That's basically the impression I took away from reading Without Hesitation, the memoirs of retired Gen. Hugh Shelton, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1997 to 2001. Boy is he steamed.

There are plenty of other people Shelton pings in the book, most notably John McCain. But the unquestionable No. 1 villain of the book is the former secretary of defense who, in Shelton's telling, elevated his old Princeton wrestling techniques into a management philosophy. "The McNamara-Rumsfeld model," as Shelton calls it, was "based on deception, deceit, working political agendas, and trying to get the Joint Chiefs to support an action that might not be the right thing to do for the country but would work well for the President from a political standpoint." (401) (As an experiment, I'm including page numbers -- should I continue doing this in future book discussions?) He adds, "It was the worst style of leadership I witnessed in 38 years of service." (413)

After his first meeting with Rumsfeld, Shelton recalls thinking, "We're going to need some heavy-duty cleaning supplies if all we're going to do is waste time having pissing contests like this." (407) When Rumsfeld was proven wrong in a meeting, Shelton says, he wouldn't admit it, but rather would press on and do "his best to stay afloat amid the bullshit he was shoveling out." (413)

At one point, Rumsfeld utterly rejected a plan for how to deal with Iraqi attacks on U.S. warplanes in the old "no-fly zones." Shelton liked the plan how it was, so when ordered to revamp it, he let it sit on his desk for a couple of weeks, and then sent it back to the defense secretary with a new label on it: "Rumsfeld Auto-Response Matrix." "He loved every word of it," Shelton reports with unconcealed contempt. (424)

This book is different from other senior generals' memoirs I've read, such as those by Colin Powell, Norman Schwarzkopf, and Tommy R. Franks. Hugh Shelton's telling stories and naming names. The first half of the book is a rather dull account of his earlier career, but that changes in his relation of his last year as chairman of the Joint Chiefs, in 2001.

Overall, Shelton comes off like a good soldier and a decent and honorable man, but inexperienced in the ways of Washington, and so a bit of a babe in the woods when it comes to politics. I blame this situation on civilian officials, Democratic and Republican alike, who were so scared of the political clout that Colin Powell accumulated that they have picked a series of political non-starters as chairmen: Shalikashvili (his pop fought for the Nazis), Shelton (naïve about Washington), Myers and Pace (the two most pliable senior officers of recent memory). Admiral Mullen is proving to be an exception -- he stands up for himself, yet isn't trying to move into the political realm. I am not sure President Obama and his aides appreciate this.

PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images

 

HUNTER

2:40 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Midday in Central Europe circa 1994ish

Only one person in the Battalion (aside from the 2 participants) heard the conversation as an Infantry Bn S3 and his Bn CDR squared off in the closed door Bn Cdr's office.

The conversation points are pretty insignificant, indeed they had almost zero effect. The only thing that mattered in the end was the MAJ's final statement. He declared loudly and clearly "You, sir, are a savage and I cannot work for you." The MAJ squared out of the office and left the Bn. He was later the BDE 1 and later still offfered a chance to redeem himself as a BN XO in a different BDE elsewhere.

Later the BDE CDR, a bit tired of a IN BN CDR who cycled through S3s like some people cycled through underwear supposedly told the BN CDR, "this is your last S3, if he goes, you go."

The one person who overheard the conversations? The BN S1 whose office adjoined the BN CDRs. He was my best friend (and later my Best Man). He was also the man who made certain that every officer in the unit knew that the MAJ, former S3, was the only man with the moral courage to stand up for what was right. The MAJ staked his career on it. He survived - and as I understand it later retired as a LTC. I don't know if he ever got a BN command of his own but he deserved one (based not just on his last stand, he was a genuinely good S3 and caring officer).

What if we had a General like that MAJ? What if Shinseki had made that stand, instead of being cowed and made a lame duck? What if Shelton himself had stood up for what is right? There's a special circle of purgatory waiting for these fellows. They may have rendered good service over long careers, but at the pivotal moment they flinched...and we all lost. The MAJ had plenty to lose, yet I don't think any General has lost anything of substance lately. Indeed even McChrystal, who did not deserve to retire with his last star, got away with it.

George Patton said: Moral courage is the most valuable and usually the most absent characteristic in men.

He also said: A man must know his destiny… if he does not recognize it, then he is lost. By this I mean, once, twice, or at the very most, three times, fate will reach out and tap a man on the shoulder… if he has the imagination, he will turn around and fate will point out to him what fork in the road he should take, if he has the guts, he will take it.

These memoirs seem like self-serving claptrap - the only one who wins is the asshole who releases his last, so he can counter the accusations of the previous books and make their own finger-pointing declarations.

Shelton, go f%^& yourself.

 

MEG

8:15 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Yes!

Please do keep the page numbers. It's helpful when you want to get back to the original source.

 

BENNIS

6:00 PM ET

October 12, 2010

Moral courage

Mr. Hunter you are correct. Guess W. Bennis is going to have to talk about some "Army values" in the context of "ITS ABOUT THE NEEDS OF THE COUNTRY! NOT! your GD career or party!"

 

THECROW

2:55 PM ET

October 11, 2010

"based on deception, deceit"

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/clock-stoppers/

 

WHISKEYPAPA

3:28 PM ET

October 11, 2010

 

RUBBER DUCKY

3:29 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Page #s

No.

 

WHISKEYPAPA

3:30 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Wolfowitz

"The general said the deputy is also a man of great courage. 'Those of us who wear the uniform understand courage on the battlefield, but there's another very distinct form of courage, and that is intellectual courage,' Pace said."

I don't see what someone would necessarily doubt Wolfowitz' intellectual courage. He just applied it to help Israel instead of the country he swore to defend (I believe senior DoD officials take an oath).

Walt

 

DOUG MERRILL

4:38 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Shalikashvili's dad

What's his dad got to do with anything?

 

XENOPHON

5:35 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Re: Shali's Dad

When TR was making his list of Chairmen and their shortcomings, he couldn't think of any one-liners for Shalikashvili, so he just inserted the first irrelevant fact that came into his head.

 

TOM RICKS

7:54 PM ET

October 11, 2010

It made him a political non-starter

And so didn't worry the civilians like Powell did.

 

XENOPHON

12:40 AM ET

October 12, 2010

Re: It Made Him a Political Non-Starter

Really? So the Clinton Administration chose Shali as CJCS because his father was in the German Army and he therefore couldn't operate politically on the Hill and elsewhere?

According to Defense Daily which first broke the story on 27 Aug 93, "Gen. John Shalikashvili, President Clinton's choice to replace Gen. Colin Powell as the nation's top military officer, received his early education in Nazi Germany during Hitler's Third Reich--a regime his father joined in 1941 and ultimately served as a major in the Waffen SS, according to documents unearthed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Clinton picked Shalikashvili Aug. 11 to replace Powell as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top military advisor to the president."

Shali subsequently denied having known that "Dad was a Nazi". Defense Daily (23 Sep 93): "Gen. John Shalikashvili, President Clinton's choice as the nation's top military officer, seemed headed for certain Senate approval yesterday after admitting that he lacked even a "hint" that his father served as a major in the Waffen SS during World War II. 'I did not withhold any information and never had the slightest hint,' Shalikashvili told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "

If the Wiesenthal Center unearthed the documents two weeks after Shali's nomination on 11 Aug 93, then you're saying that the Clinton Administration knew beforehand about his "Nazi Dad" and, then, what? Funneled the information to the Wiesenthal Center to be "discovered", thereby damaging Shali just enough that he could still be confirmed but not pose a Powell-like threat? Or was Shali in on it too? Somebody please page John LeCarre.

Forgive me for being skeptical, but what sources (Clinton Admin insiders?) say that Shali was chosen to be a politically neutered CJCS because of his "Nazi Dad"?

 

TOM RICKS

3:04 AM ET

October 12, 2010

I'll forgive you

I think you are confusing the particulars of the father's service with the general knowledge that his father had fought for the Germans during WWII.
Best,
Tom

 

XENOPHON

11:46 AM ET

October 12, 2010

RE: I'll Forgive You

"I think you are confusing the particulars of the father's service with the general knowledge that his father had fought for the Germans during WWII."

OK, I take your point.

But my question still stands: Is there any concrete evidence from anyone involved in the decision that any aspect of Shali's father's background actually drove his selection as CJCS with the intent of putting a political "lame duck" into the position?

 

HEDGES333

6:09 PM ET

October 12, 2010

sins of the father

"...no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood." Though the literal clause prohibits restrictions on inheritance for attainted traitors, it contains the principle that punishing the family for the father's sins is contrary to liberty, since each should be responsible for one's own actions and judged independently, rather than punishing an entire family for the sins of a progenitor. Thank God.

 

LALEHK

7:22 PM ET

October 11, 2010

page numbers

Yes please. Do keep the page numbers. As an academic I find them very useful for research.

 

CMEYERGO

7:24 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Games Generals Play

Shelton is a classic US Army do nothing General. They hated Rumsfeld because he forced change. He made them move one of their two brigades from Korea to the USA, and they predicted WW III.

It costs lots more money to keep an armored brigade in Germany than the USA, and they take longer deploy since they must move by rail to N. German ports to board ships. Rumsfeld shoved a plan down their throats to move two brigades back to the USA. New facilities were built, all is ready, but they delayed the plan and now hope to quietly squash it. The GAO reports this will require a billion dollars in new construction in Germany and at hundreds of million more a year in other costs. Details are here:
http://www.g2mil.com/germanbases.htm

 

WOMBAT

8:57 PM ET

October 11, 2010

The world turns

I'm with Don Bacon on this. I am really upset about all the reports of military officers complaining about civilian interference and insisting on the right to reject orders. If they don't like the constitution then they should not have sworn to uphold it.

 

CPTPETE08

4:10 PM ET

October 12, 2010

Extra-Constitutionality...

Perhaps you, Sir, and "Don" could provide one concrete example of extra-Constitutional transgressions by General Petraeus or anyone else? (This includes General McChrystal).

 

HEDGES333

6:34 PM ET

October 12, 2010

yes and no

If the civilian orders were placing the citizens and the nation at risk to achieve short-term political gains, it seems like the brass should push back. Unfortunately it's a mixed bag. Saving money by redeploying battalions at home seems like it was a great idea that pushed up against DoD's bureaucratic inertia. But how much money was saved by those few bureaucratic maneuvers, versus how much money was spent on the wars during Rumsfeld's watch at Rumsfeld's prompting which Rumsfeld mismanaged, including how much cash was given away, literally by the pallet, to God knows who in Iraq? The total cost is driving us into bankruptcy. Isn't that the same tactic Reagan used against the Soviets, to push their economic system over the edge? And now the same thing is happening to us, but people who point out that contradiction are branded "liberals" who hate America? Huh? http://www.uschristiandemocrats.org

 

ADMIRAL

10:36 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Mr. Bacon

As usual your comments are the best.

How about if your grand daddy did biz with the NAZI's? How many coward yellow bellies who work for the Washington Post ass wipe propaganda pig pen would go there? Answer. None. Did not seem to slow down the DC Crime Family at all. Political non starter my ass.

 

ADMIRAL

10:44 PM ET

October 11, 2010

Shelton is a loser

Typical military officer of today. A complete loser and mental midget that like to play army.

Hunter seems to be getting really pissed lately. Maybe a wake up is coming? We can only hope.

 

HUNTER

11:24 AM ET

October 12, 2010

Please Admiral

Your disturbed writings are, without fail, insulting and laughable. Most of us would gladly see you find some other blog to troll.

 

WHISKEYPAPA

1:43 AM ET

October 12, 2010

Objective

If theobjective of the Bush Administration had been to wreck the power and prestige of the United States, they could hardly have done a better job.

Walt

 

LAVBO0321

3:21 AM ET

October 12, 2010

Page Numbers

Only in books that really matter.

Especially for us students.

 

CK MACLEOD

5:04 AM ET

October 12, 2010

Page #s

You might look into turning them into footnotes - there are some nice, widely available plug-ins that can facilitate creating and formatting them. If that can't be accomplished, maybe a smaller font and italicized or some such.

 

AMA

7:33 AM ET

October 12, 2010

Page Numbers

Yes! Keep the page numbers! They were very useful when reading the source.

@Hunter, Love your comment! Look forward to reading more from you.

 

RUBBER DUCKY

12:03 PM ET

October 12, 2010

Page numbers...

So 20th century.

 

ENLISTED

8:01 AM ET

October 12, 2010

It takes some time and some will to get back

It wasn't just the senior leadership that took damage from the Rumsfeld/Bush era (I put it in that order on purpose). Their policy was meant to change the military to be more flexible to immediate domestic political influence and less capable of responding to real world intelligence or maintaining the rule of either U.S. or international law. I can't speak personally to the lingering effects on the military intelligence capability, but I know that the JAG corps of the services were eviscerated, and are not recovering. And that's had and likely will have more foreign policy consequences that might now be unintended (that's a little complex, more likely they were never thought of by the implementers, and the current officials don't know what's wrong).. The status quo won't do, and I don't see Admiral Mullen as one likely to look deeper.

 

WHISKEYPAPA

3:37 PM ET

October 12, 2010

Zinger

"Their policy was meant to change the military to be more flexible to immediate domestic political influence and less capable of responding to real world intelligence or maintaining the rule of either U.S. or international law."

That is as big a zinger as I have ever seen on Tom's blog. Especially when you couple it with the recent article about U.S. officers who think it is hunky-dory to disobey lawful orders.

Walt

 

ZKP20977

6:20 PM ET

October 12, 2010

The travesty of the Bush Administration

I largely agree with General Shelton’s assessment of Rumsfeld. Everything I have read about Rumsfeld points to a man who was over-matched as head of the Pentagon and politicized the position for personal gain. Therefore, General Shelton’s characterization of Rumsfeld in this light is not at all shocking. The truth is, in areas of Foreign Policy, I believe President Bush relied too much on his Vice-President as well as “Don” Rumsfeld. He instead should have relied more on Colin Powell and, early on, Condoleezza Rice. However, the voices of the neo-conservative dream of installation of democracy worldwide were louder than those of pragmatism. Democracy is something which foreign powers should not be forcing on others, rather democracy comes from the people within a country.

 

NSC LOS ANGELES

8:15 PM ET

October 12, 2010

Chuckle-worthy indeed

An enjoyable review, I think I may have to get this book. I do love a good bit of sh*t talking, especially when it's A) coming from a credible source, and B) aimed at someone as loathesome as Rummy.

The page numbers are a nice touch!

 

Thomas E. Ricks covered the U.S. military for the Washington Post from 2000 through 2008.

Read More