The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
[ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ] dear all another internal memo leaked from the bowels of the u.s. department of defense, speaks unmistakably of the failures of the wars on "terror", afghanistan, and iraq. when the war on vietnam was becoming "unwinnable", the same mr rumsfeld posed similar rhetorical questions in the early 70's and in the process became an irritant to nixon and his national security adviser, henry kissinger. i sense he is now trying to "pressure" condeleeza rice in the same way, and will surely irritate bush (not that i care!)...he seems to forget that he has been the architect of the ill-conceived and intellectully and morally corrupt current policies, and cannot, in contrast to earlier behavior, play the pontius pilate. absurd? certainly. and "no exit" from these can be envisioned...after "a long, hard slog". sad! tony October 22, 2003 Rumsfeld Memo Questions Effectiveness in Terror Fight By DAVID STOUT ASHINGTON, Oct. 22 — Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has predicted eventual victory in Iraq and Afghanistan, but only after "a long, hard slog," and he has pressed Pentagon officials to rethink strategy in the campaign against terrorism. "Are we winning or losing the global war on terror?" Mr. Rumsfeld asked in a recent memorandum. He went on to ask whether the Defense Department was changing fast enough "to deal with the new 21st-century security environment." The memo, first reported in Wednesday's issues of USA Today, was sent last week to Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz; Gen. Peter Pace, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Douglas J. Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy. Mr. Rumsfeld saw a mixed record in the battle against Al Qaeda terrorists. "We have put considerable pressure on them," he said. "Nonetheless, a great many remain at large." He said the United States had made "reasonable progress in capturing or killing the top 55 Iraqis" from Saddam Hussein's ousted regime, but had had less success tracking down leaders of the Taliban in Afghanistan. The Secretary went on to ask whether the Pentagon needed "to think through new ways to organize, train, equip and focus to deal with the global war on terror?" "Are the changes we have and are making too modest and incremental?" he asked. "My impression is that we have not made truly bold moves, although we have made many sensible logical moves in the right direction, but are they enough?" At the Pentagon today, an official tried to deflate any notion that Mr. Rumsfeld's memo reflected a deeper pessimism than he has so far expressed in public about the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan and the United States' efforts to deal with terrorism. Powell Moore, the assistant secretary of defense for legislative affairs, said Mr. Rumsfeld was simply "trying to ask the kinds of questions that need to be asked, that any leader should be asking." At another point, Mr. Moore said the Secretary was trying to encourage defense officials "to look up and look beyond the tree tops." The White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, who was traveling with President Bush in Australia today, told reporters that Mr. Rumsfeld was simply doing "exactly what a strong and capable secretary of defense" should be doing. "The president has always said it will require thinking differently," Mr. McClellan told reporters, according to The Associated Press. "It's a different type of war." In fact, Mr. Rumsfeld has said many times in public that, while he sees progress in Iraq and Afghanistan, the people of the United States must be prepared for a long, hard mission. Moreover, Mr. Rumsfeld is known for prodding his subordinates with memos and questions, and it is no secret that he has been trying to change the very culture of the Pentagon, an enormous bureaucracy that has often been resistant to change, as previous defense secretaries have discovered. On the other hand, the memo could be grist for debates on Capitol Hill as lawmakers ponder how much to spend on Iraq and Afghanistan, and how long to keep troops there. Another question, perhaps unanswerable, is who leaked the memo, and why. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk