Someone leaked a memo to the New York Times last week that was written by outgoing Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld just two days before Pres. Bush forced him to resign. In the memo, we learn that Rummy may not have been as stupid about the Iraq Civil War as he appeared to be, or as stubborn as his betters in the West Wing continue to be:
“In my view it is time for a major adjustment,” wrote Mr. Rumsfeld, who has been a symbol of a dogged stay-the-course policy. “Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough.”
Nor did Mr. Rumsfeld seem confident that the administration would readily develop an effective alternative. To limit the political fallout from shifting course, he suggested the administration consider a campaign to lower public expectations.
“Announce that whatever new approach the U.S. decides on, the U.S. is doing so on a trial basis,” he wrote. “This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not ‘lose.’ ”
“Recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) — go minimalist,” he added. The memo suggests frustration with the pace of turning over responsibility to the Iraqi authorities; in fact, the memo calls for examination of ideas that roughly parallel troop withdrawal proposals presented by some of the White House’s sharpest Democratic critics.
We may have to wait for Rumsfeld’s book (and you know there will be one) to find out whether he was fired over the contents of the memo, which Pres. Bush probably viewed as insubordination, or whether, as most people assumed before the memo was leaked, he was thrown overboard to appease voters and to take the spotlight off the Democrats the day after they won control of Congress.
Can not help but wonder when this “leaked memo” was actually written and by WHOM: it seems to be more than a little bit suspect in ALL of its various parts, and REEKS OF ROVIAN “FRAMING”!
A MOST fortunate occasion for an “apology”!