I sincerely appreciate your efforts to expose Larry DiRita's revisionism of Rumsfeld's record.

I find it unbelievable that he boasts of the Army's increase in endstrength when anyone with a brain (hell, I was a 1LT at the time) knew that 2 divisions were on the chopping block in mid-2001.

Moreover, it was Rumsfeld and his cowardly, incompetent hand-picked Army CSA, Peter Schoomaker, who publicly opposed any Congressional effort to increase authorized RA endstrength until very late 2006.

Sure, authorizations have grown and the RA inventory has grown, but the Army Reserve is well below its authorized strength right now and is barely at 50% fill on Captains and is less than 2/3rds fill on Sergeants First Class.

UPDATE: I just saw his claim (in the original piece) about RA endstrength growing 40% under Rumsfeld. What sleight of hand! This includes moblized Reserve, Guard and IRR/Retiree recalls. I don't think anyone can claim this as an increase in RA endstrength when it's simply a pool of folks moving from one component to another and then back again.

Re the pic: it brings back wistful memories of an Era when Army General officers deemed it common-sense/appropriate to accompany their suit-wearing civilian masters to Pentagon press conferences in their Class A's. We need to restore this "adult" mindset once again. I think everyone can agree that General McChrystal presented quite a commanding, professional image in his Class As at press conferences surrounding the start of OIF. He exuded professionalism, poise and confidence.

The Economist likes Ricks:

The invasion of Iraq was like much else in the Bush years—an initial triumph that contained the seeds of disaster. Thomas Ricks, the author of “Fiasco”, argues that “the US-led invasion was launched recklessly, with a flawed plan for war and a worse approach to occupation.” Mr Rumsfeld’s decision to invade with too few troops led inexorably to the breakdown of law and order, which turned the Iraqi population against the Americans, and to the Abu Ghraib scandal, which solidified world opinion against America. But Mr Bush responded to the unfolding disaster with a mixture of denial and stubbornness, refusing to force Mr Rumsfeld to adjust his plans. He engaged in an absurd photo-op to declare “Mission accomplished”, and he also gave medals to three of the architects of the debacle, George Tenet, Tommy Franks and Paul Bremer.

Bush, not so much.

In exile or exiting stage right, most Team W members continue to stay on message. That allows admitting the 'mistake' (practice looking reflective, then rephrase as 'disappointment'...) of not 'splaining things to the American People' with sufficient skill. When his bile at going down for Rove had settled, even Scott McClellan thought he could have 'explained better.'

Getting the policy wrong? 'No time for looking back.' Divisive misdirection, deception, exploiting false associations and manufacturing 'we know where they are' facts? 'No time for the blame game...'

The admissible mistake was 'failure to communicate', to close the deal with those tactics. Not recognizing the fading effectiveness of half-truths in service of misdirection, that was the mis..., er, disappointing.

If you look at where the shadow cabinet architects of the Unitary Presidency are coming from, they wanted a rewrite. Famous mistakes just didn't go far enough. They regret that Nixon wasn't strong enough to continue the stonewalling. They regret that Ford wasn't in position to resist and roll back the War Powers limitations, in the wake of Kissingers secret wars. They regret that Reagan got burned on skimmed profits from war sales to both Saddam and Khomeini. That St. Ron lacked the hubris to ride 'executive priviledge' till the horse died. But didn't North's heroic stonewalling work out altogether better, directing attention away from GWH Bush's fingerprints till time and memory failed?

Market research shows that evidence to the contrary does little to dissuade true believers from patent medicine, as long as the old cure is still being sold. They mentally flip the graph so it runs uphlll, or use the occasion of doubts to invent new arguments and strengthen the faith. 'Betrayed and undercut by a liberal press, that's the ticket...'

Thank you Mr. Ricks, for suggesting a 'Truth Commission'. The serious problems of the 43rd Presidency call for creating durable record, setting the facts straight. Not Di Rita's reiterations of the Rumsfeld Doctrine.

Reconciliation requires truth and good faith by those who have perpetrated past misbehaviour. It is a basis for forgiveness and growth. This appears to be beyond the perspective of a Di Rita and I would submit based upon my contacts with the type which became the storm troopers behind the desks of this administration reconciliation is viewed as an opportunity for a political sucker punch.

It was a wise strategic decision by our lethal enemies to provoke the Bushies, Cheneys and Rummeys - without character they would overreact without scruples (and as a bonus without competence) and poison our own political landscape both at home and among other nations.

We need the commissions for our defense and the defense of the Constitution.