I found this a very good read - the article gives background on each of the generals and a dissenting view by Richard Kohl who maintains that the retired generals violated the traditions of civilian control of the military.

The six generals are LtGen Greg Newbold (USMC), MG Paul Eaton (USA), MG John Batiste (USA), LTG John Riggs (USA), MG Charles Swannack Jr. (USA) and LtGen Paul Van Riper (USMC).

The 16 page (printed) article provides a brief background on each of the General's careers, some background on their thoughts while on active duty (excepting Van Riper) concerning the lead-in and the war in Iraq, reasoning behind their decision (or in one case another's decision) to retire, what prompted them to speak out and any regrets they may have in doing so.

Of particular interest were some of the parallels the article drew concerning the wars in Iraq and Vietnam. The oldest of the group, Van Riper, was the only one with Vietnam (two-tour) experience. Still, the legacy of the earlier war seemed to influence much of their opinions on Iraq.

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld plays heavily in the article to include his styles of management and leadership.

Without passing judgment - I recommend this as a must read. I will say this though - I'm glad I did not have to "walk a mile" in their shoes. The decision to go or not to go public in dissent, both on active duty and in retirement, was not a decision these men took lightly.