In Defense of Rumsfeld

A retired Marine lieutenant general defends Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. Michael DeLong, NY Times:

AS the No. 2 general at United States Central Command from the Sept. 11 attacks through the Iraq war, I was the daily "answer man" to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. I briefed him twice a day; few people had as much interaction with him as I did during those two years. In light of the recent calls for his resignation by several retired generals, I would like to set the record straight on what he was really like to work with.

When I was at Centcom, the people who needed to have access to Secretary Rumsfeld got it, and he carefully listened to our arguments. That is not to say that he is not tough in terms of his convictions (he is) or that he will make it easy on you (he will not). If you approach him unprepared, or if you don't have the full courage of your convictions, he will not give you the time of day.

Mr. Rumsfeld does not give in easily in disagreements, either, and he will always force you to argue your point thoroughly. This can be tough for some people to deal with. I witnessed many heated but professional conversations between my immediate commander, Gen. Tommy Franks, and Mr. Rumsfeld — but the secretary always deferred to the general on war-fighting issues.

The general went on to say that Secretary Rumsfeld made necessary and long overdue decisions to update and streamline the military, which of course raised hackles among vested interests. He also says there was a post-war plan and it was thoroughly discussed.

Both the current and former head of the Joint Chiefs defend Rumsfeld,Washington Post; Thomas Lipscomb asks why didn't they resign at the time and suggests book deals are in the offing, and the WSJ weighs in with some pointed remarks about the MSM's sudden respect for senior military judgement (only when engaging in Bush-bashing), but makes the greater point about policy decisions necessarily being in the realm of civilian control, and the presidency.