Rumsfeld calls the Pentagon establishment a " Risk-averse Culture"

[Dover]

These are terms used within corporations and "cleaning house" after the takeover of another company is common.
The corporate culture is all pervasive now within this government and so it is no surprise that even their language (as well as their code of greed) reflects the change. Do you think corporations are democracies?

Have you read about Rumsfeld's Pentagon takeover today?

http://www.msnbc.com/news/947673.asp

...The Army has a total of 50 three- and four-star generals. A senior Pentagon civilian called the move “housecleaning.”
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has made no secret of his dissatisfaction with what he sees as unimaginative Army leadership. Schoomaker, too, is critical of a culture he sees as risk-averse and change-resistant. In comments made privately but now circulat-ing widely in the Pentagon, Schoomaker said recently: “Rumsfeld might think we’re at war with terrorism, but I’ll bet he also thinks he is at war within the Pentagon ... It’s a war of the culture.”



This "house cleaning" is VERY significant. The military complex is run by a new leadership that not only is WILLING to take risks, they also consider themselves above both domestic and international law. And they take their orders from the "commander in chief" (if you'll remember Rumsfeld took issue with just who can be called what. There is only ONE commander according to Rummy).

If you saw the PBS special about Watergate the other night, then perhaps you'll recall the part where there was some question whether, after the highest court in our land ruled that Nixon should turn over his tapes, he would do it. He had argued that he was above the law (he called himself Louis XIV...a monarch who was above the law). There was a very tense period there, because Nixon also was "Commander In Chief" of the armies and therefore..theoretically....had the rule of force on his side, which only needed a word from him to take actions protecting their commander against this country's laws. It seems to me that those Republicans and peripheral people who supported Nixon and that philosophy learned their lessons from Watergate and are attempting to secure power in ALL branches....the courts, the Pentagon, and various other areas of government. And sadly Congress, the one body who is supposed to be representative and protective of The People and their rights, is itself torn in its allegiance between this duty and their corporate sugar daddies who offer to ensure their power. So this is the pickle we are in folks. And if we don't open our eyes to this bigger picture immediately it will be too late. Maybe it already is. If you are hanging your hopes on one man, or the DLC or DNC you have already lost what's really at stake (hint: it isn't just another election...and every one of us has to be the ONE).

So as I said before...this action that Rumsfeld took to "clean house" is VERY VERY VERY important. Perhaps it's time for THE PEOPLE to become less "risk averse" and plan a takeover of their own.

[EAMcClure]

1. Praetorian Guard

Of course Rumsfeld is doing the Bush family work... erect a dynasty. Empower sympathetic military leadership, subsidize more and more risky military ventures, and disperse the costs on the middle and lower classes.

History spells this out quite clearly as the Roman model of imperial power. The Bush family are merely acting out the historical compulsion to keep the purple in their ranks until kingdom come.

The results will be that the Bush family Praetorian guard will ruthlessly dispose of them and inflict centuries of horror upon the American people, and this horror will yield a new generation of progressive leadership...

and this noble experiment will break apart.

Eric

[maha]

2. Fortunately

Family members who are career military assure me that the military brass hates Rummy passionately, and the enlisted men are quickly growing disenchanted with the Bushies.

I don't see a military coup d'etat in the future, but if there were one, it would uproot the Shrub.

[SpiralHawk]

3. What the Hell, I mean Rummy's willing to take a risk

with the safety and prosperity of the USA to promote the Bush Empire, why shouldn't everyone else? Can those who are weak in the knees, and bring in the True Believers.

As an omen, as a portent of things to come, the Sacking of the Pentagon will go down as a pivotal maneuver in the Destruction of Traditional American Democracy.

[ShaneGR]

4. Shouldn't the Pentagon actually be risk-adverse???

Doesn't risk equate possible failure? Do we want our the agency employed with our national defense taking risks which could put us all in danger?

[UTUSN]

5. "Should I Read Doonesbury?---Yeppers" n/t

[gristy]

6. fuck, Rummy. We like it that way.

I don't see you risking your ass on the front line.

Also, this is a dupe thread. Go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=124572&mesg_id=124572

[Dover]

8. I wouldn't call it a dupe...I posted this earlier than the one you linked.

Someone else from the 'evening shift' must have read the article when they logged on and decided to post a response. Room enough for all of them.

[bodhisattava]

7. It would be interesting

to find out if any of Rummy's children or grandchildren are serving in Iraq.He himself never saw any action in Korea or Vietnam even though he was a flier in the navy.

Risk averse indeed!

[Classical_Liberal]

9. When Rummy, Wolfie, Perle and Cheny fall on their swords

Thet American Enterprise Institute will give them million a year jobs! Risk, yeah right!

[Dover]

10. Ha! Good point (pun intended).

Yeah, these guys would wet their pants if they REALLY had to fall on their swords. Their egos are far too big to make such a sacrifice anyway.

[Generic Other]

11. Did he just call the generals in the Pentagon a bunch of chickens?

And when does the blanket party form?