I believe it's when the Fonz jumped over a shark while water skiing.
Posted on 11/21/2006 8:30:44 AM PST by MNJohnnie
Rumsfeld
By Douglas Feit Sunday, November 19, 2006
Much of what you know about Donald Rumsfeld is wrong.
I know, because I worked intimately with him for four years, from the summer of 2001 until I left the Pentagon in August 2005.
Through countless meetings and private conversations, I came to learn his traits, frame of mind and principles -- characteristics wholly at odds with the standard public depiction of Rumsfeld, particularly now that he has stepped down after a long, turbulent tenure as defense secretary, a casualty of our toxic political climate.
I want to set the record straight: Don Rumsfeld is not an ideologue. He did not refuse to have his views challenged. He did not ignore the advice of his military advisers. And he did not push single-mindedly for war in Iraq. He was motivated to serve the national interest by transforming the military, though it irritated people throughout the Pentagon.
Rumsfeld's drive to modernize created a revealing contrast between his Pentagon and the State Department -- where Colin Powell was highly popular among the staff. After four years of Powell's tenure at State, the organization chart there would hardly tip anyone off that 9/11 had occurred -- or even that the Cold War was over.
Rumsfeld is a bundle of paradoxes, like a fascinating character in a work of epic literature. And as my high school teachers drummed into my head, the best literature reveals that humans are complex. They are not the all-good or all-bad, all-brilliant or all-dumb figures that inhabit trashy novels and news stories. Fine literature teaches us the difference between appearance and reality.
Because of his complexity, Rumsfeld often is misread. His politics are deeply conservative but he was radical in his drive to force change in every area he oversaw. He is strong-willed and hard-driving but he built his defense strategies and Quadrennial Defense Reviews on calls for intellectual humility.
Those of us in his inner circle heard him say over and over again: Our intelligence, in all senses of the term, is limited. We cannot predict the future. We must continually question our preconceptions and theories. If events contradict them, don't suppress the bad news; rather, change your preconceptions and theories.
If an ideologue is someone to whom the facts don't matter, then Rumsfeld is the opposite of an ideologue. He insists that briefings for him be full of facts, thoughtfully organized and rigorously sourced. He demands that facts at odds with his key policy assumptions be brought to his attention immediately. "Bad news never gets better with time," he says, and berates any subordinate who fails to rush forward to him with such news. He does not suppress bad news; he acts on it.
Rumsfeld's drive to overhaul the Pentagon -- to drop outdated practices, programs and ideas -- antagonized many senior military officers and civilian officials in the department. He pushed for doing more with less. He pushed for reorganizing offices and relationships to adapt to a changing world. After 9/11, he created the Northern Command (the first combatant command that included the U.S. homeland among its areas of responsibility), a new undersecretary job for intelligence and a new assistant secretary job for homeland defense.
Seeking to improve civil-military cooperation, Rumsfeld devised new institutions for the Pentagon's top civilian and military officials to work face to face on strategic matters and new venues for all of them to gather a few times a year with the combatant commanders. He also conceived and pushed through a thorough revision of how U.S. military forces are based, store equipment, move and train with partners around the world -- something that was never done before in U.S. history.
On Iraq, Rumsfeld helped President Bush analyze the dangers posed by Saddam Hussein's regime. Given Saddam's history -- starting wars; using chemical weapons against foreign and domestic enemies; and training, financing and otherwise supporting various terrorists -- Rumsfeld helped make the case that leaving him in power entailed significant risks.
But in October 2002, Rumsfeld also wrote a list of the risks involved in removing Saddam from power. (I called the list his "parade of horribles" memo.) He reviewed it in detail with the president and the National Security Council. Rumsfeld's warnings about the dangers of war -- including the perils of a post-Saddam power vacuum -- were more comprehensive than anything I saw from the CIA, State or elsewhere. Rumsfeld continually reminded the president that he had no risk-free option for dealing with the dangers Saddam posed.
Historians will sort out whether Rumsfeld was too pushy with his military, or not pushy enough; whether he micromanaged Ambassador L. Paul Bremer and the Coalition Provisional Authority, or gave them too much slack. I know more about these issues than most people, yet I don't have all the information for a full analysis. I do know, however, that the common view of Rumsfeld as a close-minded man, ideologically wedded to the virtues of a small force, is wrong.
Rumsfeld had to resign, I suppose, because our bitter and noxious political debate of recent years has turned him into a symbol. His effectiveness was damaged. For many in Congress and the public, the Rumsfeld caricature dominated their view of the Iraq war and the administration's ability to prosecute it successfully. Even if nominee Robert Gates pursues essentially the same strategies, he may garner more public confidence.
What Rumsfeld believed, said and did differs from the caricature. The public picture of him today is drawn from news accounts reflecting the views of people who disapproved of his policies or disliked him. Rumsfeld, after all, can be brutally demanding and tough.
But I believe history will be more appreciative of him than the first draft has been. What will last is serious history, which, like serious literature, can distinguish appearance from reality.
Douglas J. Feith, a professor at Georgetown University, served as undersecretary of defense for policy from 2001 to 2005.
Kofi please go to hell.
And raising taxes is a Democrat Party speciality.
I believe it's when the Fonz jumped over a shark while water skiing.
Some years ago Bo was on the cover of the New York Times Magazine as part of the up and coming conservative voices in America.
Including a female one. I believe Rush called her Maria Snerdley.
We caught the problem with the contractor in time.
What tipped us off is that he wouldn't let us place
our house where we wanted to. Basically, thought
we were stupid and would do whatever he wanted. He
took a few trees down and left the carcasses.
We have been praying that God would be in control
of this and He is. More for which to be thankful.
Because of the dogs, Hubby and I are orphans this
Thanksgiving. Ordering turkey dinner from Albertsons
because I like Patricia Heaton. LOL!
Just meant that MSNBC has NO redeeming voice at all. Not a one.
Just meant that MSNBC has NO redeeming voice at all. Not a one.
I've had the same reaction to other 70s TV series that I enjoyed at the time (when I was just a youngster) but now in re-runs I can see that many were just vehicles for liberal propaganda. "All in the Family" is one of the foremost examples.
Me too. I thought there must be something wrong with me. The show, and Jerry Seinfeld himself, bore me!!
I love All In The Family
Another loser. The media never sees reverse racism.
After you explain how you're going to solve the problem of your "peacekeepers" assaulting, raping, and robbing the people they're supposed to be protecting.
Actually I doubt Kofi seen any problem with the peacekeepers' behavior.
Jumping the shark is a metaphor used by television critics since the 1990s. The phrase, popularized by Jon Hein on his web site www.jumptheshark.com, is used to describe the moment when a television show or similar episodic medium is in retrospect judged to have passed its "peak" and shows a noticeable decline in quality. Hein also uses the "jumping the shark" concept to describe other areas of pop culture, such as music and celebrities, for whom a drastic change was the beginning of the end.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jump_the_shark
I'm surprised it isn't in the FR lexicon. Maybe it is assumed to be too ubiquitous for documentation.
I know that most people I run into who are under age 25 know what jumping the shark is even though they weren't alive when the first shark jump occured.
Thanks
I believe Snerdly is a made up name, but a real person(s).
Sorry... you are right. I was thinking of the "South Park" parody of it where he was on his motorcycle and got eaten by the shark in mid-air.
You are right about that. CNN Main and CNN International are jsut as bad though. THey are making a new stab for independence at CNN Headlines...
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.