Rumsfeld Takes Fire From Own Troops

Posted on Thursday, December 09 at 13:43 by Jim Callaghan
From the Toronto Star: RUMSFELD TAKES FLAK FROM TROOPS Bush's defence secretary grilled at Kuwait event Soldiers ask him about long tours, equipment flaws TIM HARPER WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON—Donald Rumsfeld received an unprecedented series of in-your-face challenges from soldiers preparing to deploy to Iraq yesterday, incoming fire which raised more questions about the morale of U.S. troops as the war lurches toward its second anniversary. The U.S. defence secretary was blistered with questions by some of the 2,000 men and women in uniform who attended a town hall meeting in Kuwait — queries about inadequate equipment, lack of benefits, pay owed them by the government and an unpopular program known as "stop-loss," which has lengthened deployments for volunteer soldiers and been dubbed a "backdoor draft" at home. It was the first trip abroad for the 72-year-old Rumsfeld since he agreed to stay in U.S. President George W. Bush's cabinet — at least for part of the second term — and he seemed taken aback by the blunt questions, the like of which he's not been subjected to since the beginning of the war. Defence analysts said most of the questions are rooted in the Bush administration's lack of planning for any sustained war with a determined insurgency, and show the absence of foresight has had an impact on those who are putting their lives on the line in Iraq. More trouble could be looming for Rumsfeld when he returns to face new revelations of prison abuse in Iraq, alleged mistreatment that occurred after the Abu Ghraib scandal that tainted the United States' reputation worldwide last spring. A leading American newspaper, the Los Angeles Times, in an editorial published yesterday, wondered what it takes to get fired these days, suggesting Rumsfeld should have been ousted months ago for the prison abuse scandal and "a disastrous lack of judgment" in conducting the Iraq war. The editorial came a day after the Pentagon's inspector-general blamed leadership failures by top air force officials for a decade of sexual assaults against female cadets at the elite Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs. At the Kuwait question-and-answer session, army Specialist Thomas Wilson, an airplane mechanic whose unit, the 278th Regimental Combat Team of the Tennessee Army National Guard, is about to drive north into Iraq for a one-year tour of duty, bluntly asked Rumsfeld why there are not enough armoured vehicles for the mission. He drew applause when he said he and his colleagues have had to rummage through garbage to find what they need to fortify their vehicles. "We're digging (through) pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that's already been shot up, dropped, busted — picking the best out of this scrap to put on our vehicles to take into combat," he said. "We do not have proper armament vehicles to carry with us north." Rumsfeld said the army is doing all it can to get armoured Humvees to troops in Iraq. "It's a matter of production and capability of doing it," Rumsfeld said. "As you know, you go to war with the army you have. They're not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time." At another point, Rumsfeld tried to lighten the atmosphere after taking a series of tough questions. "Now settle down. Settle down," he said, drawing laughter. "Hell, I'm an old man and it's early in the morning. I didn't take ... just gathering my thoughts here." One Democrat, Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd, said Rumsfeld's remarks showed a "stunning" lack of concern for the soldiers, and Arizona Republican Senator John McCain told CNN the stop-loss program is a "terrible thing" for morale and shows the need for an expanded military. "It is highly unusual for a defence secretary to be challenged by troops, in a war zone, in what is supposed to be a pep talk," said Loren Thompson, an analyst at the Lexington Institute, a defence think-tank in Virginia. "It is also highly unusual for the troops to applaud when he is challenged. "It shows you there is a lot of dissatisfaction among U.S. troops." Thompson said the shortage of armour and the stop-loss program both show the Bush administration has continually been surprised by the efficiency and strength of the insurgency in Iraq. A member of the 116th Calvary Brigade told Rumsfeld the National Guard must deal with shortages and antiquated equipment and the inspector-general for the 116th Brigade Combat team said about 150 soldiers are owed thousands of dollars of travel pay since last July and are having collection agencies showing up at their spouses' doorsteps at home. That complaint was also met with applause. "That's just not right," Rumsfeld said. "Folks (who) have earned money, and are due money, ought to be able to get the money and they ought not to have to put their families under stress while they're waiting for the money." Another soldier complained she and her husband signed up as volunteers yet cannot return home as scheduled, under the stop-loss program. The contracts of about 7,000 active-duty soldiers have been extended under the policy and it could affect up to 40,000 reservists. Rumsfeld said the stop-loss program was well understood by those who enlist — although many soldiers say recruiters did not tell them about the involuntary deployment extension — and it will be continued even though he hoped it would be used infrequently. The Pentagon said yesterday it was producing 450 armoured Humvees per month and acknowledged it is still about 2,000 short of the 30,000 needed in Iraq. Israel has deferred its order of armoured Humvees so they can be sent directly to Iraq, the Toronto Star's Mitch Potter reports from Jerusalem. Link: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1102547411800&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:15 am
    I say Rumsfeld making these comments on Jon Stewart tonight. My mouth dropped when he said "You go to war with the army you have", and then something like... "They're not the one you want or the one you hope to have in the future." WHAT? But I guess they all went to war with the Secretary of Defense that they have and not the one they want or the one they hope to have in the future. What a mess those soldiers are in. It's disgusting how they're being used and abused.

    ---
    "Yeah, well, [Mr. President] we used all five fingers because that's the way our mittens are made." Antonia Zerbisias

  2. Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:28 am
    Fact !! There are soldiers that take comfort im murdering women and children. That happens in any war, but this is not a war, except Dubya declared it as such. Now they are paying the price. And he calls himself a "war president."
    His words !

  3. Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:32 am
    Those that want to come to Canada have a place in my home.

  4. Fri Dec 10, 2004 2:50 pm
    'Journalists' wanting to create a big news story planted the questions with the soldiers that asked them and apparently even managed to stage it so their plants in the audience got picked to ask a question. The briefing and Q & A session probably wouldn't have gotten nearly as much attention with this intervention. But that's par for the course with 'news' media, especially the 'journalists' that are driven by their biases and agenda against Iraq or the Bush administration - like Toronto Star drones.

  5. Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:31 pm
    What does it say about Americans 'freedom of speech' and 'freedom of the press' if the Journalists aren't able to ask these questions themselves?



    ---
    "If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill

  6. Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:44 pm
    From the New York Times:

    Lost in a Masquerade
    By MAUREEN DOWD

    WASHINGTON

    Hoooo-rah! Rummy finally got called on the carpet.

    Not by the president, of course, but by troops fighting in Iraq. Some of them are finally fed up enough to rumble about his back-door draft and failure to provide them with the proper armor for their Humvees, leaving them scrambling to improvise with what they call "hillbilly armor."

    The defense secretary had been expected to go to Iraq on this trip but spent the day greeting troops in Kuwait instead. Even though Pentagon officials insist that security wasn't an issue, I bet they had to be worried not to travel the extra 40 miles to Iraq.

    Rummy met with troops at Camp Buehring, named for Chad Buehring, an Army colonel who died last year when insurgents in Baghdad launched a rocket-propelled grenade into Al Rasheed, a Green Zone hotel once frequented by Western journalists and administration officials that is still closed to guests because - despite all the president's sunny bromides about resolutely prevailing - security in Iraq is relentlessly deteriorating.

    As Joe Biden told Aaron Brown of CNN about his visit to Falluja, "They got the biggest hornets' nest, but the hornets have gone up and set up nests other places." He said that a general had run up to him as he was getting into his helicopter to confide, "Senator, anybody who tells you we don't need forces here is a G.D. liar."

    Rummy, however, did not hesitate to give the back of his hand to soldiers about to go risk their lives someplace he didn't trouble to go.

    He treated Thomas Wilson - the gutsy guardsman from Tennessee who asked why soldiers had "to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles, and why don't we have those resources readily available to us?" - as if he were a pesky Pentagon reporter. The defense chief used the same coldly cantankerous tone and squint he displays in press briefings, an attitude that long ago wore thin. He did everything but slap the kid in the hospital bed.

    In one of his glib "Nothing's perfect," "Freedom's untidy" and "Stuff happens" maxims, Rummy told the soldier: "As you know, you go to war with the Army you have."

    It wouldn't make a good Army slogan, and it was a lousy answer, especially when our kids are getting blown up every day in a war ginned up on administration lies. Remember when the president promised in the campaign that the troops would have all the body armor they needed?

    These young men and women went to Iraq believing the pap they were told: they'd have a brief battle, chocolate, flowers, gratitude. Instead, they were thrust into a prolonged and savage insurgent war without the troop levels or armor they needed because the Pentagon's neocons had made plans based on their spin - that turning Iraq into a democracy would be a cakewalk. And because Rummy wanted to make his mark by experimenting with a lean, slimmed-down force. And because Rummy kept nattering on about a few "dead-enders," never acknowledging the true force, or true nationalist fervor, of the opposition.

    The dreams of Rummy and the neocons were bound to collide. But it's immoral to trap our troops in a guerrilla war without essential, lifesaving support and matériel just so a bunch of officials who have never been in a war can test their theories.

    How did this dangerous chucklehead keep his job? He must have argued that because of the president's re-election campaign, the military was constrained from doing what it is trained to do, to flatten Falluja and other insurgent strongholds. He must have told W. he deserved a chance to try again after the election.

    He had a willing audience. W. likes officials who feed him swaggering fictions instead of uncomfortable facts.

    The president loves dressing up to play soldier. To rally Camp Pendleton marines facing extended deployments in Iraq, he got gussied up in an Ike D-Day-style jacket, with epaulets and a big presidential seal on one lapel and his name and "Commander in Chief" on the other.

    When he really had a chance to put on a uniform and go someplace where the enemy was invisible and there was no exit strategy and our government was not leveling with us about how bad it was, W. wasn't so high on the idea. But now that it's just a masquerade - giving a morale boost to troops heading off someplace where the enemy's invisible and there's no exit strategy and the government's not leveling with us about how bad it is - hey, man, it's cool.


    E-mail: liberties@nytimes.com

  7. Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:37 pm
    The journalists ask questions like that all the time - in this case though they wanted it stage managed for the TV cameras because they knew the optics would get them good ratings. And it worked.

    looked at another way, how many officials would go out of their way to have a question and answer session with the troops while TV cameras are rolling? not many from any army.

  8. Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:53 pm
    An assumption about a person's feelings cannot be stated as fact. Facts are what are used to back up such an assumption.

    ---
    Zachary Whalen

  9. Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:26 am
    I can't believe what I'm reading. ANON is actually questioning real soldier issues in Iraq. If this ANON thinks these troops are all treated 100% right, and if this ANON believes everything is just perfect for them. Then maybe this ANON should be enlisting in this war.

    It frustrates me when people can constantly defend the validity of this war while their on the outside of this war looking at it through the TV. ANON continue believing that everything is 100% for the soldiers in Iraq. Believe they are 100% happy with their government and how their family back home is treated. Then go enlist yourself.

    I can't even imagine in my head what these soldiers are going through in Iraq, and I know no ANON here can either. So please ANON enlist into the U.S Military go to Iraq and share with us how wonderful it is there and how wonderful the U.S government treats you and your family back home. Come and tell us FACTS about how it is there then maybe your defence towards the war validity will have merit.

    Kevin

    ---
    War does not determine who is right - only who is left.
    --Bertrand Russell

  10. Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:32 am
    Well I guess the New York Times and Toronto Star worked together on this one. Right ANON? :-p

    Kevin

    ---
    War does not determine who is right - only who is left.
    --Bertrand Russell

  11. by hoopoe
    Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:06 am
    Bullshit! Journalists almost never ask questions like this. They sure as hell don't ask them at a press conference, especially those that are usually strictly choreographed such as with Rumsfeld and those at his level are so that they only pick those that they have a pretty good idea won't ask too challenging of a question! Politics is all about PR and controlling the media. It's only in rare instances like this when they let down their guard that you see politicians squirming. You're correct that this person was given the question to ask (so the story goes) but one thing you forgot to mention is that this person was a soldier and not a journalist. It is likely that the question got through in this instance because Rumsfeld felt he was on totally safe ground being in the presence of soldiers and would not have to answer any tough questions so the regular choreographing was relaxed.

  12. Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:48 pm
    Good answer, Hoopoe. I really think that if one cannot give their name, they shouldn't be allowed to post any of their drivel.

  13. Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:52 pm
    Indeed, Kevin. If one cannot give their name, they shouldn't be allowed to speak.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news