Rumsfeld Resigns

[Rex Kickass]

I read somewhere that electricity availability in Iraq is now significantly less than it was pre-2003 because of Sectarian violence. Iraq is either going to go back to the stone age or not, and the presence of 150,000 troops won't change that given our current strategy. We need to find a concrete and comprehensive approach to improving stability and life in Iraq. That solution isn't necessarily military.

[NorthSideSox72]

I have quite a few good friends that served in Iraq (a couple being West Point Grads) and than a couple being Army guys (out of high school) and the stories I've heard are all resoundingly positive of how much the people appreciate our army and us.

 

I'm sorry but I refuse to let a vast majority ruin my perception of helping out a country. Albeit its still got a long ways to go and we need to find a way to get Iraq far more involved in there own mess, but stuff doesn't happen over night.

 

We also have some family friends that are from Iraq (they had to flea and lost everything at one point during Saddam's reign) and obviously they are biased but they still have some family over there and they've been back to visit and talk about how much better the country is and how so many people are happy.

I gotta tell ya, that stands in complete opposition to my experiences. I happen to be close with a journalist for a major paper, who has been there three times now for long periods. My former partner and field-training officer is over there now in his second stint as an MP of sorts. And another friend who flies hornets.

 

The resounding opinion of all involved, and frankly of every non-military piece of journalism I've read from there as well, is that the place is an absolute mess. Way, way worse off than under Saddam.

[Texsox]

I have quite a few good friends that served in Iraq (a couple being West Point Grads) and than a couple being Army guys (out of high school) and the stories I've heard are all resoundingly positive of how much the people appreciate our army and us.

 

I'm sorry but I refuse to let a vast majority ruin my perception of helping out a country. Albeit its still got a long ways to go and we need to find a way to get Iraq far more involved in there own mess, but stuff doesn't happen over night.

 

We also have some family friends that are from Iraq (they had to flea and lost everything at one point during Saddam's reign) and obviously they are biased but they still have some family over there and they've been back to visit and talk about how much better the country is and how so many people are happy.

 

That is all well and good, but imagine all the good we could have done with a few billion dollars and without spending it on bombs and bullets? There are a lot of countries that could have used our help and we could have said the exact same thing.

 

btw, I think you meant flee

[Chisoxfn]

That is all well and good, but imagine all the good we could have done with a few billion dollars and without spending it on bombs and bullets? There are a lot of countries that could have used our help and we could have said the exact same thing.

 

btw, I think you meant flee

But I don't think anything would have done that country good without getting rid of Saddam. That said had I been told they had no weapons of mass destruction I don't think I would have went into Iraq. But we did and now it would be absolutely irrisponsible to cut and run. I still think Saddam had to go though, but if they had no WOMD there probably would have been other ways to do it without going to war.

 

How were we supposed to know our intelligence was bloody awful? We went in and at that point were comitted, imo. We run and we make a big failure bigger. I'd say differently if I thought the vast majority of the people were against what we've done in Iraq but the vast majority (imo) is glad we are there to help and that country is going in the right direction.

[Balta1701]

How were we supposed to know our intelligence was bloody awful? We went in and at that point were comitted, imo. We run and we make a big failure bigger. I'd say differently if I thought the vast majority of the people were against what we've done in Iraq but the vast majority (imo) is glad we are there to help and that country is going in the right direction.

Some of us were saying it was bloody awful a full 6 months to a year before the invasion.

 

One good way to know it was bloody awful was to listen to the UNMOVIC inspectors. I believe, pre-invasion, one of them actually used the phrase "Garbage" to describe the intel they were getting from the U.S.

 

Oh, and at least what polling data there is in Iraq seems to strongly contradict your statement. Here's one recent one i was able to find.

 

Here are some of its key findings:

 

– A large majority of Iraqis–71%–say they would like the Iraqi government to ask for US-led forces to be withdrawn from Iraq within a year or less. Given four options, 37 percent take the position that they would like US-led forces withdrawn “within six months,” while another 34 percent opt for “gradually withdraw[ing] US-led forces according to a one-year timeline.”

 

– Support for attacks against US-led forces has increased sharply to 61 percent (27% strongly, 34% somewhat). This represents a 14-point increase from January 2006, when only 47 percent of Iraqis supported attacks.

 

– More broadly, 79 percent of Iraqis say that the US is having a negative influence on the situation in Iraq, with just 14 percent saying that it is having a positive influence.

 

– Asked “If the US made a commitment to withdraw from Iraq according to a timeline, do you think this would strengthen the Iraqi government, weaken it, or have no effect either way?” 53 percent said that it would strengthen the government, while just 24 percent said it would weaken the government.

 

– Asked what effect it would have “if US-led forces withdraw from Iraq in the next six months,” 58 percent overall say that violence would decrease (35% a lot, 23% a little).

I think the key note there is that out of the polling sample, a majority actually support attacks on the U.S. forces in Iraq.

[NorthSideSox72]

But I don't think anything would have done that country good without getting rid of Saddam. That said had I been told they had no weapons of mass destruction I don't think I would have went into Iraq. But we did and now it would be absolutely irrisponsible to cut and run. I still think Saddam had to go though, but if they had no WOMD there probably would have been other ways to do it without going to war.

 

WMD was never, ever the primary reason for going to Iraq. WMD was a public-facing excuse for it, just like the other "reasons" they tried to market after the war went badly (like ousting Saddam, or doing it to somehow save the Iraqis, or because of some non-existent 9/11 connection).

 

They went into Iraq because they wanted to spread Americanism throughout the Middle East, and further, because the hawks like Rummy felt that they needed to have a base for the war on terror. They needed an anchorhead in the Mid-East to do that. Iraq, lead by a maniac and militarily crumbling, was the best possible target for that.

 

Sounds a lot like Imperialism, doesn't it?

 

How were we supposed to know our intelligence was bloody awful? We went in and at that point were comitted, imo. We run and we make a big failure bigger. I'd say differently if I thought the vast majority of the people were against what we've done in Iraq but the vast majority (imo) is glad we are there to help and that country is going in the right direction.

Actually, the survey I heard yesterday on the radio (sorry, no link) indicates that the vast majority of Iraqis want the Americans out. So, I'm thinking they aren't too happy.

[AbeFroman]

You all got what you wanted - control of Congress and the EVIIIIIIIIL Donald Rumsfeld to resign all within 24 hours of each other. So, for just one day, can you let it rest for once? I guess not.

 

We got all we wanted? Are you kidding me? We've had one day! In case you forgot, here's what you've had recently:

1) 12 consecutive years of controlling the House of Representatives

2) 10 of 12 years of controlling the Senate

3 6 consecutive years of controlling the White House (even after a lost popular vote in 2000)

4) An impeachment trial of a President who basically lied about getting a BJ

5) 2 uber-conservatives have coasted through the senate on their way to the Supreme Court

6) A veritable plethora of highly charged conservative laws that appeal to virtually no blue states.

 

Let it rest? All we've been able to do was push one grossly inept bureaucrat out of a position he was failing miserably in... And everyone is better off for it! You know how many high-ranking retired military generals had turned on this guy?! Including republican golden boy Colin Powell himself?

[DBAHO]

WMD was never, ever the primary reason for going to Iraq. WMD was a public-facing excuse for it, just like the other "reasons" they tried to market after the war went badly (like ousting Saddam, or doing it to somehow save the Iraqis, or because of some non-existent 9/11 connection).

I saw this story that had quotes from Rumsfeld and I found this beauty from 3 years ago;

 

"WE know where they are... they're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat" – Mr Rumsfeld, 30 March 2003, when asked about weapons of mass destruction days after US forces invaded Iraq.

 

As for Australians thoughts about this, well I think it's going to be pretty damn positive. Rumsfeld was seen by most down here as an idiot and one of Bush's lackies to put it bluntly.

[EvilMonkey]

Boy....Rumsfeld and K-Fed both kicked to the curb within 24 hours of each other.....who would have thunk it?????

 

[Texsox]

Boy....Rumsfeld and K-Fed both kicked to the curb within 24 hours of each other.....who would have thunk it?????

 

 

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Boy....Rumsfeld and K-Fed both kicked to the curb within 24 hours of each other.....who would have thunk it?????

 

Britney and Rummy sitting in a tree!

[Texsox]

Britney and Rummy sitting in a tree!

 

OMG Rummy, OMG, OMG, Stay the Course I'm Cummming!!!!!

[Balta1701]

KFed and Rummy sitting in a tree!

[Balance]

Good effing riddance.

[kapkomet]

Most polarizing post in the whole damn thread. Possibly all day.

 

I would really appreciate one post of yours that doesn't resort to mocking and hyperbole in this forum.

 

Sorry, that's harsh, but you cry partisanship all day, and then you post something like this? Please.

You know what? Normally, I'll let this go, but since I got "called out"... I think the little smug remarks and all that s*** that is dispersed throughout without being near as direct as I was about it was right about par for the course. It's the "hidden hyperbole", if you will, that didn't get addressed by you.

 

Every f***ing post by a few of you in here (and not you Soxy, I understand your point, but I stepped it up from the little digs to what you call "mocking and hyperbole"). If you want to start slinging s***, sling some both ways, and that includes some of you who responded to Soxy's comments to me.

 

I think it's amazing that we have an election, where change was inevitable, and when that change occurs and even leads to more change, we get nothing but snarky, rude, dickhead veiled comments about how our President is nothing but a lying jackass. It grows tiresome, and my "hyperbole" is in direct response to that.

 

That's all I will say about it, but you know who you are, and the jackassery should stop. Maybe then I wouldn't have to be "mocking all the time". If you read 90% of my other posts in other threads on this whole situation, it's pretty neutral.

[Texsox]

You know what? Normally, I'll let this go, but since I got "called out"... I think the little smug remarks and all that s*** that is dispersed throughout without being near as direct as I was about it was right about par for the course. It's the "hidden hyperbole", if you will, that didn't get addressed by you.

 

Every f***ing post by a few of you in here (and not you Soxy, I understand your point, but I stepped it up from the little digs to what you call "mocking and hyperbole"). If you want to start slinging s***, sling some both ways, and that includes some of you who responded to Soxy's comments to me.

 

I think it's amazing that we have an election, where change was inevitable, and when that change occurs and even leads to more change, we get nothing but snarky, rude, dickhead veiled comments about how our President is nothing but a lying jackass. It grows tiresome, and my "hyperbole" is in direct response to that.

 

That's all I will say about it, but you know who you are, and the jackassery should stop. Maybe then I wouldn't have to be "mocking all the time". If you read 90% of my other posts in other threads on this whole situation, it's pretty neutral.

 

Interesting Kap. If I understand your opinion, the snarky, rude, dickhead, veiled comments should stop because the GOP lost both houses and Rumsfeld resigned. I see two problems with that

1. Perhaps the election results and the aftermath are vindication that Bush is actually all those things?

and

2. When will the GOP stop bringing up good ol' number 42, William Jefferson Clinton?

 

You are asking the Dems to stop in a day, when the GOP hasn't stopped in 14 years? Comparing this to past elections, we had those pretty maps that showed a huge landslide for Bush, who received 51% of the vote and the flip flop comments continued. Not mentioning this as justification, just showing these remarks are inevitable. The winners will gloat and try to make more of the election it is. The losers will try and mitigate the loss. Some people will have their pride hurt. The spinning will make everyone dizzy until we puke.

[southsider2k5]

Interesting Kap. If I understand your opinion, the snarky, rude, dickhead, veiled comments should stop because the GOP lost both houses and Rumsfeld resigned. I see two problems with that

1. Perhaps the election results and the aftermath are vindication that Bush is actually all those things?

and

2. When will the GOP stop bringing up good ol' number 42, William Jefferson Clinton?

 

You are asking the Dems to stop in a day, when the GOP hasn't stopped in 14 years? Comparing this to past elections, we had those pretty maps that showed a huge landslide for Bush, who received 51% of the vote and the flip flop comments continued. Not mentioning this as justification, just showing these remarks are inevitable. The winners will gloat and try to make more of the election it is. The losers will try and mitigate the loss. Some people will have their pride hurt. The spinning will make everyone dizzy until we puke.

 

Um I think you missed the point. I think he is sick of it being one-sided, and then getting yelled at for responding in kind.

[Texsox]

Um I think you missed the point. I think he is sick of it being one-sided, and then getting yelled at for responding in kind.

 

I believe that was the motivation, but reading his paragraphs three and four, I believe my comments were directly to his points.

[kapkomet]

Um I think you missed the point. I think he is sick of it being one-sided, and then getting yelled at for responding in kind.

That's exactly my point, nothing more. It's interesting that everyone reads so much into every single one of my posts.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Blame The Onion, not me.

 

Rumsfeld: 'My Half-Assed Job Here Is Done'

 

WASHINGTON, DC—After nearly six years of much-publicized service as Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld announced his resignation Wednesday afternoon, saying that he had "proudly accomplished everything [he'd] set out to bungle." "Years ago, I decided to bog this great nation down in an extended, grueling foreign occupation, and I'm happy to say that's exactly what I've done," said Rumsfeld in a farewell address at the White House, during which he urged Americans to continue waging the ill-conceived, mismanaged, and evidently unwelcome fight for democracy in the Middle East. "Each of my actions—from undersupplying troops with body armor to focusing on capturing Saddam Hussein while Osama bin Laden remained free—has led America inexorably toward our current state of extreme crisis. Well, anyway, goodbye!" President Bush expressed confidence that Robert Gates, his new nominee for Secretary of Defense, will be able to "f*** everything up the rest of the way."

[kapkomet]

 

Leave it to you to link us to the onion on this issue.

[FlaSoxxJim]

And then there's this one, which is NOT from the Onion:

 

Though he is now the former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld is expected to be accused of war crimes in a lawsuit to be filed next week in Germany.

 

The Center for Constitutional Rights will file the suit on behalf of a group of Iraqi detainees as well as the so-called 20th hijacker, who is currently being held at Guantanamo Bay.

 

"The former secretary actually authorized a series of interrogation techniques," said Michael Ratner, President of CCR. "They included the use of dogs, stripping, hooding, stressed positions, chaining to the floor, sexual humiliation and those types of activities."

 

Those techniques, he says, amount to torture and violate the Geneva Conventions. Ratner will be traveling to Berlin next week and plans to file the suit on Tuesday.

 

The suit is being brought in Germany because a "universal jurisdiction" law there allows German courts to claim jurisdiction over war crimes even if they were committed outside that country's borders.

 

. . .

 

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/1...ut_but_som.html

[kapkomet]

It stinks. Both sides of it.

[Soxy]

You know what? Normally, I'll let this go, but since I got "called out"... I think the little smug remarks and all that s*** that is dispersed throughout without being near as direct as I was about it was right about par for the course. It's the "hidden hyperbole", if you will, that didn't get addressed by you.

 

Every f***ing post by a few of you in here (and not you Soxy, I understand your point, but I stepped it up from the little digs to what you call "mocking and hyperbole"). If you want to start slinging s***, sling some both ways, and that includes some of you who responded to Soxy's comments to me.

 

I think it's amazing that we have an election, where change was inevitable, and when that change occurs and even leads to more change, we get nothing but snarky, rude, dickhead veiled comments about how our President is nothing but a lying jackass. It grows tiresome, and my "hyperbole" is in direct response to that.

 

That's all I will say about it, but you know who you are, and the jackassery should stop. Maybe then I wouldn't have to be "mocking all the time". If you read 90% of my other posts in other threads on this whole situation, it's pretty neutral.

I understand your point, but exactly what made you make that post in the first place? I don't see any rude mocking or hyperbole by anyone else (prior to your post) in the thread. Basically, it was that post that kind of set up a powder keg. I saw some speculation that Bush might nominate a Dem senator (which, okay, maybe cynical, but it was certainly a possibility).

 

And yes, I know there are other mocking posts, but truth is, for Wednesday yours took the cake (and, not to sound like your mother but, you really are a better poster and "dialoguer" than that). And by posting in that style, how are you going to elicit anything but a negative, rude, and mocking response from people on the other side? Either you want a dialogue that can be conducted in a respectful tone, or you're contributing to the negative cycle of politics.

 

I aplogize if my response sounded rude, but if you're going to complain about "the others" using a tactic you don't like, don't use that tactic.

[kapkomet]

I understand your point, but exactly what made you make that post in the first place? I don't see any rude mocking or hyperbole by anyone else (prior to your post) in the thread. Basically, it was that post that kind of set up a powder keg. I saw some speculation that Bush might nominate a Dem senator (which, okay, maybe cynical, but it was certainly a possibility).

 

And yes, I know there are other mocking posts, but truth is, for Wednesday yours took the cake (and, not to sound like your mother but, you really are a better poster and "dialoguer" than that). And by posting in that style, how are you going to elicit anything but a negative, rude, and mocking response from people on the other side? Either you want a dialogue that can be conducted in a respectful tone, or you're contributing to the negative cycle of politics.

 

I aplogize if my response sounded rude, but if you're going to complain about "the others" using a tactic you don't like, don't use that tactic.

No, you're right, my post was much more direct and not as subtle as the others, but the little digs sometimes gets to me, and that was one of those times the other day.

 

No harm, Soxy, in you stating your opinion of the post. That's one of the biggest reasons I respect you so much around here.