Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 04/14/2006 View Thu 04/13/2006 View Wed 04/12/2006 View Tue 04/11/2006 View Mon 04/10/2006 View Sun 04/09/2006 View Sat 04/08/2006
1
2006-04-14 Home Front: Politix
Batiste's call for Rummy's resignation puzzles aides
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 Dan Darling 2006-04-14 02:40|| || Front Page|| [11127 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Monday-morning-quarterbacking and sour grapes.

Maybe general Pace likes Rummy.

He encourages subordinates to push back? I bet that does intimidate some folks!
Posted by Bobby 2006-04-14 07:11||   2006-04-14 07:11|| Front Page Top

#2 Under Rumsfeld, Marines command Strategic Command (!) and hold the Chair of the Joint Staff.

A Special Ops guy was brought back FROM RETIREMENT, over the heads of serving regular generals, to be Chief of Staff of the Army.

In Fallujah, we used a joint ops structure in which marines reported to soldiers and v.v.

It's a revolutionary change for the Army and not one that some officers are comfortable with, it would appear.

Note that the Marines - in part because their smaller force size and expeditionary organization makes it possible - have pioneered the use of a lot of high tech in Iraq - for instance, the Raven mini-UAV for tactical recon. And in some places in Iraq, Marine style small wars doctrine has replaced Army doctrine with what some would say was greater success.

Note also the increased emphasis on Special Opns and the move to smaller units of deployment/action (from division to brigade). Again, a move away from the massive army force-on-force doctrine to a doctrine a lot closer to what the Marines do well.

Change isn't easy and revolutionaries aren't necessarily correct. But it would seem these changes have a lot to do with the discomfort of many old school Army leaders. I'll leave it to others to argue whether they or Rumsfeld are more right.
Posted by lotp 2006-04-14 07:43||   2006-04-14 07:43|| Front Page Top

#3 Good summary, lotp. And, i'd note that (at least) 1 of these 5 got "screwed" (in his mind) in being forced to retire. Wonder how many others will be writing "insider" books soon? If so, that could very well be the motive.
Posted by BA 2006-04-14 09:01||   2006-04-14 09:01|| Front Page Top

#4 lotp, did the transfer of primacy from the division to the brigade have any impact on the number of high level slots available?

Also don't forget sacking Crusader.

I predict Rumsfled will be the first Sec Def to serve two full terms. That ina an of itself says something about the old man.
Posted by Glaviper Slaimble4232 2006-04-14 09:50||   2006-04-14 09:50|| Front Page Top

#5 I assume all of these Generals attended West Point or Annapolis. As graduates, they were perfect gentlemen. They're not such gentlemen any more. That doesn't say much for 30 or 40 years in the service, does it ?
Posted by wxjames 2006-04-14 10:09||   2006-04-14 10:09|| Front Page Top

#6 The leader takes the arrows, particularly when instituting change into a tired, Cold War era military.

There will be many more who didn't have the balls to challenge Rummy while in service who will strike out against him in the media. Rummy's got big shoulders; Prez Bush knows the important role Rummy plays in history, so fuck the (not soon enough) retired generals.

Besides, retirement of the Old School brings opportunity for those capable of adapting to 21C demands.
Posted by Captain America 2006-04-14 12:47||   2006-04-14 12:47|| Front Page Top

#7 
"brown people Iraqis, frankly, in my experience, do not understand democracy. Nor do they understand their responsibility for a free society."
OK, he's officially announced he's a liberal.

Also a bigot. But I repeat myself. :-(
Posted by  Barbara Skolaut"> Barbara Skolaut  2006-04-14 12:51|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/page/15bk1/Home_Page.html]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/page/15bk1/Home_Page.html]  2006-04-14 12:51|| Front Page Top

#8 here's the meat of the story right here.

Five retired generals hardly constitute a groundswell among what the Pentagon estimates are 9,000 active and retired generals and admirals.

Yawn - non-story.
Posted by 2b 2006-04-14 14:06||   2006-04-14 14:06|| Front Page Top

#9 lotp, did the transfer of primacy from the division to the brigade have any impact on the number of high level slots available?

Not to my knowledge. However, it DID change the focus of a lot of battle decisionmaking, downwards an echelon.
Posted by lotp 2006-04-14 14:19||   2006-04-14 14:19|| Front Page Top

#10 Only Republican servicemen matter, it seems. Sad.
Posted by Glash Whuse7842 2006-04-14 16:47||   2006-04-14 16:47|| Front Page Top

#11 According to the news we've seen lately, only the opinions of the five negative liberals matter. I'm still waiting to hear from the other 8,995.

Posted by 2b 2006-04-14 17:12||   2006-04-14 17:12|| Front Page Top

#12 Only Republican servicemen matter, it seems. Sad.

The red states provide the overwhelming majority of US military personnel, while the ivy leaguers and west coast universities diss them.
Posted by Captain America 2006-04-14 17:25||   2006-04-14 17:25|| Front Page Top

#13 I'm still waiting to hear from the other 8,995.

They all must be Republicans I gather.

The red states provide the overwhelming majority of US military personnel,

Interesting. The majority of officers are probably Democrats. I'd like to see the breakdown actually, but they don't keep stats like this, afaik.
Posted by Elmiling Uloque1954 2006-04-14 18:11||   2006-04-14 18:11|| Front Page Top

#14 As graduates, they were perfect gentlemen. They're not such gentlemen any more.

Yes, combat experience changes a man. Also makes you second guess the dupes in Washington, especially when they fuck up like Rumsfeld. Another way to look at it, is that combat turns Republicans into Democrats. :-)
Posted by Thravirong Omolunter2927 2006-04-14 18:15||   2006-04-14 18:15|| Front Page Top

#15 Oh and, there's no converse. Democrats are turned into even bigger weenies. It's like a political red shift of sorts, except the shift is in the blue direction.
Posted by Elmating Omose9921 2006-04-14 18:19||   2006-04-14 18:19|| Front Page Top

#16 Change isn't easy and revolutionaries aren't necessarily correct.

Oh yeah, Rumsfeld a revolutionary. A regular Che Guevara. That's why Iraq and Afghanistan are such examples of success. Iraqi insurgents deserve more credit than Rummy for all the changes in the US armed forces.
Posted by Angoting Gromble3562 2006-04-14 18:26||   2006-04-14 18:26|| Front Page Top

#17 Anonymous postings from beef-witted idiots do not impress around here....run along.
Posted by Rex Mundi 2006-04-14 19:06||   2006-04-14 19:06|| Front Page Top

#18 How's this for beef-witted: 2008 can't come fast enough. It'll be a joy to see you whine.
Posted by Granwyth Hulatberi 2006-04-14 19:30||   2006-04-14 19:30|| Front Page Top

#19 Allright now, let's be nice.

To the recent anon poster with various names and the IP address of 85.195.123.22: we don't put up with trolling or taunting around here. If you have a point to make, make it. Differing opinions are fine, even strongly dissenting opinions. But trolls end up banned.

Steve White (AoS), moderator, Rantburg
Posted by Steve White">Steve White  2006-04-14 19:41||   2006-04-14 19:41|| Front Page Top

#20 Yep..that qualifies. Hint: your parents weren't evil. They were prophetic.
Posted by Rex Mundi 2006-04-14 19:41||   2006-04-14 19:41|| Front Page Top

#21 Well you have my apologies SW...y'all can catch me at the tip jar ;]
Posted by Rex Mundi 2006-04-14 19:45||   2006-04-14 19:45|| Front Page Top

#22 Why if Americans were just more like the Germans. Germans REALLY KNEW how to take of the primitives.

2008? That's the year muslims begin massive head removal in your shitty little country. Try not to scream like a little girl. It ruins the audio on the video.
Posted by ed 2006-04-14 20:02||   2006-04-14 20:02|| Front Page Top

#23 how to take care of the primitives.
Posted by ed 2006-04-14 20:02||   2006-04-14 20:02|| Front Page Top

#24 To the recent anon poster with various names and the IP address of 85.195.123.22: we don't put up with trolling or taunting around here.

So I take it Republican commenters can make whatever comments they like without opposition, because, as I'm sure you've noticed, all my "taunts" have been directed at statements made previously by others here, and I'm the one singled out as the troll.

If you have a point to make, make it.

Can I make my point through satire? Honest question.

But if you insist, here's my point: I've seen pretty much every regular at RB at one time or another exalt our service men and women. I've seen comments such as "they get it". Well it seems that's been a pretty thin veneer because the many comments that we see today clearly indicate that Democrat soldiers don't count. And there's a lot of them. Most of them critical of Rumsfeld and Bush. I know, it's hard to believe and it's even harder to accept...for Republicans.
Posted by Granwyth Hulatberi 2006-04-14 20:10||   2006-04-14 20:10|| Front Page Top

#25 Ok. Batiste is confusing. There are only 2 critical sentences by Batiste in the whole article.

1. He calls for more teamwork, not leadership. That's just a recipe for paralysis.

2. So does he want to kill them all or fence the muslims off so they can kill each other. Or does he want to withdraw and wait for the next mega-attack? If he has a plan, he should let the public know about it. People will follow a plan. They tune out general criticism.
Posted by ed 2006-04-14 20:12||   2006-04-14 20:12|| Front Page Top

#26 since active soldiers are not allowed to criticize the C-in-C or SecDef - I call Bullshit on your statements - wishful thinking. There are, no doubt, many many Democratic party voters in the ranks - I doubt they support the same party views as you
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-04-14 20:18||   2006-04-14 20:18|| Front Page Top

#27 I would imagine that the use of a smaller force overall would limit the number of general officers needed IN COMBAT. All Army officers know that combat is an essential ingredient in getting promoted. It seems the generals wanted a Vietnam-style deployment, with 500,000 troops and a corrseponding number of general officers. A lot of this may be nothing more than sour grapes.
Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot  2006-04-14 20:20|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]  2006-04-14 20:20|| Front Page Top

#28 OK Fritz, what are the valid points that Batiste is trying to make? What would you do you suddenly became the US Secretary of War?
Posted by ed 2006-04-14 20:20||   2006-04-14 20:20|| Front Page Top

#29 Secretary of War?

We have not had one of those since WW-II.
Posted by 3dc 2006-04-14 20:31||   2006-04-14 20:31|| Front Page Top

#30 It's what we need.
Posted by ed 2006-04-14 20:37||   2006-04-14 20:37|| Front Page Top

#31 Elmiling U - I'll make a deal with you. I won't discuss Celebrity Gossip (since I don't know anything about it) and you stick with what you know. Clearly you know absolutely NOTHING about the military and it shows. Go back to one of those chat sites where you can be the hero just by making really witty jokes along the lines that Bush looks like a Chimp and doesn't know how to read. That seems to be the height of humor and wit on the left these days.
Posted by 2b 2006-04-14 23:35||   2006-04-14 23:35|| Front Page Top

23:35 2b
23:25 CrazyFool
23:10 Ptah
23:01 jpal
22:58 BillH
22:52 Asymmetrical Triangulation
22:50 Chinter Flarong9283
22:22 JosephMendiola
22:16 Zhang Fei
22:15 JosephMendiola
22:01 JosephMendiola
21:55 JosephMendiola
21:47 JosephMendiola
21:38 JosephMendiola
21:35 JosephMendiola
21:26 john
21:23 ed
21:16 djohn66
21:09 Joel Richardson
21:07 Old Patriot
21:03 JosephMendiola
21:02 Old Patriot
20:52 john
20:47 JosephMendiola









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com