Army Times calling for Rumsfeld's Resignation

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2903288.php

Editorial: A failure of leadership at the highest levels

-snip-

But while responsibility begins with the six soldiers facing criminal charges, it extends all the way up the chain of command to the highest reaches of the military hierarchy and its civilian leadership.

The entire affair is a failure of leadership from start to finish. From the moment they are captured, prisoners are hooded, shackled and isolated. The message to the troops: Anything goes.

-snip-

On the battlefield, Myers’ and Rumsfeld’s errors would be called a lack of situational awareness — a failure that amounts to professional negligence.

-snip-

This was not just a failure of leadership at the local command level. This was a failure that ran straight to the top. Accountability here is essential — even if that means relieving top leaders from duty in a time of war.

During a time of war.

Bush first, Cheney & Rumsfeld with him. They should be ashamed of themselves for trying to blame their depravity on a bunch of soldiers.



http://www.wgoeshome.com

one of the major talking points of the most loyal repubs is that Rummy can't be replaced in a time of war.

Excuse me..????

Didn't Lincoln relieve McClelland from his command during the Civil war because of his incompetence?

The difference between Lincoln and Bush* is that Lincoln actually cared about the horrendous loss of life in battle.

A better comparison to what Lincoln did was his replacement of cabinet members, notably Simon Cameron, the Secretary of War. He did this in 1862, in the midst of the war.

One could argue the merits of replacing McClellan.