• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rumsfeld Memo Presents Grim Outlook of War on Terror Progress

T

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
from usatoday.com


Among Rumsfeld's observations in the two-page memo:

? The United States is "just getting started" in fighting the Iraq-based terror group Ansar Al-Islam.

? The war is hugely expensive. "The cost-benefit ratio is against us! Our cost is billions against the terrorists' cost of millions."

(hasn't he been ridiculing everyone publically who has said the same thing)?????????????

? Postwar stabilization efforts are very difficult. "It is pretty clear the coalition can win in Afghanistan and Iraq in one way or another, but it will be a long, hard slog."

Well at least it seems that they may be honest internally to some extent.
 
Heres the actual memo and not some parsed version.

TO: Gen. [bleep] Myers
Paul Wolfowitz
Gen. Pete Pace
Doug Feith



FROM: Donald Rumsfeld

SUBJECT: Global War on Terrorism

The questions I posed to combatant commanders this week were: Are we winning or losing the Global War on Terror? Is DoD changing fast enough to deal with the new 21st century security environment? Can a big institution change fast enough? Is the USG changing fast enough?

DoD has been organized, trained and equipped to fight big armies, navies and air forces. It is not possible to change DoD fast enough to successfully fight the global war on terror; an alternative might be to try to fashion a new institution, either within DoD or elsewhere ? one that seamlessly focuses the capabilities of several departments and agencies on this key problem.

With respect to global terrorism, the record since Septermber 11th seems to be:

We are having mixed results with Al Qaida, although we have put considerable pressure on them ? nonetheless, a great many remain at large.

USG has made reasonable progress in capturing or killing the top 55 Iraqis.

USG has made somewhat slower progress tracking down the Taliban ? Omar, Hekmatyar, etc.

With respect to the Ansar Al-Islam, we are just getting started.

Have we fashioned the right mix of rewards, amnesty, protection and confidence in the US?

Does DoD need to think through new ways to organize, train, equip and focus to deal with the global war on terror?

Are the changes we have and are making too modest and incremental? My impression is that we have not yet made truly bold moves, although we have have made many sensible, logical moves in the right direction, but are they enough?

Today, we lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror. Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?

Does the US need to fashion a broad, integrated plan to stop the next generation of terrorists? The US is putting relatively little effort into a long-range plan, but we are putting a great deal of effort into trying to stop terrorists. The cost-benefit ratio is against us! Our cost is billions against the terrorists' costs of millions.

Do we need a new organization?

How do we stop those who are financing the radical madrassa schools?

Is our current situation such that "the harder we work, the behinder we get"?

It is pretty clear that the coalition can win in Afghanistan and Iraq in one way or another, but it will be a long, hard slog.

Does CIA need a new finding?

Should we create a private foundation to entice radical madradssas to a more moderate course?

What else should we be considering?

Please be prepared to discuss this at our meeting on Saturday or Monday.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
 
Looking at the actual memo, its pretty funny what USA/Washington Times did. Nice adding words that just arent there.
 
ya they commented on the points but i don't think that anyone who understands the concept of quotation marks would accuse them of adding words that were not there. 😉
 
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
ya they commented on the points but i don't think that anyone who understands the concept of quotation marks would accuse them of adding words that were not there. 😉
Click to expand...

Well when you take something out of context and "interpert" it, thats not very good reporting.
 
I actually have a newfound respect for Rumsfeld. The memo tells it like it is, and is actually an honest, non-spun assessment of the current problems our country faces. Now I assume he never meant for this to be leaked, and contrary to what the Administration has tried to spin, Rumsfeld has not painted this picture publicly.

But kudos to Rumsfeld for recognizing that there is a serious problem on his hands, and looking for the solution pragmatically instead of ideologically, even if he didn't want to admit it in public.
 
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
I actually have a newfound respect for Rumsfeld. The memo tells it like it is, and is actually an honest, non-spun assessment of the current problems our country faces. Now I assume he never meant for this to be leaked, and contrary to what the Administration has tried to spin, Rumsfeld has not painted this picture publicly.

But kudos to Rumsfeld for recognizing that there is a serious problem on his hands, and looking for the solution pragmatically instead of ideologically, even if he didn't want to admit it in public.
Click to expand...


Actually he's been "this way" all along - His defensive posture was only because of the constant bombardment before. I do believe that his stance has alway been - do you have what you need, are we doing enough for you, etc - it's just that all the bleeting has forced him to only talk about the other things which you say he's had to paint.

Oh and one more thing - this memo isn't "recognizing there is a serious problem" it's an attempt to make sure we are doing things right and if not - what needs to be changed and how. This isn't some "grim outlook" - it is forward looking, just like he's always been.

CkG
 
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Actually he's been "this way" all along - His defensive posture was only because of the constant bombardment before. I do believe that his stance has alway been - do you have what you need, are we doing enough for you, etc - it's just that all the bleeting has forced him to only talk about the other things which you say he's had to paint.

Oh and one more thing - this memo isn't "recognizing there is a serious problem" it's an attempt to make sure we are doing things right and if not - what needs to be changed and how. This isn't some "grim outlook" - it is forward looking, just like he's always been.
Click to expand...

Sorry Cad, but I just don't buy the argument that he's been like this all along. I never saw it, and I don't think he's reflected this attitude in public.

Secondly, there IS a serious problem he faces. Its the fact that we have Islamic nuts waging jihad against us. I'm not saying the DoD is in a state of flux or its a disaster under him. Its not at all. I'm saying the serious problem he faces is winning the peace in Iraq, in the Middle East, and the world in general.
 
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Actually he's been "this way" all along - His defensive posture was only because of the constant bombardment before. I do believe that his stance has alway been - do you have what you need, are we doing enough for you, etc - it's just that all the bleeting has forced him to only talk about the other things which you say he's had to paint.

Oh and one more thing - this memo isn't "recognizing there is a serious problem" it's an attempt to make sure we are doing things right and if not - what needs to be changed and how. This isn't some "grim outlook" - it is forward looking, just like he's always been.
Click to expand...

Sorry Cad, but I just don't buy the argument that he's been like this all along. I never saw it, and I don't think he's reflected this attitude in public.

Secondly, there IS a serious problem he faces. Its the fact that we have Islamic nuts waging jihad against us. I'm not saying the DoD is in a state of flux or its a disaster under him. Its not at all. I'm saying the serious problem he faces is winning the peace in Iraq, in the Middle East, and the world in general.
Click to expand...

If you look back at his statements over the years you'll see that he is a very intelligent and forward thinking type man.

Now, again - this memo has been dubbed as a "grim outlook" - which it is not. Sure we face serious issues and he is seeing what needs to be done and what he(they) can do to help. Look at this memo in a positive mindset once - i bet you'll see what is there and not there😉 It'll be tough to read without bias - but I'm sure you can do it🙂 What I'm trying to say is that this memo isn't a review of out standing on the "war on terror" but rather a memo which calls for people to review the things that he posed and answer them so they can continue to mold and shift stategies, because the DoD wasn't built for this kind of war as he pointed out. If they see issues that the DoD can't or isn't handling well or could use some more help with - then he wan't it identified and addressed.

It is hardly a "Grim Outlook".

CkG
 
This looks like a carefully orchestrated leak. The administration is now trying to back away from its earlier, and much rosier positions, and this is the kind of stuff that prepares the American public to spend a few 100 billion dollars more chasing extremist rabbits down the drain hole. Every day it smells more and more like QUAGMIRE, and how did HE get in here? 🙂,

Anyway, is everyone ready to pony up a few thousand more American casualties and your children's future?

Uncle Sam wants YOU!! 🙂,

Sign up here --->

-Robert
 
Originally posted by: chess9
This looks like a carefully orchestrated leak. The administration is now trying to back away from its earlier, and much rosier positions, and this is the kind of stuff that prepares the American public to spend a few 100 billion dollars more chasing extremist rabbits down the drain hole. Every day it smells more and more like QUAGMIRE, and how did HE get in here? 🙂,

Anyway, is everyone ready to pony up a few thousand more American casualties and your children's future?

Uncle Sam wants YOU!! 🙂,

Sign up here --->

-Robert
Click to expand...

New shipment of tinfoil today?

rolleye.gif


CkG
 
CadGuy. Are you old enough to remember Robert McNamara? He was the Secretary of Defense during the Viet Nam war. He was absolutely sure he was right. And, he was a very bright guy (still is). But he poured it down a rathole because he thought he kew best. I admire Rumsfeld's memo. But I think Rumsfeld would have to move the entire defense industry to get some serious results. That's not how the world works. Everyone is protecting turf and unwilling to change. I don't use tinfoil and I think we're going to spend much, much more and still get nothing positive.

Look for us to set up a pesthole government in Iraq before the presidential elections.
 
Originally posted by: Whitling
CadGuy. Are you old enough to remember Robert McNamara? He was the Secretary of Defense during the Viet Nam war. He was absolutely sure he was right. And, he was a very bright guy (still is). But he poured it down a rathole because he thought he kew best. I admire Rumsfeld's memo. But I think Rumsfeld would have to move the entire defense industry to get some serious results. That's not how the world works. Everyone is protecting turf and unwilling to change. I don't use tinfoil and I think we're going to spend much, much more and still get nothing positive.

Look for us to set up a pesthole government in Iraq before the presidential elections.
Click to expand...

Nope - I'm a young-pup🙂 I have read quite a bit about him though. I'm not sure what you are trying to say though, because Rummy is asking questions, looking for ideas, making sure things have the right plan or are even able to have conclude the right plan. That is hardly grounds to call him McNamara😉

And yes - there'll be a "gov't" in Iraq before the election next fall - but remember who is forcing that quickness. It wasn't this Admin, they wanted to take things slow and build a good solid foundation for the gov't but has been hounded to force the Iraqi's to do things quicker by the UN and some people here at home that want "our troops out".
Nice try Whitling - but you're not going to be able to play it both ways.🙂

CkG
 
it is a grim outlook to the masses who were lead into believing that the whole of Iraq was cowering under Saddam's rule and we could simply waltz in there, throw the cuffs on him and everything would be peachy. i belive that is what the title is referring to.
 
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Whitling
CadGuy. Are you old enough to remember Robert McNamara? He was the Secretary of Defense during the Viet Nam war. He was absolutely sure he was right. And, he was a very bright guy (still is). But he poured it down a rathole because he thought he kew best. I admire Rumsfeld's memo. But I think Rumsfeld would have to move the entire defense industry to get some serious results. That's not how the world works. Everyone is protecting turf and unwilling to change. I don't use tinfoil and I think we're going to spend much, much more and still get nothing positive.

Look for us to set up a pesthole government in Iraq before the presidential elections.
Click to expand...

Nope - I'm a young-pup🙂 I have read quite a bit about him though. I'm not sure what you are trying to say though, because Rummy is asking questions, looking for ideas, making sure things have the right plan or are even able to have conclude the right plan. That is hardly grounds to call him McNamara😉

And yes - there'll be a "gov't" in Iraq before the election next fall - but remember who is forcing that quickness. It wasn't this Admin, they wanted to take things slow and build a good solid foundation for the gov't but has been hounded to force the Iraqi's to do things quicker by the UN and some people here at home that want "our troops out".
Nice try Whitling - but you're not going to be able to play it both ways.🙂

CkG
Click to expand...

Exactly like McNamara. In fact seeing both, I would say he was superior to Rumsfeld. He was always asking questions, looking for ideas, making sure things have the right plan, etc. Unfortunely his agenda subverted the facts about the war, and indeed escalated it along with others. In this respect, Iraq is a carbon copy of Vietnam. Now, like then, we had to have reasons that were "clearer than truth". In fact, they had misunderstood the whole situation. McNamara would come to realize this while still in the war, and publically admitted it in his book years later. It is starting to look like Rumsfeld is reaching the point where some light is dawning, but too little too late to reverse course.
 
My point with McNamara is that the top guys like to give the impression that they know what they're doing. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. You'll perhaps recall that last year the Time Warner guys who bought AOL wrote off $100 Billion. That's Billion with a B. Whoops, we paid a little too much for AOL.

As to being pressed to form a government, it was clear from the start that we did not have the resources (or the skill) to properly administer Iraq. If it was clear to me and to many, many others, some of whom are published, why wasn't it clear to the administration. IMO two reasons: (1) They wanted to do this, and (2) Ignoring contrary opinions. There's a story about a guy who tried to corner the flower marked in Kuwait. He thought he'd sell them to Iraqis to throw at Americans. Although the story is probably apochryphal, he should have tried to corner the RPG (rocket propelled grenade) market. I think it's little disengenuous to say "Kiss my ash." to the rest of the world, then call for help, then blame them when they attach some conditions.

There are real limits on the ability of one society to impose its values on another. You keep hearing about how successful we were in Germany and Japan but both of those countries had a long history of orderly government and respect for authority in the abstract.
 
Originally posted by: Whitling
My point with McNamara is that the top guys like to give the impression that they know what they're doing. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. You'll perhaps recall that last year the Time Warner guys who bought AOL wrote of $100 Billion. That's Billion with a B. Whoops, we paid a little too much for AOL.

As to being pressed to form a government, it was clear from the start that we did not have the resources (or the skill) to properly administer Iraq. If it was clear to me and to many, many others, some of whom are published, why wasn't it clear to the administration. IMO two reasons: (1) They wanted to do this, and (2) Ignoring contrary opinions. There's a story about a guy who tried to corner the flower marked in Kuwait. He thought he'd sell them to Iraqis to throw at Americans. Although the story is probably apochryphal, he should have tried to corner the RPG (rocket propelled grenade) market. I think it's little disengenuous to say "Kiss my ash." to the rest of the world, then call for help, then blame them when they attach some conditions.

There are real limits on the ability of one society to impose its values on another. You keep hearing about how successful we were in Germany and Japan but both of those countries had a long history of orderly government and respect for authority in the abstract.
Click to expand...

Whats spooky is that there were conversations just like this 35 years ago. Cad was defending the Gulf of Tonkin, or someone just like him.
 
Yes. Gulf of Tonkin. We're in because one of our destroyers got "attacked." Five years later, "Whoops, it was a flock of geese on the radar." And, I'm not making this up. I started questioning things when I read in Stars and Stripes (a service newspaper) tht there were three bad guys rocketing Saigon and Westmoreland had 10,000 men out looking for them. "That shows that they're desperate." said Westmoreland. He's got 10,000 guys out looking for them and they're desparate. But, that was then, this is now.

We're there because of weapons of mass destruction, or maybe because Saadam was oppressing his people, or maybe because . . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top