The Corner

anti-Rummy cons

They are growing in number according to my in-box. Some e-mails:

Subject: Thank you

You are, of course, correct.  Half measures have availed us far less than nothing.  My hope is that Rumsfeld will be out by the end of the month.  Unless that happens, whatever remains of my wishful thinking will go aglimmering.



You just plain nailed it.  To put it bluntly,  “Go to war with the SecDef that you need, not the one you’ve got”.

I am reminded of Winston Churchill’s decision to take full responsibility for the failure of the Gallipoli invasion even though he was not directly responsible for the tactical errors made by the generals and admirals on the scene.  He resigned his cabinet position and went into a line regiment in France.  Can you visualize Rum  .  .  .  . oh, never mind.

Subject: RE: Against Half Measures


 … I have been saying this for months (probably since my 2d son joined the Army) and I agree with you 100%.  As a matter of fact, I have written to you expressing my very same feelings.  We can support our troops best by sending them over there in an offensive mode rather than setting around and being targets.  Rumsfeld needs to go, and GWB needs a set of “stones”.  GWE and Rumsfeld remind me of LBJ and McNamara…

Subject: Overwhelming Force

I reluctantly agree with you…reluctantly, because I am tired of all the charges being leveled against Rumsfeld, who I believe has some creative ideas in terms of restructuring our armed forces to meet modern warfare contingencies.  With respect to Iraq and Afghanistan, however, we plainly appear to be hanging on by our fingernails. 

Subject: Rumsfeld Doctrine

We need to rescind the above.  This is the doctrine that espouses sending just enough troops not to win.