Lawmakers Chide Rumsfeld for Auto-Signed Sympathy Letters

Reuters ^ | December 19, 2004 | Jackie Frank

[ejdrapes]

Lawmakers Chide Rumsfeld for Auto-Signed Sympathy Letters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld did not personally sign his name on letters of condolence to families of troops killed in Iraq but instead had it done by a machine, an action lawmakers said on Sunday showed insensitivity and was inappropriate for leadership during war.

Rumsfeld acknowledged that he had not signed the letters to family members of more than 1,000 U.S. troops killed in action and in a statement said he would now sign them in his own hand. "This issue of the secretary of Defense not personally signing the letters is just astounding to me and it does reflect how out of touch they are and how dismissive they are," Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel said on CBS's "Face the Nation."

"I have no confidence in Rumsfeld," Hagel added.

Rumsfeld has been under strong fire from Democrats and some Republicans recently for appearing to brush off concerns of soldiers about the lack of protective equipment in Iraq.

But President Bush's Chief of Staff Andrew Card emphasized White House support for Rumsfeld on Sunday.

He "is doing a spectacular job, and the president has great confidence in him," Card told ABC's "This Week" program.

Hagel noted that the families of the troops killed in Iraq have received letters signed by Bush.

"My goodness, that is the least we can expect the secretary of Defense ... If the president can find the time to do that why can't the secretary of Defense?" said Hagel, who has been a sharp critic of the way Bush has handled the Iraq war.

Democrat Jack Reed of Rhode Island said family members of those killed, "would like to think that at least for a moment the secretary thought about individually this young man or this young woman."

"Again it shows a lack of leadership style appropriate for the military ... This goes to his capability to continue to serve."

However, Republican Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, said that while "this is another area in which the secretary is being insensitive," the action did not "go to his leadership."

AUTOPEN RETIRED

"I wrote and approved the now more than 1,000 letters sent to family members and next of kin of each of the servicemen and women killed in military action," Rumsfeld said in a statement on Sunday."

"While I have not individually signed each one, in the interest of ensuring expeditious contact with grieving family members, I have directed that in the future I sign each letter."

Rumsfeld got himself into trouble earlier this month by appearing to brush off a soldier headed to Iraq who complained that military vehicles did not have sufficient armor and troops were having to piece together scraps of metal for extra protections.

Some prominent Republicans including Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain and former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott have questioned his performance, leading the White House to come to his defense on Friday with a statement that he was "doing a great job."

Among the critics, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar expressed concern on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that removing him from office could threaten national security.

"He should be held accountable and he should stay in office," the Indiana Republican senator said. "The fact is a change of leadership in the Pentagon at this point might be as disruptive as trying to get someone in Homeland Defense," he added.

Military families told the Stars and Stripes newspaper, which first carried the story, that the machine-signed letters reflected a lack of respect for the losses the families had suffered.

"To me it's an insult, not only as someone who lost a loved one but also as someone who served in Iraq," Army Spc. Ivan Medina whose brother Irving was killed in Iraq this summer, told the newspaper.

[ozzymandus]

Chuck Hagel is stupid even by Nebraska standards. If this is all they can think of to bitch at Rumsfeld about, they must have no real complaints.

[Rik0Shay]

Agreed. McNamara was a terrible Sec. Def. I still remember the Infamous "McNamara's 100,000"

[EGPWS]

I wonder who personally signed the 500 letters per day during WWII.

You wonder because during WWII it wasn't an issue.

Issues were better placed by the media and for good reason back then.

Reason is becoming a confusing word in the English language with the media anymore.

[SoKatt]

I disagree with you about it being time for Rumsfeld to go, but I agree with you 100% on the hand signing- vs-machine signing issue.

I know he's a busy guy, but I think that for a letter of condolence, the proper thing to do is to sign it personally. It wouldn't take up THAT much of his time, and it would be classier and more respectful than a stamped signature. IMHO, a form letter- especially in a situation where a family member has been wounded or killed- really is kind of tacky. :)

[asgardshill]

Bird dookie!

I cower in obesiance from your persuasive and unanswerable argument. I concede the debate and admit I am an idiot.

[cksharks]

Your trying to s--t against the wind pal the left wing nuts are out in force. I would like to here about some of their time in the service.

[patriciaruth]

I thought we were going to have several thousand killed in 2003 when we went to war with Iraq.

Rumsfeld may have thought that was possible, too. As I said, he may have set this policy at the beginning for this reason.

They tried to keep the hostage negotiations information from President Reagan, because they felt his emotional concern would interfere with his ability to make Presidential decisions about policy.

Is it a good idea for the Secretary of Defense to sign a half dozen letters of condolence a day, and become so emotional that he can't continue with some tough minded decisions that are necessary?

There are pluses and minuses here.

I believe Rummy cares. I'm sure he does. I don't think this is an "issue". I think this is a "talking point" for the MSM.

[EGPWS]

Wonderful post MOG!

[diabolicNYC]

While I think Hagel is a garbage senator and this could have been handled privately(especially by a republican senator), why wasn't he signing the letters personally? If I was the parent of a fallen soldier, I'd rather recieve no letter at all than a form letter from the Secretary of Defense.

[Non-Sequitur]

I agree that in the grand, cosmic scheme of things this is a complete non-issue. But in a situation like this where the letter is going to the family of a service member who has made the ultimate sacrifice and laid down their lives, if you aren't going to personally sign the letter then why bother sending it in the first place?

[cksharks]

Opnions are like those things we all are supposed to have, you have yours and I have mine.

[EGPWS]

Your trying to s--t against the wind pal the left wing nuts are out in force.

I think not my friend for the winds of late are against the mindset of the "nuts".

[sinkspur]

You know, I've reached the point where I wish Hagel would simply get defeated by somebody, anybody.

He's the most annoying Senator in Congress, Republican or Democrat.

[Jackknife]

yawn

[italianquaker]

the people have no faith in hagel so wheres the news

[patriciaruth]

There is another fact that may have gone into the decision to set this as policy at the beginning of the war.

On 9/11, Rumsfeld was outside the Pentagon, helping with the wounded, carrying IV fluid bags, etc.

He was so wrapped up in helping the wounded that he was distracted from coordinating our defense.

He may have decided not to make that error again.

[asgardshill]

I have no doubt that Donald Rumsfeld is a fine human being. But my assessment stands and I'll depart this thread by acknowledging that we must agree to disagree on this issue.

[Mad Mammoth]

He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

EXACTLY. Officialdom and their media whore-operatives are in an uproar (and they were in an uproar from the day Rumsfeld moved BACK into his SecDef office in 2001, as this is the SECOND time he has been called to serve our Nation) because they know Rumsfeld does not suffer fools gladly.

The fact is, as SecDef, Rumsfeld has worked hand-in-glove with the President to liberate Afghanistan and Iraq, and I'm sure those successful operations had something to do with Libya choosing to fold their WMD cards as well.

That spells SUCCESS my friends.

Now when Rumsfeld was ambushed by that trick question in Iraq, he spoke the truth: you don't go to war with the army you wish you had, you go to war with the army you have in place at the time.

Some go wah-wah-wah, and say "we should have WAITED!" and unfortunately for those Monday morning quarterbacks, time was the one thing that was NOT cooperating with us when it came to launching Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The bottom line here is that instead of going apesh*t about whether or not Rumsfeld used an autopen or signed a letter himself, or whether or not he appears to 'care' enough for the troops (and as a Navy veteran, (aviator & flight instructor) himself, you can bet the rent that oh yes, he definitely CARES.), these are all the babblings of people who are falling into the Clintonian trap of embracing style over substance.

I don't give a good damn about anything but Rumsfeld's PERFORMANCE as SecDef, and that has been an absolute tour de force.

As for all these baying hounds howling for Rumsfeld to resign, does that mean they endorse the default position of John Kerry, who demanded over and over during the campaign that Rumsfeld should resign?

You Rumsfeld-bashers should have voted for Kerry and maybe you might have gotten your wish.

As for me, I'm behind Rummy 100 percent and so should the rest of you.

[EGPWS]

Obviously, you are an idiot.

Obviously my FRiend you have chosen your words unwisely.

Lest you refrain from emotional outbursts and focus on intelligent discussion.

Regards,