Please visit the new home of Majikthise at

« Szechuan Gourmet | Main | Canada the cradle of life, eh? »

August 10, 2005

Why was General Kevin P. Byrnes fired?

This doesn't pass the sniff test. Four-star Generals don't get fired for affairs with female civilians every day. Is it possible that someone wanted to punish Byrnes? He was in charge of training and recruiting for the army. Might he have said anything inconvenient about the Army and its recruiting goals and/or some aspect its interrogation curriculum?

Gen. Kevin P. Byrnes, 55, led the Army's Training and Doctrine Command at Fort Monroe, Va., where he supervised the recruitment and academic programs at 33 Army schools, from basic training to the war colleges. Byrnes, who several military sources said had a previously unblemished record, was set to retire in November after 36 years of service. [WaPo]

The official story is that General Byrnes was fired for an extramarital affair with a civillian. Allegedly, the Army terminated Byrnes to show how serious it is about moral values. Mark Kleiman notes irony: torture innocents, no problem; commit adultery, you're accountable. If anyone has any alternative hypotheses about Byrnes' demise, they're eligible for one of these tinfoil medals that I am empowered to bestow.

Update: Mojo has a fascinating hypothesis about Byrnes, TRADOC, and LandWarNet.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Why was General Kevin P. Byrnes fired?:

» Byrnes Canned? from The MojoWire
The official story is that General Byrnes was fired for an extramarital affair with a civillian. Allegedly, the Army terminated Byrnes to show how serious it is about moral values. Mark Kleiman notes irony: torture innocents, no problem; commit adult... [Read More]


My theory, based only on gross speculation, is that it is about sexual misconduct, but that the affair is not all there is to it. He did something that would have made news and embarrassed the Army, and they canned him to get ahead of the story. Just a guess.

Well, he was the leader of Training and Doctrine Command, which 1) is responsible for recruitment, and 2) is going to be about the _last_ command to speak out against the war or the civilian leadership.

So it wouldn't be surprising at all if the buck stopped at him as far as poor recruitment went.

Also, maybe it was a male civilian.

Clearly a Hippie Freak: Too much loving, not enough warmaking.

The thing is, based on our actual experience with the military, these retards really are actually serious about Medieval sexcrime.

They really will let you grab your colleague's ass or set up a "gauntlet" a a convention or bang barracks ho's every night and then totally destroy your career for giving a ride to a woman not your wife.

The homosexuality thing is an outgrowth of a larger moral tunnel vision in which razing villages is okay but any sex outside of a het marriage (and the UCMJ actually defines, in one of the word-rapes that make people love lawyers, everything but missionary as "sodomy") is impermissable.

We're all for "conspiracy" questioning on the grounds of its numerous successes and the invitations to such thinking blasted loudly by excessive government secrecy, but this is no exaggeration: the military's legal establishment really does care about sex.

I have to echo kei & yuri on this one. I used to live in the town that accompanies Cannon Air Force Base, and the military does indeed fire you for getting caught having an affair, regardless of your political convictions. They will also get rid of you for spousal abuse and not paying your child support.

But not one of _11_ four-star generals. And it's usually in lieu of getting them on something else.

I'm down with Thomas. But forget recruiting, it's the training where all Americans have been let down.

They canned him for a run of the mill affair, better that than having the truth come out. It's an admirable way to fall on your sword. Almost convienent.

Well, if we are entertaining flights of fancy, then here's one...

Byrnes might have been spaced out the airlock in a nasty political fight with a rival...

Tin foil hats on, everyone? Good...

One of the last major promotions made before the current junta took power was the tapping of Byrnes to be Lt. General in 1999. He was still at his post at that time as commanding general of the 1st Cav. In 2003, W punted him over to TRADOC taking him out of rotation for combat duty in the gulf. Why? Who knows...

But, while at TRADOC, he very quickly initiated a project called LandWarNet, a massive information integration command and control infrastructure that is -- eventually -- supposed to completely revolutionize the way data is used adminsitratively and on the battlefield.

So far so good... however, while he was working on this, a General Steven Boutelle, U.S. Army's G6 (or the Army's Chief Information Officer) was about to go to Congress and testify regarding funding for his pet project, called the "Army Knowledge Management Strategy."

In an April 2004 interview, Byrnes talks about how:

"The G6 has made significant headway for the institutional Army under the Army Knowledge Management Strategy. Now it is time to integrate the operational Army into a capstone strategy that is LandWarNet. The LandWarNet initiative will also establish the Army’s future networking efforts with the joint community, specifically in the joint battle management command and control development process.

In essence "thanks for all your help Steve, me and TRADOC will take it from here..." It ws shortly thereafter that Boutelle was sent up the Hill to pimp for LandWarNet, instead of his own deal, but as CIO, he really has little implementation control or funding access to it, since it is now a TRADOC program.

My theory turns on the idea that these guys are getting to the end of their useful shelf lives as flag officers. It is not uncommon for retired flag officers to "double dip" -- that is, take a pension, then get a job as a "consultant" with the Dept. of Defense, or just simply go to work as a pimp for any of the numerous defense contractors looking to open doors at the Pentagon.

And make no mistake, whoever ends up running LandWarNet is going to be in charge of majorly -- majorly-- phat stax of mad bank.

The fact that G6 technically outranks the TRADOC commander in the chain of command, although Boutelle was a three-star as opposed to the four stars of Byrnes is something I found interesting in the context that LandWarNet is something that is more naturally suited to the G6 command instead of Training and Doctrine, or so it would seem to me.

Boutelle's resume is not nearly as combat command intensive as Byrnes' and moreover he has not been in as long, making his bones as one of Rummy's hand-picked technocrat Tom Clancy desktop generals.

For Byrnes to have essentially seized a multi-billion dollar hardware and software intiative out from under Boutelle is the sort of thing that makes hard feelings in Washington.

After seeing Byrnes' resume, it seemed unlikely that a mere pecadillo would be the sort of thing that would force him out... what's the old saying in politics "unless he's found with a live boy or a dead girl, he's got job safety..." I think there's more to his ouster than just a dalliance.

Personally, I think the thing to watch for now is to see if G6 regains complete control of the LandWarNet project, and to see if one of his minions ends up running TRADOC... I would also be interesting in knowing more about the contractors bidding for LandWarNet projects and who in the Pentagon they are close to...

mojo sends

I don't really have anything to add to the subject, but could you add </b> to the end of the update?

Every post below it is now emboldened.

I swear to God the bolding it *not* my fault...

mojo sends

Fixed, thanks for the heads up.

I knew Byrnes when he commanded the 1CD DIVARTY at Fort Hood, TX in 1991-92. He was then, and still is now, an asshole. And not just your everyday run-of-the-mill asshole, mind you - he is a special kind of asshole. This kind of person makes enemies, and payback in this town (DC) is a bitch, let me tell you.

Ironically, Byrnes used to tell us "Don't do anything you wouldn't want to see on the front page of the Washington Post." Of course, on Tuesday he was on the front page of the Post for his screw up. Now that's karma!

This is not about adultery. It is about hypocrisy. Byrnes is a hypocrite. When I knew him at Fort Hood, he was "burn happy." He would burn officers and NCOs for the slightest infraction. It's great to see him get a taste of his own medicine. Like I said, payback in this town (DC) is a bitch.

It could be one of two things.

1) He was set to make statements at his retirement that didn't coincide with the Administration's policies, and they're trying to discredit him now.

2) He was part of a "Military Coup" to take back control of our Government. That is the "rumor" on the net, and can't be verified, but I thought I'd point that out.

Another view of the story from

Four Star General Fired For Organizing Coup Against Neo-Cons?
Reporter suggests Brynes discovered plan to turn nuke exercise into staged terror attack

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones | August 10 2005

The head of Fort Monroe's Training and Doctrine Command, four star general Kevin P. Byrnes, was fired Tuesday apparently for sexual misconduct according to official sources.

Other sources however have offered a different explanation for Byrnes' dismissal which ties in with the Bush administration's unpopular plan to attack Iran and the staged nuclear attack in the US which would provide the pretext to do so.

According to reporter Greg Szymanski, anonymous military sources said that Brynes was the leader of a faction that was preparing to instigate a coup against the neo-con hawks in an attempt to prevent further global conflict.

Indications are that, much like popular opinion amongst the general public, half the military oppose the neo-con's agenda and half support it.

Further revelations were imparted by journalist Leland Lehrman who appeared today on The Alex Jones Show.

Lehrman's army sources, including a former Captain in intelligence, became outraged when they learned that the official story behind 9/11 was impossible.

They told Lehrman that the imminent Northcom nuclear terror exercise based in Charleston, S.C, where a nuclear warhead is smuggled off a ship and detonated, was originally intended to 'go live' - as in the drill would be used as the cover for a real false flag staged attack.

This website has relentlessly discussed similar style drills which took place on the morning of 9/11 and on the morning of 7/7 in London.

"Speculation exists that he had potentially discovered the fact that it was gonna go live and that he was trying to put a stop to it or also speculation indicates that he may be part of a military coup designed to prevent the ridiculous idea of doing a nuclear war with Iran, " said Lehrman.

Lehrman said that other sources had told him all army leave had been cancelled from September 7th onwards, opening the possibility for war to be declared within that time frame.

Northcom officials also admitted to Lehrman that CNN had been using its situation room as a studio.

Earlier this week, Washington Post reported that the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the continental United States, in which terrorist attacks would be used as the justification for imposing martial law on cities, regions or the entire country.

American Conservative Magazine recently reported that Dick Cheney had given orders to immediately invade Iran after the next terror attack in the US, even if there was no evidence Iran was involved.

Government and media mouthpieces have been fearmongering for weeks about how a nuclear attack within the US is imminent.

Now would be the most opportune time for the Globalists to stage a major attack, as it would head off any potential indictments against the Bush administration for their involvement in illegally outing CIA agent Valerie Plame.

While rumors circulating about indictments having already taken place against Bush and Cheney should rightly be treated very carefully, the fact that there is an ongoing criminal investigation into the matter is something that's admitted and shouldn't be viewed as speculation.

Here's the deal. I've been in the Army for 14+ years and been a company commander three times. I know from experience and observation that the Army doesn't "can" someone for adultery unless it's become a problem. How does it become a problem? Usually someone makes a big stink about it (often the pissed of spouse), the person in question is approached and told to quit, and then that person blows off the warning. IE: USAF LT Kelly Flynn. Imagine the precedent it would set if we fire highly qualified but emotionally immature fighter pilots but excuse very senior officers for essentially the same offense. Can you imagine how much fun the Washingpost would have with that? And add to that, this administration ROUTINELEY sends senior guys home for almost any it legal or difference of opinion. IE: GEN Shinseki, Secretary of the Army Mr. White, etc. This administration will cashier someone on a dime.

He was our CG of the MND-North when we were in Bosnia. He truly set an excellent example to all the soldiers of the NATO peacekeepers there. He represented your country, ideals and the men in uniform well. He was a great soldier. And it was great to know him...

The comments to this entry are closed.