(Ex-) Generals vs. Rummy

I have mixed feelings about the current round of Rummy-bashing by retired generals: Retired generals speak out to oppose Rumsfeld by Brad Knickerbocker Christian Science Monitor 04/14/06.

But before I could write them down, Steve Gilliard stated one of the points I wanted to make very well, so I'll settle for that for now:

Like the FEMA plans for refugee camps, they are preparing for disaster. [Gilliard thinks that the FEMA refugee camps are intended to hold refugees from Iraq who supported the Americans during the war.] Franks is useless, Myers tried to get a relative a job from the Bushies. These generals are preparing their defense for the coming disaster in Iraq. They want to lay the foundation for blaming the administration for the failures in Iraq.

This isn't selfless, they know what's coming in Iraq, and they want to save the Army from the political storm coming over the failure in Iraq.

The storyline they're pushing is that Rummy is the cause of the failure, don't blame us, we followed orders and had our ideas ignored.

The fact is that they want to save the instutituon, and this is round two. First was Jack Murtha, and he was semi-ignored. Then, it's the generals. I think active duty retirements and resignations are next. They are ratching up the pressure on Bush.

This is about saving the Army, not about opposing the war. (my emphasis)

Actually, I would say that it is actually one type of opposition to the war we actually have going on. But his point is an excellent one: a significant part of what's going on here is positioning for a "don't blame me" excuse.

| +Save/Share | |