Isn't sort of hypocritical to now like Gen Sanchez?

[HardWorkingDem]

I find it kind of odd how Dems are now applauding Gen R. Sanchez, while during Abu Ghraib it was the exact opposite. Help me out here.

[incapsulated]

1. I'm just glad he is embarrassing Bush

But I ain't patting him on the back.

[gateley]

2. I wasn't all that comfortable with the bashing he took during Abu Ghraib as

it was determined he hadn't been involved or knew about it, but it was easy to jump on him because Abu Ghraib was more PROOF that Bush and his people were evil.

If my parents had been held responsible for all the crap I did without their knowledge....

And now he's getting criticism about not "coming forward" earlier with his concerns. I may be mistaken, but didn't the high up military guys voice their complaints and Rumsfeld just blew them off? One can't expect a General to openly disparage the commander in chief while he's still serving in the military.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. General Miller, bible beater, prisoner beater, masterbeater

is a real problem.

[incapsulated]

6. Indeed

Another war criminal who will never do time.

[incapsulated]

5. He knew about it

And it happened on his watch. I hold him responsible, even if he wasn't in charge of it.

[tabasco]

3. If he is helping to end the war I don't give a shit.

Welcome, General Sanchez, to the ever growing Phony Soldier Corps!

[liberalmuse]

7. At least he is speaking out.

I think applauding this does not automatically make one a supporter of Abu Ghraib, nor is it hypocritical to anyone who possesses even the slightest complexity of thought.

[rusty quoin]

8. I am mixed here. It comes down to what you should do,

and what you are suppose to do. I am just supposing here, but Sanchez was doing what a military person was trained to do. Under normal circumstances he would be in the right. Try to imagine yourself in his position. I cannot. So I cannot judge him.

I was in the military, and followed orders, but had my own mind. I never got to that state of believing that the military had all the answers, thank God.

We like to think that the top brass are among the smartest and the ones to watch over us, but I think maybe they get in a situation where they just follow orders like I did. I would not have done the stuff in Abu Ghraib, I don't think, but it is tough to not follow orders.

Sanchez might be just a normal guy who has worked his way up and knew he was doing wrong, but hoped something would change.

As for applauding Sanchez, I don't. He was following orders. The exceptional military officers would have resigned. He is nothing special.

[Spinzonner]

9. Who has to like him

Just promote him as a useful tool.

[JI7]

10. it's not about liking HIM, it's about liking it that he is being truthful

rather than spreading the bs.

[greyshade]

11. Sanchez was part of the circular "commanders on the ground" argument. Bush repeatedly says...

...he listens to the commanders and Generals (http://www.dubyaspeak.com/repeatoffender.phtml?offense=commanders), not "politicians in Washington D.C." (completely ignoring that he, the Commander in Chief, is a politician in Washington D.C.).

But what are the Generals going to say? Most are going to say what their superiors tell them to say. That's how it works all the way down the line to the lowest foot soldier.

So the Generals just repeat what their commanders - all the way up to the Commander in Chief - tell them to say. This means:

1. Bush listens when the commanders parrot back everything he has told them to say. Wow, how noble!

2. If you are a commander and want to continue to serve - or, in Gen. Sanchez' case, retire with your pension - you don't speak up until you are out of the service.

Sanchez deserves the same praise and criticism as someone who goes into rehab. You're pleased that they've finally made the right decision, but you really wish that they hadn't done the junk in the first place.

[incapsulated]

12. What is ironic...

Is I've now lost count of the number of former Iraq Commanders who have retired and said the war is a disaster.

[greyshade]

13. How many generals have retired and *not* spoken out?

[incapsulated]

14. Most probably

But given the limited number who were actually in charge over there, the numbers of those speaking out is rather notable.

[greyshade]

15. No, seriously, I don't know what the percentage is that has spoken out.

I suspect it is high, for the reason you state, incapsulated. Just hoping someone else knew and could provide some data. :)

[incapsulated]

16. It was something I was thinking of looking up myself, heh

Because I don't know. I thought about when I heard Sanchez was speaking out... like is anyone keeping a tally, lol? This seems awfully familiar.

[HardWorkingDem]

17. Well, if you were involved and either...

sincerely did the best you could or just wanted to divert attention away from your own culpability, wouldn't you also speak out when it was safe to do so?

What I would like to know from Sanchez is exactly what role he did play in Abu Ghraib. My gut sort of tells me that he and people like he were more or less told what was going on was on a need to know basis and beyond his level and not to worry about it.

[incapsulated]

18. What I remember is...

He was handed a load of information and allegations and told to do an investigation which went nowhere until that soldier spoke up. Then it all came out.

[greyshade]

19. "...more than 20 retired U.S. generals have broken ranks..."

As of 7/23/07, according to an article I found on CommonDreams.org.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/23/4048/

It says, in part:

In op-ed pieces, interviews and TV ads, more than 20 retired U.S. generals have broken ranks with the culture of salute and keep it in the family. Instead, they are criticizing the commander in chief and other top civilian leaders who led the nation into what the generals believe is a misbegotten and tragic war.