And how.
But still, it seems to miss a point...
Rumsfeld has been attacked for insisting that troop levels for the Iraq operation be kept low, supposedly out of ideology and contrary to the advice of the military. What I saw, however, was that Rumsfeld questioned standard military recommendations for "overwhelming force." He asked if such force was necessary for the mission.
There wasn't just one "Iraq operation"... Secretary Rumsfeld made the error that so many have done through history--he failed to recognize a change in conditions that required a change in response. If his generals were not realizing this, then they are also the problem.
In fact, that's one of the unaddressed problems our military has. As a product of the Clintonian 90s, we have a very politicized and managerial military that inhibits the proper flow of information and response along the chain of command. The frustration is felt by so many small-unit commanders, and it's a shame that Secretary Rumsfeld was unable to get beyond this and see the real needs in Iraq.
He was the right man for transforming our offensive and "conventional" armed forces, but not the right man for understanding the current phase of operations in Iraq.
Rummy was hired to restructure the military, like he had done the first time he was Sec. of Defense. For anyone to remain surprised by his decisions and conclusions it must mean that they were not paying attention when Bush first put him in the office, again. Did no one examine his record?
That is so true. He was the smartest man in town. And now we go from a great "Rummy" to an old re-tread dummy. So sad and so bad for this nation.
And when the room is full of "journalists," that's a terrible crime indeed.
Exactly. The DemocRats are so threatened by the competence of the Bush appointees, that their mission is to destroy them any way they can.
Sadly, I'm afraid Mr. Bolton is next on the hit list.
God Bless Donald Rumsfeld. He deserved better, and I am thankful he served this Country and it served it well!
bttt
<< Thank you for the post.
.... Iraq was invaded under the watchful eye of the embedded media (Who to the last American or subversive or traitor among them considered Secretary Rumsfeld) a rockstar. Some wanted him to be considered for the Presidency.
(Secretary Rumsfeld's) only crime was to be the smartest guy in the room. >>
Especially when only he and our erstwhile "Republican" president -- and/or Carl Rove) were the only ones there.
As was cut into steel by Secretary Rumsfeld's firing two weeks after that action might have been rationalized and justified as at least advancing the Republicans' election chances.
And was further reinforced by being chipped into granite as well by the nomination (coincidental with the awful prospect of his setting himself to adapting an amalgamation of the Baker Gang's, "Colonel" Murtha's and Charley Rangells' Iraq proposals) of Bush 41's failed CIA director!
At the time his Doctrine was promulgated, Mr Bush was likely headed for greatness. Instead of having his remains split up and well-deserved divided between the Republican Party's and History's garbage cans, which his feckless political and administrative actions have more recently reserved as his most likely destination!