Replies

I have been in and out today so someone may have already mentioned the huge contradiction from the military types who were in Iraq and are now complaining about "the plan". These people worked "the plan". Some for more than a year. Now are they trying to tell us they willingly worked a plan they thought put the lives of men and women entrusted to them in greater danger than if there had been a "better plan"? If that is the case, where are the apologies to the parents and wives and children of the men and women they willing sent into battle with a bad plan?

If there were issues, certainly these would have been put into a memorandum. That is the military way. So where are the copies? These retired types are under no obligation to keep these memos to themselves. I want proof. These Generals are married to chain of command and protocol. There would be memos. I want to see copies. But you know what? They don't exist, because these people are liars, period.

Tommy Franks was on with Chrissy Matthews tonight...and told Chrissy that some of these generals had been in meetings with he and Rummy, and had every chance to complain back then...and never did.

I've been struggling with trying to synthesize this argument all this week. I think you've nailed it.

If these folks (who were in uniform till recently) have these complaints now, were they lying when they supported the policy? The "I was under orders and couldn't say anything" crap went out the window in 1946. Do they understand what honor is? Do they even know the name Billie Mitchell?

I've found histories of most of "the six" but I'm still working on a couple of them. They seem to be all Clinton appointed political Komisars, not folks who came up through the combat arm. Further they seem to be folks who object to Rummy's transformation from a military designed to fight the Soviet Union in the Fulda gap to a military built for WOT and special ops.

In short they're defending fiefdoms, not the Republic or the Constitution.

We need to identify and recruit folks who have seen the elephant and can bring their own bona fides to this argument (first to tell me if I'm WAY OFF BASE) so that we have a rational and persuasive case to put before the world.

I think you've framed the question and the opening arguments extremely well.

The Generals are playing politics. They are Cold War Dinosaurs. Part of the dead weight Rummy had to shift to drag the Pentagon into the 21st Century. These guys are simply getting payback. I mean, a former Major General of Infantry goes on the Today Show and complains because Rummy "Was Abusive"??? That a PR crafted complaint, not serious commentary. Also, not one idea what we should do different. Finally, not one of these guys is a SOF or Counter Insurgency guy.

I am embarrassed for this guy. I am sure there are people who worked for these guys who thought "What an @$@%@#$%" some times too.

Gee sorry Rummy had to be tough to get some of these guys to get to quit plotting how to stop the Sovs from running the Fulda Gap and start thinking about the 21st Century.