| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Pace defends Rummy |
| 2006-04-12 |
| The top U.S. military officer on Tuesday defended Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld against three retired generals demanding his ouster, and denied that the United States invaded Iraq without sufficiently weighing its plan. Standing next to Rumsfeld at a Pentagon briefing, Marine Corps Gen. Pete Pace said critics could legitimately question the defense secretary's judgment but not his motives. "People can question my judgment or his (Rumsfeld's) judgment," Pace said. "But they should never question the dedication, the patriotism and the work ethic of Secretary Rumsfeld." Retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton and Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni have recently separately called for Rumsfeld to be replaced. This comes as opinion polls show eroding public support for the 3-year-old war in which about 2,360 U.S. troops have died. "I don't know how many generals there have been in the last five years that have served in the United States armed services -- hundreds and hundreds and hundreds," said Rumsfeld, whom critics have accused of bullying senior military officers and stifling dissent. "And there are several who have opinions, and there's nothing wrong with people having opinions. And I think one ought to expect that when you're involved in something that's controversial as certainly this war is," he said. Newbold, the military's top operations officer before the Iraq war, said he regretted not speaking up more forcefully against what he now regards as an unnecessary war and a diversion from "the real threat" posed by al Qaeda. In a Time magazine opinion piece on Sunday, Newbold encouraged officers still in the military to voice any doubts they have about the war. "My sincere view is that the commitment of our forces to this fight was done with a casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions -- or bury the results," Newbold wrote. Newbold said he went public with the private encouragement of some still in positions of military leadership. Pace, chairman of the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, questioned whether Newbold knew all the facts about the invasion plans, noting he retired in September 2002, six months before the invasion took place. "It's also important to go back and take a look, when you look at people talking: When did their personal knowledge end?" Pace said, noting that the war plan changed many times after Newbold's departure. Pace said the war plan was thoroughly vetted before the operation was launched. "We had discussions in the department, we had discussions in the National Security Council, we had discussions with the president. And they were extensive discussions. An awful lot of people around were not shy about giving their views," he said. Pace said when now-retired Central Command head Gen. Tommy Franks presented the final invasion plan "we were satisfied that he had a good, executable plan, and we so told the secretary of defense and the president of the United States." Rumsfeld said he was unaware that Newbold had publicly or privately questioned the war plan. Eaton, in charge of training the Iraqi military from 2003-2004, wrote in a New York Times opinion piece last month that Rumsfeld had put the Pentagon at the mercy of his ego. "In sum, he has shown himself incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically, and is far more than anyone else responsible for what has happened to our important mission in Iraq. Mr. Rumsfeld must step down," he wrote. Pace said he did not know whether Eaton ever voiced his concerns before leaving the military. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #19 Poor Clasing, he doesn't get out much and only sees the world in terms of Democrats v/s Republicans. Almost cute in its childish, naive, simplicity. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 23:59 |
| #18 You are still not getting it, Rummy is the boss, these generals didn't want to listen to him, they got fired now they are whining about it. McArthur was popular general too, but he pissed off the boss guess what got fired. |
| Posted by: djohn66 2006-04-12 23:30 |
| #17 Yeah, the republican ones are okay. |
| Posted by: Clasing Greremble8635 2006-04-12 23:15 |
| #16 I'm always skeptical of Generals who criticize after the fact. I'm not so sure they did everything to carry out the mission that they possibly could because they disagreed with the mission to begin with. The problem with McCellan was he was so afraid of losing and he believed the wildy inflated reports of Confederate strength that he couldn't possibly win. I think some of these ex-generals are like that. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2006-04-12 19:44 |
| #15 ok. And it was news when McClellan did it to. In fact it wasn't just news, it made the history books. McClellan's insubordination is credited with losing the opportunity to put a quick end to the war and resulting in many lost lives. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 17:47 |
| #14 My point is, genius, that in this circumstance and context it is news when a former combat general criticizes Rumsfeld, and one that served in Iraq no less. |
| Posted by: Thutle Ebbavish1322 2006-04-12 17:38 |
| #13 Didn't happen with the Vietnam-era generals. And they had a bit more reason to complain. I wonder why it's happening now. sooo your point is what? That you wonder? Hmmmm ..... I point my finger to my chin and ponder. Care to make a point or are just going to "wonder". |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 17:35 |
| #12 Oh and, forgot to mention, Batiste is obviously a Democrat, like McClellan was. So obviously, my original assertion stands. Not everyone in the armed services "gets it". |
| Posted by: Thutle Ebbavish1322 2006-04-12 17:35 |
| #11 you seem to think its breathless news that the Generals bitch about the decisions by the Sec Def. OOooh newsflash - not all decisions were popular or perfect. Didn't happen with the Vietnam-era generals. And they had a bit more reason to complain. I wonder why it's happening now. But, sure, 2b knows his stuff. At least, he knows much more than Batiste. |
| Posted by: Thutle Ebbavish1322 2006-04-12 17:29 |
| #10 Funny thing is, I wonder if history will view them like McClellan. If McClellan had done his job properly, the war would have been over quickly. But his personal beliefs got in the way and prevented him from achieving decisive victories at the beginning of the war which allowed the south a chance to organize and believe they could at the very least, win concessions by continuing to fight. The end result was that McClellan's wimpiness made the war last much, much longer than it needed to and resulted in many unnecessary deaths, all for the same end result. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 17:21 |
| #9 dj - yeah, they all thought they knew better too. If I were these guys, I'd wait a bit to see how the winds blow before I'd go spouting off about how much better things would have turned out if they'd only done it my way. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 17:13 |
| #8 ok...in the editing I left out "and above". Wasnt' gonna fix it, cause I figured TE wouldn't catch it anyway, but I just know someone is going to correct me. bah. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 17:02 |
| #7 Wasn't Lincoln throwing genrals out left and right, boy they sure bitched, nobody threw Lincoln out of office because of it. You don't have to like the boss but you better do what he sez. |
| Posted by: djohn66 2006-04-12 17:00 |
| #6 know lots of 07's do you TE? Just like everyone else they bitch about their bosses. The difference between me and you is that you seem to think its breathless news that the Generals bitch about the decisions by the Sec Def. OOooh newsflash - not all decisions were popular or perfect. I feel faint. I saw Zinny on CNN the other day and couldn't help thinking of McClellan. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 16:53 |
| #5 you nailed it john. Ya sure. Whatever floats your boat. What speaks volumes is when a former combat general, who served in Iraq, like Major General John Batiste, criticizes Rummy for not providing sound military planning. Ouch. But of course, Batiste is one of those who "doesn't get it", so he doesn't count. |
| Posted by: Thutle Ebbavish1322 2006-04-12 16:35 |
| #4 you nailed it john. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-12 13:20 |
| #3 Rummy changed the way the arm forces does business and it pissed people off, they need to get over it and if they don't like it they become Sec of Defense and change it. |
| Posted by: djohn66 2006-04-12 12:56 |
| #2 But I cant think of any serious critique that attacks Rummys patriotism. Hes called (rightly or wrongly) arrogant and incompetent, not unpatriotic. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-04-12 11:11 |
| #1 "People can question my judgment or his (Rumsfeld's) judgment," Pace said. "But they should never question the dedication, the patriotism and the work ethic of Secretary Rumsfeld." Excellent. Turning the liberal's "don't you DARE question my patriotism" mantra around on them. Let's see how they wriggle out of THAT one, then apply the method they use against their darlings. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2006-04-12 08:32 |