The revolt continues and those usually associated with the R, like Max Boot from the LAT, are having a hard time with their arguments. On April 19^th, 2004, Boot presents a winning and losing argument at the same time.

Some examples:

”...In the last few weeks, six retired generals and counting have called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

As it happens, I agree with their advice. As I first said on this page two years ago, I too think that Rumsfeld should go. But I am nevertheless troubled by the Revolt of the Generals, which calls into question civilian control of the armed forces. In our system, defense secretaries are supposed to fire generals, not vice versa.

Well, the Generals are retired. And if Max really doesn’t like retired Generals influencing politics and or policy, then he should have spoken up before the war when many retired Generals, serving as media advisors, did their best to support the administration’s position.

And also this:

Their second complaint — about how the war has been fought — is more valid. There is no doubt that the president and his top aides blundered by not sending enough troops and not doing enough occupation planning. But what about the blunders of the generals?

To listen to the retired brass, the only mistake they and their peers made was not being more outspoken in challenging Rumsfeld. But that's not the picture that emerges from the best account of the invasion so far: "Cobra II" by veteran correspondent Michael Gordon and retired Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard Trainor. They present copious evidence of Rumsfeld's misguided micromanagement. But they also show that Gen. Tommy Franks, the top military commander, was guilty of major misjudgments of his own.

"Tommy Franks never acknowledged the enemy he faced," they write, "nor did he comprehend the nature of the war he was directing." He was so focused on defeating the Iraqi armed forces that he ignored the threat posed by irregular fighters like the Saddam Fedayeen. After the fall of Baghdad, Franks was happy to declare victory and retire, unaware that the real work had just begun. Although some generals, such as then-Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki, rightly warned about the need to dispatch more troops to pacify Iraq, Franks was eager to send units home as soon as they reached the Iraqi capital.

Well, I agree with him regarding the blunders. But isn’t that precisely the point. And what about the conduct of Gen Tommy Franks? Isn’t Rumsfeld’s or Bush’s job to evaluate the effectiveness of their Generals?

I had to bold that just in case boredom had set in.

Max Boot, telling it like it is...just shaded to the right...sometimes more, sometimes less.

Vote for Competence in 2006 and 2008

¶ 6:30 PM