Hat tip to Oxblog, who has a whole post up on the new Secretary of the Army Army Chief of Staff (thanks, Mark...). What caught my eye was an this old CNN story:
According to a once-secret Army memo, Gen. Peter Jan Schoomaker, who was in charge of a special forces unit at the time, declined to provide an assessment of the FBI plan for the siege of the [Waco] compound.Believe it or not, this is good news...
"....This was not a military operation and could not be assessed as such," Schoomaker, a career special forces soldier, wrote in the memo describing the meeting.Well, he understands the limitations and boundaries between civilian and military action. That's a good sign."We explained that the situation was not one that we had ever encountered and that the Rules of Engagement for the FBI were substantially different than for a military operation."
One of the soldiers told the Justice Department officials in attendance: "We can't grade your paper," according to the memo.
He's been nominated to be the new Army Chief of Staff -- not Secretary of the Army. James Roche, who was recently Secretary of the Air Force and was a Navy officer well before that, has been nominated as Secretary of the Army. Rumsfeld's pretty serious about changing the Army.
PLEASE dont miss the student's anti gov. demonstrations in IRAN
We won't, M. Coming tomorrow...
Good sign? Given the multitude of government lies surrounding Waco it appears the government has selected another careerist who will not rock the boat. I was marooned in Laredo during the hearings so had ample time to witness the exposure of government lies and cover-up. When a professional soldier cannot access an assault, can we expect any degree of candidness or honesty in the future?
TJ, I think the relevant point is that Schoomaker's unwillingness to assess the plan, either positively or negatively, suggests he understands the important divide between civilian and military affairs, will not try to blur that line, and may bring this understanding to Iraq, where we are trying to use a military force to conduct police operations.
TJ, note that he was asked to review the plan before the assault, and thereby participate in it...
...not afterwards in order to exonerate the participants.
A.L.
Folks, I have seen where people are bashing General Schoomaker, & I have one word about that: STOP!! You all who bash General Schoomaker don't know squat about what happened at Waco! I don't, only to say that I saw on t.v. newscasts the fire on the compound that destroyed a building but worse it destroyed the lives of those Davidians' families & this nation. General Schoomaker was in no position to assess where the military was or what the FBI or ATF might have done wrong.
Another thing, General Schoomaker is decisive & is a great choice to lead the Army's soldiers into the future. If you all want to bash anybody in the government's defense structure, it is Rumsfeld, at whom you all & I & all Americans need to point fingers. Rumsfeld couldn't find anybody, why? I know why, the active duty generals DID NOT want to work for somebody who jabbed at General Shinseki. I could go into it all day where Rumsfeld likes unconventional warfare, & dislikes conventional guys like General Shinseki, but I won't. Instead, you all who complain about General Schoomaker better wake up & smell the coffee, otherwise, you get your sorry butts out to Germany or Korea & stand at attention at your posts with a rifle in hand!!!