revolt of the generals

[selftitled85]

what is everyones take on this?

its pretty close to becoming a coup of sorts as all the big retired generals minus a few and most of the generals still in power are behind it calling for rumsfelds head.

it could get very testy.

[ClapClapSnap]

i need to start reading the newspaper more often

[catscradle]

The key word is retired. I'm pretty sure rumsfeld is privy to much more information than they are. Rumsfeld can come off as a prick, but he's a pretty intelligent fellow.

[selftitled85]

The key word is retired. I'm pretty sure rumsfeld is privy to much more information than they are. Rumsfeld can come off as a prick, but he's a pretty intelligent fellow.

not really.

all the generals are just recently retired. they all took part in planning the iraq war while a couple commanded in iraq. plus they have other men in office on the inside feeding them info. they stay well connected.

rumsfeld is smart...but when it comes to the iraq war he was an idiot.

[A picasso blue]

The key word is retired. I'm pretty sure rumsfeld is privy to much more information than they are. Rumsfeld can come off as a prick, but he's a pretty intelligent fellow.
most of them were involved in the initial planning and invasion of Iraq.. so you dont know anyhting about this

[A picasso blue]

i dont get why they retired so shortly into it .did they retire because they disagreed with the administration?

[selftitled85]

i dont get why they retired so shortly into it .did they retire because they disagreed with the administration?


i know batiste was offered a rise in rank. i dont know if he is a two star or three...but he was offered to either become a 3 or 4 star and turned it down solely because he did not want to work with rumsfeld.

so i think disagreeing with rumsfeld played a large part in retiring.

[cal1082]

not really.

all the generals are just recently retired. they all took part in planning the iraq war while a couple commanded in iraq. plus they have other men in office on the inside feeding them info. they stay well connected.

rumsfeld is smart...but when it comes to the iraq war he was an idiot.

I dont think that's a fair. Playing armchair quarterback is quite easy and there's no way to say how good any of there plans would have been. Also I'll say it's not as if Rumsfeld devised this plan on his own. He ran it by many of these generals that are now criticizing it and at the time they signed off on it.

[selftitled85]

I dont think that's a fair. Playing armchair quarterback is quite easy and there's no way to say how good any of there plans would have been. Also I'll say it's not as if Rumsfeld devised this plan on his own. He ran it by many of these generals that are now criticizing it and at the time they signed off on it.


people throughout the pentagon would disagree.

people state that rumsfeld will ask for the generals views. but if they were different then the cabinets then they would be put on the back burner for someone who spoke more favorably of the plan.

[cal1082]

people throughout the pentagon would disagree.

people state that rumsfeld will ask for the generals views. but if they were different then the cabinets then they would be put on the back burner for someone who spoke more favorably of the plan.

What people? How many people? Are you talking dozens of people, or just a couple? And I dont understand what you mean by being put on the back burner?

[selftitled85]

What people? How many people? Are you talking dozens of people, or just a couple? And I dont understand what you mean by being put on the back burner?

i have been doing research on it for my bosses op-ed. officials who will remain anonymous state that generals who disagree with rumsfeld or other senior officials are pretty much put in the shadow of generals who completely agree with the plan. leading to only a couple views being shown to the important people.

[cal1082]

i have been doing research on it for my bosses op-ed. officials who will remain anonymous state that generals who disagree with rumsfeld or other senior officials are pretty much put in the shadow of generals who completely agree with the plan. leading to only a couple views being shown to the important people.

How many at least?

One or two who have sore feelings would be much different than a mutiny on ship which is what's being protrayed. Do they also not provide examples?

[selftitled85]

How many at least?

One or two who have sore feelings would be much different than a mutiny on ship which is what's being protrayed. Do they also not provide examples?

well right now there are six generals who have come forward. they have all stated there are many on the inside but none give numbers nor names.

[cal1082]

well right now there are six generals who have come forward. they have all stated there are many on the inside but none give numbers nor names.

And now you have 4 generals coming out and supporting Rumsfeld. So really how big of deal is this (hardly a coup)? No matter what happens in the end someone one one said will be left out on decisions.

[selftitled85]

And now you have 4 generals coming out and supporting Rumsfeld. So really how big of deal is this (hardly a coup)? No matter what happens in the end someone one one said will be left out on decisions.


led primarily by tommie franks whom is in the back pocket of george bush and rumsfeld.

i mean come on...even powell has taken some shots.

[cal1082]

led primarily by tommie franks whom is in the back pocket of george bush and rumsfeld.

i mean come on...even powell has taken some shots.

I wasnt even referring to franks. I'm referring to the op-ed that was written in the Wall Street Journal.

Also how in the hell can you dismiss Franks opinion anyway? You give ear to these 6 generals without knowing there political leanings, or personal feelings towards Rumsfeld and Bush, but you dismiss Franks? Give me a break.

[selftitled85]

I wasnt even referring to franks. I'm referring to the op-ed that was written in the Wall Street Journal.

Also how in the hell can you dismiss Franks opinion anyway? You give ear to these 6 generals without knowing there political leanings, or personal feelings towards Rumsfeld and Bush, but you dismiss Franks? Give me a break.


im not dismissing franks. he is a damn good general. but you can make a point that he has always been on the side of the pres. he has never voiced opposition.

these generals have agreed with the pres before but feel betrayed most especially since rice's comments.

[cal1082]

Among the generals who came out in his support..............

retired Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong---the former deputy chief of U.S. forces in the Middle East.
retired Gen. Richard Myers---former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
retired Lt. Gen. John Crosby---former deputy commanding general of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command
retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney---former assistant vice chief of staff of the U.S. Air Force
retired Maj. Gen. Buron Moore---U.S. Air Force, who was director of Central Command during Operation Desert Storm
retired Maj. Gen Paul Vallely---former deputy commander of the U.S.. Army, Pacific.

[cal1082]

im not dismissing franks. he is a damn good general. but you can make a point that he has always been on the side of the pres. he has never voiced opposition.

these generals have agreed with the pres before but feel betrayed most especially since rice's comments.

How do you know Franks hasnt voiced opposition? He might not have but I have no idea what's going on behind closed doors with them.

[cal1082]

Also I dont want it to seem that I'm behind Rumsfeld no matter what and screw what these retired generals are saying. My only point is that this has been made a much larger deal than it is. Once you get a large number of generals or other insiders who planned the war come out in opposition it makes more since.

But putting the heat on Rumsfeld from 6 generals is not as news worthy as made out. The very fact that the generals that have come out in support havent gotten the coverage that the others have should make you question the story

[selftitled85]

Also I dont want it to seem that I'm behind Rumsfeld no matter what and screw what these retired generals are saying. My only point is that this has been made a much larger deal than it is. Once you get a large number of generals or other insiders who planned the war come out in opposition it makes more since.

But putting the heat on Rumsfeld from 6 generals is not as news worthy as made out. The very fact that the generals that have come out in support havent gotten the coverage that the others have should make you question the story


that you can attest to the media. the media hasnt been behind the war for the past year. therefore you are going to see more about the generals voicing their discontent with the cabinet.

but i also think part of the issue is there has never been something like this in a long time. some people are calling it a little short of a coup. yes people are overreacting but it stems from the fact that it has never happened before.

the only two times like it were macarthur during korea...and he was quickly fired. and the vietnam war when congress shut out all funds to the army.

[A picasso blue]

I just found out that Scott McClellan is leaving.

[selftitled85]

I just found out that Scott McClellan is leaving.


yep. they are also taking some of rove's duties away so he can focus most of his attention on the elections.