• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Army Times: "Time for Rumsfeld to go"

tecoyah

Illusionary
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,453
Reaction score
3,844
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
This is a small excerpt from an article to be posted in the Army times.....as well as the Navy, Marines, and Air Force times......and carries my sentiments exactly.

"Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large. His strategy has failed, and his ability to lead is compromised. And although the blame for our failures in Iraq rests with the secretary, it will be the troops who bear its brunt.

This is not about the midterm elections. Regardless of which party wins Nov. 7, the time has come, Mr. President, to face the hard bruising truth:

Donald Rumsfeld must go."


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/indexn/detail?blogid=16&entry_id=10582
 
I've been preaching that ever since Tora Bora.

This is also an interesting admission:

Two prominent neoconservatives challenge Bush administration
The Associated Press
Published: November 3, 2006

WASHINGTON: Richard Perle, a leading proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, now says devastating dysfunction within the Bush administration has turned U.S. policy there into a disaster.

"At the end of the day, you have to hold the president responsible," Perle told Vanity Fair magazine.

Perle said had he seen at the start of the war in 2003 "where we are today" he probably would not have advocated an invasion to depose President Saddam Hussein.
Full story here - http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/11/03/america/NA_GEN_US_Iraq_Critics.php
 
It will be interesting to see what happens with this. I don't think George Bush will let Rumsfeld go, although he unquestionably needs to go. I think steadfastness can be a great quality, but not in this circumstance. It's much more important for Bush to look like others cannot dictate what he should do than it is to attempt to attain victory in Iraq. Sorry, but our troops's lives are at stake, and he must set aside his personality disorder.

I posted this yesterday. It's a letter to the editor that was published in the New York Times yesterday:

To the Editor:

John Kerry on his worst day could not insult the troops more than President Bush did when he announced that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was doing a “fantastic” job and would remain with him through the remainder of his presidency.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/opinion/l03bush.html

George Bush, wake the f*** up, will ya?
 
On MSNBC.com, they are doing a poll on this issue. Here are the results:

Should Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld be removed from his position, whether by resignation or dismissal? * 50,605 responses

Yes, he has lost all credibility and the ability to lead and has failed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He must go.
87%

No, he has ably overseen wars in Iraq and Afghanistan while working on overhauling the armed forces. He should stay.
13%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15552318/

87%. Wow.
 
After the high of the Kerry gaffe, the cons giddiness was tempered by:

The Rev.Ted Haggard, President of the NEA, and vocal opponent of same-sex marriage, resigned amid allegations that he had a three-year affair with a male prostitute.
The NEA is a 30 million-strong organization that is home to multitudes of preachers and laypersons who condemn homosexuality in strident terms.

The Los Alamos security breach.
The recent security breach at Los Alamos National Laboratory was very serious, with sensitive materials being taken out of the facility — possibly including information on how to deactivate locks on nuclear weapons,

Richard Perle, a leading proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, now says devastating dysfunction within the Bush administration has turned U.S. policy there into a disaster.

An editorial scheduled to appear on Monday in Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times, calls for the resignation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

In a poll by Princeton Survey Research Associates released by Newsweek. 61 per cent of respondents think the U.S. should set a timetable for the withdrawal of military forces in Iraq, but Cheney, on ABC, said it was "full speed ahead" with the admin's Iraq policy.

Let me add that, like Kerry's blunder, the cons woes will have very little, if any, effect on Tuesday's election.
 
hipsterdufus said:
I don't know why Bush decided to say what a great job Rummy was doing so close to the election
Maybe because that's what he thinks.
 
CurrentAffairs said:
Maybe because that's what he thinks.

Or maybe Perle is trying to cover his butt because he knows that if the Dems win the election and go through with their promise to investigate how the Iraq intelligence was manipulated, his goose is gonna get cooked.

Perle also gave seminars on how to profit from the Iraq invasion. If one didn't know better one might think Perle cooked up the evidence to invade Iraq just so he could get rich. But then, they don't call him the 'Dark Prince' for nothing.
 
Quote by CURRENT AFFAIRS and MOOT
(Maybe because that's what he thinks.)

Show me one link where it says that President Bush Jnr THINKS?
 
Wpuld not be surprised to see him go after the elections. The left has demonized him to the point that the majority of the people will not support our efforts with him in the office, he should be gone.
 
CurrentAffairs said:
Maybe because that's what he thinks.

Of course it's what he thinks, but really bad political timing to say it yet again.
 
Stinger said:
Wpuld not be surprised to see him go after the elections. The left has demonized him to the point that the majority of the people will not support our efforts with him in the office, he should be gone.

Oh, so blame the left huh?

Well, the left has demonized Bush and Cheney even more. Using the same logic should they go too?
 
I suspect Rumsfeld will lose his job in 2008. New president, new cabinet.
 
Stinger said:
The left has demonized him to the point that the majority of the people will not support our efforts with him in the office, he should be gone.
Good thing Mr. Rumsfeld has no responsibility for the outcomes of his decisions and actions.

Good thing elitist types out there to remind us what dupes we Americans are. We just do whatever the nigh unto omnipotent 'Left' tells us. Us regular Americans have no ability to reach adult decisions based on evidence.

Too bad us Americans are all a bunch of sheeple. Thanks for reminding us that we are not the elite like yourself.
 
hipsterdufus said:
Oh, so blame the left huh?

It has been one of their primary goals, they have accomplished it. Why doesn't that make you happy?

Well, the left has demonized Bush and Cheney even more. Using the same logic should they go too?

Sure have, that's really helped the war effort hasn't it.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Good thing Mr. Rumsfeld has no responsibility for the outcomes of his decisions and actions.

You really think so? I don't.

Good thing elitist types out there to remind us what dupes we Americans are. We just do whatever the nigh unto omnipotent 'Left' tells us. Us regular Americans have no ability to reach adult decisions based on evidence.

So you don't think the statements of the left and the Dems has any sway with the public?

Too bad us Americans are all a bunch of sheeple. Thanks for reminding us that we are not the elite like yourself.

Has nothing to do with elite or not it has to do with whether one side condemns the administration and the war by calling it immoral and illegal and for oil and built of lies that the people running it are too incompetent, when a large portion of the country gets it infromation from a side that presents it that way it will surely disway public opinion and it has. Most don't support the war anymore and if that support is not there then it will be almost impossible to carry on the effort. Rumsfield is now viewed by the vast majority of the public as "the problem", so it's time for him to go. Will that turn around public opinion and end the attacks by the Dems, no.

Just imagine if the Dems and the left had supported the war and that we as a country had presented a united front and a resolve to win. It might have made all the difference as to where we are now.
 
This article is just an Editorial. It is just a few opinions of Donald Rumsfield, not a military endorsement for kicking Rumsfield out.
 
Crummy Rummy should have been canned aeons ago. Not only has he completely mismanaged the war unintentionally but he has also mismanaged the war intentionally. He allowed the looting and plundering in Iraq to continue unabated for weeks and his only response to that policy was "Stuff happens...". I can't figure out which is more outrageous:

1. The policy allowing Iraqis to loot and plunder with 0 U.S. military interference.
OR
2. The Secretary of Defense stating "Stuff happens..." and persistently supporting that policy even after a nuclear research facility, controlled by the IAEA, and containing hundreds of tons of uranium was looted.
 
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/15031-what-sort-job-rumsfeld-doing-4.html

http://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/qjecon/v120y2005i4p1191-1237.html

freethinker said:
http://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/qjecon/...1191-1237.html

When compared to the opinions of members of congress on liberal vs conservative issues, all media outlets excluding foxnews and the washington times were seen to have a liberal slant.

This is nothing ground breaking, but it proves this point:

The army/navy/marine times are published not by the army/navy/marines, but by a privately owned media organization, which as a whole has a liberal slant.

Silly liberals. Tricks are for kids.
 
FreeThinker said:
Silly liberals. Tricks are for kids.

Silly Republicans. Propaganda is for fools. The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Federal Times and Defense News are all owned by Gannet Company Incorporated which also owns 1 national newspaper (USA TODAY), 97 local newspapers, and 20 news stations (all affiliates of NBC, ABC, and CBS). Gannet Company Incorporated doesn't control what those media outlets say. Many of them lean to the right.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
Silly Republicans. Propaganda is for fools. The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Federal Times and Defense News are all owned by Gannet Company Incorporated which also owns 1 national newspaper (USA TODAY), 97 local newspapers, and 20 news stations (all affiliates of NBC, ABC, and CBS). Gannet Company Incorporated doesn't control what those media outlets say. Many of them lean to the right.

Don't worry about FreeThinker. All you see from him is name calling and talking points. *yawn*
 
aps said:
Don't worry about FreeThinker. All you see from him is name calling and talking points. *yawn*

Is that a rebuttle of what he posted or do you accept what he posted as factual?
 
Stinger said:
Is that a rebuttle of what he posted or do you accept what he posted as factual?

I was referring to this post:
FreeThinker said:
Silly liberals. Tricks are for kids.

What is factual about that stupid comment?
 
aps said:
I was referring to this post:

What is factual about that stupid comment?

You quoted much more than that didn't you.
 
Back
Top Bottom