Would anyone care to defend Rumsfeld?

[mad_dog]

If I look at it objectively I can see how an American might support Bush, he does have an amazing sense of self-belief and determination to proceed with a course of action.

However, I can’t find any redeeming features in Rumsfeld or in his track record as Secretary of Defence. Many top military figures seem to have no confidence in him; former senior Intelligence officers have accused him of lying to or misleading the American public; he has refused to bare any responsibility for Americas missteps in Iraq ; his terrible unintelligible political doublespeak is the worst i have ever witnessed; mainstream newspapers such as the Economist have accused him of incompetence and have called for him to be sacked. But still he remains in office albeit with a much lower profile ( I can’t remember the last time I saw a Rummie press conference)

I personally see him as at best an incompetent fanatic whose political beliefs have clouded his judgement irreparably and at worst as a war criminal of the first order who should be put on trial for his crimes and hung.

Are there any avid Rummites out there to defend the man and inform us of his better qualities and grand achievements?

[kingwilly]

Are there any avid Rummites out there to defend the man and inform us of his better qualities and grand achievements?

i wouldnt think so......

but then again MrKeruz likes to defend the indefensible.....

[Bobk_nyc]

I think you might be to kind to bush.

[kingwilly]

^ for what reason? the same way that one takes pity on a mentally challeged kid with Downs Syndrome?

[mad_dog]

I think you might be to kind to bush.

Iwas trying to make a more neutral, balanced arguement.

[kingwilly]

^ oh, well in that case.... carry on! haha

[mad_dog]

^ oh, well in that case.... carry on! haha

My real opinions on what should be done with Bush... are extreme ....

[kingwilly]

^ dont think you'd b the only one.

but is there a decent/credible alternative ?

[Bobk_nyc]

I think Bozzo the Clown would have done a better job.

The man woulds be funny, if it weren't so serious

[kingwilly]

I think Bozzo the Clown would have done a better job.

The man woulds be funny, if it weren't so serious

now how did that Ramones song go ?

[Butterfly]

^ for what reason? the same way that one takes pity on a mentally challeged kid with Downs Syndrome?

Bush is innocent, too fucking stupid to care. But he still needs to go down.

How should he go down ? how about having his dad ask him to step down.

[keda]

I think you might be to kind to bush.

Iwas trying to make a more neutral, balanced arguement.

Dog, using your balances I for one wouldn't buy anything from you that had to be weighed.

[keda]

^ oh, well in that case.... carry on! haha

My real opinions on what should be done with Bush... are extreme ....

And on terror they're not. Yah, right.

[barbaro]

If I look at it objectively I can see how an American might support Bush, he does have an amazing sense of self-belief and determination to proceed with a course of action.

However, I can’t find any redeeming features in Rumsfeld or in his track record as Secretary of Defence.

Rumsfeld has never been liked by many folks. Old George H. Bush tried to keep his son W. from bringing him in his administration.

Rumsfeld has been in government for decades. He's 74 years old.

When W. Bush was elected he had only 4 years of political experience in his entire life. Four years as governor of Texas.

Therefore, when W. was appointing people he had a lot of assistance and help and advice on who to appoint to his cabinent.

But he still didn't have the knowledge and experience to choose.

I think that fact that Rumsfeld is still SecDef, reinforces the fact that the Peter Principle applies in the U.S. government.

People are often promoted to their level of incompetence.

Removing the incompetent is the solution to this.

But W. Bush rarely does this, and cites loyalty.


To show how out of touch Rumsfeld seems to be, earlier this week he stated (to paraphrase):

Our (U.S.) military is too strong to lose in Iraq.

Instead of focusing on the political, this statement leads us to believe that he's still focusing on the military aspect of Iraq.

[Boon Mee]

Bush is innocent, too fucking stupid to care. But he still needs to go down.

In about two more years!

[mad_dog]

Rumsfeld has been in government for decades. He's 74 years old.

.

Fucking hell... Perhaps he has gone senile...

[Butterfly]

My real opinions on what should be done with Bush... are extreme ....

How about Bush being analy raped by Hilary with a strapon ? and make it live on Faux news.

[mad_dog]

My real opinions on what should be done with Bush... are extreme ....

How about Bush being analy raped by Hilary with a strapon ? and make it live on Faux news.

Drop him in the Hindu Kush mountains with a Bible and an American flag sown to his back?

[Butterfly]

^ no, too nice, and he might convert a few.

[man with no head]

Rumsfeld can't even defend Rumsfeld:

[Storekeeper]

Rumsfield has been around since he was a Congressman ... back when Ford was the Minority Leader in Congress.

Doesn't matter if people like him or not. He's not an elected politcian anymore. He serves at the pleasure of the President and his loyalty is to the President ... period.

George H.W. Bush denies that he ever said Rumsfield shouldn't be in GWB's Cabinet ... as well as denying that he ever said Rice is in over her head as Sec of State. Sounds like some BS somebody read in a Bob Woordward book to me.

I think it's a 50/50 split on people in the military on whether they like him or not. Military people don't like how he runs the Pentagon when it comes to running the place like a business. But they do like him on the other hand for staying the course in Iraq.

As SECDEF what has he done that should make the civilian sector happy ? Alot. He was cutting the budget and streamlining long before 9/11. He's making the various branches of the service work together more than ever in history.

Civilians all over the world have no reason to complain about Rumsfield as citizens except for their stance on the Iraq war.

[raycarey]

Rumsfield has been around since he was a Congressman ... back when Ford was the Minority Leader in Congress.

that was about the time this photo was taken, right?

George H.W. Bush denies that he ever said Rumsfield shouldn't be in GWB's Cabinet ... as well as denying that he ever said Rice is in over her head as Sec of State. Sounds like some BS somebody read in a Bob Woordward book to me.

of course he's going to deny it. just like the current generals backtrack after they actually tell the truth about how things are going in iraq.

Military people don't like how he runs the Pentagon when it comes to running the place like a business. But they do like him on the other hand for staying the course in Iraq.

they also don't like how he micro-manages, equates loyalty with fealty and banishes those with dissenting opinions on troop levels.

General Anthony C. Zinni, United States Marine Corps, head of United States Central Command until 2000: "We are paying the price for the lack of credible planning, or the lack of a plan. … Ten years worth of planning were thrown away; troop levels dismissed out of hand. … These were not tactical mistakes. These were strategic mistakes, mistakes of policy made back here. Don't blame the troops," On mistakes made by the war planners; on Meet the Press on April 2, 2006.

Lieutenant General Gregory Newbold, United States Marine Corps, director of operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2000 to 2002: "My sincere view is that the commitment of our forces to this fight was done with a casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions—or bury the results. The troops in the Middle East have performed their duty. Now we need people in Washington who can construct a unified strategy worthy of them." Written in a Time magazine article published April 9, 2006.

Major General John Batiste, United States Army, commander, First Infantry Division in Iraq until 2005: "I think he should step aside and let someone step in who can be more realistic. I think we need a fresh start. We need leadership up there that respects the military as they expect the military to respect them. And that leadership needs to understand teamwork." On why Mr. Rumsfeld should resign; quoted in The Washington Post on April 12, 2006.

Major General John M. Riggs, United States Army, director, Objective Force Task Force until 2004: "They only need the military advice when it satisfies their agenda. I think that's a mistake, and that's why I think he should resign," On Mr. Rumsfeld and other civilian war planners, National Public Radio, April 13, 2006.

Major General Charles H. Swannack Jr., United States Army, commander, 82nd Airborne Division in Iraq until 2004: "I agree it was right to go ahead and try to establish a stable government in Iraq. We need to continue to fight the global war on terror and keep it off our shores. But I do not believe Secretary Rumsfeld is the right person to fight that war based on his absolute failures in managing war against Saddam in Iraq." Quoted in the New York Times, April 14, 2006.

Former NATO Commander and 2004 Democratic presidential candidate General Wesley Clark: "I believe Secretary Rumsfeld hasn’t done an adequate job. He should go."[11]

Lieutenant General Paul van Riper, United States Marine Corps, Director of the Command and Staff College, Quantico VA by 2003: "I admire those who have stepped forward, and I agree with the arguments they are making. I count myself in the same camp." Quoted in a Washington Post article on April 15, 2006, which also reported, "Van Riper, a lifelong Republican who voted for Bush in 2000 but did not vote in the 2004 election, said Rumsfeld has failed in a number of ways, including 'disastrous' war planning and execution and fostering a poor command climate." [12]

Donald Rumsfeld - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

or are you right, and they just 'don't like him' because he runs the military like a business?

Civilians all over the world have no reason to complain about Rumsfield as citizens except for their stance on the Iraq war.

i honestly don't know where to begin with this part of your post, because it's alarmingly fascist. it seems to imply that US citizens can't object to the performance of a public servant.

and as far as 'except for the iraq war' is concerned.....iraq is the single most controversial and deadly event taking place in the world today. to simply dismiss it as unimportant exposes how out of touch you are.

[kerux]

Defending Rumsfeld would be defending the Devil.

No, actually, it be easier to get the Devil off than anyone in Bush's cabinet.

[Storekeeper]

Civilians all over the world have no reason to complain about Rumsfield as citizens except for their stance on the Iraq war.

i honestly don't know where to begin with this part of your post, because it's alarmingly fascist. it seems to imply that US citizens can't object to the performance of a public servant.

and as far as 'except for the iraq war' is concerned.....iraq is the single most controversial and deadly event taking place in the world today. to simply dismiss it as unimportant exposes how out of touch you are.

You did alright with your response until you got to this point. Then you just show your comprehension skills are lacking.

[raycarey]

civilians all over the world (particularly those in the US) have every right and reason to complain about rumsfeld

you've been in the military for 30 years, and you take umbrage if anyone criticizes anything about it....in some ways you shouldn't be blamed because of the indoctrination you've gone through, but you're in for a bit of a shock once you experience life 'on the outside'.

'on the outside', citizens can complain about the incompetence and arrogance of govt. officials....as opposed to the military where underlings look at the floor when they should be speaking truth to power.