Rumsfeld Rebuked By Retired Generals

[tw]

How incompetant is Rumsfeld? Years ago, the Republican Party newspaper, the National Review, called Rumsfeld incompetant. Meanwhile George Jr will say, "Your doing a heck of a job, Rummy". Gen Batiste is only the latest in a chorus of retired generals saying reams about incompetant top management - and we really know who they are talking about - why Rumsfeld is still there:

Rumsfeld Rebuked By Retired Generals
... Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who commanded the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq in 2004-2005 ... It is widely known there that he was offered a promotion to three-star rank to return to Iraq and be the No. 2 U.S. military officer there but he declined because he no longer wished to serve under Rumsfeld. ...
Batiste said he believes that the administration's handling of the Iraq war has violated fundamental military principles, such as unity of command and unity of effort. In other interviews, Batiste has said he thinks the violation of another military principle -- ensuring there are enough forces -- helped create the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal by putting too much responsibility on incompetent officers and undertrained troops.

Outright violations of well proven principles from 500 BC such as disbanding the army and police; incompetance that even violates Military Science 101. Notice again the repeated refraim that George Jr claims no one is saying - too few troops.

"We won't get fooled again," retired Marine Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, who held the key post of director of operations on the staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2000 to 2002, wrote in an essay in Time magazine this week. Listing a series of mistakes such as "McNamara-like micromanagement,"

... retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, wrote an opinion piece for the New York Times in which he called Rumsfeld "incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically." Eaton, who oversaw the training of Iraqi army troops in 2003-2004, said that "Mr. Rumsfeld must step down." ...

"The problem is that we've wasted three years" in Iraq, said Zinni, who was the chief of the U.S. Central Command, which oversees Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, in the late 1990s. He added that he "absolutely" thinks Rumsfeld should resign.

Zinni had predicted many problems that are now situation normal in Iraq - a situation that has only been getting worse as even some in the Cellar said otherwise.

Gen. Peter Pace, who is the first Marine to serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, attempted to tamp down the revolt of the retired generals. No officers were muzzled during the planning of the invasion of Iraq, he said.

But then do you remember how far down into the ranks Rumsfeld went to find replacement generals in 2002? Why do you think Zinni was removed? Rumsfeld had to recruit one and two star generals to top ranks because so many generals 'disagreed' with Rumsfeld - and ended up retiring. You tell me how many really were permitted to speak their minds when Rumsfeld's management is a most common complaint from retired military commanders.

Other retired generals said they think it is unlikely that the denunciations of Rumsfeld and his aides will cease. ... "A lot of them are hugely frustrated," in part because Rumsfeld gave the impression that "military advice was neither required nor desired" in the planning for the Iraq war, said retired Lt. Gen. Wallace Gregson, who until last year commanded Marine forces in the Pacific Theater. ...

Another retired officer, Army Maj. Gen. John Riggs, said he believes that his peer group is "a pretty closemouthed bunch" but that, even so, his sense is "everyone pretty much thinks Rumsfeld and the bunch around him should be cleared out."

Of course they are frustrated. Other sources cite Gen. Tommy Franks, who lead the Iraq invasion, is also quietly saying same criticism which is why the Current Joint Chief Chairman is said to reply, "Not once was Tom told, `No, don't do that. No, don't do this. No, you can't have that, ". Tommy Franks also describes how he breifed George Jr in detail before the "Mission Accomplished" war. Woodward described all that George Jr remembered from that detailed breifing - the sun bursts that Tommy Franks put on the charts.

First thing a civilian leadership must do is plan for the other 50% of a war - the peace settlement. This Military Science 101 concept posted here so many times previously. During the Kuwait liberation, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovitz, etc all were drinking champagne when they should have been issuing the conditions for Saddam's surrender. Schwarzkopf had to improvise because those Washington civilian leaders did not do their jobs.

In the "Mission Accomplished" war, those same people did nothing for seven months which is why the commander of 101st Airborne literally had to steal funds to get something started. Again incompetent George Jr administration somehow thought Iraq would magically flourish if all we did is defeat Saddam. And so looting continued everywhere: predictable. No serious attempt to restore basic services occurred for seven months - as even Tobias should be able to testify to - because Rumsfeld and his boss are incompetent. But again, these are now well documented historical facts.

The US currently has two options. 500,000 soldiers for the next year to restore order in Iraq; or an announcement of total withdrawl in 6 months - forcing Iraqis to actually try to run their country. The status quo is a no win solution. Another source - and they are coming like termite swarms - instead leaks administration plans for a 20 year war. Well at least they are planning for what current strategy - with way too few troops - will create. Ready yet to talk about competancy in the George Jr administration? Vietnam deja vue. Yes, administration plans call for 20 continuous years of war. Why do you think retired generals are doing what generals never do? 20 years.