| Author | Message | ||
     themp Supporter Username: Themp Post Number: 2792 Registered: 12-2001  |
 From left, Major General Paul D. Eaton, General Anthony C. Zinni, Lieutenant General Gregory Newbold, Major General John Batiste, Major General John Riggs and Major General Charles H. Swannack Jr. They think he should resign. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/14/washington/14military.html?_r=1&oref=slogin (gentleleman, start your swiftboats!) | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2877 Registered: 5-2004  |
They obviously hate America, and have a grudge against us for their retirements. They WANT us to fail. Communists, each and every one of them, the terrorist-loving bastards! | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1944 Registered: 3-2004 |
Add Genl Bernard Trainor, USMC (ret) to the list. Of course, all these guys are blatant cowards and they want to see the administration fail in its mission of spreading freedom and democracy in the middle east. As Rummy might say, they've been living in a fantasy land during their entire 30 year, decorated and respected careers in the military. It took Rummy to be secretary of defense to demonstrate how incompetent these guys are, in spite of their long military careers. | ||
| Joe Citizen Username: Gonets Post Number: 1209 Registered: 2-2004 |
Why do they hate freedom? | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2881 Registered: 5-2004 |
Well, they obviously couldn't get jobs in the private sector, so they went for public sector civil servant jobs. Suckling at the public teat. Leeches, every one of them. | ||
| notehead Supporter Username: Notehead Post Number: 3165 Registered: 5-2001  |
Buncha cowards, obviously looking for some kind of handout. They must miss the power they used to have, so now they're looking for the spotlight to replace it. They'll say anything for a few minutes of time on camera. What the heck would any of 'em know about how to run a war, anyway? Gimme a bunch of guys whose knowledge of the subject remains pristine, unsullied by actual experience. | ||
| Foj Citizen Username: Foger Post Number: 1150 Registered: 9-2004 |
YES the list grows larger. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 13647 Registered: 1-2003  |
It's only six people. Aren't there hundreds of thousands of people in the military? | ||
| Alleygater Citizen Username: Alleygater Post Number: 1743 Registered: 10-2004 |
Tom: How many of those people are at a high enough level to have actually known and worked with Rummy? How many of them were high enough up the ladder to see the big picture of all of the militaries problems. How many of them are high enough to have seen how the White House manipulate the military to cover up for their boondoggles? Probably not very many. These highly decorated senior level people have a unique perspective that the little man on the battlefield wouldn't see. Also Tom, these people are waiting until retirement to reveal their REAL opinions because (I presume) they are concerned about reprisals from the White House. Their most senior boss is the President. You have seen how the current administration handles people who don't say the right things. They have almost completely squelched proper reporting by newspapers. So you might see a larger list if more Senior military officers were retiring. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1948 Registered: 3-2004 |
There are hundreds of thousands in the military. Since RHIP and they serve under orders, it would create hell for them if they spoke out in ways that don't have DoD approval. It could lead to disciplinary actions, courts martial, dishonorable discharges. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 13651 Registered: 1-2003 |
Everyone here is joking, but you assume I'm not? | ||
| Alleygater Citizen Username: Alleygater Post Number: 1744 Registered: 10-2004 |
Damn, now I feel like an idiot posting all that. Tom, when did you suddently grow a sense of humor? You know, you are always the straight-man in every other thread. You usually don't deliver the punch lines. So now when you offer up a joke it looked like you were just being your usual straight-man self. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 13653 Registered: 1-2003 |
Tom, when did you suddently grow a sense of humor? Gee, thanks, I guess! No, I know what you mean. I usually aim to be the straight man. I actually think I have a knack for saying the line that leads the next person to the funny line. | ||
| Alleygater Citizen Username: Alleygater Post Number: 1745 Registered: 10-2004 |
I meant it as a gentle gibe.  | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 13655 Registered: 1-2003 |
It's quite all right.  | ||
| Foj Citizen Username: Foger Post Number: 1158 Registered: 9-2004 |
ANd 1000's of Generals. | ||
| bettyd Citizen Username: Badjtdso Post Number: 191 Registered: 12-2005 |
Rummy has been wrong about everything regarding Iraq. But he knows better than everyone else what to do. He is a perfect fit for this administration. The President, VP, Rummy, etc., all have the same quality: a deadly combination of arrogance and ignorance. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4969 Registered: 9-2001  |
...losers, and you can assume I'm not joking? It's true that speaking out in the military without being able to back up what you said could lead to disciplinary actions, court martial, and dishonorable discharges. This is why now that they're out you can take what they said with a grain of salt. Our country and our military is a lot better off without them! | ||
| Jim McLaughlin Citizen Username: Jmclaugh Post Number: 94 Registered: 3-2005 |
AJC, Read this article from the Department of Defense website about Paul Eaton. Is our country and military better off without him? I wonder what his two sons who are serving in Iraq think about their father. http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/jun2004/a061404e.html | ||
| Jim McLaughlin Citizen Username: Jmclaugh Post Number: 95 Registered: 3-2005 |
AJC, From the USMC website: General Zinni's decorations include: the Defense Distinguished Service Medal; the Defense Superior Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters; the Bronze Star Medal with Combat "V" and gold star in lieu of a second award; the Purple Heart; the Meritorious Service Medal with gold star in lieu of a second award; the Navy Commendation Medal with Combat "V" and gold star in lieu of a second award; Navy Achievement Medal with gold star in lieu of a second award; the Combat Action Ribbon; the Vietnamese Honor Medal; the French National Order of Merit; and the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic. Are we better off without him? | ||
| Jim McLaughlin Citizen Username: Jmclaugh Post Number: 96 Registered: 3-2005 |
AJC Are we better off without this loser too? From the USMC website: At the time of his retirement, Lieutenant General Gregory S. Newbold served as the Director for Operations, The Joint Staff. He assumed his assignment on October 10, 2000. Lieutenant General Newbold is the son of a career U.S. Air Force Officer. After his commissioning as a second lieutenant in 1970 he attended The Basic School in Quantico, VA, where he was designated an infantry officer.Lieutenant General Newbold's assignments have included Fleet Marine Force tours in the 1st, 2d, and 3d Marine Divisions, with the 4th Marine Expeditionary Brigade, and with I Marine Expeditionary Force. He has commanded infantry units at the platoon, company, and battalion level, and also served at different times as executive officer, operations officer, and logistics officer in a variety of operational units. While Lieutenant General Newbold commanded the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, this force was in the vanguard of the U.S. commitment for Operation RESTORE HOPE in Somalia. Prior to reporting to his current assignment, he served as Commanding General, First Marine Division. Lieutenant General Newbold has served tours outside the Fleet Marine Force as tactics instructor at The Basic School, officer assignment officer at Headquarters Marine Corps, Warfare Policy Planner on the Joint Staff, Military Assistant to the Secretary of the Navy, Head of the Enlisted Assignment Branch at Headquarters Marine Corps, and as the Director, Manpower Plans and Policy Division, Headquarters Marine Corps, Washington, DC. His professional military education has included attendance at Amphibious Warfare School, the Marine Corps Command and Staff College, and the National War College. Lieutenant General Newbold's personal awards include the Legion of Merit, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal, Navy Commendation Medal, Joint Commendation Medal, Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 358 Registered: 1-2006 |
Any combat experience reported? jd | ||
| Jim McLaughlin Citizen Username: Jmclaugh Post Number: 97 Registered: 3-2005 |
jd The "V" attached to any medal is awarded in recognition of valorous act performed during direct combat with an enemy force. The award must also be personally recommended by a superior and is not an automatic decoration or upgrade. | ||
| Southorangemom Citizen Username: Southorangemom Post Number: 317 Registered: 6-2003 |
gee, anyone know where Rummy served? other than as a lackey of the Bushes? SouthOrangeMom | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4222 Registered: 12-2001  |
I'm with AJC on this one. We need less thinking and more following of orders if we are to prevail in Iraq. A little more "Ja wohl, Herr Minister von Rumsfeld" and a little less second guessing of the mission is what we need. | ||
| Foj Citizen Username: Foger Post Number: 1161 Registered: 9-2004 |
SouthOrangeMom: Rummy was a pilot in the Air Force. IIRC the only one of the Cabal to serve, for real. | ||
| Duncan Supporter Username: Duncanrogers Post Number: 6199 Registered: 12-2001  |
AJC...my brother, a Captain in the Navy, had dinner in a swanky D.C. restaurant a while back and had to be extremely careful what he said as Rummey was dining at the next table. Even his opinion (which cannot be backed by fact, i.e. I don't think the SOD is doing a very good job) would have cost him his rank and pension. My brother serves at the pleasure of the president. And he dislikes both the POTUS and SOD. Do you really feel that his disapproval, on a personal level, should be grounds for the actions you list above? | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1953 Registered: 3-2004 |
AJC's posting is confused, but since we are in Passover, we can paraphrase one of the four questions and ask: How is that posting different from any others he keys? Officers don't have the opportunity to "back up" their opinions about their civilian boss because while on active duty, especially during wartime, to voice those opinions is to risk disciplinary action and certain retribution. I'm glad to see, on the other hand, that AJC is so cocksure that we don't need officers of the caliber of Zinni, Newbold, Swannack, Baptiste, et al. because the big SoD can handle the war himself. Rummy was a Naval aviator and is the sole member of the incumbent's team to have done some active service (from 1954 to 1957). He served with gallantry during the great Pizza vs Hamburger Wars at Pensacola Naval Air Base. Since that tour of duty, he has twice served as a SoD, so you could say that for most of his career, he has been in the Chairborne. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4971 Registered: 9-2001 |
"And commanders are responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen in their units. The good and the bad,” Eaton said." Dear JM and others, With all due respect to each of you engaged in this difficult debate, we have all heard this at one time or another and it's never been truer than it is today; "Now tell me what you've done for me lately!" All these officers have done great things in the past that in my mind should never be taken away from them. However, they will probably be most remembered for what they've done lately. It's regrettable at times, but professional soldiers know full well that honorable service in the military is mostly about taking orders, in others words it’s to do or die. For those of us who understand the basics of the chain of command, we know very well what our responsibilities are and how we must go about getting them done. What these former officers are doing to undermine our Commander and Chief is inexcusable. Anyone with any knowledge of government and the military knows that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld serves at the pleasure of our President, and the President has made it very clear that he fully supports the difficult job his Secretary continues to do, year in and year out. It’s also common knowledge and has been confirmed repeatedly that both the President and Secretary Rumsfeld rely heavily on the input from their commanders in the field. This includes the numbers of troops and the equipment needed to perform their military assignments. In his own words Eaton said, "And commanders are responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen in their units, the good and the bad.” For these officers to cop out now, after all their years of honorable service to our country is a disgrace. If one of these men was my father, I’d still love him and respect his past service to our country, but I’d be embarrassed for his bad judgment in how he is handling himself at this time. Shame on these men for criticizing the job being done! The time for any of these men to make a difference in how the war is going was when they were on the front lines and clearly had the responsibilities, and the attention and respect of their superiors. The United States and our military have a very difficult job to do in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the rest of the world if we want to see Democracy and the respect for religious freedom and what we understand to be basic human rights prevail over the present circumstances. Success will require all Americans to make great sacrifices, some even with our lives. Those among us who want reach these goals through peaceable means need to win that right at the ballot box by proving to the rest of us that our adversaries will respond in kind. Given history, this seems highly unlikely… With all of Iran’s on going threatening rhetoric, saber rattling, and their financial and moral support for a number of different terrorist groups, who among us feels that their Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Programs are not a threat to world peace? I’m afraid reaching a diplomatic solution at this point in time is highly unlikely… The world community has recently agreed that allowing Iran to acquire nukes is unacceptable; the problem again is whether or not they have the guts to do anything about it. IMHO, a retaliatory response to our adversaries is totally unacceptable. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2888 Registered: 5-2004 |
Can I have some of what you're smoking? I believe it was Zinni who specifically told the SecDef that he needed many more troops. He was forced to resign because of it. Which Commander told him we would be greeted with flowers and hailed as liberators? However Americans outside the military and their families are NOT making sacrifices, nor are they being asked to. Tax cuts? Are you kidding me? How is that asking people to sacrifice? How, may I ask, are YOU sacrificing? Are you out of your mind? Cop out? They are speaking their minds now that they are able to and are not risking their careers. Are you saying they should have ended their careers? Perhaps they should have. But that was the cop out, not speaking out now. They never had the "attention and respect of their superiors" when it came to their opinions about how to prosecute the war. As for "[t]hose among us who want reach these goals through peaceable means," I thought our President made it abundantly clear that he wanted to solve these issues through peaceful means and diplomacy. Are you saying he should leave office? I am confused - who is saying they do not want to "reach these goals through peaceable means"? I mean, I know Liberals call Bush a warmonger sometimes, but this is the first time I've heard a staunch conservative Republican do so proudly. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2889 Registered: 5-2004 |
And what does Iran have to do with any of these military leaders' comments? | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4973 Registered: 9-2001 |
"And what does Iran have to do with any of these military leaders' comments?" Everything Rastro, absolutely everything!!! I suggest that you think about what you asked a little harder… As for your question, you must be out of your mind pal! Their comments are nothing but one big stinking cop out... They are speaking their minds now because they didn't have the guts to speak out and take a stand for their vision for America when they were in a position to do something about it... You want us to believe that officers at their level don’t have a say in how the war is going or should go? Forget about it, of course they have a say; it’s just not the last word!!! Thank God these cry babies are out of the military. BTW, I don't buy it that they never had the attention of their superiors, but you may be right that they didn't get the respect of their opinions! So is that good reason to bad mouth their leadership now? No! Anything that they have to say after the fact is simply self-serving and, IMHO, weak as a fart!!! One more thing, I believe you're confused about what I said about for those among us who want to reach these goals through peaceable means... I totally support our President, the war effort and Rumsfeld, and I am for the most part a conservative Republican. So please re-read what I wrote with that in mind... | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4224 Registered: 12-2001 |
"They are speaking their minds now because they didn't have the guts to speak out and take a stand for their vision for America when they were in a position to do something about it... " Actually, when they were in uniform, they could not publicly comment on the conduct of the war unless testifying before Congress. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4975 Registered: 9-2001 |
... Tjohn, I don't know about you, but I watch C-Span. FWIW, I just don't understand how anyone can really believe these "self-serving" men have our nation or the military's best interests at stake. Their public criticism regarding the way the war is, or has been run, is totally inappropriate and counter productive to our troops still serving in the war zones and elsewhere around the world. It’s a damn disgrace! Generals my •••!!! These so called military men carry the honor of their titles with them for the rest of their lives. They can command public attention because of their titles. However, with this honor comes the responsibility and respect of using that title, and for the chain of command, no different than if they were still on active duty. The world, and importantly our declared enemies are watching and listening to these men who are supposed to be our nation’s professional career military officers. If they are so inclined to speak out against their superiors, let them first publicly renounce their titles and all other privileges given to them before they do. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4225 Registered: 12-2001 |
I assume these guys are not showboating and have serious concerns. Let them speak. As BobK pointed out, it is unusual for retired officers to speak out like this. I don't think our enemies are paying much attention. Any student of American history knows that we tire of wars quickly and that is all the insurgents and terrorists need to know. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1954 Registered: 3-2004 |
Tjohn: So we tired of WWII after 4 years (as long as it took, but we had plans). We tired of Korea after 3. We tired of Vietnam after more than 10 years of presence there (I believe that the first real contingent of MAC advisors went there in 1965 but military assistance to the Republic of South Vietnam started under Eisenhower after the fall of Dien Bien Phu). Yes, we sure do tire of wars quickly. This from AJC: "With all of Iran’s on going threatening rhetoric, saber rattling, and their financial and moral support for a number of different terrorist groups, who among us feels that their Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Programs are not a threat to world peace?" This is sad, and speaks volumes about the focus, effectiveness and ability of the current administration. What is true is that Iran has nuclear programs going on, probably with information, technology, and secrets that they bought from our ally Pakistan's chief nuclear researcher. While we don't like what Iran is doing, we took no steps to punish Pakistan for the sale of secrets. And while we disliked Pakistan's selling of nuclear technology secrets, our president came back from India pumped full of plans to sell our nuclear technology to that country. But India has been embroiled in border disputes, battles, saber-rattling, and exchanging nuclear threats with its neighbor, Pakistan (you know, the same one I just discussed above, which has sold nuclear secrets to god knows whom). In addition, we appear to have dropped the ball on North Korea, which seems to have a more advanced standing than Iran when it comes to nuclear missile delivery capabilities. Why? Because the incumbents in the WH have no real focus. They're busy putting out an Iraq fire that they started and which has gotten out of control. In the meantime, other fires have started, which we could have avoided, and the WH has no contingency plans for them. So they will burn while all we can do is threaten to sound the fire alarm. Sorry for all the mixed metaphors above. They're still better than the mixed up attempts to deal with global issues in this administration. When I think of this administration, I can't help but think of a juggler with too many plates in the air who all of a sudden gets a wicked jock itch. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 13672 Registered: 1-2003 |
AJC, I don't follow. One can't speak out while serving in the military. That is the rule. And according to you, when one leaves, we have to take what he says with a grain of salt because he has left. So, when can we take someone seriously? Please help me understand. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 4742 Registered: 5-2001 |
these men shouldn't have to make a choice between renouncing their titles and renouncing their citizenship. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1957 Registered: 3-2004 |
AJC would like us to take seriously only those whose actions he approves of and whose opinions agree with his. That makes for a strange America, more like a 1960's Communist East Bloc state. IMHO. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4980 Registered: 9-2001 |
...later guys, I have some Easter stuff to do with the kids. |
