It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
New York Times
The three-star Marine Corps general who was the military's top operations officer before the invasion of Iraq expressed regret, in an essay published Sunday, that he did not more energetically question those who had ordered the nation to war. He also urged active-duty officers to speak out now if they had doubts about the war.
Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, who retired in late 2002, also called for replacing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and "many others unwilling to fundamentally change their approach." He is the third retired senior officer in recent weeks to demand that Mr. Rumsfeld step down.
The decision to invade Iraq, he wrote, "was done with a casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions — or bury the results."
Originally posted by Souljah
Looks like US Armed Forces Generals wants Rumsfeld OUT.
We Need More Generals Like That.
I wonder how many of them have to speak out and raise their voice until something really changes.
Originally posted by thermopolis
Yes, I would like to know who this tin-start-general actually is, becuase he should lose his retirement. Perhaps even be brought up on treason in a time of WAR. We need more "pattons" and fewer politicians in the pentagon..............
Originally posted by koji_K
And... wouldn't getting rid of Rumsfeld be one fewer politician in the Pentagon?
Originally posted by thermopolis
Rummy is disliked among the DoD revolving door bunch becuase he keeps killing "pet" projects that various general staff have promised their defense contractor "pimps" so they have a 'cush" job after retirement. Same problem for certian members of congress.
Originally posted by skippytjc
First up: "we"? What do you mean by that Slovenian?
Secondly: Who is this guy? Maybe he was forced into retirement because he was a terrible general.
General Newbold served as director of operations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2000 through the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the war in Afghanistan. He left military service in late 2002, as the Defense Department was deep into planning for the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.
"I retired from the military four months before the invasion, in part because of my opposition to those who had used 9/11's tragedy to hijack our security policy," General Newbold wrote.
His generation of officers thought it had learned from Vietnam that "we must never again stand by quietly while those ignorant of and casual about war lead us into another one and then mismanage the conduct of it," General Newbold wrote.
Try another topic someday...
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his top military leader on Tuesday issued their strongest rebuttal to date of recent comments by retired generals criticizing Iraq war planning and calling on Rumsfeld to resign.
In particular, Rumsfeld said he didn't recall retired Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold raising any objections to the war planning when he was working in the Pentagon for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"He never raised an issue publicly or privately when he was here that I know of," said Rumsfeld. "An awful lot of people around here were not shy about giving their views. ... But in terms of why he would come up with this now, I just can't speak to that."
New Military Offensive Against Rumsfeld
The latest demand for Rumsfeld's resignation came Wednesday when Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who commanded the First Infantry Division in Iraq, called for a "fresh start in the Pentagon."
"We need a leader who understands teamwork, a leader who knows to build teams, a leader that does it without intimidation," Batiste told a CNN interviewer.
Batiste's remarks, which follow highly public demands from three other top generals for Rumsfeld's resignation over the past several weeks, came as public confidence in the policies of the administration of President George W. Bush both in Iraq and in the more general "war on terror" has dwindled to all-time lows.
Retired US Iraq general demands Rumsfeld resign
A recently retired two-star general who just a year ago commanded a U.S. Army division in Iraq on Wednesday joined a small but growing list of former senior officers to call on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign.
In recent weeks, retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton and Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni all spoke out against Rumsfeld. This comes as opinion polls show eroding public support for the 3-year-old war in which about 2,360 U.S. troops have died.
New York Times
The widening circle of retired generals who have stepped forward to call for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's resignation is shaping up as an unusual outcry that could pose a significant challenge to Mr. Rumsfeld's leadership, current and former generals said on Thursday.
Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., who led troops on the ground in Iraq as recently as 2004 as the commander of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division, on Thursday became the fifth retired senior general in recent days to call publicly for Mr. Rumsfeld's ouster. Later in the day, another retired general, Maj. Gen. John Riggs, joined in the fray.
"We need to continue to fight the global war on terror and keep it off our shores," General Swannack said in a telephone interview. "But I do not believe Secretary Rumsfeld is the right person to fight that war based on his absolute failures in managing the war against Saddam in Iraq."
Originally posted by polanksi
I don't care if this general was drummed out or not, there is a concept in law called a preponderance of evidence and Rumfeld is guilty as sin. If the evidence isn't enough for then so be it but i think Souljah has a very good case and a right to make it.
Hey, I tell you what, how about you, Souljah, those 6 ex-generals, and whomever else get together, gather up all that "preponderance of evidence's" take it before a judical court or military court and see what all that "preponderance of evidence" gets ya? Your "preponderance of evidence's" are conjectures and assertions, amounting to nothing in any legal sense. As such, that would make what you, Souljah, and these 6 generals are saying what....criticism worthy of insignificance, slight merit, or headline coverage from the likes of MSNBC, the Today Show, or CNN?
I speak as a CITIZEN of PLANET EARTH.
You have a problem with that, American?
Originally posted by iskander
Wow Seekerof, that's called impeachment, you know, and we all been there under VERY similar circumstances, so be careful what you wish for.
It's really time for you to pull the rip cord, cause that whole Nixon impeachment reality is coming up (again) real fast. You know, you have all those ATS points, you'll have re-register, all that stuff, why not get it over with now and skip all the hassle? Just my two cents.