From: "Mark" 

Turns out it's about 4700 retired generals still kicking.
http://www.slate.com/id/2139847

"It's hard to get good numbers, but the Explainer estimates that about
4,700 general officers are enjoying their retirement in the United States
right now. (For a detailed look at the data and the Explainer's
calculations, click here.) That means the six former generals who stepped
forward to criticize Rumsfeld make up about one-tenth of 1 percent of the
total community...."


"Gary Britt"  wrote in message news:444189a7$1{at}w3....
> What you can't add?  Makes it more than thousands.  Then add in the
> retired and it makes it more than thousands again.  So 4 or 5 guys out of
> thousands have something to say.  Odds are 4 9r 5 out of thousands believe
> the moon is made of blue cheese as well.
>
> Gary
>
> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
> news:44414897{at}w3....
>> Really. What happens when the reserves are called up - They are on active
>> duty. I read what Rumsfield said ( the transcript is online). I also gave
>> you the DOD numbers from Feb of this year.
>>
>>
>>
>> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
news:44414169$1{at}w3....
>>> Your link shows total active duty personnel by rank with generals at
>>> just under 1000.  Today's military is designed to be composed of not
>>> just active duty but reserve personnel.  That will put generals over
>>> 1000. When you total active duty, reserves, national guard, and retired,
>>> its thousands Bob. Rumsfeld was correct.  You should have kept
>>> listening.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote
in message
>>> news:44412ac4$1{at}w3....
>>>> http://www.dior.whs.mil/mmid/military/miltop.htm
>>>>
>>>> "Gary Britt"  wrote in
message news:444129c3{at}w3....
>>>>> There are thousands of Generals Bob.  Almost 2000 active duty
>>>>> generals, and must be thousands more retired.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> "Robert Comer"
 wrote in message
>>>>> news:44411aec$1{at}w3....
>>>>>> Rumsfeld also said there are thousands of
generals/admirals, which I
>>>>>> know is exaggerated to say the least, and I
stopped listening to him
>>>>>> after that.....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Bob Comer
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Gary Britt" 
wrote in message news:44411a0a{at}w3....
>>>>>>> Generals brings us back to the change adverse
whiners and
>>>>>>> incompetents and passed over for promotion
people who are speaking
>>>>>>> out to hawk books and to promote their
feelings against the military
>>>>>>> reformation that Don Rumsfeld has been pushing
since coming into
>>>>>>> office.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:443ffe69{at}w3....
>>>>>>>> So none of the Generals have any experience either?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1842182&page=1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Batiste is one of six retired generals
demanding Rumsfeld step
>>>>>>>> down, breaking a long tradition of the
military steering clear of
>>>>>>>> politics.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "We have nothing to gain by this.
There's no political agenda at
>>>>>>>> all," Batiste said. "We've been
loyal subordinates. This is all
>>>>>>>> about soldiers - service men and women -
and their families."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Batiste led the First Infantry Division in
Iraq in 2004 and 2005.
>>>>>>>> He retired from the military in November
2005, passing up a third
>>>>>>>> star and a chance to be second in command in Iraq.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Gary Britt"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:443ff67c$1{at}w3....
>>>>>>>>> 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_kniv
es_are_out_for_rummy;_ylt=A86.I2ELwT9EM18BjgT9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN
5bnN1YmNhdA--
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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