I see President Bush has named a 'war czar' by the name of Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute. This, after nearly half a dozen retired four star generals refused the poisoned chalice.
Why do we need a 'war czar'? If Lute actually has a clue, unlike the people around the president, why doesn't Bush just replace them with him?
Shouldn't the secretary of war, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, the Iraq commander, the Afghanistan commander or, heaven forbid, the commander-in-chief of the armed forces actually be the 'war czar'?
No comments:
Post a Comment