From: "Gary Britt" 

It doesn't say anything in there about having any defense
department/military operations and strategy expertise now does it.  Doesn't
even indicate interest in military stuff.

Gary

"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:443ff261$1{at}w3....
> Gee Gary  I would have thought the Lexington Institute your cup of tea.
> It's not the liberals that are turning
>
> http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/mission.asp
>
> The Lexington Institute believes in limiting the role of the federal
> government to those functions explicitly stated or implicitly defined by
> the Constitution. The Institute therefore actively opposes the unnecessary
> intrusion of the federal government into the commerce and culture of the
> nation, and strives to find nongovernmental, market-based solutions to
> public-policy challenges. We believe a dynamic private sector is the
> greatest engine for social progress and economic prosperity.
>
>
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
news:443fe9ee$1{at}w3....
>>I bet he understands it a hell of a lot better than Loren Thompson and the
>>entire Lexington Institute.
>>
>> If a general thinks a policy is so wrong that it puts his troops in
>> needless and senseless danger, then he should have the courage of his
>> convictions; resign his commission publicly and make known at that time
>> the specific reasons for his resignation.
>>
>> Otherwise its just money hungry book hawking and change adverse and/or
>> disgruntled EX employees of the military.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
>> news:443fe058$1{at}w3....
>>> The Bushies will have to purge the officer corps soon
>>>
>>>
http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20060414/cm_rcp/the_knives_are_ou
t_for_rummy;_ylt=A86.I2ELwT9EM18BjgT9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNh
dA--
>>>
>>> But Loren Thompson, a military analyst of the Lexington Institute, told
>>> the Christian Science Monitor that while some of the rancor towards
>>> Rumsfeld can be attributed to his well publicized efforts transform the
>>> military, "much of the officer corps thinks he simply
doesn't understand
>>> technology or operations in sufficient depth to grasp the consequences
>>> of his policies, and yet he routinely uses his position to quash
>>> dissent."
>>>
>>>
>>> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
news:443fcfcd$1{at}w3....
>>>> Imagine that Monte has absolutely no clue of the psychology of
>>>> bureaucracies and the petty grudges of people who don't want their
>>>> bureaucracy changed. Anyone with a brain whose ever worked
in a large
>>>> organization knows full well and first hand how change adverse some
>>>> people can be.  Rumsfeld has been reforming and changing
the military,
>>>> its operations, its budgeting, its programs, its
structure, etc. since
>>>> first coming to office.  If he didn't make a few change adverse
>>>> generals upset then THAT would be something to worry about.
>>>>
>>>> Over the past 5 years 100's and 100's of generals have retired, been
>>>> passed over, been pushed out of the military and only 4 or 5 out of
>>>> these 100's come forward to bitch when it is in their own
pecuniary and
>>>> petty interests to so do.
>>>>
>>>> Only a non-nuanced imbecile (i.e. Monte et al) would consider these
>>>> people anything but petty change adverse, passed over for promotion,
>>>> bureaucrats. Seeking revenge on the guy who isn't as milk
toasty as the
>>>> incompetent defense secretary's to whom they grew accustomed under
>>>> Clinton.
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> Don't reply Monte, we know you have no defense to these comments.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Monte Davis" 
wrote in message
>>>> news:glcv32db4qtplkv84l9fnm2g6nmgr5t85e{at}4ax.com...
>>>>> "Mark"  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Imagine that, as we crossed the Rhine...
>>>>>
>>>>> Imagine that neither Victor nor Mark has a clue about
the differences
>>>>> between WWII and Iraq.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Or, more likely, that they do -- but find it
ideologically useful to
>>>>> ignore them)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5