I wonder if there had been a war czar during Rummie’s reign would we still be in the mess we’re … OK, let’s assume that was a rhetorical question. Real question: Other than being inaccurately named (Future Scapegoat admittedly doesn’t sound as sexy), what exactly was the reason this position was created? Given Bush’s handling of the war, shouldn’t … OK, perhaps I answered my own question. Snow’s answer was just a tad cloudy.
“I Don’t Know” Why It Took Five Years To Appoint A War Czar
Excerpted from Wednesday’s White House Press Briefing With Tony Snow. Read the entire transcript here.
Q Back on Lute. Why did it take so long, now into the fifth year of the war, to come up with somebody of his seniority and stature?
MR. SNOW: I don’t know. I think what happened is, again, as you’re taking a review, it became clear to us that this — as you develop — as you move into a new phase of the war — keep in mind, we are still in the process of deploying people in this new way forward, as the President called it, and therefore, it seems proper at a time like this also to task somebody with the job of keeping an eye on all the different players who are involved in it.
What we do have is a different set of policies governing what’s going on in Iraq. It is something that is government-wide in its scope, and therefore, it is appropriate to have somebody coming in, in a new position, in support of a new philosophy and a new way forward in Iraq, not only to monitor progress, but to do everything possible to assist those on the ground to help them succeed.
Q So you think this is a new need and you did not need someone to do this for the previous four years?
MR. SNOW: Well, again, I’m not going to try — I don’t know. I don’t have an answer for you. I’m telling you that’s what he’s here to do now.
Wow… I thought Snow was better at speaking.
1. Its the material he has to work with you know. How many ways can you say Fucked Up Beyond All Repair.
#1 – Its a well known chess play, the Gonzalez defense, first you don’t know, shortly thereafter you don’t remember.
#3 – When did we rename the Ronald Reagan Defence for Gonzolas?
Regardless of your opinion on Bush, can we agree that Snow has balls of steel to come back from a ready made excuse to resign (cancer) to face these reporters and defend an unpopular President on a daily basis.
Seems perfectly consistent. Don’t we have an idiot in the White House who already thinks he’s the Czar of Czars?
waar zaar? wha zaar waar zaar? weer zaar waar zaar? haar haar!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoat
I cannot understand why any sane or reasonable general would even want this job. Were there not three previous nominees who turned it down? More?
Seems to me this general has taken on a can’t win job. The White House is run by military amateurs who do not listen to reason or military reality. He will be overridden every time he disagrees with the Power Behind the Throne, Dick Cheney, and all the blame will be shifted to him.
A bad career move, IMO. Then again, once he leaves the military, he will search for a high paying civilian job, which may already have been garunteed him. So, mayhap it’s a good career move; depends on what he may have been bribed with, if in fact he has been.
It’s happened before.
Now, were he Patton, Rommel, Guderian, Model, Zukhov, or another of that quality, and given a free hand, then it would be reasonable. But, he is not, and will not.
Seems a no win situation for him, IMO.
Been trying to figure this out. We have the Commander and Chief (Decision Maker) and this guy. The Republicans are supposed to stand for less government. My guess is this guy is going to take the fall if and when the administration fails in Iraq. They are good at letting someone else take the wrap for their wrong deeds. You know King George doesn’t take advice well, so I don’t think this guy has a good future.
mmm scapegoat
http://www.bigskybrew.com/process/scapegoat.html
mmm beer…
#5. Yes, Snow had a ready-made reason to resign and did not. I am not sure what that shows, but it shows something.
And any amateur military historian could tell you that another tangle in the chain of command is not what any military effort needs.
This is a PR stunt – along the lines of appointing a Drug Czar back in the day – that misfired the moment that it became clear that no one with any stature wanted the job.
Wasn’t Rumsfeld the war czar? Or, was it Cheney? Or, Rove?
Agree with doug.
Anyone remember the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff? The Commander in Chief of the forces in Iraq? Apparently they don’t have anything to do with war! What do they do, sell cookies?
But here’s something that hasn’t been pointed out yet:
THIS ISN’T A WAR! THE US HASN’T DECLARED WAR ON ANYONE IN 62 YEARS. THEY CAN’T EVEN GET THE TITLE RIGHT.
You could argue that this is an undeclared state of war but then what about “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED”?
war house is pretty close phoneticly to whore house, i can just see dubya mangling that one….
it just occurs to me that, taken at face value, the appointment of a ‘war czar’ is an admission that the war in Iraq is failing not because of something in the field, but something, back home, in the Bush Administration.
“we are still in the process of deploying people in this new way forward…”
Isn’t “New Way Forward” Ford’s new marketing slogan? So the military is deploying soldiers in Fords now?
This could give new meaning to “found on road dead”.
#14 – Milo –
What “Mission Accomplished”? – see http://tinyurl.com/yzb6ln
Seems the GOP is embarrassed. They should be.
Kind of ironic for a military that has been so fervently battling “Communism” in the last 50 years..
As long as we keep blowing stuff up. Explosions contribute to Global Warming (TM) and that’s a good thing. Far more people die from freezing every year than from overheating. I call for a new War on Coldness.
Endless war. I predict that the US will be at war with someone for the next 500 years.
Hasn’t there been a war each generation?
I wonder who will be next? and where? Is there a betting line in Las Vegas on this?
#21 – Not really… What was mine? Grenada?
#22. Gulf War
counting backwards from there:
Vietnam
Korea
WW2
WW1
Spanish-American
Civil War
War of 1812
Revolution
biggest gap has been 30 years or thereabouts. Throw in all the minor interventions and Indian Wars, and I bet the US has not gone 10 years without an armed conflict.
silly me, I left out the Mexican War between Civil and 1812
#1, This is a career path to a fourth star for the General.
#2, It won’t happen. All three star and up Generals must be approved by the Senate for new jobs. After the veto of their Iraq funding bill, does anyone think Lute will pass the confirmation without a lot of answers?
#3, Bush won’t let Lute answer any Confirmation questions. He’ll use some bullcrap about the Democrats wanting to “micro manage” the war and pull the nomination as soon as the Senate gets warmed up to a hearing.
#23 – Right… But what might be considered a war for a generation is absent between Vietnam and The First Gulf War.
If you became an adult between the end of Vietnam and the mid-80s, there has been no major military conflict that would have had a broad cultural or generational impact.
Man… Those were the years 🙂
#26, OFTLO,
You missed the War on Crime and the War on Drugs. Both serious stuff. On a minor note were our involvements in Grenada and Lebanon and just before the Gulf War I was that horrible conflict in Panama.
Yup, your generation has had it tough with all that fighting.
#27 – I nearly forgot…
I’m a veteran of The Cola Wars.
http://tinyurl.com/22matr