Rumsfeld Vs. the Generals

One of our favorite columnists, John Burtis has a new article titled "They’re on the barricades together":

...true to his word, Pinch, through his minions, really laid into Mr. Rumsfeld, in Wednesday’s article, Rumsfeld Defends His Record Against His Critics, the Times avers that, "…many of his controversial decisions-- and his second-guessing of the military…"
Controversial decisions? Second guessing of the military? But of course, historical fact has no place at the NYT, a stark truth which still troubles old line readers. Let it appear that Mr. Rumsfeld dares to question the generals, the new allies of the Times, the real leaders in this time of war, the thwarted architects of systems and plans that would have worked in Iraq--the victims of an ego run roughshod.

And mentions how the generals ( and the press and the Democrats) are all wrong on how to win in Iraq:

...while all the armchair fox hunters looking for Mr. Rumfeld’s scalp blather about the half million men we need in Iraq to win, not one of them took the time to mention the amazing number of additional targets this astonishing number of troops and boundless stockpiles of materiel this vast expeditionary force would supply the enemy.

Such thinking helped us lose in Vietnam. Rummy is right!