WaPo: In White House Plan, War 'Czar' Would Cut Through Bureaucracy

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/12/AR2007041202147.html?nav=rss_world

In White House Plan, War 'Czar' Would Cut Through Bureaucracy

By Peter Baker and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, April 13, 2007; Page A13

When the commanding general in Iraq needed people for a rule-of-law initiative, he had to send a memo to the U.S. Central Command. That command forwarded it to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Joint Chiefs forwarded it to the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Only then was it passed along to the White House to find the people.

That would change under a plan being developed by President Bush's aides to create a high-powered "czar" to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The new "execution manager," as the White House has called the position, would be empowered to cut through the bureaucracy and talk directly with Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, and other key figures to figure out what is needed to make more progress on the ground.

A copy of the White House proposal, obtained by The Washington Post, details a strikingly different role for the West Wing in the day-to-day management of the two wars, and represents an attempt to assert a more coherent and efficient leadership that many officials in different parts of the government have complained is lacking. The idea for such a czar has been promoted by various people, including former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who sent a memo to the White House several weeks ago advocating it as part of an 18-point plan.

Under the proposal distributed by the National Security Council, the execution manager would talk daily with the military commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as to the ambassadors in Baghdad and Kabul. The official would then meet with the president each morning to review developments. The goal to meet requests for support by Petraeus and others would be "same-day service," the proposal said.

"The slowness and ineffectiveness of the American bureaucracy is a major hindrance to our winning, and they've got to cut through it," Gingrich said in an interview yesterday.

more...

[Botany]

1. Pure B.S. We already had a chain of command

It worked out well in WW II

FDR Sec of War Marshall Ike

"they" want somebody to blame because "they" know it is a lost cause.

What the hell is bush talking about? Does he wants somebody to take charge of his failed policy?

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=United%20State...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
President of the United States of America - acting with his power as Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Appointed by an electoral vote based on a national election. (See also Presidential Line of Succession)

Secretary of Defense - acting as the principle defense policy advisor to the POTUS. Appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. All military action taken by the president goes through this Cabinet position.

Secretaries of the Military Departments - the following secretaries are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate:

Secretary of the Army
Secretary of the Navy (who is also in charge of the Marine Corps and Coast Guard)
Secretary of the Air Force
Joint Chiefs of Staff - consists of the following members all appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. Their primary duties are to advise the Chairman and the National Security Council, and they have no authority to command any combatant military unit.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Chief of Staff of the Army
Chief of Naval Operations
Chief of Staff of the Air Force
Commandant of the Marine Corps

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

[TwilightGardener]

2. Why not just cut the bureacracy, then--streamline the communication

process, instead of creating a whole fucking new level? WTF is the job of the SecDef--isn't this really Gates' job? Didn't they used to call his position "Secretary of War" in Lincoln's time? Something smells bad about this, especially if Gingrich has a hand in it (Gingrich--why is anyone listening to him in the WH, when they apparently listen to no one else?).

[aquart]

3. Got it. The bureaucracy is why we're not winning.

See, we'd have total victory if not for the paperwork.

[babylonsister]

5. And here we thought dimson wanted total power. Who knew! nt

[babylonsister]

4. Gingrich now directs the NSC?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=642929&mesg_id=642929