon.
"I said I could not do that for one very fundamental reason," which is that no soldier or Marine in Iraq should "think — ever — that his chairman, whoever that person is, could have stayed in the battle and voluntarily walked off the battlefield.
"That is unacceptable as a leadership thing, in my mind," he added.
Pace, whose current term ends Oct. 1, said he intended to remain on the job until then. Navy Adm. Michael Mullen has been announced as Bush's choice to succeed Pace, who is the first Marine ever to hold the military's top post.
A Vietnam veteran, Pace has served in uniform for 40 years. That experience colored his decision to refuse to quit voluntarily.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
“The GOP is annihilating itself and it is being led by the base.”
Well Jefferson once said we could always use a revolution every once in a while. Hopefully our next emblem will be a phoenix.
I just think that causing another Military staff member change for political reasons is a bad message to send the Jihadist and anarchists.
this is such a sad commentary on this administration and especially about Gates.
They’ll try and likely succeed (due to the MSM) in making it a grandstanding exhibition on the war. ADM Mullen could be a cardboard cutout, for all they care.
I agree the battlefield is heavily rigged in their favor. That is 99.9% due to Pubbie ineptness and unwillingness to fight. And everytime we cede the battlefield without so much as a whimper, the situation gets worse.
The spinelessness is amazing, isn’t it? All a democrat has to do is say he’ll block it and this President won’t even try; for a loyal Marine.
But, I’m betting it’s more than just a fight. I’m betting this Marine was traded for legislation wanted by the President.
As for loyalty, this President only demands it for himself. He doesn’t reciprocate.
ROFL!
“...no matter the cost.”
There’s your problem. How high a cost? Morale boost to the enemies and a decrease for our servicemen? Leaked secrets? Leaderless forces?
Pres. Bush and Sec. Def. Gates weighed the benefits and risks and deemed that the cost/benefit ratio is insufficient to bring back Pace, much to their chagrin.
I’m sure Sec. Def. Rumsfeld would make the same choice.
The same man who vetoed the Cut and Run supplemental is the same person who decided against renomination. He has calculated the cost/benefit of renomination and decided against it.
He knows whne to bet and when to fold. When he sees a great benefit, he’ll make a stand. If Pace had a chance and if the hearings lead to a restoraton of faith in the war, the media and DEMons would already be screaming murder as he “forces an incompetent lackey down America’s throat!”
Sadly, such is not the case. The victory wouldn’t even be Pyrhic (sp?), there would be no victory.
Under normal circumstances I’d think this sounds self-serving, but given the pathetic state of our political machine, I’m glad he said it. Right on, sir.
The man who vetoed the cut and run supplemental had a veto-proof majority before he did. He knew the Dems would fold because they didn’t have the votes. I don’t see valor there. It doesn’t even count as good poker playing if you’ve seen your opponents’ hands.
Right now your hero is spending what very little political capital he has left on a domestic policy initiative that upwards of 70% of the American people are vehemently against. He’s twisting arms, insulting opponents, waiving tax $$ around and promising who knows whom goodness knows what (dumping Pace?) to get his priority passed.
A little, just a little of that passion and effort could have been spent on keeping a good, solid JCS Chairman in place during wartime. But no, “wouldn’t be prudent” to tick off the Dems right now.
The war isn’t on Bush’s front burner these days. He’s on to other things. And for the troops with their backsides on the line, that’s a tragedy. Having been a troop with my backside on the line, I’m disgusted, and growing more so every day.
The war isn’t on Bush’s front burner these days. He’s on to other things. And for the troops with their backsides on the line, that’s a tragedy. Having been a troop with my backside on the line, I’m disgusted, and growing more so every day
Do you ever listen to what you say?
Rumsfeld should have been fired a year ago when the 172nd Stryker was pulled back into Iraq as they were strung out between Mosul and Alaska.
If you think that GWB didn’t have anything to do with Pace’s firing, I’ve got a bridge you may be interested in.
I AM SCREAMING LOUD ABOUT BUSH AND I VOTED FOR HIM TWICE. WHAT HE HAS DONE WITH PACE IS EGREGIOUS. BUSH HAS FAILED IN LEADERSHIP AND NO LONGER DESERVES REPUBLICAN SUPPORT. WHY SHOULD WE SUPPORT THE GUY WE PUT IN ONCE THE GOING GETS TOUGH WHEN HE WON’T SUPPORT THE GUY HE PUT IN WHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH?
As I explained, I didn't vote for Webb nor did I campaign for him after his Clinton embrace...still, I find him a decorated Marine who served his country admirably while "Macaca" was tossing interceptions at U.Va.
I see, people should just ignore those pesky facts that don’t fit the Bush hater’s dogmas.
What "pesky facts"? I must say, you really seem enamored with failed Sen. George Allen who, IMHO, did nothing remarkable with his term in the Senate...Since you like him so much, why don't you write him in as your presidential pick in 2008? Incidentally, a gun owner and a stalwart 2nd amendment advocate, I'm glad that Webb "carries". It not only sets him apart from his Democrat loonies, it could protect his life in D.C. And I cannot fathom why any so-called conservatives would object to gun ownership.
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.