[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 54 (Thursday, April 3, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4821-S4822]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      RETIRED OFFICERS' COMMENTARY

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there has been much discussion here in the 
Senate and in the press about retired military officers who have been 
appearing in the media throughout the coverage of the diplomatic 
efforts and the actual military operations to end the global threat 
posed by Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction.
  My own opinion is that most of these retired officers have, in a very 
fair, constructive, helpful way, interpreted the complexity of modern 
military operations, the highly technical range of military equipment, 
and have conveyed their positive observations of the courage and 
professionalism of our men and women in uniform--from the generals to 
the privates.
  In most presentations, these retired officers have shown professional 
responsibility and prudent restraint in giving their views and 
interpretations. But a few have added personal criticisms over the 
planning and execution of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
  Professionals in the military have devoted their careers to 
protecting our Constitutional freedoms. Among the most cherished of 
these is freedom of speech. But that freedom has its legal, as well as 
ethical, restraints, and requires the exercise of good judgment, common 
sense, and taking into accounts the likely impact of their criticisms 
on servicemen and their families.
  By and large, the retired officers have, through their careers of 
dedidated service, earned the admiration of the general public. 
Consequently, a special trust is accorded them by the families, the 
parents, the grandparents of those serving in uniform. Quite often, the 
families take to heart what they say, even more so than the views of 
others.
  If retired officers have professional views and judgments at variance 
with the active duty chain of command, they are, like all Americans, 
free to speak their mind. But how to do it--publicly or privately?
  They have ample opportunity to convey their views to their former 
colleagues--today's military commanders--through private channels, and 
I know many do so through a variety of forums and through personal 
communications. Before making critical public statements during the 
course of military operations, I hope they carefully consider the 
consequences of such statements and recall how they, and their 
families, felt about unexpected public criticism when they were in the 
``trenches of conflict.''
  The tradition followed by Presidents, especially in times of 
conflict, is a worthy precedent. A sitting President customarily 
receives the views of past Commanders in Chief by way of private 
communication rather than through the media.
  Mr. President, I expressed these points to members of the media after 
a Capitol Hill meeting Tuesday evening with Secretary Rumsfeld and 
General Meyers, and I ask unanimous consent that the excerpted text of 
my remarks at that news conference, and those of the general, be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

  Excerpt From Transcript, News Conference With Secretary of Defense 
   Donald Rumsfeld; General Richard Myers, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of 
 Staff; Senator John Warner (R-VA); Representative Duncan Hunter (R-CA)

       Sen. Warner.--We covered that very carefully. The general 
     gave us a complete briefing. And I think, Duncan, I believe 
     you will join with me, the consensus in our group just now is 
     that a good plan has been in place, it is being executed. It 
     is timely. Considerable progress has been made to date. And 
     we see no reason at this time for anyone to be in criticism 
     of this program.
       And I want to talk a little bit about this retired 
     military. I've been associated with the military a half-
     century or more. I think some of them have in a very 
     constructive way interpreted the complexity of military 
     operations today and the equipment, and I think they have 
     done a good job in portraying the courage shown by the men 
     and women who are executing this plan.
       And if some have criticisms, we don't mean to stifle 
     freedom of speech, but I think they should follow the 
     tradition of President, the Commander in Chiefs. You do not 
     see former Presidents criticizing a sitting President during 
     a war. And in the same way, if they've got constructive 
     criticism at variance with the plan, I think they should 
     confidentially contact their own peers in the Pentagon and 
     share it that way rather than open.

[[Page S4822]]

       Question: But Senator Warner, what about current 
     commanders? It is reported this morning, Army--(inaudible)--
     Army colonel--(inaudible)--concerned about doing this war--
     (inaudible)--not bring enough--(inaudible)--
       Sen. Warner. Well, there's always, during any conflict, 
     going back to George Washington, complaints among his forces. 
     I have personally been involved in the wars in Korea, and 
     Vietnam, and Panama, and Somalia--and I could go on for a few 
     more, and I think Duncan, you've been in them--but that's all 
     right, we'll take that in stride. I'm more concerned about 
     the very senior officers who by virtue of their training and 
     experience have a lot of credibility, and I think that if 
     they have criticism, fine. Call up the chairman----
       General Richard Myers. You bet.
       Sen. Warner: You'd take the call?
       Gen. Myers: Absolutely.

                          ____________________