| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Combat, in all its forms, is not for the uninformed or ill-trained, no matter the degree of their enthusiasm.
Don’t do or say things you would not like to see on the front page of the Washington Post.
– Donald Rumsfeld
[Note: With some people, it’s a wonder how they ever got to be on the inside circle at the highest level of the Pentagon, especially when the boss had such pronounced mistrust of media in all its permutations. Larry DiRita is a case in point. A former high-level aide to former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, DiRita became known to readers of this website when he engaged in an ill-advised battle of ideas and words with war correspondent Joe Galloway and the emails became part of the dispatch “Pen-MAN-Ship.”
At the time, DiRita was using his official government email account to provoke an argument with Joe (and then to whine about it when Joe pummeled him). Joe had written a column critical of Rumsfeld’s handling of the Iraq War and in particular with how the Pentagon had disregarded the extensive existing war plans that called for a vastly different approach to invading the country (namely, with more troops, and also through maintaining the government structures and personnel when ever possible). Back when it was first published, Joe’s column was one of the first voices to call Rumsfeld to account for obvious and costly failures in Iraq.
DiRita’s emails were in response to Joe’s steady attacks and in defense of his boss. They were also a textbook example of a guy ignoring the famous advice of British politician Dennis Healy: “when you are in a hole, stop digging.” With Joe’s permission, that email exchange was published on this site, and it got picked up and spread widely across the internet.
Earlier today when the email exchange published below was forwarded to me by General Barry McCaffrey (ret), it reinforced my original questions about how someone who can’t seem to fight keeps landing himself in the ring with undefeated champions of the written word. DiRita’s aim still exceeds his grasp—especially of detail when it comes to military analysis—as this latest exchange proves. While DiRita claims to have learned from his previous experience with Joe Galloway, he repeats the same mistakes with McCaffrey, only this time he does it with his eyes wide open. With the permission of General McCaffrey, the emails are published here.]
Original Message —–
From: BARRY MCCAFFREY
To: ldirita
Cc: Melissa Henson Associates LLC ; Joe Galloway
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 5:29 PM
Subject: Fw: yourrecent comments on rumsfeld
Larry,
Thanks for the email. Did not know you were in J5. It was a great assignment following Desert Storm combat command. Those were very challenging and rewarding duties before I went on to SOUTHCOM command.
Appreciate your admirable loyalty to Mr Rumsfeld. However, I see him as a huge failure as the Secretary of Defense. A patriotic, dedicated, intelligent, charismatic man of great experience—with a crippling sense of arrogance and hobbled by terrible instincts.
In large part, because of his mistaken decisions and micro-management of the tactical aspects of this war—we are nowstuck in a mess with 29,000 US troops killed and wounded…. with $400 billion wasted…and no good way out.
It is my view from direct dealing with the current senior leadership of this Administration… and the Congress… and the Armed Forces — that Mr Rumsfeld is viewed by many as a ruthless and mostly self-serving official who dominated the policy process to the ultimate detriment of the nation.
He claimed credit when it was not his due—- and adroitly evaded responsibility for his failures. Finally, by the end—it was my belief that he was disingenuous at best when confronted by the media for his failures.
This is as polite as I can be to characterize his deliberate denial of evidence that contradicted his public mis-statements of the facts. The new Secretary Bob Gates is going to make a serious contribution to getting us out of this dangerous situation in the short time remaining. He is brilliant and has common sense–and is an official of great integrity.
Dr Rice is no longer anchored by the constraints of Mr Rumsfeld—and now plays a pivotal role in a new aggressive public diplomacy. Dave Petraeus and Ryan Crocker will jointly play a creative leadership role in Iraq —minus the widely hated interference which came from Mr Rumsfeld. The White House Chief-of-staff and the National Security Advisor will now have a chance to open a dialog with Congress to possibly get some sort of bi-partisan solution to
the disaster that Mr Rumsfeld left us.
Again–I understand and respect your sense of loyalty–but I think Mr Rumsfeld’s leadership failure as the Secretary of Defense got the nation and the Armed Forces in a very dangerous position. Would also suggest that your very pointed and uncivil emails—such as the one to Joe Galloway and now me—which defend his disastrous tenure… are very much part of the public record and debate.
Appreciate the chance to respond to your views. Best wishes.
Barry McCaffrey
________________________________
From: Lawrence Di Rita
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 6:32 AM
To: BRM
Subject: your recent comments on rumsfeld
general mccaffrey–
i happened to catch you on one of the cable programs monday nite. in response to a question about whether or not condi ought to engage iran, you said that she no longer has donald rumsfeld ‘as an anchor around her neck’ and, thus, should be able to be more effective as secretary of state, or something to that effect.
that is a harsh characterization and it was quite unfair to both rumsfeld and rice. in particular, characterizing the matter as you did with respect to iran is also a non sequiter in that rumsfeld was explicit publicly and privately that iran was a diplomatic matter to be managed by the president and the secretary of state.
more generally, though, to characterize the regular interactions between two serious people dealing with serious issues as you did is, to be frank, beneath someone who has operated at the level you have operated.
rumsfeld had a job to do as secretary of defense, and i’m quite aware you may believe you would have done it differently if you were doing the job. but he did his job as best he could to support the president’s and the nation’s objectives, and he did it with considerable effect.
although he was the least parochial leader i ever served, he also was always mindful that, at times, his actions or actions of others at DoD butted up against the institutional views/priorities of other departments. still, at the level he, condi, colin powell, tenet, and the others operated, they accepted that sometimes there are bound to be those kinds of conflicts and they worked through them in a respectful and responsible fashion.
on a personal note, i served in j-5 around the same time as you and just prior to my departure from the service. i suppose it won’t shock you to know that people had views of your leadership that might diverge from how you saw yourself doing your job. still, i imagine you would find it unfair, unwarranted, and undignified to hear someone at or above your own station in life to describe your tenure using the kind of inflammatory rhetoric you
used.
i do hope you will consider what i am suggesting, and accept it in the spirit in which it is given. rumsfeld is an honorable patriot and deserves better and, whether you accept that or not, you do yourself a disservice by resorting to name calling to characterize your disagreements with his views.
finally: about a year ago i had an email exchange with joe galloway that i– stupidly, it turns out — assumed was a discussion between two people. joe was playing for the galleries, though, and released our exchange through various blogs. i had no problem with anything
anything i said, but thought it was pretty unsporting of joe to have done what he did. i mention only because i do not intend to distribute this email, or any response you may care to offer, and i suppose i should have stipulated that with galloway, too!
best…larry di rita
Please support this mission by making a direct contribution. Without your support, the mission will end. Thank you for helping me tell the full story of the struggle for Iraq and Afghanistan.
