wiffleball 4,790 Posted May 15, 2007 It took them weeks, but they finally found a sucker err 'patriot' to be the War Czar! Ya know, kind of like a Commander of the Armed forces. A "Commander in Chief" if you will. Man, that'll be great. I wonder why we never had a position like that before? Seems to be the Bush Doctrine. When in doubt - create a bureacracy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,503 Posted May 15, 2007 Seems to be the Bush Doctrine. When in doubt - create a bureacracy. Or like a Wiffleball thread idea - When bored, make fun of Republicans Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Greedo 13 Posted May 15, 2007 What's wrong with the Department of Defense? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,790 Posted May 16, 2007 Interesting article from a Lt. Col on this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18700530/ Selected Excerpts: This is not about Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute; by all accounts, he is a fine officer. This is about the need—or perhaps more importantly the wisdom—of creating such a position. We already have a czar for America’s wars – he’s called the Secretary of Defense. And we already have a war czar for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan – he’s called the Commander, U.S. Central Command (COMCENT)..... What happens when LTG Lute calls the Secretary of Defense (or State) and directs something be done and the Secretary disagrees? This sets up confusion and confrontation inside the administration. Then it has to go to the president for resolution. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
