Retired guys bitching about their boss…I’m shocked.
Mutiny would involve disobeying an order. Clearly none of these officers felt strongly enough about it, at the time, to resign. Certain lack of honor bitching him out after the fact, to the media. Not really acceptable in big green. At least it didn’t used to be.
Here’s a link to some warfighters who agree with Rumsfeld and see things a little differently.
Sure, and one of them, Newbold, said he wished he’d spoken up when he was in uniform. But they all remember what happened to General Shinseki, who had the gall to be honest to Congress and tell them that several hundred thousand American troops would be needed to provide security in Iraq. Rumsfeld appointed his replacement in advance and made him a lame duck. Publicly speaking out against Rumsfeld was career suicide. Doesn’t make honesty after the fact admirable, but it does make it understandable.
And Franks’ deputy supporting Rumsfeld makes perfect sense, given that Franks is largely responsible for the chaos in Iraq too.
If you feel that strongly against something then you voice your concern, loudly, and do not give ground. If the cost is your job then so be it. Better your job then your men. What price is your honor and the lives of those who serve under you. People die in war but if that is how these generals really felt, I’m suspect. They may be right or they may not be…their timing, however, is all wrong.
The time to dissent is not after you retire. My guess is they opposed these plans a lot more now then they did at the time the decisions were made. I’d also wager they oppose these plans in the media a lot more then they do in private.
Shinseki stood his ground and is greatly admired.
Those are mostly good points, but my suspicion is that most of these men felt they could help the Army more by staying in (again, public dissent = career suicide under Rumsfeld) and trying to influence policy that way.