Is Rumsfeld the source of all evil in the Bush administration?

Recent "revelations" such as contained in Bob Woodward's new book State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III, or at least the media's popularized accounts of what the book allegedly says, suggest that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is the source of all evil related to the Bush administrations policies in Iraq. I don't believe that for one moment. Rumsfeld's "strategy" is completely consistent with the agenda of the Neoconservatives and the rest of the so-called Pro-Israel Lobby. The chorus of people calling for the "liberation" of Iraq never consisted of Rumsfeld alone. Replace Rumsfeld, and the rest of the chorus is still singing, behind the scenes maybe, at least until the election is over, but singing nonetheless.

One minute the war is personified by Bush, then Cheney, then Rumsfeld, then whoever is political villain du jour.

Yes, Rumsfeld is a key player in the "gang" that pushed us into Iraq, but to suggest that the current mess is primarily his and his alone is far from the truth.

Woodward's book certainly adds some "color" and details and plain simple gossip, but simply doesn't change the overall picture one iota.

I by no means support the policies pursued by the Bush administration, but highlighting Rumsfeld as the primary culprit and suggesting that the "solution" is for Rumsfeld to resign or be fired smacks of political opportunism when what we really need is cold, dispassionate analysis of both the underlying problems in the Middle East and potential solutions.

I myself am not a political "operative", otherwise I might be right up there on the front line taking pot shots at the easiest and biggest target in Washington, Rumsfeld, who isn't even up for election at all and hence doesn't have a campaign war chest to launch a full-bore media counter-attack. Politics stinks. Shame all those who wallow in it and suggest that they are adding value to society.

-- Jack Krupansky