Article

2007-03-01 Home Front: WoT

Top Army General Relieved of Command at Walter Reed

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Sherry 2007-03-01 14:28|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 ...Well, we pretty much knew that was coming. On the other hand, there's two sides to this: first, there was no real maintenance money authorized by Congress to keep WRMC up to speed - the facility is supposed to be CLOSED (by order of the BRAMC)by 2010. Accordingly, a lot of the outbuildings - exactly the ones the WaPo article was in - were in lousy shape, because what money there was was being allocated was going to the main facility. On the other hand, MGen Weightman could have begged, borrowed, reallocated or stolen every dime he could to get those facilities back up to speed, and had he been caught he could have dared the Army to court-martial him. Now, I mean no direspect for MGen Weightman - he probably felt he was doing his job as a doctor and administrator. But had he thought a little outside the box, he'd still have his corner office at WRMC.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-03-01 14:42|| 2007-03-01 14:42|| Front Page Top

#2 Aren't they moving/merging the facility with the Naval Hospital in Bethesda?

Posted by eLarson 2007-03-01 15:34|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2007-03-01 15:34|| Front Page Top

#3 Yes, but.

There will have to be a whole lotta construction happening at Bethesda Naval real soon if they plan to move even one patient from WR. Also about eleventy billion dollars worth of infrastructure upgrades, Wisconsin Avenue isn't really adequate for the increased traffic, sewres, water mains, power supply, etc. etc.

The local residents haven't started hollering about their property values yet, so I take that to mean no plans have been submitted to the zoning poobahs.

On the other hand, the WR campus carcass has already been carved up by the city and the developers, and no doubt they will be agitating soon to get all the patients o-u-t.

I'm not fond of this plan as I think it destroys redundancy that is critical in these perilous times. Putting all our wounded at BN makes it more likely that one dirty bomb could take out all of them plus all the doctors, technicians, radiologists and so on, plus all of our critical research facilties and personnel right across the street at NIH.

I don't doubt that WR is outdated, overcrowded, and not adequate for its current task, but I don't think the move to BN is the right choice.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-03-01 15:57|| 2007-03-01 15:57|| Front Page Top

#4 MGen Weightman could have begged, borrowed, reallocated or stolen every dime he could to get those facilities back up to speed, and had he been caught he could have dared the Army to court-martial him.

At one time that might have been possible. Since the creation of the Installation Management Agency, base commanders do NOT control monies for facilities construction, repair or management.

IMA was created in part because at some installations, commanders were cannibalizing housing funds for training etc. purposes to the point where housing and other facilities were in really crappy shape. IMA also realigned spending to try to make facilities roughly equal in quality across the various posts in a region.

With the expansion at BN, not much was allocated for Walter Reed.

Posted by occasional observer 2007-03-01 16:58|| 2007-03-01 16:58|| Front Page Top

#5 Wisconsin Avenue isn't really adequate for the increased traffic
I've, er, noticed.

On the plus side, Code Pink won't have anywhere to stand... at least not as I can see.

Posted by eLarson 2007-03-01 17:02|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2007-03-01 17:02|| Front Page Top

#6 This could just be considered a snapshot into the entire philosophy of command: In order to advance, you have to be successful; successful as used here = for some short period of time, and leave it to those that follow to pick up the pieces. Whether hospitals, aircraft maintenance, HUMVEE armor, if you, as the top dog, whine, you can bet you will be replaced by somebody that can play the game. but you are only in control to the limits of your checkbook; if you do not have the fiscal authorizations, there is not a lot you can do.
Having said that, I would question the lack of day-to-day cleanliness, or lack thereof as shown by the pictures that have been splashed around. But I will admit that this is a bit of armchair quarterbacking the General, and not knowing all the various parameters he had to contend with, he was probably painted into a pretty tight corner.

Posted by USN, Ret. 2007-03-01 17:41|| 2007-03-01 17:41|| Front Page Top

#7 Scapegoat, then. Which Peter will have to rob to pay this Paul, I wonder?

Posted by trailing wife 2007-03-01 17:45|| 2007-03-01 17:45|| Front Page Top

#8 Just my two cents but I think this is all a lot of BS. An example of the Big Lie, a typical Washington Post hatchet job. I've had the opportunity to observe Walter Reed and its operations for a number of years. I've never seen any dirt or mold or shoddy infrastructure or anything of the like. They're as good or better than any hospital around here as far as I know. They have the best Doctors, Nurses, and Equipment, therapy facilities,etc. All together a class operation. I don't know exactly where or what the problem was that they dug up, but if you look hard enough you'll probably find some crack in the works anywhere. Whatever it was it shouldn't detract from the excellent reputation Walter Reed deserves. It's a real shame they're making a scapegoat of the Commander there and degrading the reputation of this hospital and everyone associated with it; but that's what the Washington Post and its minions do best I guess.

Posted by Chereting Phins9544 2007-03-01 19:43|| 2007-03-01 19:43|| Front Page Top

#9 Good point. There may be some truth to the assertion that it's IMA's facility. If so, then fire the garrison commander too, dissolve IMA, and give the posts back to the commanders. It was a novel idea, but poorly executed and underfunded from the start.
As far as the comment "It's a real shame they're making a scapegoat of the Commander there..." I disagree. - when you fire junior officers and unit NCO's that's scapegoating. When you relieve commanders, that's accountability.

Posted by Fod">Fod 2007-03-01 22:13|| http://foreignobjectdamage.blogspot.com]">[http://foreignobjectdamage.blogspot.com] 2007-03-01 22:13|| Front Page Top

#10 fire the garrison commander too, dissolve IMA, and give the posts back to the commanders.

I know a couple 2- & 3-stars that will give a loud HOOAH to that. LOL

Posted by occasional observer 2007-03-01 22:59|| 2007-03-01 22:59|| Front Page Top

#11 And yes the WRMC garrison is under control of IMA.

Posted by occasional observer 2007-03-01 23:02|| 2007-03-01 23:02|| Front Page Top

#12 Duh, make that 'WRAMC'. Y'all knew what I meant ...

Posted by occasional observer 2007-03-01 23:03|| 2007-03-01 23:03|| Front Page Top

#13 Firing anyone because of someone else's failed responsibility is scapegoating, not accountability.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-03-01 23:11|| 2007-03-01 23:11|| Front Page Top

23:57 Shipman
23:53 JosephMendiola
23:48 JosephMendiola
23:46 RD
23:38 JosephMendiola
23:35 RD
23:30 Abu do you love
23:26 JosephMendiola
23:24 Thromoger Thrumble5163
23:20 Abu do you love
23:18 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:16 RD
23:13 RD
23:13 JosephMendiola
23:11 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:10 Thromoger Thrumble5163
23:07 JosephMendiola
23:05 Abu do you love
23:03 occasional observer
23:02 occasional observer
23:00 JosephMendiola
22:59 occasional observer
22:58 Frank G
22:57 RD