Why the Generals are speaking now …

[blueinindiana]

Some on here have complained that these Generals should have spoke up when they where active and not retired. I think that is unfair, the SECDEF is their superior while they where active and criticizing him would be against the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I was enlisted in the military and someone told me once, you have to respect the RANK not the person. Given the current regime track record on vengeance and retribution it would be very tough to openly talk bad about the SECDEF or anyone else in the current administration.

You also have to remember that flagged ranked officers may not necessarily retire at their present rank. You can be a one star general and retire as the rank of colonel. Speaking out against the SECDEF would go against good order and discipline that is instilled in the armed forces. It also would seriously jeopardize the rank at which these generals would retire.

I know this sounds selfish but these men have served sometimes 30 plus years and they do not feel like sacrificing all they have worked for in order to criticize the SECDEF, knowing full well their actions would be in vain.

It is easy to arm chair quarterback these Generals, in fact it takes a lot of courage to speak up even after retirement. The government can still seek retribution even after retirement, black list them from government jobs, government contractors and make clerical errors about their retirement benefits etc.

[WestHoustonDem]

1. I think they're trying to prevent another debacle - attacking Iran n/t

[saltpoint]

2. A good point. I welcome their voices and respect the fact that

they may be trying to save the United States from a foolhardy and calamitous assault on Iran, as WestHoustonDem says.

Their experienced voices raised against a foolhardy administration is, in my view, an act of true patriotism.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

3. It's bullshit

Their target should not be Rumsfeld, but the policies that Rumsfeld is enforcing.

I don't care about their status, but I am suspicious of why they didn't start protesting the day after each of them retired.

It's showboating, and even though I applaud these guys for speaking their minds now, it's too little too late.

It's the policies, stupid, not the asshole in charge at the Pentagon.

[kybob]

6. they didn't speak up

because they didn't want to risk the bennies they get, at retirement. thats the only reason. fuckers one and all.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

They waited for the gangbang,

and then got in line.

It does smack of cowardice, doesn't it?

[blueinindiana]

8. U put in 30 + yrs

U pu tin 30 + yrs in the military see how fast u want to piss it all away by disrepecting your superiors.

[babylonsister]

11. If you worked for 30 years in one company, would you want bennies,

or even a pension?

[havocmom]

16. Seem to recall one or two of them doing 'expert analysis' for TV

in the early days of the war. Some of them seem to have held back while the $$ was good.

No, I don't berate them for holding their tongues while still in, but once retired at rank... well, they could have helped get people to wake up a lot sooner if they had made noise upon taking off their uniforms. We could have been a lot further down to road to recovery at this point in time if the generals' dissent had started sooner.

[babylonsister]

7. Dang, you're impatient! I'm thinking baby steps, a la

Fitzgerald, and what he might eventually bag by playing his cards so close to his chest. A major poker game is on, and Fitz is doing great.
Maybe this is a start for the generals, and whoever else cares to speak out.
OK, I admit, I'm an optimist. But we have to start somewhere calling bullshit; the generals are a
nice touch and I'm happy.

[BuyingThyme]

12. I think it's Rumsfeld behind the policies.

[babylonsister]

4. Thank you, blueinindiana!

I've seen criticisms about some of these retired men, but never considered how brave they are to speak out even after retirement, and at what potential cost. I wouldn't expect them to give up a retirement/pension, to then have their opinions and words discounted.
Their consciences are getting the better of them, and that's a good thing in my book. Who better than these guys to bring attention to the follies of this admin?

[peacebird]

5. they speak now because they are horrified by the troops being so misused

so abused. Sent into harms way for lies, and mostly because they hope to prevent further loss of life and perhaps stop the armaggeddon they know Iran will become if we attack.

They should have spoken earlier but most generals are also repugs and probably could not even begin to believe that bush would throw out the geneva conventions and have american soldiers running gulags and secret prisons around the world. That torture would be standard interogation techniques.

I doubt they thought america could sink so far so fast.

rather than castigate them for failing to speak sooner, we should thank them for speaking out now.

[babylonsister]

13. I agree. Iraq has degenerated, time to

do what you can, and hope someone is listening.

[sendero]

9. I sometimes wonder..

.... if the sudden rash of out-speaking isn't an attempt to cut off any misadventures in Iran at the knees.

[stillcool]

10. Everytime.....

someone with the mircrophone speaks out against this administration....the same scathing cries come. It's like a Salem witch-hunt...creeps me out.

[shrdlu]

14. At least they're not weeping and moaning...

like Robert Strange McNamara.

Sorry, I'm sure these are brave and competent men and it is good that they are speaking out, however belatedly. But "culture" of the military bedamned, they should have stood up earlier.

War-blogger Chris Albritton said it well, imho, regarding Lt. Gen. Greg Newbold:

"Don’t lecture us about heroism and constructive roles to play, Lt. Gen. Newbold (Ret.) You could have done something then, and you didn’t. You could have been a powerful symbol, even if you would have taken a lot of flak from your old bosses. You say officers swore an oath to the Constitution, not the men appointed above them, yet you betrayed it with your three-year silence. It’s been said that for evil to triumph, all it takes is for good men to do nothing. Well, you did nothing. You don’t get to be considered good now."

[Cleita]

15. Why is a civilian allowed to be Sec. of Defense?

Shouldn't an active military officer do it? Actually, why is the President allowed to be Commander-in-chief? I don't think it should be this way. IMO only Congress should be able to act as a check, balance and overseer of the military. Maybe they can do this at the request of the President, but I don't think the President should have this power directly.