Missing A Key Point In Rumsfeld's Memo

This below is a key portion of the Rumsfeld memo everyone seems to be overlooking for the flash of focusing on a list of proposed military options:

Aggressively beef up the Iraqi MOD and MOI, and other Iraqi ministries critical to the success of the ISF — the Iraqi Ministries of Finance, Planning, Health, Criminal Justice, Prisons, etc. — by reaching out to U.S. military retirees and Reserve/National Guard volunteers (i.e., give up on trying to get other USG Departments to do it.)

Previous public comments by Rumsfeld indicated his belief that it took a Federal American government to build a nation in Iraq and he didn't feel the other areas of government, from Agriculture, to State to Treasury, were doing their part. If accurate, I think he's right.

As an aside, the memo also threw stones in a manner I suspect the Bush administration didn't appreciate. It would be bound to widen any rifts between various agencies and the Pentagon. But, true to form, Rumsefld said what he thought.

Everyone seems to be dissecting Rumsfeld's advice in a recently leaked memo. Jules Crittenden is pretty hard on Rumsfeld here. And Michelle Malkin has a round up of links.

But the memo wasn't so much advice, as it was a laundry list of options given the present situation in Iraq. What I sensed in reading the actual memo was just how much Rumsfeld was opposed to nation building in Iraq. Left with that impression, I wonder if it wasn't the final straw for Bush in deciding to let Rumsfeld go. The Bush policy, which I continue to support, by the way, is to establish democracy in the Middle East as a means of combating radical Islam with a long term solution that will actually work.

In Rumsfeld's defense, he went to the Pentagon to reshape the American military into a technical-communications advanced, more compact fast strike force suited to what is anticipated to be the conflicts in our short-term future. But Bush had to go to war with the SecDef he had, just as Rumsfeld had to go to war with the military he had.

What troubled me about the memo is that it was long on options but absent any real advice, or solid proposal for a way out of Iraq. If I want a menu from someone I can visit a restaurant. I would imagine like many managers Bush wanted at least the proposal of an actual solution, something the memo failed to give. Maybe that stems from Rumsfeld's distaste for the whole affair.

Hopefully Gates will propose solutions, not possibilities and an Iraq approach can come together around Bush's longer-term goal.

Comments

[Laura]

My husband is a retired naval officer heading back to Bagdad, he's already spent ovr 18months there.
Almost all the folks doing any real work over there are already retired/former military. The State department in Iraq has been a major roadblock to any serious work undertakn there, and the other agencies just refuse to play. This is really old news. The one thing I try to get everyone I know to understand is that interdepartmental rivalries and good old bureaucratic intransigence have played a huge part in our difficulties to stabilize Iraq. The military itself is plagued by too many handwringers and a lack of innovative thinking, not to mention the garrison mentality of many at the top.
This was not the war Rumsfied wanted, and in many ways it was not the military he wanted to go to war with. His focus was on reshaping the military, but he got stuck with Iraq. I wonder if his zeal for transformation as neccessary as it is sapped his ability to deal with the war at hand. I think over time Rumsfield will be seen as both a visionary and capable instrument for change, but he will also be viewed as biind to the realtime needs of the military to achieve victory.

[Carol Herman]

Strange question? Why is everyone assuming Gates has the job?

Advice and Consent. Ya know? When Harriet Miers went up on the Hill, Bush was told to take her off his list. Because if he did not? SHE WASN'T GONNA GET ENOUGH VOTES TO GET HER ASS UP ONTO THE SUPREME COURT. (The vacancy was created when O'Connor said she was ready to retire.)

Anyway, the president has openly pretty much destroyed good will in the Mideast. Maliki is not interested in having the palestinians (a group the Shi'a hate. Along with their hatred of Saudi Arabia) ... And, at least Maliki got his message across. If this was top and bottom. Bush2 was on the bottom. Was it missionary? Did he enjoy himself? It certainly wasn't the "plans" that James Baker shot off. Now was it?

And, you think ALL GOP SENATORS are just dying to give Bush what he wants.

Not so fast there! I count at least 23 senators with opinions that could turn out to be different than the president's. And, I count 33 democrats who are pretty loyal to the State of Israel. Including Shumer. SO where you see a done deal, I do NOT.

I also know James Baker was trying to get Gates confirmed BEFORE Christmas. You see this one happening? Last year? Fitzmas fizzled. This year? You buying that James Baker gets the supreme court to sock Gates through? Just asking. Baker is a lawyer. And, that's on his resume. Again. I think NOT.

But I just don't KNOW. Lott knows. And, so does Dr. Frist. In other words two GOP kiesters, sitting in the senate, for now. And, again, in January 2007, just might know something about counting votes?

I'm waiting to see what happens next, though. And, just because Gates 'has a study group' doesn't mean he passes the test.