Democrats & Liberals Archives


Let me just say this about Rumsfeld. I like the way he set up the war-fighting doctrine for our armed forces, and I like the way he sat on General Franks until he got an invasion plan that didn’t involve a bazillion divisions. I wish Clinton’s SecDefs could have done it.

Having said that, Rumsfeld doesn’t seem to understand the difference between winning a battle and winning a war - and we are still at war in Iraq.

Kerry's plan for raising an additional combat division, a civil affairs division (linguists, MPs, etc.) and doubling our special forces showed a complete grasp of the kind of multi-function military now needed. Rumsfeld apparently believes everything is fine, except for a few kinks here and there.

Among others, William Kristol, the public mouthpiece for the neo-conservative bunch, has made Rumsfeld the scapegoat for failure. The writing is on the wall my friends,

...Rumsfeld assured the troops who have been cobbling together their own armor, "It's interesting." In fact, "if you think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up." Good point. Why have armor at all? Incidentally, can you imagine if John Kerry had made such a statement a couple of months ago? It would have been (rightly) a topic of scorn and derision among my fellow conservatives, and not just among conservatives.

Indeed. Of course, Kristol is completely glossing over his own part in the fundamental error of unilaterally invading Iraq in the first place.

Kristol and his neo-conservative brethren are blaming everyone around them, just like some cartoon evil genius: "Incompetence! I'm surrounded by incompetence!" The plan was flawless, and it would have worked "if it wasn't for those meddling kids and their dog!"

Posted by American Pundit at December 17, 2004 5:25 AM