In defense of Donald Rumsfeld

The Sec. of Defense has probably been the most criticized administration official outside of John Ashcroft. I’ve lost count of the number of people, mostly Democrats, who have called for his resignation.

Rich Lowry at NRO wrote a piece today critical of Rummy’s Iraq war decisions. He posted a couple of reader responses to his piece that in essence defend Rummy and I found them well worth reading, especially considering that if Dems gain control of Congress, you know the pressure will be on even heavier than normal to get rid of Rummy. You can find them here and here.

3 Responses to "In defense of Donald Rumsfeld"

Severian says:

November 7, 2006 at 4:50 pm

Those are some excellent, and accurate, comments in support of Rumsfeld. People have no idea how moribund, constricted, rigid, and petty the military establishment can be. Careers are made and broken on the advancement of one idea or weapon system or another, and patronage and “not invented here” are deeply embedded. Rumsfeld killed several major weapon systems, systems that were expensive, and either flawed or not relevant to todays battlefield. Systems that many flag level officers and below had bet their careers on, planning on riding them into retirement and then get follow on jobs related to them. This is unfortunately very common, and one of the worst things about the Pentagon culture (just watch “The Pentagon Wars” about the Bradley gestation to get a glimpse). There also is, and has been, a culture of “don’t change that way we can’t get blamed” at work. We have to say we need this many troops, if we don’t, and it doesn’t work, we will be in deep doo doo, we have always done it this way, if we drag our feet we won’t have to do anything, etc. While this is not everyone, it happens enough at the top levels to be a serious concern, and what you’re hearing from are these people who have had their ox gored. Unfortunately, to become a general officer, and to move beyond brigadier, it takes a lot of politicing, and unfortunately many general officers are career protecting politicians before they are soldiers. Thank heavens for the ones who aren’t, but it’s more common than it should be.

I worked on a project Rumsfeld canceled, and got laid off because of it, and I’ll tell you in no uncertain terms he was right on the money. The system was a freaking basket case that had already sucked up hundreds of millions of dollars, and would have sucked up close to a billion to get it to half way work. It was a white elephant, and it needed desperately to die. Rumsfeld had the moxie to kill it regardless of the political cost (something he’s reaping now with these backstabbers), and I respect him for doing it.

So this is more of the same old witch hunt we’ve been seeing for the past 6 years as the Dems look for someone with “absolute moral authority” to slime an amazingly effective Sec Def. I am consistently amazed at how much Rumsfeld has managed to accomplish in the past 6 years, things I never thought the military would ever get done.
Drewsmom says:

November 7, 2006 at 5:10 pm

Sev, it takes an intelligent man to make the comments you did after losing a job and you’re my kinda man.
God knows who the dems would want to lead the military.
Just wanted you to know I agree with your comments and you’re on hell of a man for saying it.
stackja says:

November 7, 2006 at 10:12 pm

FDR picked Stimson and let him win WW2 but now the Dems want to help the enemy. Strange world.

Comments are closed.