The outcry also appears based in part on a coalescing of concern about the toll that the war is taking on American armed forces, with little sign, three years after the invasion, that United States troops will be able to withdraw in large numbers anytime soon. ...
Some say privately they disagree with aspects of the Bush administration's handling of the war. But many currently serving officers, regardless of their views, say respect for civilian control of the military requires that they air differences of opinion in private and stay silent in public. ...
Some officers who have worked closely with Mr. Rumsfeld reject the idea that he is primarily to blame for the inability of American forces to defeat the insurgency in Iraq.
-- More Retired Generals Call for Rumsfeld's Resignation
I commented that the serious noises (you know, of major generals) that the Secretary of Defense should resign seemed like a case of non-precision bombing. In other words, the generals -- having to deal with their loathing to attack civilian leadership given our mores anyway (but there is some rumblings even among active ones, who not surprisingly want to keep on the down low) -- are upset at Donald Rumsfeld. As with the rest of the Bush Administration, he favored a heavy-handed approach that wanted to serious change how things are done, to increase the firmness of the power of the (civilian) executive branch.
This led to heavyhandness that did not respect the opinion of military leaders, even though we keep on hearing from the likes of Bush that they really are the ones making policy on the ground (hypocrites -- who knew?). Also, his policies of streamlining of course caused problems -- and even if it might have been a good idea on some level, it was less so in various war situations. Finally, some of his strategy moves are questioned.
So yes, DR himself is a target. But, the buck does not stop with him, even though he is a good target. [And appropriate, since it not only sends a message, but again, he has problems.] Some generals have underlined that they did not like the policy overall, including going to war in Iraq. This is not only DR's fault. The ultimate blame goes to the top, including the Vice President and President himself. Air America just mentioned that some blame him for Gitmo sort abuses. Well, yes, he is responsible ... just not alone. Others, including a sitting and nominated judge, an Attorney General, and so forth. And, even overall military policy, surely it is not just Rumsfeld -- just how much does one man do?
But, I want to admit some ignorance on the nuances here -- partly as a matter of being depressed over the whole thing as well as being opposed to it on a broad basis, I have not paid attention to the nitty-gritty decision-making in military matters. And, there is a reason to target the Secretary of Defense in particular in this context. Still, and not only because he was involved in the appointment and negligently left him to make more of a mess of things, President Bush has a large part in all of this. As does others, especially in particular matters. So, I again find targeting Rummy in particular is a bit too easy.
Atta boy Rummy ... meanwhile, the rest of the assholes are safe. Per Atrios:
But, let's not kid ourselves and imagine replacing Rumsfeld will achieve much. Bush is unlikely to let anyone come aboard who will puncture his little fantasy bubble. The policy will stay the same - we stay in Iraq, because leaving=losing in Bushworld.