Author Topic: We don't need no steenking czar  (Read 2927 times)

Paddy

  • Guest
We don't need no steenking czar
« on: May 16, 2007, 07:18:33 AM »
More BS from this WhiteHouse.  What the hell is the SECDEF for, anyway???  Oh yeah, they may need another 'fall guy' as things continue to deteriorate.   rolleyes

Bush selects Pentagon official as war czar
Lt. Gen. Lute chosen to oversee Iraq, Afghanistan conflicts, officials say
 MSNBC video

WASHINGTON - President Bush has chosen Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the Pentagon's director of operations, to oversee the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as a "war czar" after a long search for new leadership, administration officials said Tuesday.

It was a difficult job to fill, given the unpopularity of the war, now in its fifth year, and uncertainty about the clout the war coordinator would have. The search was complicated by demands from Congress to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq and scant public support for the war. The White House tried for weeks to fill the position and approached numerous candidates before settling on Lute.

In the newly created position, Lute would serve as an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser, and would also maintain his military status and rank as a three-star general, according to a Pentagon official.

May be limited by lack of civil experience
Lute became director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September. Before that, he served for more than two years as director of operations at U.S. Central Command, during which he oversaw combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with other regions.

Anthony Cordesman, an Iraq expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Lute comes into the job with a stellar background in combat operation and agency coordination.

Yet the nature of the job poses an enormous challenge. Lute wont be able to deal with civil agencies the way he did with military officers, and his lack of budget authority or ability to reshape regulations could limit his clout, Cordesman said.

You really need strong leadership and planning from the ambassador and from the commander in Iraq. Theyre the ones who have to interact with the Iraqis, he said. In effect, youre a czar in a support role to field commanders and an ambassador 7,000 miles away.

Military background
A West Point graduate, Lute, 54, has had an extensive military career. He fought in the 1991 Gulf War.

From 1998 to 2000 he commanded the Second Cavalry Regiment at Fort Polk, La. He served next as the executive assistant to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs for 14 months before joining the 1st Infantry Division in Schweinfurt, Germany, as the assistant division commander. He also served in Kosovo for six months in 2002 before being assigned to U.S. European Command in January 2003.

Jon Soltz, who leads an organization of veterans critical of the administrations war policy, said there is already a war czar  Bush.

The troops are now depending on Lt. Gen. Lute to do something the president wouldnt  listen to commanders who are telling him we need more diplomacy, not escalation, said Soltz, an Iraq veteran and chairman of VoteVets.org.

Retired Marine Corps Gen. John J. Sheehan was approached about the job, but declined because he thinks that decision-making in Washington lacks connection to a broader understanding of the region.

These huge shortcomings are not going to be resolved by the assignment of an additional individual to the White House staff, Sheehan wrote in The Washington Post, explaining his reasons for not wanting to be considered.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18683993/

Eleven Mike

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 546
  • All your desert are belong to us.
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2007, 07:26:08 AM »
Oh, no!!  Entering its fifth year!!

Ron

  • Guest
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2007, 07:34:49 AM »
Oh no! My faith in war!

Ron

  • Guest
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2007, 07:39:09 AM »
I never understood the reason for the use of the term czar. I blame Bill Bennett and the whole drug czar bs.

Typical reaction to a problem by bureaucracy, lets add another layer.

Eleven Mike

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 546
  • All your desert are belong to us.
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2007, 07:40:02 AM »
Yeah. 

HankB

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,646
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2007, 12:01:40 PM »
Quote
Lute  . . . his lack of budget authority or ability to reshape regulations . . .
If he has no budget authority and can't reshape regulations, exactly WHAT kind of a "czar" is he?

Is there ANYTHING that he CAN do?

(That is, other than take the heat for bad decisions made above his pay grade?)
Trump won in 2016. Democrats haven't been so offended since Republicans came along and freed their slaves.
Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it. - Mark Twain
Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction in stolen goods. - H.L. Mencken
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. - Mark Twain

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2007, 12:25:08 PM »
Quote
Lute  . . . his lack of budget authority or ability to reshape regulations . . .
If he has no budget authority and can't reshape regulations, exactly WHAT kind of a "czar" is he?

Is there ANYTHING that he CAN do?

(That is, other than take the heat for bad decisions made above his pay grade?)

They can be a scapegoat.  smiley

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,431
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2007, 12:32:31 PM »
I sense another name change for me.   smiley   Something involving czar.  Suggestions? 
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

mfree

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,637
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2007, 05:00:39 PM »
Well, ScapeCzar is obvious.... you'd be the first, maybe CzarGoat?

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2007, 05:21:04 AM »
If it ever occurred to a .gov employee to REMOVE layers of bureaucracy rather than ADD them, the entire universe would instantly collapse in on itself.

Also, I want no czars/caesars/kaisers in my USA. 
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,431
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2007, 05:29:58 AM »
Czar of APS?

Or perhaps something more specific?

Czar of Post Count?

Czar of Forum Dueling?

Czar of Internet Nit-Picking?
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Art Eatman

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,442
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2007, 07:19:57 AM »
Off the cuff, it sounds like another effort--likely to fail, IMO--to create a single authority over the action.  The Pentagon is no different from the Drugwar world in having all manner of interlocking bureaucracies that don't talk to each other, and refuse to take any responsibility when things go wrong.

Recommended reading:  Allen Drury's novel, "Pentagon".  Written maybe thirty years ago...Nothing's changed.

Art
The American Indians learned what happens when you don't control immigration.

Gewehr98

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,010
  • Yee-haa!
    • Neural Misfires (Blog)
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2007, 07:31:18 AM »
Oh no, my faith in RileyMc!  grin
"Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round...

http://neuralmisfires.blogspot.com

"Never squat with your spurs on!"

Marnoot

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,965
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2007, 08:31:31 AM »
FistgoatCzar?

Agreed that adding yet another bureaucrat is asinine. I'm just waiting for various parts of the government to metaphorically fall over and not be able to get up, due to their stubby arms and legs and enormous Staypuft Marshmallow Man-like torso.

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2007, 09:19:49 AM »
Quote
Or perhaps something more specific?

"NameChangeCzar" ...?   laugh
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2007, 09:33:34 AM »
Fistgoatczar?

That sounds like something he could do in San Francisco or Tiajuana.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Ron

  • Guest
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2007, 05:24:24 PM »
Inanity Czar (said w/brotherly love)

Paddy

  • Guest
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #17 on: May 17, 2007, 06:30:03 PM »
Goatfelcher Czar

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,431
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #18 on: May 17, 2007, 06:53:49 PM »
Well, you don't have to get all personal.   undecided

One thing I like about APS is that, for the most part, we can rip one another full of holes in a good debate and then be friendly and civil in some other thread about grilled cheese sandwiches and what-not. 
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Ron

  • Guest
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2007, 05:42:35 AM »
I wasn't trying to be mean I thought mine was funny  undecided

Marnoot

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,965
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #20 on: May 18, 2007, 06:00:36 AM »
Mine was a mere concatenation of your previous, current, and possible future names. No malice intended. smiley

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,431
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2007, 06:04:06 AM »
Psst.  I wasn't talkin' to you guys. 
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Paddy

  • Guest
Re: We don't need no steenking czar
« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2007, 10:46:34 AM »
Actually, my previous suggestion was a bit too personal.  I'd like to revise it.  How about
'Goatfister czar'?  That would tie in with your prior screen name and also allow you to keep it 'arms length', so to speak.  laugh