Posted on 11/09/2006 2:19:06 AM PST by John Carey
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, the icon of the U.S. war on Islamic terrorists, succumbed to mounting pressure to resign, allowing the Bush administration to begin examining a new course on the bogged-down Iraq war where the American death toll exceeds 2,800. Appearing with President Bush at the White House yesterday, Mr. Rumsfeld referred to his many critics on Iraq by paraphrasing a hero, Winston Churchill: "I have benefited greatly from criticism, and at no time have I suffered a lack thereof." He then talked of "this little understood, unfamiliar war," a conflict the Pentagon has dubbed "the long war" because of the time it will take to dismantle al Qaeda worldwide. "The first war of the 21st century is not well-known, it was not well-understood, it is complex for people to comprehend," he said. Mr. Bush, appearing the day after many Americans registered a protest vote against his Iraq policy, said, "As the secretary of defense, he has been dedicated to his mission, loyal to his president and devoted to the courageous men and women of our armed forces." He was flanked by his the defense secretary-designate, former CIA Director Robert M. Gates, who will take a fresh look at Iraq policy. White House press secretary Tony Snow told The Washington Times that Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld had been talking about future operations in Iraq for months, but he did not know who first raised the issue of the departure. "It wasn't like, 'come see the principal,' " Mr. Snow said, who noted Mr. Rumsfeld had offered twice to resign two years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Exactly!
Whatever you read in the Times doesn't impress me.
I've read it but out of respect for the British feet on the ground in Iraq I shall refrain from expressing my opinion of their military command.
You know Rumsfeld didn't implement Phase Z either.
That's the plan where we all run around like chickens with our heads cut of screaming "we're all going to die" until we did.
Military Times the Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times, and Marine Corps Times, November 4, 2006,:
It is one thing for the majority of Americans to think Rumsfeld has failed. But when the nation’s current military leaders start to break publicly with their defense secretary, then it is clear that he is losing control of the institution he ostensibly leads.... Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large. His strategy has failed, and his ability to lead is compromised. And although the blame for our failures in Iraq rests with the secretary, it will be the troops who bear its brunt.
Army Brig. Gen. Mark Scheid, an early planner of the war
Months before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld forbade military strategists from developing plans for securing a post-war Iraq, the retiring commander of the Army Transportation Corps said Thursday.
In fact, said Brig. Gen. Mark Scheid, Rumsfeld said “he would fire the next person” who talked about the need for a post-war plan.
As part of G2 I was surprised that there was going to be no phase 4 plan, which is why I went on FreeReepublic to talk about it
I suspect his failure to do that was the source of hate exhibited by the press and the whackjobs.
I do hope at some point in time we find out who's idea it was to run a PC war of national building rather than the more tried and true method of killing the other SOB.
So the best way to plan a military operation is on a suck it and see op.
Thank you its nice to know you value the troops who serve you
By the way, putting your faith in anything Scheid has to say is, well, not the best thing in the world to do. Scheid, along with guys like Wesley Clark, are great examples that idiots can get ahead in any organization, even the military.
Mark Scheid is part of a cabal of retired military who have it in for Rummy. They've been making the rounds of talk shows and press conferences for months now. Most of them have had their noses pushed out of joint by Rummy and the neocons, so they have an axe to grind. When they're quoted heavily by all the liberal "peace and justice" groups, they've lost all credibility around here.
You know you're right!
He should have re-planned everything until he got it right, perhaps even withdrawn our troops and started all over again when things didn't go the way we planned they would, instead of trying to stick with a plan that constantly changed to met the situation.
Maybe we should have waited until Saddam had died of natural causes first and then went in.{Sarcoff}
Lets discuss Iraq from a pure military angle.
What did you think of are immediate post Saddam policy, I don’t want what we should of done I want to discuss what did you think of what we did
The real question is, why wait until to the day after the election to accept a year-old offer to resign? I really doubt Rumsfeld "quit".
Exactly. This is a major blunder by Bush. Instead it looks like a sacrificial peace offering to the dems. Bush is slow on the draw -- borders, granny for supreme court, energy policy....
That does not mean they are wrong or right.
I don’t understand the lot of you.
We made no provision for phase 4 for fks sake I was there I saw it with my own eyes we made no sodding provision.
In the weeks following Saddams fall we should of initiated a stabilisation, pacification normalisation program to take advantage of the window of opportunity we did not there was no orders just confusion.
I feel that you are all defending Donald Rumsfeld not because you think he is right but because he is a Republican and its all to do with internal politics.
I don't know who's call that was. I can opine, based on what they say, that is probably wasn't Rumsfeld and Cheney that made that call.
It feels more like State Department handwringers got to the president on that one.
But again, I don't know any of the above for a fact other than to win you kill the enemy which we didn't do.
While we disagree on Rummy I'll pray for your safety and thank you for your service to your country.
That would be giving more ammunition to the liberidiots. I don't think the SECDEF would be that disloyal.
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.