Josh Marshall asks if the DOD site is destined for a "Scrub"?

[RedEarth]

because of a scathing op-ed in yesterdays NYT(Link below)......

will the DOD scrub this article....might need to save it, since rummy will be pissed....

U.S. Army General Dubbed Father of the Iraqi Army

BAGHDAD, Iraq, June 14, 2004 — Less than a year ago an unassuming man from Weatherford, Okla., arrived in this country to guide an organization that didn’t even exist – to build an army that wasn’t there.

There was no plan, no force, and only slight guidance.

And 363 days later – despite a host of staggering setbacks and difficulties with logistics, contractors, funding, cultural differences and a plan that changed in scope, size and overall delivery – Iraq’s armed forces and civil security forces total more than 230,000 people. In only a matter of months, the army will consist of a 27-battalion, nine-brigade, three-division army and air force, navy, coastal defense force, civil defense corps, police service, facilities protection service, border police force, customs police force, immigration police force, national security police force and a diplomatic protection service officers force.

“There’s nothing that could have prepared me for what I’ve encountered here – but a number of things have happened to me in my career that have proven helpful,” said U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, the former Office of Security Transition Commanding General.

http://www.defendamerica.mil/cgi-bin/prfriendly.cgi?http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/jun2004/a061404e.html

here's the op-ed...

A Top-Down Review for the Pentagon
By PAUL D. EATON
Fox Island, Wash.

DURING World War II, American soldiers en route to Britain before D-Day were given a pamphlet on how to behave while awaiting the invasion. The most important quote in it was this: "It is impolite to criticize your host; it is militarily stupid to criticize your allies."

By that rule, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is not competent to lead our armed forces. First, his failure to build coalitions with our allies from what he dismissively called "old Europe" has imposed far greater demands and risks on our soldiers in Iraq than necessary. Second, he alienated his allies in our own military, ignoring the advice of seasoned officers and denying subordinates any chance for input.

In sum, he has shown himself incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically, and is far more than anyone else responsible for what has happened to our important mission in Iraq. Mr. Rumsfeld must step down.

In the five years Mr. Rumsfeld has presided over the Pentagon, I have seen a climate of groupthink become dominant and a growing reluctance by experienced military men and civilians to challenge the notions of the senior leadership.

I thought we had a glimmer of hope last November when Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, faced off with Mr. Rumsfeld on the question of how our soldiers should react if they witnessed illegal treatment of prisoners by Iraqi authorities. (General Pace's view was that our soldiers should intervene, while Mr. Rumsfeld's position was that they should simply report the incident to superiors.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/opinion/19eaton.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fContributors&_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

Johs's site.....

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007944.php