Monday Morning Rant

I've just about had it with the Rumsfeld defenders making the case that we don't want to change leadership in wartime.

First, wartime is exactly when we need the most effective people in place, when we must do our absolute best. If the people we have in place aren't up to snuff, wartime is even more reason to replace them. We could ignore a clinker in peacetime.

Second, do they mean we are in full-bore war right now? Isn't Iraq a sovereign nation that we are just lending our military to while they figure out how to be a functioning democratic nation? It's not like we're fighting hordes of Red Chinese coming across the Yalu. Are they really saying we don't want to change leadership in a time of counter-insurgency?

Third, haven't they been telling us that the War on Terra is a different kind of war, that will last for a 'Long' time, perhaps decades? In which case, unless they're suggesting we abandon the Constitution (which I guess some are, surreptitiously) we're going to have a leadership change every 8 years minimum. So, the whole idea that we mustn't change leadership when we need to is, yet again, absurd.

I can't believe people support Don Rumsfeld.

Meanwhile, now that we're hearing reports that we have covert forces already in Iran doing target research and working on alliances with local regime-change helpers, it would be nice if we had someone in the mainstream asking when Congress authorized that.