d recommend all current 3 and four star generals retire immediately--for their jobs are all being usurped!

During WW11, Patton and Montgomery were considered equal in rank but they had their own chiefs of staff to report to and the chair of the joint chiefs and the Secretary of WAR [later called the Sec of Defense].

I have no clue how a war czar can do any job anywhere without confusing things. And it is insulting to the current generals, which we do not lack

We have a cleric who wishes to attack Americans and yet, his buddy, the president of Iraq, needs the Americans to finance the Iraqi nation and teach its soldiers. Interesting, till the war began, Iraq was supposed to field the best army in the world. And yet, they collapsed like a deck of cards!

Unless the Iraqi citizens wi

If any of the readers of my previous materials will poke and prod around, you will know I pontificate about the military and claim knowledge thereof.

I have been in the service 4 times and am "reasonably" well read about it.

Bush's seeking out a war czar smacks of such a lack of understanding that it is amazed that he can hold his head high and ward off calls for impeachment because of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

For those of you not sure of what we learn in basic training in the military, one of our basics is the Chain of Command. Instead of starting at the top, I will start at the bottom. [THE president is at the top]

We have our [for the army] fire team leader, leading 1/2 of a squad, or about 5 other soldiers, making a total of 6. The leader is often a 2 striper, aka a Corporal. Ahead of him is the squad leader who is usually a sergeant, a 3 stripe wearer. About 4 such squads make up a platoon, led by a 4 or 5 stripe sergeant and also headed by an officer, a second or first lieutenant, [gold or silver bar, respectively]. [Think; the Movie "Platoon."

Above the platoon is the company with 4 platoons within it. The company is led by a captain and his first sergeant; the capt has 2 silver bars on his shoulder.

[While this is infantry, the other branches and arms are similar]

Next up is the Battalion, an amalgamation of four companies and engineers and other support units, run by a Lieutenant Colonel [the next rank up is a major, who is an executive officer to the batt commander]; a silver oak leaf.

Next up is the brigade; with 4 battalions, led by a FULL BIRD colonel.

Next up is a regiment, with 4 brigades, led by a one star general [in the UK, called a brigadier], and we call them a brig general.

Next is a division, with 4 regiments, led by a 2 star general, called a major general [why not a capt general?]

Next is a Corps, with 4 divisions, led by a 3 star, [like Patton was in Africa], a lieutenant general.

Finally, we have an army, with 4 corps, led by a 4 star general, called a "general"

Now things get confusing.

The army field general has a boss called the army chief of staff. His boss is the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. His boss is the Secretary of Defense. His boss is the president

In the news, we can see that field generals and theater generals and even our chairman of the joint chiefs and Secretary are all replaced at the whim of their boss or the president.

Often, the field general is on temporary assignment to the United Nations, and he commands other nations' armies as well.

Thus, we have a field commander--a four star general, a theater commander who is a four star general, the chairman of the joint chiefs is a four star as well.

That makes THREE, four star generals.

And then, pres Bush wishes to hire or promote another 3 star, to become war czar. Only the Russians have the term Czar in their military command structure I believe. I would have thought Bush would want a peace czar or peace advocate. [Jesse Jackson, where are you?]

Also, if I were any current three or four star army general in the US Army and Bush endeavored to appoint a new person war czar, I would recommend all current 3 and four star generals retire immediately--for their jobs are all being usurped!

During WW11, Patton and Montgomery were considered equal in rank but they had their own chiefs of staff to report to and the chair of the joint chiefs and the Secretary of WAR [later called the Sec of Defense].

I have no clue how a war czar can do any job anywhere without confusing things. And it is insulting to the current generals, which we do not lack

We have a cleric who wishes to attack Americans and yet, his buddy, the president of Iraq, needs the Americans to finance the Iraqi nation and teach its soldiers. Interesting, till the war began, Iraq was supposed to field the best army in the world. And yet, they collapsed like a deck of cards!

Unless the Iraqi citizens wi

rporal. Ahead of him is the squad leader who is usually a sergeant, a 3 stripe wearer. About 4 such squads make up a platoon, led by a 4 or 5 stripe sergeant and also headed by an officer, a second or first lieutenant, [gold or silver bar, respectively]. [Think; the Movie "Platoon."

Above the platoon is the company with 4 platoons within it. The company is led by a captain and his first sergeant; the capt has 2 silver bars on his shoulder.

[While this is infantry, the other branches and arms are similar]

Next up is the Battalion, an amalgamation of four companies and engineers and other support units, run by a Lieutenant Colonel [the next rank up is a major, who is an executive officer to the batt commander]; a silver oak leaf.

Next up is the brigade; with 4 battalions, led by a FULL BIRD colonel.

Next up is a regiment, with 4 brigades, led by a one star general [in the UK, called a brigadier], and we call them a brig general.

Next is a division, with 4 regiments, led by a 2 star general, called a major general [why not a capt general?]

Next is a Corps, with 4 divisions, led by a 3 star, [like Patton was in Africa], a lieutenant general.

Finally, we have an army, with 4 corps, led by a 4 star general, called a "general"

Now things get confusing.

The army field general has a boss called the army chief of staff. His boss is the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. His boss is the Secretary of Defense. His boss is the president

In the news, we can see that field generals and theater generals and even our chairman of the joint chiefs and Secretary are all replaced at the whim of their boss or the president.

Often, the field general is on temporary assignment to the United Nations, and he commands other nations' armies as well.

Thus, we have a field commander--a four star general, a theater commander who is a four star general, the chairman of the joint chiefs is a four star as well.

That makes THREE, four star generals.

And then, pres Bush wishes to hire or promote another 3 star, to become war czar. Only the Russians have the term Czar in their military command structure I believe. I would have thought Bush would want a peace czar or peace advocate. [Jesse Jackson, where are you?]

Also, if I were any current three or four star army general in the US Army and Bush endeavored to appoint a new person war czar, I would recommend all current 3 and four star generals retire immediately--for their jobs are all being usurped!

During WW11, Patton and Montgomery were considered equal in rank but they had their own chiefs of staff to report to and the chair of the joint chiefs and the Secretary of WAR [later called the Sec of Defense].

I have no clue how a war czar can do any job anywhere without confusing things. And it is insulting to the current generals, which we do not lack

We have a cleric who wishes to attack Americans and yet, his buddy, the president of Iraq, needs the Americans to finance the Iraqi nation and teach its soldiers. Interesting, till the war began, Iraq was supposed to field the best army in the world. And yet, they collapsed like a deck of cards!

Unless the Iraqi citizens wi

FULL BIRD colonel.

Next up is a regiment, with 4 brigades, led by a one star general [in the UK, called a brigadier], and we call them a brig general.

Next is a division, with 4 regiments, led by a 2 star general, called a major general [why not a capt general?]

Next is a Corps, with 4 divisions, led by a 3 star, [like Patton was in Africa], a lieutenant general.

Finally, we have an army, with 4 corps, led by a 4 star general, called a "general"

Now things get confusing.

The army field general has a boss called the army chief of staff. His boss is the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. His boss is the Secretary of Defense. His boss is the president

In the news, we can see that field generals and theater generals and even our chairman of the joint chiefs and Secretary are all replaced at the whim of their boss or the president.

Often, the field general is on temporary assignment to the United Nations, and he commands other nations' armies as well.

Thus, we have a field commander--a four star general, a theater commander who is a four star general, the chairman of the joint chiefs is a four star as well.

That makes THREE, four star generals.

And then, pres Bush wishes to hire or promote another 3 star, to become war czar. Only the Russians have the term Czar in their military command structure I believe. I would have thought Bush would want a peace czar or peace advocate. [Jesse Jackson, where are you?]

Also, if I were any current three or four star army general in the US Army and Bush endeavored to appoint a new person war czar, I would recommend all current 3 and four star generals retire immediately--for their jobs are all being usurped!

During WW11, Patton and Montgomery were considered equal in rank but they had their own chiefs of staff to report to and the chair of the joint chiefs and the Secretary of WAR [later called the Sec of Defense].

I have no clue how a war czar can do any job anywhere without confusing things. And it is insulting to the current generals, which we do not lack

We have a cleric who wishes to attack Americans and yet, his buddy, the president of Iraq, needs the Americans to finance the Iraqi nation and teach its soldiers. Interesting, till the war began, Iraq was supposed to field the best army in the world. And yet, they collapsed like a deck of cards!

Unless the Iraqi citizens wi

ry are all replaced at the whim of their boss or the president.

Often, the field general is on temporary assignment to the United Nations, and he commands other nations' armies as well.

Thus, we have a field commander--a four star general, a theater commander who is a four star general, the chairman of the joint chiefs is a four star as well.

That makes THREE, four star generals.

And then, pres Bush wishes to hire or promote another 3 star, to become war czar. Only the Russians have the term Czar in their military command structure I believe. I would have thought Bush would want a peace czar or peace advocate. [Jesse Jackson, where are you?]

Also, if I were any current three or four star army general in the US Army and Bush endeavored to appoint a new person war czar, I would recommend all current 3 and four star generals retire immediately--for their jobs are all being usurped!

During WW11, Patton and Montgomery were considered equal in rank but they had their own chiefs of staff to report to and the chair of the joint chiefs and the Secretary of WAR [later called the Sec of Defense].

I have no clue how a war czar can do any job anywhere without confusing things. And it is insulting to the current generals, which we do not lack

We have a cleric who wishes to attack Americans and yet, his buddy, the president of Iraq, needs the Americans to finance the Iraqi nation and teach its soldiers. Interesting, till the war began, Iraq was supposed to field the best army in the world. And yet, they collapsed like a deck of cards!

Unless the Iraqi citizens wi

d recommend all current 3 and four star generals retire immediately--for their jobs are all being usurped!

During WW11, Patton and Montgomery were considered equal in rank but they had their own chiefs of staff to report to and the chair of the joint chiefs and the Secretary of WAR [later called the Sec of Defense].

I have no clue how a war czar can do any job anywhere without confusing things. And it is insulting to the current generals, which we do not lack

We have a cleric who wishes to attack Americans and yet, his buddy, the president of Iraq, needs the Americans to finance the Iraqi nation and teach its soldiers. Interesting, till the war began, Iraq was supposed to field the best army in the world. And yet, they collapsed like a deck of cards!

Unless the Iraqi citizens wish to denounce being Muslims.

Bush, therefore, as indicated above, has committed high crimes and misdemeanors by not exiting Iraq after not finding WPM, with the fall of Sadam and by permitting military suppliers to rob the US treasury and Iraqi treasury!