[ElderEdda]

From the article: "Rumsfeld, of course, has never served in combat himself."

Why "of course"? Don't get it. Oh, of course this is another anti-Bush article/publication.

And then some more snide: On the way out, the defense secretary said, in parting: "I want you to know that I love soldiers and I care about soldiers. All of us here do." Well, one would hope so. [emphasis added]

Excerpt: “Besides talking to people, I get a tremendous amount of e-mail from people in the military and in the Pentagon who read my column and react to it,” he replied. “They are concerned. What I'm hearing is that 99% of these readers are 100% in favor of what I am writing, and ask me to keep at it. Unfortunately, if I am right, the military is in a lot of trouble.” [emphasis added]

This is a typical myopic response, that because the majority of my 2 emails are in favor of what I'm writing, the rest of the military is too. I'm on to something...

What was the point of this article? To praise the writer or to help the military? Sounds like a little gloating and self-glorication. I could be wrong. But I do know, you can't trust E&P with the truth or accuracy of a POV.

Loved the movie.

[baystaterebel]

Exactly! I don't know if this is Joe Galloway's account of events or Greg Mitchell's. I know Joe Galloway wrote "We Were Soldiers Once-And Young". I also know Joe Galloway is writing for Knight Ridder, a news service that makes the Associated Press look like News Max in comparison.

I hope Galloway is misrepresented in this article. But I don't think it is the case.

[dighton]

Good catch. What the hell is that “of course”?