An expanding group of influential former military officers is calling for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's resignation in a public rebellion that has become a significant challenge to the Pentagon's civilian leadership. The uproar is significant because for the first time the criticism of Mr. Rumsfeld is coming from some recently retired generals who were involved in planning or execution of Iraq policy. Though their critiques differ in some respects, a common thread is that Mr. Rumsfeld's assertive style has angered many in the uniformed services as he has sought to establish more clear-cut civilian control over the Pentagon and at times involved himself in the details of war-planning more than his predecessors. The outcry against Mr. Rumsfeld also appears to be part of a coalescing of concerns among military officers that, three years into the Iraq war, the effort is taking a mounting toll on the armed forces, with little sign that the American troops will be able to withdraw in large numbers anytime soon. Today, Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., who led troops on the ground in Iraq as recently as 2004 as the commander of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division, became the fifth retired senior general in recent days to issue a public call for Mr. Rumsfeld's ouster. "We need to continue to fight the global war on terror and keep it off our shores," General Swannack said in an interview. "But I do not believe Secretary Rumsfeld is the right person to fight that war based on his absolute failures in managing the war against Saddam in Iraq." A second former Army commander in Iraq, Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who led the 1st Infantry Division, publicly broke ranks with Mr. Rumsfeld on Wednesday. In recent weeks, Gen. Anthony C. Zinni and Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, who both retired from the Marines, and Maj. Gen. Paul D. Eaton, who retired from the Army, have also spoken against Mr. Rumsfeld. Several former generals involved said that while they were unaware of any an organized effort to bring down Mr. Rumsfeld, other officers critical of Mr. Rumsfeld were exchanging e-mail messages and telephone calls with one another, weighing the pros and cons of going public. White House officials today voiced firm support of Mr. Rumsfeld and attributed the criticism to tensions inflamed by the debate over the war in Iraq. "The president believes Secretary Rumsfeld is doing a very fine job during a challenging period in our nation's history," the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, told reporters. Pentagon officials, while acknowledging that Mr. Rumsfeld's forceful style has sometimes ruffled his military subordinates, played down the idea that he was overriding the advice of his military commanders or ignoring their views. Lawrence Di Rita, a top aide to Mr. Rumsfeld, said the defense secretary's interaction with military commanders has "been frequent." "It's been intense," he said, "but always there's been ample opportunity for military judgment to be applied against the polices of the United States." Some retired officers, however, said they believed the momentum was turning against Mr. Rumsfeld. "Are the flood gates opening?" one retired Army officer asked. "The tide is changing and folks are seeing the end of this administration." No officers on active duty have joined the call for Mr. Rumsfeld's resignation. In interviews, some currently serving officers expressed discomfort with the apparent campaign against Mr. Rumsfeld, which has been spearheaded by, among others, General Zinni, who headed the United States Central Command in the late 1990's. Some of the currently serving officers said they feared the debate risked politicizing the military and undercutting its professional ethos. Some say privately that they disagree with aspects of the Bush administration's handling of the war. But many currently serving officers, regardless of their views, say that respect for civilian control of the military requires that they air differences of opinion in private and stay silent in public. "I support my secretary of defense," Lt. General John Vines said today when questioned about the calls for Mr. Rumsfeld to step down. "If I publicly disagree with my civilian leadership, I think I've got to resign. My advice should be private." http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/13/w...&ex=1145592000&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print ----------------------------- Glad to see more people standing up and speaking out.
I think that Rumsfeldt have done a great job with Iraq, especially in the first two weeks of the war when the coalition successfully defeated Saddams regime without suffering any significant casualties. Still after two 3 years of constant guerilla war, the death toll havn't passed 100.000, nor have it passed 10.000 or not even the particulary low 5.000 which is extremly good. I think it's going to the guinuess record book for the most effective largescale war ever. Remember, Russia loosed more than 40.000 troops in 1994 when they went to Chechnya and that was just after some months. But the population of Chechnya was 20 times less than in Iraq. To summarize the best and probably the most effective largescalewar war in the history made by one of the most successfull presidents to together with the brave defense secretary Rumsfeldt, I would like to use the word: excellent.
Latehorn, I believe you about russia losing 40,000. Can you pm me the facts. My brother is interested in this. Thank you