Ugh - the Bush administration is SUCH a bunch of liars. The Armchair Generalist provides a concise, convenient timeline of their deceptions relating to the supposed "mobile wmd labs". I'm really getting surprised that even the administration's most ardent supporters believe anything this team says these days. The level of mendacity they've engaged in almost defies belief.
However, I'll rally to the defense of another national leader that The Armchair Generalist derides in a recent post. When Gen. Pace "defends" Secretary Rumsfeld by noting that he works hard - well, that's hardly any defense of his behavior at all, as the Generalist notes. In fact, Pace explicitly says you can question Rumsfeld's judgment. To me, that's the most telling comment about his "defense". All Pace is saying here is that Rumsfeld salutes the flag and shows up to work on time. And if that's the strongest "defense" the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs can muster for the Secretary of Defense, well, I hardly think that shows him to be a spineless Rumsfeld lackey.
Posted by armand at April 12, 2006 01:39 PM | TrackBack | Posted to WarAlthough it does suggest he's more diligent than a certain President.
Posted by: moon at April 12, 2006 03:58 PM | PERMALINKMaybe. MAYBE you're right there. It would be a small glimmer of hope in an otherwise sad situation. I know Pace is a good guy, but politics in the Pentagon are nasty and I would have rather he kept his mouth shut completely than "defended" Rumsfeld.
Posted by: J. at April 13, 2006 06:20 AM | PERMALINKI'm not sure how easy it is to do that. When someone is in as public a position as Pace, it is very difficult to sidestep these questions. A mouth-shut-"no comment" can be taken to mean many things, while actually answering the question removes most of the ambiguity.I maintain my position with respect to the higher levels of uniformed military: whatever their views are about Rumsfeld, Bush or the "Revolution in Military Affairs", they clearly failed to articulate the perils of the course of action that the political leaders had decided upon. It isn't their job to make policy (the Constitution puts the civilians on top, clearly), but they are duty bound to point out the costs and benefits of the choices the civilians make. They have clearly failed to do that in Iraq.
Posted by: baltar at April 13, 2006 08:24 AM | PERMALINK