Recently, after the November 7 election, Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld resigned / was fired. First, I think that if W had done this a week, a month, or half a year earlier that Republican losses would have been much less. This means that the Republicans could have potentially maintained control of the Senate. But for W, its a day late and a dollar short.
Then it was leaked / release that Rumsfeld allegedly wrote a memo to W saying that the U.S. should change strategy in Iraq. Whatever.
First, I consider it very likely that Rumsfeld did write the memo. But that he pre-dated it to before the election - to make it look like he was considering change when, in fact, I doubt he was. Second, the memo shows how he may have disagreed with W. If that were the case, then it looks like W fired him (DR) for disagreeing with himself (W).
It goes back to W's old adage - he likes his friends and he like "yes-men". Supposedly Rumsfeld, before 2000, was an industrial efficiency expert. Who was hired because, supposedly, the military was getting too large, too bloated, and too inefficient. My disagreement with him is not that the military didn't need to be made more efficient, its that the military didn't need Rumsfeld for six years. They could have use Rumsfeld. But outside of either a "short stint" (as Secretary) or as a consultant and contractor the military didn't need him. Much more than a year or two or Rumsfeld was waste.
And yesterday John Bolton gave his resignation to W. I think that W pressured both Rumsfeld and Bolton to resign following the November 7 election. I'm glad he resigned - because he never had senate confirmation of his nomination. I'm disappointed he resigned because he didn't impress me as half the "bully" that his reputation said that he was.