Military discontent extends below general officer level

[Jai4WKC08]

Good article from the NY Times concerning attitudes within the junior and mid-level officer corps.

A few excerpts:

Young Officers Join the Debate Over Rumsfeld
By THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT
Published: April 23, 2006

WASHINGTON, April 22 — The revolt by retired generals who publicly criticized Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has opened an extraordinary debate among younger officers, in military academies, in the armed services' staff colleges and even in command posts and mess halls in Iraq.

The discussions often flare with anger, particularly among many midlevel officers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and face the prospect of additional tours of duty.

"This is about the moral bankruptcy of general officers who lived through the Vietnam era yet refused to advise our civilian leadership properly," said one Army major in the Special Forces who has served two combat tours. "I can only hope that my generation does better someday."

An Army major who is an intelligence specialist said: "The history I will take away from this is that the current crop of generals failed to stand up and say, 'We cannot do this mission.' They confused the cultural can-do attitude with their responsibilities as leaders to delay the start of the war until we had an adequate force. I think the backlash against the general officers will be seen in the resignation of officers" who might otherwise have stayed in uniform.

Many officers who blame Mr. Rumsfeld are not faulting President Bush — in contrast to the situation in the 1960's, when both President Lyndon B. Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara drew criticism over Vietnam from the officer corps. (Mr. McNamara, like Mr. Rumsfeld, was also resented from the outset for his attempts to reshape the military itself.)

But some are furiously criticizing both, along with the military leadership, like the Army major in the Special Forces. "I believe that a large number of officers hate Rumsfeld as much as I do, and would like to see him go," he said.

"The Army, however, went gently into that good night of Iraq without saying a word," he added, summarizing conversations with other officers. "For that reason, most of us know that we have to share the burden of responsibility for this tragedy. And at the end of the day, it wasn't Rumsfeld who sent us to war, it was the president. Officers know better than anyone else that the buck stops at the top. I think we are too deep into this for Rumsfeld's resignation to mean much.

Much more at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/23/washington/23military.html?hp&ex=1145764800&en=d9c90a77b877dfd6&ei=5094&partner=homepage

(edited for typo)

[TheBaldyMan]

1. all the way down to E1 n/t

[Jai4WKC08]

2. Absolutely! Enlisted too.

Didn't mean to slight the enlisted and non-com ranks. But the article was about junior/mid-grade officers.

I think you can assume that all the conversations and debates going on in the O-clubs and CPs are being repeated in the messhalls and foxholes.

[TheBaldyMan]

3. I thought you made it clear that you were supportive of service members

regardless of rank, I couldn't resist making a smart-assed remark. ;)

[Jai4WKC08]

5. I hope you know I do

It's the grunts in the mud... uh, sand... and the truck-drivers, and radio operators, and all the other "simple soldiers" (and marines, and even airmen and sailors who have been retrained and reassigned) who suffer most for the debacle that Bush, Rumsfeld and all the other chickenhawks have wrought.

Sadly, with the complicity of far too many generals.

[hadrons]

4. "Many officers who blame Mr. Rumsfeld are not faulting President Bush "

still in denial

[Jai4WKC08]

6. Yeah, I think that sums it up

I've been complaining about Zinni's refusal to hold Bush responsible since he came out with his book back during the run-up to 04 election. I feel just like that SF officer in the article... a general should know better.

But it's a big psychological jump for a career military man/woman to condemn the commander-in-chief. Ultimately, I think they will mostly come around.

[OneBlueSky]

7. my dad was a career Army officer . . .

retired as a Major after 30 years, and is now deceased . . . but back in the 60s, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, I remember him remarking that if the government ever got into real trouble, he could see the military taking over by force . . . never really elaborated on it, but I could tell by the way he said it that he was completely serious . . . and believed that the military absolutely had the capacity to pull it off . . .

[Jai4WKC08]

8. Personally, I don't think so

Oh, they're capable of it militarily, I suppose. But I just don't think it would happen.

I could be wrong, of course. Right or wrong, the military is a different animal than it was in the early 1960s, before Vietnam and the All Volunteer Force. That might make it more likely to intercede, not less. Still, the principle of civilian control is pretty deeply engrained.

Rumsfeld and his chickenhawk civilian appointees have split the Pentagon, really the whole military, in two already, and yet there have only been eight generals, only five who've served recently, willing to speak out. Hopefully there will be more, but I wouldn't count on many. I don't think it's because the rest are gutless, or because they're planning anything more. I think it's just too hard for most folks who have spent their adult lives in uniform to break away from the mind-set of never challenging the chain of command.

Otoh, I am heartened by how much resistance there is, even if most won't go public. I think if the current administration tried to go too far, and use the military against the American people, there would probably be enough who would refuse to participate to make any such effort ineffective.

[Totally Committed]

9. When I saw this this morning in the Times, it reminded me so

much of the lead up to the end of Vietnam. When it starts filtering down the ranks, the leadership is not going to escape their wrath. At some point, even the grunt on the ground will start screaming, and the end will be near.

Thanks for posting this Jai. Important reading for those who were not around in the 60's. This is what the beginning of the end looks like. I hate to think of how many more will die before the end really comes.

TC