BCT Editorial – 4/17/06

This page was last updated on April 19, 2006.

Generally speaking; Editorial; Beaver County Times; April 17, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Top-ranking, retired officers come to the aid of troops in Iraq

“Reinforcements are arriving to rescue America’s fighting men and women from the destructive policies of the Bush administration.”

[RWC] Even if the idiotic allegations were true, how do the words of retired generals within earshot of the enemy “rescue America’s fighting men and women?” Some of the allegations simply bash Sec. Rumsfeld’s management style, yet none of the generals in question ever reported to Sec. Rumsfeld, and Gen. Zinni retired months before Sec. Rumsfeld became Secretary of Defense. I’m sure it was an honest oversight that the editorial failed to mention this fact. <g>

“In recent days, several high-ranking retired generals have called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld because of the way in which he has mishandled the occupation of Iraq.”

[RWC] Earth to the Times. There are thousands of retired generals. Are we to assume all of them will agree with the actions of any administration?

What of the accuracy of retired generals? If you recall, prior to the Iraq War we heard from a host of retired generals that our troops would be slaughtered during the invasion. Gen. Zinni (More about him below.) himself thought the invasion would be the equivalent of JFK’s Bay of Pigs operation.

“What makes this criticism especially telling is that several were involved directly with the military operation in Iraq - before, during and after. They have seen firsthand how this administration’s we-can-do-no-wrong arrogance is destroying a first-class military organization.”

[RWC] What the editorial fails to note is the critical retired generals who were directly involved in the Iraq operation told completely different stories before retirement. Were they lying then or now?

For example, when Gen. Zinni was still on active duty in the late 1990s, he testified before Congress about the WMD threat posed by Iraq. Though none of the intelligence had changed, Gen. Zinni suddenly expressed a different opinion before the Iraq War.

Note, the code of military conduct does not require officers to lie when they disagree with superiors. According to officers I heard in interviews, if you disagree with orders you simply pass them along and do your best to execute them. You don’t have to be a cheerleader.

“The administration’s basic response is that it is going to stay the course, which means more needless death and more horrible, crippling injuries with nothing to show for it.

“The situation has reached the point that even former officers who understand and respect the chain of command no longer can keep silent. The American people need to listen to them before it is too late. Our military might is being squandered because of this administration’s lethal combination of arrogance and bungling.”

[RWC] The editorial fails to note the current ringleader, Anthony Zinni, is out hawking a new book and the best way to get on the “good shows” and generate a buzz is to bash any aspect of the Bush administration. Remember Richard Clarke and Paul O’Neill? I’m sure it’s only a coincidence, though. As noted above, Gen. Zinni retired in 2000 and has criticized the Iraq War since before the invasion.

The editorial also fails to note other retired generals disagree with the comments of the retired generals the Times loves. I saw a minimum of two interviews in which two different retired generals disagreed with Zinni et al. Two of those generals were Richard Myers – the most recent Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – and Tommy Franks – the commanding general of U.S. Central Command during the Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns. A third was Michael DeLong, second in command to Gen. Franks at Centcom, who wrote an op-ed piece (“A General Misunderstanding”) in the April 16^th edition of The New York Times. All of these men worked with Sec. Rumsfeld on almost a daily basis. As noted above, none of the current “gang of seven” ever worked directly with Sec. Rumsfeld.