Rumsfield's Parting Thoughts
 

Rumsfield's memo to Bush, shortly before he was fired.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/world/middleeast/03mtext.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Excerpt:

"The situation in Iraq has been evolving, and U.S. forces have adjusted, over time, from major combat operations to counterterrorism, to counterinsurgency, to dealing with death squads and sectarian violence. In my view it is time for a major adjustment. Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough."

The memo goes on to list numerous options. The general thrust is to begin pulling US troops out - closing 90% of bases by mid-07, withdraw forces from cities and patrolling, moving troops to Kuwait, cease providing security to some areas of the country, drawing down Coalition forces - while providing more resources to the Iraqi forces - transfer equipment, embed more trainers.

The memo also suggests talking down American expectations about what will be accomplished in Iraq.

"¶Announce that whatever new approach the U.S. decides on, the U.S. is doing so on a trial basis. This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not “lose.”

¶Recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) — go minimalist."

Well, either Rumsfeld is displaying that age old theory that hindsight is 20-20, or he felt this all along, and Bush, in his blind vitriol, encouraged Rumsfeld to supress his true feelings and be, in turn, a good soldier.

I kind of think the latter as no one can be stupid enough to believe this war has, is and will continue to conduct itself successfully. That kind of stuff is for Cheney to spew.

Following is the text of a classified Nov. 6 memorandum that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld sent to the White House suggesting new options in Iraq.

The memorandum was sent one day before the midterm Congressional elections and two days before Mr. Rumsfeld resigned.

If that document is shown to be real, and no one has done that yet, then why is another frigging classified document being released by the NYT?

Does'nt anyone care that a newspaper is again releasing CLASSIFIED documents to the public?

Not meaning just the Bush materials, but ANY CLASSIFIED documents. They are classified for a reason and its not for any newspaper to be doing this, no matter how they receive them.

Last I checked, the NYT doesn't have clearances. So obviously somebody with access is providing them to the NYT. That person is the one that bears the responsibility for the release. The NYT signed no oath and has no obligation to determine what is classified or not. That is what the government does.

As I am sure you know Joe, not everything in a classified document is classified or sensitive. Only particular facts and the sources of them. There is no justification to classify something just because it is potentially embarrassing not politically advantageous. This is one more in a string of comments that attacks the messenger.

The paper published the information, but the release was by the person who gave the document to the NYT in the first place.

Too little too late.

The time for looking at the situation objectively and realizing the stupidity of involvement was four years ago - not now.

Another "cut and run" traitor.

LOL

Do not disagree but the NYT has done nothing but disclose classified documents, one after another, time after time. I could care less whats in them, they are CLASSIFIED and until they are re-cleared and released they should not be published.

What is it going to take before we have enough of this crap and take the NYT to court to stop it?

Joe A

PS I felt the same way when Clinton was in office. This is not a political rant but feel that the NYT and others need to respect the term "classified document, or information" a bit more.

Not only do I not object, they should be praised for doing so. At least 98% of classified documents having to do with executive branch decisions are classified to cover their asses, prevent historical analysis, or to prevent criminal prosecution. There is need for classification of certain aspects of military operations in progress of imminent, of certain aspects of operating equipment, or a combination of the two. There is no need for classification for operations completed, or of intelligence gathering that took place more than 20-30 years ago.

This administration has been among the most clandestine oriented in recent history. They've even had things that had been declassified returned to a classification status that denys public access.

Last, government documents prior to 1960-1970 should be released and available to the public. All documents, papers, military operations, equipment operations, tests, and everything else.

We do not need and do not want an unaccountable government.

It seems even Fox is providing the full memo too.

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld filed a memo to the White House two days before resigning that suggested the U.S. consider a course correction in Iraq, FOX News has confirmed.

In the memo, originally published in The New York Times, Rumsfeld called for a "major adjustment" in the Iraq war policy, because he said current strategy was not working.

Click Here to Read the Full Rumsfeld Memo.

Click Here to Read the Full New York Times Story.

“Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough," the memo reads.

Rumsfeld — showing no indication of whether President George W. Bush's administration would actually adopt changes to Iraq policy — said the officials should consider a campaign if course change should be implemented to limit political consequences.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,234001,00.html

Joe,
I understand your point, but the fact is that classification is being abused greatly these days to protect decision making and not secrets. If the NYT or other organization started to publish the details of our overhead intelligence capabilities or of weapons capability (beyond the the obvious), I would get very very ticked off. This is a policy memo. I don't know what about it is classified since nothing in it seems to be derived from an intell source.

If Iraq 2 was based on the minimalist-forces model, why did it cost so much?

Cannot disagree with your comments but when and where is it going to stop? What training do the editors at the NYT have in working withclassified material? Doubt that they have any sort of clearance and most likely it has two motives, selling newspapers and getting their cronies elected into office.

How do they know that what they are disclosing is not a very secret program whose disclosure could cost lives and ruin years of work? The problem is that they DO NOT know, they just want to sell newspapers and do not care about the damage they cause.

The problem is that the NYT is not the organization that should be putting ANY classified material out to the public.

They have already published information that has screwed the country one time (the SWIFT program in Europe) and we continue to allow them and other newspapers to publish as they please.

It has to stop somewhere and hope that it does and fast, for the entire country's sake.

As a counterweight against incumbents who classify to keep their cronies in office, no problem.

Quote:

How do they know that what they are disclosing is not a very secret program whose disclosure could cost lives and ruin years of work? The problem is that they DO NOT know, they just want to sell newspapers and do not care about the damage they cause.

Because those are obvious things, even enlisted scum can tell that. (Note, I was enlisted for 16 years)

Quote:

The problem is that the NYT is not the organization that should be putting ANY classified material out to the public.

On the contrary, they've been nearly derelict in not publishing a whole lot more. When government tells you not to publish, you should immediately investigate why, and then publish when it's obvious that it's only CYA crap.

Quote:

They have already published information that has screwed the country one time (the SWIFT program in Europe) and we continue to allow them and other newspapers to publish as they please.

That freedom of the press is SO inconvenient, isn't it. If a program needs secrecy, then we don't need that program.

Quote:

It has to stop somewhere and hope that it does and fast, for the entire country's sake.

Far better to ere on the side of revealing secrets, than to let sleazy government thugs have their way with us.

the worst part of the Rummy story ,is that this weasel will still make more money in the lecture and presentations circuit let alone in the "board of directors" circuit..., then i ever could make doing a regular payed job...

yes i am slightly bitter

Pat,

Please don't start praising the NYT. They are part of the elitist ruling class that works diligently to promote those who would continue the trampling of your personal liberties.

During Stalin's rule of the Soviet Union, a NYT reporter didn't find it worth reporting that Stalin had sent millions of Ukrainian farmers to their death for resisting communism. The reporter was in Moscow when the round-up took place.

It turns out he was a member of the Communist party in the U.S. It was obvious where he placed his allegiance. I'm not convinced that much has changed over the years. They are the propaganda machine of the leftist, socialist movement at all levels of government in this country.

Fear them, loathe them but please don't praise them. They do not look out for you and don't represent your best interest.

Rumsfeld is brilliant. He is just so far ahead of the rest of you military neophytes that you will never understand. Fighting a war is much like buillding a Porsche...it is always more expensive and takes longer than you could ever imagine until you do it yourself.

Best quote of the day, hands down. You truly are a comic genius, Fint. Thanks for the laugh !:)

Aurel

LOL

i may miss my targa on the occasional day
but most of the time, i'm glad i got rid of the money pit


so yes, the analogy works..
Rummy is like a rusted , non original, saggy Targa that'll cost more to restore then it'll ever be worth even to the biggest optimist out there...

:D

Actually the analogy was between an old 911 and a war. Yes, a war costs much more than than one would ever imagine...especially in this era where politically we cannot have collateral damage or loss of troops like in past wars where they were simply cannon fodder.
Just like restoring an old 911....A war is often well worth the price once completed....but if you walk away in the middle of the job....you will have wasted a lot of money and effort and the results are likely worse than if you had never attempted the task. That is why, once undertaken, one must ignore the whining of the wife (in the case of the 911) or liberals (in the case of the war) until the manly work is done

Yes, I'm aware of their history, but even a blind (and Stalinist) hog finds a truffle now and again. If we're to let government go after the NYT, they'll use that precedent to go after them all. Lincoln closed down over 300 newspapers, most never saw the light of day again, including not just a few that had their presses smashed.

"so that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish", friggen murderous monster.

Pat,

I favor "freedom-based" solutions. I have had the NYT telemarketers call me to offer the NYT delivered to my house. I routinely tell them that I would not have that rag anywhere near my home. I don't read socialist propaganda.

Many others are choosing not to read their paper and they are losing readership. If no one buys their rag, there is no need for government interference.