Some do. I don't. Hell I think he should have been forced into re-retirement ages ago.
He is a mystery to me. Clearly he is intelligent - I mean listen to one of his press conferences and you can almost buy what he is throwing at you. You know Iraq is speeding towards civil war - but rummy will make you think that what's going on is natural, like it happens in all wars, you have ups and downs. We just have a case of a couple of little downs. Nothing much, everything is generally ok. Its all under control folks.
You have to keep reminding yourself who you are actually listening to, to ensure you don't get whisked away by his carefully crafted oratory.
So then, how the hell can such a smart guy get himself into such a mess? Did donny actually think that the campaign in Iraq would last 3 weeks? A classic case of in and out, boom boom, done, finished, mission accomplished, thank-you, lets go home and celebrate! Jesus Juice for everyone!! Coz that's what the guy thought.
So any guy who thinks like that when planing a war should be planning a war in the first place. And if he does happen to carry out that plan and it turns to be as stupid in reality as it was in his head, then isn't the logical thing to do to get someone new to try another plan.
| Quote: |
"We gave him our best military advice and I think that's what we're obligated to do," Myers said "If we don't do that, we should be shot."
- Gen. Richard Myers (ret). Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
|
I generally like dick myers, seems like a good guy and all that good stuff! But if that mess in Iraq was the best you and yours could come with, then you know what, you still deserve to be shot!!! At least by a group of nine year olds with pellet guns! i think that entire adminstration has to go 
not just "rummy" Rumsfeld should certainly go. Didn't he submit to Bush his resignation TWICE around the time of the 2004 elections? Why hasn't anybody asked him something like this, "If you are being asked to step down by many military generals and other diplomats, on top of the fact that you yourself wanted to resign twice - WHY WON'T Bush let you quit?"
The whole administration needs to go. They are bad for America. They are bad for the World. They are bad for even the little creatures.
Man! Every day more facts come out about the evil administration's plans... lies... and manipulations. Propaganda has been uncovered. Purgury attempted to save the leaker of the CIA operative. Plans to trap Saddam into non compliance. Plans of the CIA to want to effect the Iraqi elections (plans canceled -- but they planned it).
It almost makes me ashamed to call myself American. The great part is that THEY are not US - and they don't represent US. A lot of the world knows that our leaders are out of control.
You know that if they have the balls to lie to the UN (knowing what they knew, what they were using for influence was lies) I wouldn't doubt that they fixed the elections. Bush was never elected. Perhaps Gore / Kerry could rightfully come in and replace them........ that's a dream!
Why does everyone feel the need to just conform with what the media says... there is no good reason for rummy to go. I think people should look at facts and history before screaming for some to step down.
The creepiest thing Rummy did was at the start of the war.
Rummy had a huge pile of ammunition shipped to outside of Bagdhad, and naturally US forces gurarded the ammo prior to the war. When Shock and Awe was scheduled the forces guarding the ammo were told to leave to avoid being bombed, but they left all of the ammunition unguarded.
This ammo then primed the pump for the insurgency. They had the weapons to fight back and make bombs because the US left them there unguarded prior to the war.
Two groups are PROFITING mightily from this war. They are arms companies and oil companies. They are the 40% supporting the war and they should NEVER be confused with Ameican citizens, because they are NOT!
| Talk2Tom11 wrote: |
| there is no good reason for rummy to go. |
No good reason???
You must need to clean your ears. All due respect, there is so much evidence that this guy was not doing a good job. Days after the 9/11 attacks, with no known connection Rumsfeld wanted to attack Iraq. Furthermore, the case for going to war was supported by lies from Rumsfeld (among others - even Cheney and Bush told us about things that they knew were not true. Example: those potable biological laboratories - were known to be Hydrogen generators for weather balloons, yet they said for weeks that the trucks were USED FOR BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS. How scary is hydrogen? Nobody would want to support a trillion dollar war to go after some hydrogen generators.)
I ask you this - if he was doing such a good job, why did he offer to resign TWICE during the 2004 election?
Do you need a good reason? How about more dead Americans / Iraqis and less peace? Without war, nobody can be sure how much safer we would be, but it is undoubtable.
Did anybody see John Stewart's bit on Rummy this past week? He showed that Rumsfeld used the expression "Henny Penny - the sky is falling! a pint on this, a pint on that." before the war with Iraq - and he used the same EXACT expression the other day with respect to Iran. You can see it at Crooks and Liars : here.
| Jon Stewart wrote: |
Holy crap, we're going to war with Iran! |
A much better question than "Should Rummy Go", would be "if it is true, Mission Accomplished, why are we still there?
This is the dumbest administration that has ever held the reigns of power (intentional use of "reign" instead of proper "rein" -- "Let freedom reign" - Bush from the opening session of a NATO meeting here). | Talk2Tom11 wrote: |
| Why does everyone feel the need to just conform with what the media says... there is no good reason for rummy to go. I think people should look at facts and history before screaming for some to step down. |
Boogers man, why not read the papers of the last 8 years or so. Is that enough history? You probably think the media is all liberal claptrap? Any excuse to ignore what's happening in the world, because things are fine when I can fill up the car with gas. Does "chicken hawks" ring a bell? The man is incompetent. The whole lot has to go and get locked up for war crimes and breaking the law spying on americans without approval of a judge.
I am heartened by the rest of the responses here, but you better go and vote next time (the house?). The 1st time bush was elected I was stunned and shocked, the 2nd time I figured that's just what too many americans wanted.Rummy, Shouldn't stay at all, He really doesnt know anything.
one thing that is coming out of this is the rediculous culture in the military. basically if you want to succeed and get as many promotions as well as badges and stars that your poor jacket support without ripping apart, you can't openly disagree with the secretary of defense. because if you could, then i think these out-spoken retired generals would have given rummy the real deal while they were still active- which is: War in Iraq? that's retarded, let's concentrate on Afghanistan!. But they probably saw how hung-up rum was on starting a stupid war that they tried to do the best they could and minimise the damage. Which sucks!
rummy is a threat to world security and should be let go of - as air force one is flying over the pacific! but texas W won't because he knows it will show that he made a mistake , a HUGE one- and dubya can never admit any wrong-doing. Noooo. that would be too much ammo for the dems. So just to save face he keeping the guy around. Such is the cost of being a bird-brain with too much power!
This story was another failed story the left ranted about to try to trick the public into believing it and it worked for them but slightly. Left minded people scream over everything so all you hear is the commotion. Every story the left comes up with only lasts a day and a half on cnn and an episode of "jon stewart's nightly anti-(true)american" faux news show. Rumsfield is the sh*t, folks. No person with the IQ of anything over a welfare parasite would know a war will take years. Besides, this is a new type of war, this is the eradication of radical muslims who fight for no specific country. If you honestly expect a large scale war on this type of enemy will take less than a few years, you're insane.
_____________
stfu.
| shr3dd wrote: |
. If you honestly expect a large scale war on this type of enemy will take less than a few years, you're insane.
stfu. |
Are you talking about the War in Iraq or the War on Terror. Because those are two different things even though the administration has made a damn good job of making the RIGHT believe they are one in the same. Let me quickly explain them to you.
The War on Terror was effectively started after 9/11 with the campaign in Afghanistan. This is the war to wipe out radical islam. I don't know how sensible and practical an objective that is because it is pretty open-ended and well, could last a couple of decades, and it seems a little too much like the Crusades. Maybe its just me. Anyway, the more practical solution is finding out why radical islam hates the west so much and address those issues while at the same time working better with the relevant governments and engaging them to help catch terrorists in their own countries. The war on terror should be reducing the rates at which impressionable youngsters join radical groups and blow themselves up. It should be building a true relationship with regular Muslims so they too can help in the fight. That is and should be the war on terror, which of course will take a while to win. Any sensible person should understand that. it's like the cold war on opium.
The War in Iraq is the mess that's in Iraq right now. The president never said he wanted to invade iraq as a major part of the war on terror. No, he said he wanted to invade iraq because Saddam was about to build nukes and wipe NY off the map. We quickly found out that wasn't the case, and the admin changed its reasoning and rationale and tried to incorporate the war in Iraq with the war on terror. It has tried to make the two inter-changable. And some people have fallen for that. The war in Iraq had a different agenda all together. Would the americans supported this war in Iraq if they knew it might end up costing up to a TRILLION bucks? Hell no. Would they have supported it if they knew that 2000 soldiers would die, more than 10,000 get injured and god-knows how many innocent Iraqis would die? Hell no. Imagine W on prime time address saying, "My fellow americans, this is going to be a costly war, in human lives and in dollars, especially in dollars. A large number of our traditional allies will not support us. We will foot most of the bill ourselves. But regardless, we have to have resolve take Saddam out of power!"
Pretty unlikely huh?
The americans got duped. Yeah, that's right DUPED!
The US should have concentrated on the War on Terror and not started an unnecessary war. What has really been achieved by starting a war in Iraq? Weigh that against all that has been LOST??
But back to the topic at hand, Rummy should go because he has really screwed up!
