Democrats Target Rumsfeld (1 Viewer)

[26 X World Champs]

A very interesting and powerful move by Democrats. Rumsfeld is the perfect foil for the Dems. No other single member of Bush's Cabinet has made so many painful and deadly mistakes over the past 5.5 years. Even Sen. McCain said he has "No Confidence" in Rumsfeld.

Democrats Target Rumsfeld
Lawmakers to Seek a Vote of No Confidence in Defense Secretary

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 1, 2006; Page A09

Under assault from Republicans on issues of national security, congressional Democrats are planning to push for a vote of no confidence in Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld this month as part of a broad effort to stay on the offensive ahead of the November midterm elections. (snip)

Rather than change the subject to domestic issues, as they have tried in past years, Democrats are hoping to confront Republicans head-on. (snip)

Emanuel said the move is set. And he hopes to stage the resolution with as many as 12 retired generals and other military officers who have called for Rumsfeld's resignation.

"We're going to go for a no-confidence vote on Rumsfeld," Emanuel said.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101531.html

 

[TurtleDude]

A very interesting and powerful move by Democrats. Rumsfeld is the perfect foil for the Dems. No other single member of Bush's Cabinet has made so many painful and deadly mistakes over the past 5.5 years. Even Sen. McCain said he has "No Confidence" in Rumsfeld.


Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101531.html

the defeatocrats after Rummy

that should be interesting

it could work or it could prove to some that the defeatocrats want to undermine the war for their own political agenda

 

[26 X World Champs]

the defeatocrats after Rummy

that should be interesting

it could work or it could prove to some that the defeatocrats want to undermine the war for their own political agenda

You're not Turtledude you're PARROTDUDE! Took you only a few hours to mimic Grand Master Bush's new little term...so mature and intelligent all in one!

So Dude, you think Rumsfeld's done an OK job? What would it take in your world to fire someone? Do you really want me to list the basics that Rumsfeld has fuc%ed up on in Iraq? :rofl

 

[TurtleDude]

You're not Turtledude you're PARROTDUDE! Took you only a few hours to mimic Grand Master Bush's new little term...so mature and intelligent all in one!

So Dude, you think Rumsfeld's done an OK job? What would it take in your world to fire someone? Do you really want me to list the basics that Rumsfeld has fuc%ed up on in Iraq? :rofl

poor champs-Defeatocrats sounds so good and so true. I don't think you really have the education or the information to accurately assess what is going on in Iraq or to judge Rumsfeld. THere is no construction plans for a war. None are the same as the last one. I believe the moonbats denigrate the war because they hate Bush

I don't for a minute believe that anti war or arm chair generaling is what causes most of it-its really Bush hate that is the instigator of this crap

 

[26 X World Champs]

poor champs-Defeatocrats sounds so good and so true. I don't think you really have the education or the information to accurately assess what is going on in Iraq or to judge Rumsfeld. THere is no construction plans for a war. None are the same as the last one. I believe the moonbats denigrate the war because they hate Bush

I don't for a minute believe that anti war or arm chair generaling is what causes most of it-its really Bush hate that is the instigator of this crap

Written like a true Bushaholic, remarkeable! Are you saying that the Iraq War has been waged properly and that Rumsfeld is doing a GOOD job? Please do not hem and haw, tell me exactly what you think of the job Rumsfeld's done, be specific with the points that make his job performance ACCEPTABLE!

Here's a bit of what I think..taken from a much longer list of his deadly errors:

1. Too few troops to secure Iraq after the initial attack - which was Rumsfeld's idea - the center point of his plan.

2. Abu Grahb - He's responsible and this event has caused immeasurable harm to the USA and what people think of us all over the world.

I don't want to go beyond the first two...unless you push me...but first let's hear from you about the great things that Rumsfeld's done in his job...be specific...avoid the urge to be a parrot and tell us in your own words how Rumsfeld is winning the Iraq War....:mrgreen:

 

[PrimBabUB]

Do the dims think they are part of the British Parliament now? :rofl
I think the American public has given the dims a 'vote of no confidence' in the last two elections. Perhaps the dims need a Waaaaaaaahmbulance Award for the biggest crybabies in history. Poor little dims. Did mean ole Rummy give you a fuggie wedgie in your tightie whities? :rofl

 

[tecoyah]

OK, so we have a man who tries to resign,but his boss wont let him. He garners little confidence in the minds of those who actually work for him.He has made errors in judgement which cost painful errors on more than one occasion, and regardless of these things , when someone tries to remove him from the position he seems to be failing in.....they are attacked for doing the Job we ask them to do.
Rumsfeld has asked to be removed more than once:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld says he twice offered President Bush his resignation during the height of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, but the president refused to accept it."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/03/rumsfeld.resign/

The Military itself has little confidence in his leadership:

"WASHINGTON, April 13 — The widening circle of retired generals who have stepped forward to call for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's resignation is shaping up as an unusual outcry that could pose a significant challenge to Mr. Rumsfeld's leadership, current and former generals said on Thursday."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/14/w...5078c184e96b80&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Yet those in this supposed "Bush Camp" seem to think he is doing a Great Job because the President says it is so. One is left to wonder what other aspects of reality they ignore simply because Bush Says So.

Personally, I find Rumsfeld to be inadequate in his position, and would prefer we had a Military Mind in charge of....you know....the Military.

 

[PrimBabUB]

WASHINGTON, April 13 — The widening circle of retired generals who have stepped forward to call for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's resignation is shaping up as an unusual outcry that could pose a significant challenge to Mr. Rumsfeld's leadership, current and former generals said on Thursday.

I think the keyword here is RETIRED generals. Why should anyone put any stock in what retired generals say? They are no longer privy to information from which decisions are made. The fact that they are retired means that they can be as partisan as they want to be while they are armchair quarterbacking.

 

[26 X World Champs]

I think the keyword here is RETIRED generals. Why should anyone put any stock in what retired generals say? They are no longer privy to information from which decisions are made. The fact that they are retired means that they can be as partisan as they want to be while they are armchair quarterbacking.

And can you show other times in American history when so many retired generals came out against a Sec. of Defense? Huh?

Your point about the ex-Military guys being retired is naive at best or uninformed if I want to word it politely. It doesn't take a military genius to know that anyone in the active military cannot speakout against Rumsfeld, they would be in serious trouble if they did...chain of command and respect for the process.

However when they do retire they have the ability for the first time in their miltary lives to express their true feelings which has led to so many ex-generals going on the record against Rumsfeld.

I asked other Bushaholics in this thread to clearly list in your own words (not someone else's words taken from a partisan website) exactly what Rumsfled has done right since he became Sec. of Defense....list 10 things of significance....OK? If you do make claims that require substantiation please do so with links to bi-partisan sites.

Thanks....and would you try to keep the mocking posts against "dims" to a minimum since they add nothing to the debate and only expose the poster as being an immature moron?

 

[PrimBabUB]

And can you show other times in American history when so many retired generals came out against a Sec. of Defense? Huh?

Your point about the ex-Military guys being retired is naive at best or uninformed if I want to word it politely. It doesn't take a military genius to know that anyone in the active military cannot speakout against Rumsfeld, they would be in serious trouble if they did...chain of command and respect for the process.

We are in a time in American history where there are multifarious acts committed where, they, in the past would not have been thought of. There use to be a standing 'gentleman's agreement' from past presidents that they would not criticize a standing president. I think Jimmi & Bill put an end to that.

However when they do retire they have the ability for the first time in their miltary lives to express their true feelings which has led to so many ex-generals going on the record against Rumsfeld.

Sorry, but I'm not going to put stock in partisan retired generals. Without access to classified information their opinions are simply conjecture on their parts. I would have to know what THEIR records in the military were before I could give them any credence.

I asked other Bushaholics in this thread to clearly list in your own words (not someone else's words taken from a partisan website) exactly what Rumsfled has done right since he became Sec. of Defense....list 10 things of significance....OK? If you do make claims that require substantiation please do so with links to bi-partisan sites.

I have a question :2wave: When's this paper due by? What percentage of our grade will it be? Should it be double or triple spaced? How many words does it have to be? What size margins do we use (top to bottom & side to side)? Do we have to turn in our 3 x 5 index cards? What font and letter size? ...........................:rofl

Thanks....and would you try to keep the mocking posts against "dims" to a minimum since they add nothing to the debate and only expose the poster as being an immature moron?

Do you think you can not use the term "Bushaholics" or refrain from calling people 'immature moron'?

 

[26 X World Champs]

We are in a time in American history where there are multifarious acts committed where, they, in the past would not have been thought of. There use to be a standing 'gentleman's agreement' from past presidents that they would not criticize a standing president. I think Jimmi & Bill put an end to that.

HUH? Clinton has gone the extra mile to NOT criticize Bush and has partnered with the President he defeated on many humanitarian missions so your point, to me, is invalid.

Newsflash....There have been many flash points in US history that were much more severe than where we are today and never have so many ex-military come out against a Sec. of Defense, nothing even compares.

Sorry, but I'm not going to put stock in partisan retired generals. Without access to classified information their opinions are simply conjecture on their parts. I would have to know what THEIR records in the military were before I could give them any credence.

Here's a short list of retired military who have come out publicly against Rumsfeld...lots more if you'd like them...

Maj. Gen. Charles Swannack - The commander who led the elite 82nd Airborne Division during its mission in Iraq.

Retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste -- who led the 1st Infantry Division in northern Iraq in 2004-2005 -- called for Rumsfeld's resignation. In addition to commanding the 1st Infantry in Iraq, Batiste also was a senior adviser to former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, one of the chief architects of the U.S.-led invasion.

Former U.S. Central Command chief Anthony Zinni, former Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, and retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold also have called for Rumsfeld to step down.

Marine Lieut. General Greg Newbold, the Pentagon's top operations officer, voiced his objections internally and then retired, in part out of opposition to the war.

Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak
Air Force chief of staff, 1990-94 (Bush I & Clinton)
"We have a force in Iraq that's much too small to stabilize the situation. It's about half the size, or maybe even a third, of what we need."

Lt. Gen. William Odom (Reagan)
Director of the National Security Agency, 1985-88
"It's a huge strategic disaster, and it will only get worse. The sooner we leave, the less the damage."

Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy (Clinton)
Army deputy chief of staff for intelligence, 1997-2000
"From the beginning, i was asked which side I took, Shinseki's or Rumsfeld's. And I said Shinseki. I mean, Rumsfeld proudly announced that he had told General Franks to fight this war with different tactics in which they would bypass enemy strongholds and enemy resistance and keep on moving. But it was shocking to me that the secretary of defense would tell the Army how to fight. He doesn't know how to fight; he has no business telling them."

Adm. William Crowe (Reagan & Bush I)
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1985-89
"We screwed up. we were intent on a quick victory with smaller forces, and we felt if we had a military victory everything else would fall in place. We would be viewed not as occupiers but as victors. We would draw down to 30,000 people within the first sixty days."

Sources: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/13/iraq.rumsfeld/index.html
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/6593163/the_generals_speak/
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1181629,00.html

I have a question :2wave: When's this paper due by? What percentage of our grade will it be? Should it be double or triple spaced? How many words does it have to be? What size margins do we use (top to bottom & side to side)? Do we have to turn in our 3 x 5 index cards? What font and letter size?

In other words you have nothing to contribute to this debate other than juvenile putdowns. This entire post you've not stated one debating point that defends Rumsfeld on any level whatsoever. You're unable to come up with anything that Rumsfeld has done since becoming Sec. of Defense that indicates he's doing a good job. Slam Dunk, thanks....

 

[TurtleDude]

Written like a true Bushaholic, remarkeable! Are you saying that the Iraq War has been waged properly and that Rumsfeld is doing a GOOD job? Please do not hem and haw, tell me exactly what you think of the job Rumsfeld's done, be specific with the points that make his job performance ACCEPTABLE!

Here's a bit of what I think..taken from a much longer list of his deadly errors:

1. Too few troops to secure Iraq after the initial attack - which was Rumsfeld's idea - the center point of his plan.

2. Abu Grahb - He's responsible and this event has caused immeasurable harm to the USA and what people think of us all over the world.

I don't want to go beyond the first two...unless you push me...but first let's hear from you about the great things that Rumsfeld's done in his job...be specific...avoid the urge to be a parrot and tell us in your own words how Rumsfeld is winning the Iraq War....:mrgreen:

1) number one priority for the defeatocrats is to gain political power. without political power, the left has no ability to prosper

2) gaining power at the expense of america is a trade must defeatocrat elites will make in a heartbeat

3) the defeatocrats have no new ideas but have become reactionary statist parasites whose main platform is whining about Bush and laboring under the delusion that Bush really isn't the legitimate president

4) with that in mind, the defeatocrats have tried to undermine the war effort and undermine the economy so as to have a platform to run on that is something other than the tired Soak the rich, appease the UN nonsense that lost them the last three federal elections

5) I doubt anyone on this board is doing anything other than hindsight armchair generaling as to the war. There is no such thing as an instruction manual for running a war.

 

[TurtleDude]

HUH? Clinton has gone the extra mile to NOT criticize Bush and has partnered with the President he defeated on many humanitarian missions so your point, to me, is invalid.




.

THis might be one of the funniest LIES I have ever seen on this board-or on any other other boards. Bush I held off criticizing BJ Bill while slick Willy has bashed President W Bush at a level that is unprecedented in modern american politics. BTW you completely misread the other fellow's point-he was bashing CLintoon for attacking Current president Bush-either you deliberately ignored that or you didn't bother reading what the fellow actually said

Retired generals-always thinking they are better than the relevant leaders in command now. McPeak-I had to deal with that turkey's legacy which was mainly to cement his place in Air Force history by creating a new formal uniform for the general rank in the Air Force. He was a major league Kerry supporter.

 

[26 X World Champs]

1) number one priority for the defeatocrats is to gain political power. without political power, the left has no ability to prosper

What a bunch of BS! Nice talking point..what radio station do you listen to? Your point #1 says NOTHING about NOTHING. :werd

2) gaining power at the expense of america is a trade must defeatocrat elites will make in a heartbeat

Just another baseless, mindless Rush talking point that you do not back up with even one iota of fact or proof! I swear it's like you listen to Right Wing Talk Radio and jot down their talking points and then type them here. Your point #2 again says NOTHING about NOTHING! What do I mean? Show us all how Democrats are gaining power "at the expense of America." Talk about saying nothing!

3) the defeatocrats have no new ideas but have become reactionary statist parasites whose main platform is whining about Bush and laboring under the delusion that Bush really isn't the legitimate president

The party in power in all THREE branches of the Federal Government makes up the laws of the day. The Dems have no ability to pass any legislation but you know that so you use that obvious fact and twist it into stating that we do not have any ideas! How about these:

6-Point Plan for 2006
1 - Honest Leadership & Open Government
We will end the Republican culture of corruption and restore a government as good as the people it serves, starting with real ethics reform.

2 - Real Security
We will protect Americans at home and lead the world by telling the truth to our troops, our citizens and our allies. We believe in a strong national defense that is both tough and smart, recognizing that homeland security begins with hometown security.

3 - Energy Independence
We will create a cleaner, greener and stronger America by reducing our dependence on foreign oil, eliminating billions in subsidies for oil and gas companies and use the savings to provide consumer relief and develop energy alternatives, and investing in energy independent technology.

4 - Economic Prosperity & Educational Excellence
We will create jobs that stay in America and restore opportunity for all Americans, starting with raising the minimum wage, expanding Pell grants and making college tuition tax deductible. We also believe in budget discipline that reduces our deficit.

5 - A Healthcare System that Works for Everyone
We will join 36 other industrialized nations in making sure everyone has access to affordable health care, starting by fixing the prescription drug program and investing in stem cell and other medical research.

6 -Retirement Security
We will ensure that a retirement with dignity is the right and expectation of every single American, starting with pension reform, expanding saving incentives and preventing the privatization of social security.

Source: http://www.democrats.org/agenda.html

4) with that in mind, the defeatocrats have tried to undermine the war effort and undermine the economy so as to have a platform to run on that is something other than the tired Soak the rich, appease the UN nonsense that lost them the last three federal elections

Undermine the war effort that 66% of Americans are against and believe that Bush has fuc%ed up, that war effort? Dude, you're really out of touch. Bush started a useless war, diverted our resources, killed hundreds of thousands and wounded hundreds of thousands more while making America less safe...that is undermining America my friend...that is the truth...You need to switch radio stations....

5) I doubt anyone on this board is doing anything other than hindsight armchair generaling as to the war. There is no such thing as an instruction manual for running a war.

:rofl Considering that the American public was misled and lied to about this war from day one I think if the truth had been told we would never have invaded Iraq and the Trillion Dollars or more that we will spend in Iraq could have been used to make us safer, smarter, cleaner, more energy independent and have a better overall life than the harsh reality we're in today.

Bush is the worst President in modern US history and time might make him the worst ever. He has lowered the opinion of the USA around the world in an unpecedented manner, has made Americans targets for death worldwide, has made America the world's enemy at time where the real enemy....Islamic terrorists are prospering and growing like no time in history...all this under the Bush watch!

Maybe in your next post you'll actually write something that has a fact or two in it and you might even cite a source to back it up....are you capable?

BTW - I like the term Defeatocrats because that is exactly what the Democrats are going to do in 67 days to the Republicans...Did you read Bob Novaks column this week about the Congressional races? Have you asked Sean Hannity what he thinks is going to happen on November 7th?

The DEFEATOCRATS will regain power and open the books for all America to see how this war has been waged and how the Adminstration lied to all of us....TICK TICK TICK TICK TICK....

 

[TurtleDude]

What a bunch of BS! Nice talking point..what radio station do you listen to? Your point #1 says NOTHING about NOTHING. :werd

You spew demopsychobabble and you have the nerve to claim others are getting their comments from radio stations. You need to lay off the daily dose of the communist kos

Just another baseless, mindless Rush talking point that you do not back up with even one iota of fact or proof! I swear it's like you listen to Right Wing Talk Radio and jot down their talking points and then type them here. Your point #2 again says NOTHING about NOTHING! What do I mean? Show us all how Democrats are gaining power "at the expense of America." Talk about saying nothing!

typical moonbat response-anyone who doesn't buy into your BS must have been told to say this by Rush-as I said, anytime you want to compare education my man I'll be happy to do so. But I don't need a fat entertainer to tell me what to say-you have me confused with your ilk

The party in power in all THREE branches of the Federal Government makes up the laws of the day. The Dems have no ability to pass any legislation but you know that so you use that obvious fact and twist it into stating that we do not have any ideas! How about these:

Source: http://www.democrats.org/agenda.html

the GOP is limited by the fact that 60 years of dem nonsense has become firmly entrenched in America cemented into place by the decisions of FDR's lapdog courts and now we have millions of sheeple addicted to the socialist swill spewed under the new deal. You all have no ideas because every response is BUSH BAD BUSH BAD BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAK BUSH BAD

Undermine the war effort that 66% of Americans are against and believe that Bush has fuc%ed up, that war effort? Dude, you're really out of touch. Bush started a useless war, diverted our resources, killed hundreds of thousands and wounded hundreds of thousands more while making America less safe...that is undermining America my friend...that is the truth...You need to switch radio stations....


:rofl Considering that the American public was misled and lied to about this war from day one I think if the truth had been told we would never have invaded Iraq and the Trillion Dollars or more that we will spend in Iraq could have been used to make us safer, smarter, cleaner, more energy independent and have a better overall life than the harsh reality we're in today.

Bush is the worst President in modern US history and time might make him the worst ever. He has lowered the opinion of the USA around the world in an unpecedented manner, has made Americans targets for death worldwide, has made America the world's enemy at time where the real enemy....Islamic terrorists are prospering and growing like no time in history...all this under the Bush watch!

Maybe in your next post you'll actually write something that has a fact or two in it and you might even cite a source to back it up....are you capable?

BTW - I like the term Defeatocrats because that is exactly what the Democrats are going to do in 67 days to the Republicans...Did you read Bob Novaks column this week about the Congressional races? Have you asked Sean Hannity what he thinks is going to happen on November 7th?

The DEFEATOCRATS will regain power and open the books for all America to see how this war has been waged and how the Adminstration lied to all of us....TICK TICK TICK TICK TICK....

most s heeple only know what swill they are fed and the defeatocrats news media does a great job in ignoring most of the good news while focusing on death and destruction. plus we have hundreds of dem politicians bashing the war at every moment of the day.

If you dems don't win both houses I see mass suicides and committments to major mental facilities.

 

[disneydude]

I don't think you really have the education or the information to accurately assess what is going on in Iraq or to judge Rumsfeld. I believe the moonbats denigrate the war because they hate Bush...

Its pretty funny that you talk about not having the information to accurately assess what is going on, when it quite clear from your talking points in this post and on many many of your other posts that you rely on Hannity for your "accurate" information. Its time to think for yourself rather than just spewing out the regurgitated garbage that these infotainment figureheads broadcast. Pick up a newspaper or watch some real news.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Its pretty funny that you talk about not having the information to accurately assess what is going on, when it quite clear from your talking points in this post and on many many of your other posts that you rely on Hannity for your "accurate" information. Its time to think for yourself rather than just spewing out the regurgitated garbage that these infotainment figureheads broadcast. Pick up a newspaper or watch some real news.

Well said! Denying the failures of Rumsfeld is like denying 2+2=4. Let us reflect on Don Rumsfeld in his own words:

As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.

I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today will last five days, five weeks or five months, but it won't last any longer than that.

It is easier to get into something than to get out of it.

I Have Never Painted A Rosy Picture About Iraq

‘There is no question but that they would be welcomed,’ Rumsfeld replied, referring to American forces.”

“It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.”

 

[faithful_servant]

You're not Turtledude you're PARROTDUDE! Took you only a few hours to mimic Grand Master Bush's new little term...so mature and intelligent all in one!

So Dude, you think Rumsfeld's done an OK job? What would it take in your world to fire someone? Do you really want me to list the basics that Rumsfeld has fuc%ed up on in Iraq? :rofl

After that I'll tell you everything that Seattle did wrong in the last Super Bowl. I'll follow that up with a cutting analysis of how we should have won WWII in 4 months. Then I'll show you how Alexander the Great could have built an empire that would still be standing today if hadn't been so incompetent.
Hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[Deegan]

After that I'll tell you everything that Seattle did wrong in the last Super Bowl. I'll follow that up with a cutting analysis of how we should have won WWII in 4 months. Then I'll show you how Alexander the Great could have built an empire that would still be standing today if hadn't been so incompetent.
Hindsight is always 20/20.

Very clever response, hehehehe.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Except for Rumsfeld and Bush...they're vision is more like Mr. Magoo....

Can you tell me what Rumsfeld has done right in Iraq? Wasn't it earlier this week that Bush and Rumsfeld were claiming that the new strategy in Baghdad was working? Since that statement hundreds have been killed and getting near to 1000 injured...this just in:

Attacks in Baghdad Kill 64, Injure 286

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 1, 2006

Filed at 2:46 p.m. ET

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Rescue crews pulled bodies from the wreckage of bombed buildings Friday after a barrage of coordinated attacks across eastern Baghdad killed at least 64 people and wounded more than 286 within half an hour, police said.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/wor...&en=6d4be7edabb56e18&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Do you think our presence has anything to do with this? If we had never invaded Iraq do you think Saddam would have killed the reported 100,000+ civilians that have died since March 2003?

Hindsight you say? Hindsight implies we're learning from the past but the truth is that the death toll is higher today than ever before...so what was that about 20/20 hindsight?

Rumsfeld has a lot of blood on his hands and so does Bush. The mission that we went to Iraq for is over and now it's time we hand Iraq back to the Iraqis. You say that means that the "terrorists" and "Iranians" will take over the country? Is that hindsight information too? You say that if we leave now the lives of the Americans already killed will have been wasted? Well in "HINDSIGHT" that is the truth, isn't it? We should have never gone there and in HINDSIGHT had we not gone no American lives would have been wasted?

Think about the progress we could have made against Terrorism if we put our resources into fighting it instead of starting an all-out civil war in Iraq?

Hindsight is 20/20 and in Hindsight going into Iraq is a monumental mistake and in Hindsight there's a lot of innocent blood on Rummy's and Bush's hands today. In Hindsight maybe we should never have elected Bush - Hindsight is 20/20.....unless you're a Bushie....then you're still blind, deaf and dumb when it comes to the Iraq War...

 

[PrimBabUB]

HUH? Clinton has gone the extra mile to NOT criticize Bush and has partnered with the President he defeated on many humanitarian missions so your point, to me, is invalid.

Newsflash....There have been many flash points in US history that were much more severe than where we are today and never have so many ex-military come out against a Sec. of Defense, nothing even compares.


Here's a short list of retired military who have come out publicly against Rumsfeld...lots more if you'd like them...

Maj. Gen. Charles Swannack - The commander who led the elite 82nd Airborne Division during its mission in Iraq.

Retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste -- who led the 1st Infantry Division in northern Iraq in 2004-2005 -- called for Rumsfeld's resignation. In addition to commanding the 1st Infantry in Iraq, Batiste also was a senior adviser to former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, one of the chief architects of the U.S.-led invasion.

Former U.S. Central Command chief Anthony Zinni, former Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, and retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold also have called for Rumsfeld to step down.

Marine Lieut. General Greg Newbold, the Pentagon's top operations officer, voiced his objections internally and then retired, in part out of opposition to the war.

Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak
Air Force chief of staff, 1990-94 (Bush I & Clinton)
"We have a force in Iraq that's much too small to stabilize the situation. It's about half the size, or maybe even a third, of what we need."

Lt. Gen. William Odom (Reagan)
Director of the National Security Agency, 1985-88
"It's a huge strategic disaster, and it will only get worse. The sooner we leave, the less the damage."

Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy (Clinton)
Army deputy chief of staff for intelligence, 1997-2000
"From the beginning, i was asked which side I took, Shinseki's or Rumsfeld's. And I said Shinseki. I mean, Rumsfeld proudly announced that he had told General Franks to fight this war with different tactics in which they would bypass enemy strongholds and enemy resistance and keep on moving. But it was shocking to me that the secretary of defense would tell the Army how to fight. He doesn't know how to fight; he has no business telling them."

Adm. William Crowe (Reagan & Bush I)
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1985-89
"We screwed up. we were intent on a quick victory with smaller forces, and we felt if we had a military victory everything else would fall in place. We would be viewed not as occupiers but as victors. We would draw down to 30,000 people within the first sixty days."

Sources: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/13/iraq.rumsfeld/index.html
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/6593163/the_generals_speak/
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1181629,00.html

In other words you have nothing to contribute to this debate other than juvenile putdowns. This entire post you've not stated one debating point that defends Rumsfeld on any level whatsoever. You're unable to come up with anything that Rumsfeld has done since becoming Sec. of Defense that indicates he's doing a good job. Slam Dunk, thanks....

Wow. You sure do get your Burka in a wad mighty easily. I think you are a good example of why the dims have the nickname of the 'angry' party.

Newsflash....There have been many flash points in US history that were much more severe than where we are today and never have so many ex-military come out against a Sec. of Defense, nothing even compares.

Really? When?

All these Generals can say whatever partisan thing that rocks their boat because they did fight for their country and the right to free speach. Doesn't mean I have to agree with them. I believe that is still my right, is it not?

We would be out of Iraq, now, if it were not for the dim/lib/left's constant cheerleading for the terrorists. Maybe if you guys would stop emboldening them and give the Iraqis a chance, we could get out of there and perhaps have ONE ally in the ME that is predominately Muslim. What do you think the Iraqis think when they hear YOUR BS? They didn't have a life under Saddam and now you want to throw them to the wolves. Oh yeah, you are real good at building relationships between nations.

In other words you have nothing to contribute to this debate other than juvenile putdowns. This entire post you've not stated one debating point that defends Rumsfeld on any level whatsoever. You're unable to come up with anything that Rumsfeld has done since becoming Sec. of Defense that indicates he's doing a good job. Slam Dunk, thanks....

Whether I do, or whether I don't, have anything to contribute to the debate.....well......... is that really up to..... just you? The title of this thread was 'Democrats Target Rumsfeld' and I didn't see any rules about what one had to do to participate on this thread. You make it sound like there are specific rules one has to follow if they disagree with you. If so, would you mind copying and pasting them for me?

 

[TurtleDude]

Its pretty funny that you talk about not having the information to accurately assess what is going on, when it quite clear from your talking points in this post and on many many of your other posts that you rely on Hannity for your "accurate" information. Its time to think for yourself rather than just spewing out the regurgitated garbage that these infotainment figureheads broadcast. Pick up a newspaper or watch some real news.

Defining characteristic of the Moonbat cave

#5-claim any poster who doesn't buy into barking loon nonsense must have gotten his posts from Hannity, Rush or coulter. I would be happy to compare knowledge of current events or education with you any time

maybe you ought to spend more time developing your intellect rather than making ASSumptions as to where I get my ideas

 

[TurtleDude]

After that I'll tell you everything that Seattle did wrong in the last Super Bowl. I'll follow that up with a cutting analysis of how we should have won WWII in 4 months. Then I'll show you how Alexander the Great could have built an empire that would still be standing today if hadn't been so incompetent.
Hindsight is always 20/20.

Great post-I remember when the braying loons were telling us that we would lose thousands and thousands during the invasion of Iraq. I heard grave predictions of thousands of bodybags. Yet, we lose less in Iraq then what dems and their "utes" kill on the streets of major US cities

 

[26 X World Champs]

Great post-I remember when the braying loons were telling us that we would lose thousands and thousands during the invasion of Iraq. I heard grave predictions of thousands of bodybags. Yet, we lose less in Iraq then what dems and their "utes" kill on the streets of major US cities

More bullshit unsubstantiated untruths Turtledude? How about citing some of those people you're claiming made those quotes?

Why must you make everything you write up? Is it that your arguments are so weak and so wrong that there isn't any evidence to support what you're stating? That's what I think since you never do provide and proof whatsoever.

 

[TurtleDude]

More bullshit unsubstantiated untruths Turtledude? How about citing some of those people you're claiming made those quotes?

Why must you make everything you write up? Is it that your arguments are so weak and so wrong that there isn't any evidence to support what you're stating? That's what I think since you never do provide and proof whatsoever.

are you calling me a liar or are you just upset at what I said. I am all over various boards and I have a near photographic memory but not so good as to remember if it was a bunch of moonbats on DU or bezark, euwe and the loon coven on the ABC boards who said this. I might have been the cheese eatin surrender monkeys on the soros mouthpiece known as the daily kos

I spend my working hours citing everything I say to federal code or case law. I really have better things to do on my off hours than spending hours on google. I say what I believe is true. You don't like TFB. I note you have never come close in disproving anything I have said