Rumsfeld v. Reed on History

Rumsfeld is ruffling feathers again. He does have some points though.

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday that critics of the war in Iraq and the campaign against terror groups "seem not to have learned history's lessons," and he alluded to those in the 1930's who advocated appeasing Nazi Germany.

In a speech to thousands of veterans at the American Legion"s annual convention here, Mr. Rumsfeld sharpened his rebuttal of critics of the Bush administration's Iraq strategy, some of whom have called for phased withdrawal of United States forces or partitioning of the country.

Comparing terrorist groups to a "new type of fascism." Mr. Rumsfeld said, "With the growing" lethality and the increasing availability of weapons, can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?"

It was the second unusually combative speech by Mr. Rumsfeld to a veterans group in two days and appeared to be part of a concerted administration effort to address criticism of the war's conduct.

He does have a point. The behavior of many of the America-is-always-wrong crowd are making sounds exactly like those in the lead up to WWII. Appeasement has a place in international diplomacy, but when the enemy is emphatically stating its intention is your destruction, they are being much clearer than the Nazi's were in their intents.

Then of course you have Jack Reed.

While he did not directly compare current critics of the war in Iraq to those who sought to appease Hitler, his juxtaposition of the themes led Democrats to say that he was leveling an unfair charge.

Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a former Army officer and a Democratic member of the Armed Services Committee, responded that “no one has misread history more” than Mr. Rumsfeld.

"It's a political rant to cover up his incompetence," Senator Reed, a longtime critic of Mr. RumsfeldÂ’s handling of the war, told The Associated Press.

Mr. Reed said there were "scores of patriotic Americans of both parties who are highly critical of his handling of the Department of Defense."

Interesting. If you are such a good patriotic American why are you so offended by his charge? Could it be that it is striking far to close to home? Then there is Reed's normal chant on incompetence. His usual method to parry criticism from Rumsfeld.

Obviously Reed doesn't agree with the Administrations methods, but let's be truthful here, that doesn't make their methods incompetent. Reed's desire to perpetually play the Monday-Morning-Quarterback on the Secratary of Defense is always entertaining. Rumsfeld and the DoD have made some big mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan, but then they have done what most militaries that are successful do. They adapt and make progress. The problem with Reed and his ilk, is that they play the political game of requiring the right actions at all times. Anyone that has any understanding of military history, or any history for that matter, will understand that right action doesn't generally occur right from the start. But then, Reed, by his telling, must be a more honest historian than Rumsfeld.