Here's a letter published in the Deseret News in Salt Lake City this morning:

Wednesday, April 2, 2003

Rumsfeld is failing us

It was sadly ironic that the Dan Thomasson opinion column carried the headline "Don't flinch when warfare produces casualties" on the same day the combat death of Marine Staff Sgt. James Cawley [a Utahn] was announced. I fear that this is but one of many deaths made inevitable by the egotistical decision of Donald Rumsfeld to conduct this war on the cheap. As a consequence, he's at least two divisions short of what it will take to carry the battle to Baghdad and to secure the supply lines upon which an assault on the Iraqi army will depend.

The current civilian leadership at the Department of Defense has been hostile beyond comprehension to the uniformed services, particularly the Army and its chief of staff. Rumsfeld's recent canard that the current war plan is "Tommy Franks' plan" is shameful, because it's the plan Rumsfeld shaped and insisted upon. Unfortunately, it's too thin to provide adequate protection.


David Irvine

Bountiful

I don't know if this guy is retired military or just a Democrat, but heres my response rant:

It's two weeks into this war. Our troops have Baghdad encircled, and our air power is reducing Saddam's Republican Guard to rubble. Our casualties have come as much from accidents and mistakes as from enemy fire, and are incredibly low, yet "Rumsfeld has failed us!" "The War plan is a failure!"

Only if you believe Iraqi State TV.

It seems to me that warfare has changed fundamentally between the first Gulf War and today, but a lot of the Army officers, retired and in the Pentagon, haven't figured it out. They're still resentful that we aren't trying to use the methods developed to fight the USSR in Eastern Europe. They're badmouthing the Secretary of Defense on the condition that their names not be used, unless of course they're getting retirement pay and have launched new careers in journalism as military experts, paid to reassure the left that warfare is still a surefire quagmire. Just like the Soviets in Afghanistan. Now we're moving through Iraq like Patton through France, and we're hearing more criticism of the civilian leadership of the Department of Defense, than we did in 8 years of Bill Clinton's brilliant leadership. You remember him, the brilliant civilian leader who brought us "Blackhawk Down"? But then he didn't kill the Crusader artillery system, the Army's pet multi-billion project that would have really made the difference, if we needed to drive the Warsaw Pact out of Germany.

Everybody's entitled to his own opinion, but this doesn't look like any failure I've ever seen. It couldn't be that the people running this war have learned something and aren't still trying to fight the last one, could it?

I respect everybody who has served this country, but it tarnishes that service when they criticize and snipe at those who are doing it now. I recently heard Colonel David Hackworth call Secretary Rumsfeld an idiot on a radio program. Ralph Peters a noted military analyst, has been criticizing this war plan for having enough troops, as well, although the last time I heard him, he acknowledged that the troops were doing a superb job, and "pulling Donald Rumsfeld's bacon out of the fire." So much for military discipline. It's a good thing for him he's retired and can't be relieved of his command.

Donald Rumsfeld and Tommy Franks are doing a great job. They know their troops, and they know what their plan is, and none of the "analysts" has seen it. So maybe they should hold their fire until they see the whole thing, and quit giving out quotes for French and Arab TV.

As General McArthur said, "Old soldiers never die, they just fade away." Maybe it's a good thing.

I know it's too long and rambling to get published, but this kind of sadsacking is really getting on my nerves, as it is, apparently, on General Myers'. If we'd moved in and the Rebublican Guard had put Saddam before a firing squad and surrendered en masse and delivered all their WMD the first day, these jerks would be complaining that the plan was overkill, or that the strategy wasn't "sound military doctrine"--anything to keep from giving credit to Rumsfeld, or - shudder! - George W. Bush. We've still got columnists, academics and members of Congress wishing publicly that we'll lose this thing. It's also too soon to say that we won't lose a lot of young people to some ambush with gas or nukes. While the other three fourths of us are holding our breath and praying that this will hold up and we can deliver these poor people from the horror of the past thirty years. I hope that when this thing is over, we won't have to hear from any of these slimeballs again.