Senator McCain

[NousDefionsDoc]

McCain Has 'No Confidence' in Rumsfeld

Mon Dec 13, 6:32 PM ET Top Stories - AP


By BETH DeFALCO, Associated Press Writer

PHOENIX - U.S. Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) said Monday that he has "no confidence" in Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, citing Rumsfeld's handling of the war in Iraq (news - web sites) and the failure to send more troops.


AP Photo


AP Photo
Slideshow: Sen. John McCain

With all due respect to his service, WTH? First the SOWF thing and now this?


McCain, speaking to The Associated Press in an hourlong interview, said his comments were not a call for Rumsfeld's resignation, explaining that President Bush (news - web sites) "can have the team that he wants around him."


Asked about his confidence in the secretary's leadership, McCain recalled fielding a similar question a couple weeks ago.


"I said no. My answer is still no. No confidence," McCain said.


He estimat

ed an additional 80,000 Army personnel and 20,000 to 30,000 more Marines would be needed to secure Iraq.


"I have strenuously argued for larger troop numbers in Iraq, including the right kind of troops — linguists, special forces, civil affairs, etc.," said McCain, R-Ariz. "There are very strong differences of opinion between myself and Secretary Rumsfeld on that issue."


When asked if Rumsfeld was a liability to the Bush administration, McCain responded: "The president can decide that, not me."


McCain, a decorated Navy veteran and former Vietnam prisoner of war, is a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee (news - web sites), which has oversight of military operations and considerable influence over the Pentagon (news - web sites) budget.


If Senate Republicans maintain their majority two years from now, McCain would be in line to become the committee's chairman, something he said he'd weigh when considering whether to run for president again.


"In a couple of years I might give it some consideration, but not right now," he said of a 2008 presidential bid.


Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita said McCain "has frequently expressed his views regarding troop levels in Iraq, and he is an important member" of the committee.


Rumsfeld has "relied upon the judgment of the military commanders to determine what force levels are appropriate for the situation at hand," Di Rita said.


Despite the troop levels, McCain believes military morale remains high, but he acknowledged that involuntary extensions of tours of duty were frustrating to soldiers.


He said Iraq must have a functioning independent government before U.S. troops leave.


"I believe we'll be in Iraq militarily for many years, which would not be a problem to the American people," he said. "I think what is not acceptable to the American people is an increasing flow of dead and wounded."

[Kyobanim]

Comments from Schwarzkopf RE: Rumsfeld from msnbc.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6708495/

Schwarzkopf, interviewed on MSNBC-TV’s “Hardball,” chided Rumsfeld for his reply to a soldier in Kuwait over the lack of armor on many military vehicles used in Iraq.

“I was very, very disappointed — no, let me put it stronger — I was angry by the words of the secretary of defense when he laid it all on the Army, as if he, as the secretary of defense, didn’t have anything to do with the Army and the Army was over there doing it themselves, screwing up,” Schwarzkopf said.

Schwarzkopf, a registered independent who campaigned for Bush in the last two presidential elections, has previously criticized Rumsfeld on several occasions as arrogant and out of touch with troops on the ground.

Monday, Schwarzkopf said the Defense Department had badly misjudged the situation in Iraq. Reserve forces were rushed into urban combat — “toughest kind of fighting” — without adequate training, and “things have gone awry.”

“In the final analysis, I think we are behind schedule” in Iraq, Schwarzkopf said. “... I don’t think we counted on it turning into jihad.”

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Isn't it interesting that the Congress , of which McCain seems to be a member, is the one that votes on things like Iraq, appropriates funds for Iraq, passes on budgets submitted for Iraq, sets policy for places like Iraq and then holds Rumsfeld for shortcomings which, for all intents and purposes, are not entirely under his control. Seems to me the maxim of he who holds the purse strings holds the power is more appropriate here. My personal opinion of Rummy aisde, McCain needs to look in the mirror. Some of the crap that McCain comes up with makes him look more and more like the poster child for the Manchurian Candidate.

Jack Moroney

[Team Sergeant]

“Schwarzkopf, a registered independent who campaigned for Bush in the last two presidential elections, has previously criticized Rumsfeld on several occasions as arrogant and out of touch with troops on the ground.”

Schwarzkopf is an arrogant prick that hates all Special Operations Forces. I’ve never heard one Special Forces type mention anything in a positive manner when referring to Gen Shithead. I know that fat POS about choked on his own tongue when a handful of Special Forces personnel took down the entire country of Afghanistan.

Want to know more about arrogant boy go read “Shadow Warriors” by Tom Clancy and Gen Stiner.

All I'll say is we could have done much more in Desert Storm without arrogant boy at the helm.

TS

[NousDefionsDoc]

Yeah, but his Dad found the Lindburgh baby.


So, how do you feel about General Dumfkopf TS? LOL

[Kyobanim]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

"Schwarzkopf is an arrogant prick that hates all Special Operations Forces. I’ve never heard one Special Forces type mention anything in a positive manner when referring to Gen Shithead. I know that fat POS about choked on his own tongue when a handful of Special Forces personnel took down the entire country of Afghanistan.

Want to know more about arrogant boy go read “Shadow Warriors” by Tom Clancy and Gen Stiner.

All I'll say is we could have done much more in Desert Storm without arrogant boy at the helm.

TS

I'd read something like that somewhere but couldn't remember the source. I had the feeling that that was the general consensus.

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by Kyobanim

I'd read something like that somewhere but couldn't remember the source. I had the feeling that that was the general consensus.

When I was going thru the pre-command course before taking over my SF unit he came to Leavenworth and shared his philosophy with us. Of course, so did many other general officers-I guess it was there time to mentor us thru our next career hurdle and for some reason they thought we really gave a shit what they thought. Then he made a big deal of wanting to meet with all the battalion command designates one on one to share his perspectives on the Army and our careers etc. When he found out that I was taking over a SF unit he started in counselling me on my career choice. He was a real piece of work.

Jack Moroney

[Sigi]

I agree with both of them.

[brewmonkey]

While I do not agree with all that SEN McCain says or does I have to agree in many respects that Sec Rumsfeld is failing and failing badly. He seems to be turning in to a "yes" man and playing to the President. While he may work for the President he should answer to the troops. He floundered his way through last weeks Q&A with weak answers and it seemed to me like he was trying to pass the buck.

I am all for soldiers being resourceful and "liberating" the items needed (provided that it is not fucking another unit deploying) but when we are coming up on the end of our second year in Iraq and less then 10% of the trucks used daily on logistics missions have the armor they should, then something is wrong. I understand that it is congress who does the financial side of things but it is the Sec Def's job to let them know what our soldiers need to fight. It seems that is is not happening. Things take time, I understand.

It was the same thing in OIF2. We had troops deploying with no body armor, body armor not suited for the operations they were being used for or soldiers buying their own to take, that is FUBAR. It got fixed, and quick. Why is the armor for vehicles not happening the same way? Why cant they appropriate the money, ship plates of steel to Kuwait where welders can fabricate it on the spot? You have some units doing this with their own slush fund money.

Shit like this pisses me off in case you cannot tell. I thought Rumsfeld was a great pick for this position four years ago. It's time for his ass to get off the bench and act like a damn player.

[Roguish Lawyer]

I can't stand McCain. And I actually worked in his district office when he was in Congress and on his first Senate campaign.

[NousDefionsDoc]

So Brew, is it just the armor or do you feel he is failing badly in other areas?

[Roguish Lawyer]

I like Rumsfeld. Especially because the libs hate him. When people like McCain want him gone, that makes me like him even more. F them.

[Bravo1-3]

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

So Brew, is it just the armor or do you feel he is failing badly in other areas?

What burns me about SecDef is his activities involving cutting costs to fund Star Wars. A lot of those funding cuts (direct and indirect) like restructuring units to be "lighter and more agile" (which is pseudo-bullshit Clinton-era speak for "Less capable, less sustainable, less lethal) really pisses me off. I was all for cancelling the Comanche and the Crusader SPH, but when we start consolidating infantry units, and converting non-combat arms MOS's into infantry in order to take up the slack... there's just something wrong with that.

I am actually FOR a missile defense system, but not at the expense of Joe Snuffy and combat effectiveness in a shooting war.

I don't believe these were easy decisions for SecDef to make, but it does seem to me that he's so focused on the 25m Target that he's not paying attention to the 3m Target.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Somehow I doubt SECDEF really, really supports Star Wars deep down in his heart.

I was getting ready to post somthing similar to what you have said, but with the opposing view.

I get the impression that:
1. He and others have a very clear idea of what they want the military to look like in a couple of years. And 1 million UAHs ain't it.

2. I disagree wholeheartedly with your opinion of lighter and more agile. In hindsight I think it was folly to expect that after the ass whippin' they got in DS they would stand and fight again. I think the recent operation in Fallujah is a glimpse of what we can expect from this enemy in the future.

3. They know if they chop off heads and what not, they will turn the public against the admin. They ran the Red Cross and UN out and canceled any thought Europe might have had about getting involved after the fact. What did he take them to do it? 100 dedicated guys or so and some cannon fodder to let them get away when pressed?

4. I agree with you that all this doesn't resolve today's issues, valid or invalid.

5. I think they may be in a change managent crisis. It always happens when you try to effect major changes or transform during oeprations. I can almost see the frustration.

I am expecting major changes in the near future.

Also, I am expecting, depending on the outcome, changes in Iraq itself right after the elections. I think they aren't saying anything because they don't want to have to retract, but I expect them to send some people home.

One thing I do know, being SECDEF today has to be tougher than any time since WWII.

Just my opinion.

[brewmonkey]

Unlike RL the enemy of my enemy is not my friend.

NDD * B1/3 hit on some of the reasons I am starting to not have faith in the SECDEF. His idea of what the future Armed Services should look like does not sit right with me. I know we seem to have growing pains every so often, units like the 9th ID and then the 199 Motorized BDE, now the stryker program etc... We have no way of really predicting the way we will be fighting in the future but if Rumsfeld has his way IMHO we may not be able to fight at all.

After the Gulf War it seems that we went into the mindset that Heavy is the way to be. While we drew down the size of the Army and got rid of some divisions we beefed up the others with M-1'a & M-2/3's. We were ready to fight another GW and for the first 20 days of OIF that is what we did. Then we had to enter the cities and now we have everyone reagrdless of MOS fighting in a MOUT environment. Don't misunderstand me, I believe every soldier should be a shooter first and your other job second. But it looks like with the increase in MOUT I am hearing more and more about the Army changing it's structure to fight like this in the future. We will be prepped to fight this kind of fight and our ability to take on a heavy division will be seriously lacking.

Right now we have some of the best equipment in the world but we are learning fast that even the best equipment does not stop an RPG round or an IED. The rest of the world is watching Iraq and from now on anywhere we go we can expect to see something very similar in terms of guerilla warfare against our troops. Why does Rumsfeld seem to be missing this? While his main focus should be on what is currently going on, he cannot forget about the future fighting force. He needs to make sure that the Army he leaves for the next SECDEF will be able to do it's job and meet its mission requirements. To me he just does not seem to be doing it. When the next SECDEF takes over he may not have the time to get the Army in fighting mode before it is called back in to the fray, and then we will be in a world of hurt.

I have my doubts that he is capable of doing this job anymore, the Q&A session he blew was just some more icing on the cake.