It’s owned and operated by civilians, but the Army Times is a semi-official extension of the Pentagon. It exists to offer Army personnel news and analysis about military careers, benefits, and “issues impacting your professional advancement.” It also emphasizes “community information and active lifestyle features of interest to Army personnel and their families.” It is not, in other words, Mother Jones.
And yet, the Army Times has been consistently and surprisingly critical of the Bush administration and Republicans on many recent occasions, in every instance from a pro-military perspective. Everyone is understandably linking to the Times’ most recent editorial, and I’m obviously joining them here, but it’s worth noting that this is but the latest in a long line of similar criticisms.
That said, the editorial in this week’s issue is remarkable.
Under the headline, “A failure of leadership at the highest levels,” the Army Times rejects the Rumsfeld analysis of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal and suggests it may be time for the Defense Secretary to step down. The Times even suggests the Pentagon’s current leadership is made up of “morons.”
Myers, Rumsfeld and their staffs failed to recognize the impact the scandal would have not only in the United States, but around the world. If their staffs failed to alert Myers and Rumsfeld, shame on them. But shame, too, on the chairman and secretary, who failed to inform even President Bush. He was left to learn of the explosive scandal from media reports instead of from his own military leaders.
On the battlefield, Myers’ and Rumsfeld’s errors would be called a lack of situational awareness — a failure that amounts to professional negligence.
To date, the Army has moved to court-martial the six soldiers suspected of abusing Iraqi detainees and has reprimanded six others. Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who commanded the MP brigade that ran Abu Ghraib, has received a letter of admonishment and also faces possible disciplinary action.
That’s good, but not good enough. This was not just a failure of leadership at the local command level. This was a failure that ran straight to the top. Accountability here is essential — even if that means relieving top leaders from duty in a time of war.
Funny, when Democrats say this we’re anti-military. Will Tom DeLay accuse the Army Times of “aiding and abetting the enemy”?
The Army Times’ willingness to hold the Bush administration accountable, despite its semi-official status, is highly commendable. Considering the Bush administration’s penchant for punishing any and all dissent, the publication is taking a risk by stating the truth. Good for them.
As a reminder, let’s not forget that it was also the Army Times that hammered Republicans in March for failing to stand up for military families while congressional Democrats were trying to improve troops’ living standards.
The [Republican majority on the] House Budget Committee was determined March 17 to just say no when Democrats offered a slew of ways to improve military pay and benefits by cutting tax breaks for the wealthy.
Dems proposed scaling back tax cuts for the richest Americans in order to provide:
$1 billion for expanding health-care benefits for reservists and their families; $1 billion to improve military housing; $350 million for targeted pay raises for enlisted members; $141 million in danger pay and family separation allowance increases; $50 million to improve family support programs for reservists; $14 million for public schools near military bases that teach many military dependents.
The GOP sided with the tax cuts instead of the diverse benefits for the troops, so the Army Times didn’t hesitate to criticize the move.
Moreover, it was the same Army Times that condemned the Bush administration last summer for not backing up its “lip service” on troop support.
In recent months, President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress have missed no opportunity to heap richly deserved praise on the military. But talk is cheap — and getting cheaper by the day, judging from the nickel-and-dime treatment the troops are getting lately.
[…]
Taken piecemeal, all these corner-cutting moves might be viewed as mere flesh wounds. But even flesh wounds are fatal if you suffer enough of them. It adds up to a troubling pattern that eventually will hurt morale — especially if the current breakneck operations tempo also rolls on unchecked and the tense situations in Iraq and Afghanistan do not ease.
Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas, who notes that the House passed a resolution in March pledging “unequivocal support” to service members and their families, puts it this way: “American military men and women don’t deserve to be saluted with our words and insulted by our actions.”
Translation: Money talks — and we all know what walks.
Now if only the mainstream media was as tough as the Army Times, we’d all be better off.