We've probably seen the last unscripted, town hall-style meeting between Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the troops who serve under him.
Faced with blunt questions from Iraq-bound soldiers at a base in Kuwait, Mr. Shock-and-Awe turned into Mr. Shuck-and-Jive.
He squinted. He squirmed. He hesitated. He dodged.
...
During the election campaign, John Kerry had made an issue of the armor and equipment shortages that were adding to U.S. casualties in Iraq. President Bush shrugged off the criticism, insisting that everything was hunky-dory.
That remains the sunny position of the White House, even as the situation in Iraq disintegrates toward a civil war.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/10388348.htm?1cAnother Rumfield editorial:
Troops heroic in confronting Rumsfeld
...
A staff sergeant from Fort Bragg, N.C., put on the table an issue that cries out for national debate – and, yes, national outrage. The “stop-loss” orders that force our men and women in uniform to stay in the service long after they have fulfilled the terms of their enlistments amount to a backdoor draft, no matter how you cut it. The sergeant certainly suggested that.
“My husband and myself, we both joined a volunteer Army,” said the sergeant, nicely inserting that word volunteer to make her point sharper. “Currently, I’m serving under the stop-loss program. I would like to know how much longer do you foresee the military using this program?”
Rumsfeld seemed to ask: What’s your beef? “The stop-loss has been used by the military for years and years and years,” he replied. “It’s all well understood when someone volunteers to join the service.” Which did not explain why the administration’s failure to anticipate just how tough this war would be is what’s forcing the military to rely so heavily on stop-loss to keep up our troop strength.
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/editorial/10400661.htmedited to add E. J. Dionne's editorial