Remember the film Dr. Strangelove? The rabid military's overzealous drive to annihilate the enemy? The way fate coalesced in support of their headlong plunge into nuclear oblivion despite elected officials' attempts to rein them in?
The Avenging Bombadier is the newly-released sequel to Strangelove.
At the Pentagon War Planning Desk and in the White House Situation Room, there's an ironic role reversal - a snowballing revolt of senior military officers against the Bush Administration's policies, in general, and Rumsfeld's style, in particular. Now, it's the civilian zeal for war that needs to be reined in! Planning for an Iran invasion has brought more and more military leaders forward to criticize Bush and Rumsfeld for their dogmatic adherence to the PNAC vision of US dominance in the Middle East.
Yesterday, Army Major General (Ret.) John Batiste called for Donald Rumsfeld to step down. Batiste, a West Point graduate who commanded the Big Red One, criticized Rumsfeld's management style as one that ignores teamwork, ignores and intimidates career officers and ignores the needs of the troops.
Sy Hersch, in his New Yorker article (see Akman's Nuke Iran), noted that the Pentagon military planners' struggle against Rumsfeld's people had reached the highest levels of command - the Joint Chiefs of Staff were forced to formally notify President Bush of their strong opposition to the use of any tactical nuclear weapons in Iran.
Time.com has published an essay by Lt. General Greg Newbold, USMC (Ret.), former Director of Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who "retired from the military four months before the [Iraq] invasion, in part because of my opposition to those who had used 9/11's tragedy to hijack our security policy":
"I will admit my own prejudice: my deep affection and respect are for those who volunteer to serve our nation and therefore shoulder, in those thin ranks, the nation's most sacred obligation of citizenship. To those of you who don't know, our country has never been served by a more competent and professional military. For that reason, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's recent statement that "we" made the "right strategic decisions" but made thousands of "tactical errors" is an outrage. It reflects an effort to obscure gross errors in strategy by shifting the blame for failure to those who have been resolute in fighting. The truth is, our forces are successful in spite of the strategic guidance they receive, not because of it.
"What we are living with now is the consequences of successive policy failures. Some of the missteps include: the distortion of intelligence in the buildup to the war, McNamara-like micromanagement that kept our forces from having enough resources to do the job, the failure to retain and reconstitute the Iraqi military in time to help quell civil disorder, the initial denial that an insurgency was the heart of the opposition to occupation, alienation of allies who could have helped in a more robust way to rebuild Iraq, and the continuing failure of the other agencies of our government to commit assets to the same degree as the Defense Department. My sincere view is that the commitment of our forces to this fight was done with a casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions—or bury the results."
Retired Marine General Anthony Zinni, former head of the U.S. Central Command and Army Major General Paul Eaton, who oversaw training of Iraqi forces, have added their voices to the chorus of criticism.
These men, as well as the President, have sworn allegiance to the Constitution - to support and defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic. In spite of their distinguished military careers, this may be the generals' finest moment in carrying out that oath since the President argues that the Constitution authorizes him to do what he damn well pleases!
Captain Marvel has observed that Bush and Rumsfeld want "to play with all the toys in the box". The Captain, like the generals, recognizes it's Pandora's Box.







del.icio.us
Digg It!


According to the public comments you've noted, Yes Men survive in this Pentagon, Naysayers or those questioning the party line are marginalized and/or intimidated.
Of course, all the generals speaking out are retired now so that their careers aren't jeopardized but what about those colonels with stars in their eyes?
Newbold isn't urging active-duty senior officers to go public, he wants them to speak directly to the President as the Joint Chiefs have done. However, the White House filters are famous for only permitting good news to reach the Oval Office.
Still, in an atmosphere where Rumsfeld hammers three-star generals for their opinions, Newbold's suggestion looks like a revolutionary manifesto.
I guess, with this Administration, it is!
Report Abuse