Friday, March 02, 2007
Secretary of the Army Resigns
Comments:
Jason,
I guess I'm getting into this story a bit late in the game. As I read some of the accounts some questions come to mind.
Has anyone done the work to look at the paper trail related to Building 18 inspections over the years? I bet there are plenty of building inspection reports stating the need for repairs and pest control. I also bet that there are plenty of budget based denials. How far back into the past do these extend. The problem did not just "happen".
I guess I'm getting into this story a bit late in the game. As I read some of the accounts some questions come to mind.
Has anyone done the work to look at the paper trail related to Building 18 inspections over the years? I bet there are plenty of building inspection reports stating the need for repairs and pest control. I also bet that there are plenty of budget based denials. How far back into the past do these extend. The problem did not just "happen".
# posted by 
: 3:26 PM
: 3:26 PM
I suspect the sackings were more as a result of inept handling of the event than as a result of the event itself.
Naming a former commander of Walter Reed back into the post, for example, when it is obvious the problem extends well prior to Weightman's tenure, was simply ham-handed. Weightman could have remained in command until a suitable successor could be found.
It could also be that the SecDef looked into his own records and found a lot of "three bags full, can-do, can-do" reports, rather than a frank assessment of the situation, and had enough.
Who knows.
An occasional shakeup isn't a bad thing. That's why I liked Rummy -- he kept his generals all shook up.
Of course, he probably should have shaken this one up a bit sooner.
I wonder how Hackworth would have done as Secretary of the Army?
Post a Comment
Naming a former commander of Walter Reed back into the post, for example, when it is obvious the problem extends well prior to Weightman's tenure, was simply ham-handed. Weightman could have remained in command until a suitable successor could be found.
It could also be that the SecDef looked into his own records and found a lot of "three bags full, can-do, can-do" reports, rather than a frank assessment of the situation, and had enough.
Who knows.
An occasional shakeup isn't a bad thing. That's why I liked Rummy -- he kept his generals all shook up.
Of course, he probably should have shaken this one up a bit sooner.
I wonder how Hackworth would have done as Secretary of the Army?
