Troops fear Rumsfeld's exit will end their Iraq mission
From Martin Fletcher in Baghdad
Half of America and the upper echelons of the US military may be cheering Donald RumsfeldÂ’s resignation from the post of Defence Secretary, but there was no rejoicing yesterday among those most directly affected by his decisions: the frontline soldiers in Iraq.
Troops expressed little pleasure at the departure of the man responsible for their protracted deployment to a hostile country where 2,839 of their comrades have died.
Indeed, some members of the 101st Airborne Division and other troops approached by The Times as they prepared to fly home from Baghdad airport yesterday expressed concern that Robert Gates, Mr RumsfeldÂ’s successor, and the Democrat-controlled Congress, might seek to wind down their mission before it was finished.
Mr Rumsfeld “made decisions, he stuck with them and he did what he thought was right, whether people agreed with it, liked it, or not”, Staff Sergeant Frank Notaro said. He insisted that Iraq was better off now than before the war.
Staff Sergeant Michael Howard said: “It’s a blow to the military. He was a good Secretary of Defence. He kept us focused. He kept the leaders focused. It’s going to be hard to fill his shoes.”
But one US army colonel, who did not want to be named, said that such positive views were uncommon in the higher ranks of the US military. “We are the ones closer to the problem. We are the ones who have the broader picture,” he said.
The colonel criticised Mr Rumsfeld for sending too few troops to Iraq, and for refusing to listen to the advice of his generals. He noted that General Eric Shinseki, the former US Army Chief of Staff, was dismissed for demanding more troops, while General John Abizaid, the commander of Central Command, was the sole general to have differed publicly with Mr Rumsfeld and survived.
Certainly the rank-and-file are trained not to question the decisions of their superiors. “We don’t question why we’re sent here. Our job is to do what we’re told and we do it with pride,” said Sergeant Jason Gomez, a military policeman. When pressed, some also admitted that to question Mr Rumsfeld’s execution of the war would raise doubts about the value of their mission and of their comrades’ deaths.
“I try to keep positive. That’s what keeps you going,” said Sergeant Daniel Allen, of the 101st, who has lost three friends during his two tours in Iraq. “When you lose someone close to you, it’s hard to say whether [their deaths] were worthwhile or not. I like to believe so, especially for their families’ sake.”
and the Euro slant, but heck it is a UK paperBut these men are also some of the last believers — people who are still convinced that Iraq can survive its present violence to become a stable democracy. “We’re losing a lot of people over here, but they’re not dying in vain,” Sergeant Gomez insisted.
Sergeant Ron Carter, of the 101st, said: “It’s a bad situation. It's a tough situation. But I think [Rumsfeld] probably did the right thing for the right reasons. Maybe it could have been a bit better planned, but helping people who were suffering — that’s a good reason.”
Major Mike Jason, who has been advising an Iraqi battalion for the past year, said that it remained to be seen how Mr Rumsfeld would be judged. “I hope history will judge that we did something good and stuck with it and saw it through, because it’s already been pretty damn costly.”
