Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Guardian - Comment
Friday, April 14, 2006

Desert Rats Leave The Sinking Ship
Why Rumsfeld Should Not Resign

By Greg Palast

Well, here they come: the wannabe Rommels, the gaggle of generals, safely
retired, to lay siege to Donald Rumsfeld. This week, six of them have
called for the Secretary of Defense's resignation.

Well, according to my watch, they're about four years too late -- and they
still don't get it.

I know that most of my readers will be tickled pink that the bemedalled
boys in crew cuts are finally ready to kick Rummy in the rump, in public.
But to me, it just shows me that these boys still can't shoot straight.

It wasn't Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld who stood up in front of the UN
and identified two mobile latrines as biological weapons labs, was it,
General Powell?

It wasn't Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld who told us our next warning from
Saddam could be a mushroom cloud, was it Condoleezza?

It wasn't Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld who declared that Al Qaeda and
Saddam were going steady, was it, Mr. Cheney?

Yes, Rumsfeld is a swaggering bag of mendacious arrogance, a duplicitous
chicken-hawk, yellow-bellied bully-boy and Tinker-Toy Napoleon -- but he
didn't appoint himself Secretary of Defense.

Let me tell you a story about the Secretary of Defense you didn't read in
the New York Times, related to me by General Jay Garner, the man our
president placed in Baghdad as the US' first post-invasion viceroy.

Garner arrived in Kuwait City in March 2003 working under the mistaken
notion that when George Bush called for democracy in Iraq, the President
meant the Iraqis could choose their own government. Misunderstanding the
President's true mission, General Garner called for Iraqis to hold
elections within 90 days and for the U.S. to quickly pull troops out of
the cities to a desert base. "It's their country," the General told me of
the Iraqis. "And," he added, most ominously, "their oil."

Let's not forget: it's all about the oil. I showed Garner a 101-page plan
for Iraq's economy drafted secretly by neo-cons at the State Department,
Treasury and the Pentagon, calling for "privatization" (i.e. the sale) of
"all state assets ... especially in the oil and oil-supporting
industries."  The General knew of the plans and he intended to shove it
where the Iraqi sun don't shine. Garner planned what he called a "Big
Tent" meeting of Iraqi tribal leaders to plan elections. By helping Iraqis
establish their own multi-ethnic government -- and this was back when
Sunnis, Shias and Kurds were on talking terms -- knew he could get the
nation on its feet peacefully before a welcomed "liberation" turned into a
hated "occupation."

But, Garner knew, a freely chosen coalition government would mean the
death knell for the neo-con oil-and-assets privatization grab.

On April 21, 2003, three years ago this month, the very night General
Garner arrived in Baghdad, he got a call from Washington. It was Rumsfeld
on the line. He told Garner, in so many words, "Don't unpack, Jack, you're
fired."

Rummy replaced Garner, a man with years of on-the-ground experience in
Iraq, with green-boots Paul Bremer, the Managing Director of Kissinger
Associates. Bremer cancelled the Big Tent meeting of Iraqis and postponed
elections for a year; then he issued 100 orders, like some tin-pot pasha,
selling off Iraq's economy to U.S. and foreign operators, just as
Rumsfeld's neo-con clique had desired.

Reading this, it sounds like I should applaud the six generals' call for
Rumfeld's ouster. Forget it.

For a bunch of military hotshots, they sure can't shoot straight. They're
wasting all their bullets on the decoy. They've gunned down the puppet
instead of the puppeteers.

There's no way that Rumsfeld could have yanked General Garner from Baghdad
without the word from The Bunker. Nothing moves or breathes or spits in
the Bush Administration without Darth Cheney's growl of approval. And
ultimately, it's the Commander-in-Chief who's chiefly in command.

Even the generals' complaint -- that Rumsfeld didn't give them enough
troops -- was ultimately a decision of the cowboy from Crawford. (And by
the way, the problem was not that we lacked troops -- the problem was that
we lacked moral authority to occupy this nation. A million troops would
not be enough -- the insurgents would just have more targets.)

President Bush is one lucky fella. I can imagine him today on the intercom
with Cheney: "Well, pardner, looks like the game's up." And Cheney
replies, "Hey, just hang the Rumsfeld dummy out the window until he's
taken all their ammo."

When Bush and Cheney read about the call for Rumsfeld's resignation today,
I can just hear George saying to Dick, "Mission Accomplished."

Generals, let me give you a bit of advice about choosing a target: It's
the President, stupid.

**********

Read more about the untold story of General Garner and the secret war
plans in ARMED MADHOUSE, by Greg Palast, to be released June 6 (US) and
July 6 (UK). View Palast's interview with Garner for BBC Television at
http://www.GregPalast.com

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or you 
can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will become disabled or deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to