Just in....Rumsfeld finally stepping down..

univera

Just heard it on CNN.

Shizelbs

Awesome.

brettw22

lol........did he see a chopping block being set up somewhere?

mrbigbluelight

The people have spoken, and it appears the government is listening.

Danny Tse

I suppose the election sealed his fate.

aaharvel

mrbigbluelight wrote:

The people have spoken, and it appears the government is listening.

....

bobman1235

Well, one thing I can say for Rumsfeld, I used to love his press conferences back like, 4 years ago.

TroyD

You know, Rumsfeld was actually, short of withdrawing the troops, following a course of action that dovetailed perfectly with the Democrats.

Stick with me on this. Had I been in charge? REAL shock and awe. Carpet bombing...the whole nine yards. However, we never really did that because we didn't want to piss the locals off, or piss them off as little as possible.

We DIDN'T take over wholesale, we really don't have an overwhelming presence, we haven't made any demands. Honestly, we've been as easy as could be expected. Essentially what we have done is secure to the bare minimum while trying to stand up the Iraqi military/defense. Also allowing the Iraqi gov't to form with fairly little intervention on our part (much less than we have done in the past).

BDT

F1nut

BDT's got it right.

ohskigod

that man was screwed no matter what he did..LOL

brettw22

The problem is the 'bare minimum' part.....that aspect is why we're still there and will continue to be for much longer than we should......

polkatese

I guess he chose to step down rather than face the Witch...


he he he.

mrbigbluelight

The strategy of how the war has been conducted up to this point was formed by Donald Rumsfeld, plain and simple.
The military commanders on the ground have shown a lot of courage, not just by facing the enemy, but by openly stating that more troops are needed on the ground to secure Iraq properly. Why did that take courage ? Because this directly opposed Rumsfeld's philosophy of "lean and mean".

"We're listening to our commanders on the ground". BS.

Johnson tried to run the war in Vietnam from Washington, and it didn't work.
Rumsfeld tried to run the war in Iraq from the safety of his think tanks, and it didn't work.

Put the suits on the ground, with rifle in hand, amidst the dangers of IEDs, RPGs, and other explosive devices, and guess what: you don't have the same suits making smug statements, as Rumsfeld did, of : "Well, we go to war with what we have, not with what we wish we had".

No, WE go to war, while you sit safely back in Washington.

Unbridled arrongance on the part of the President, Vice-President, and Secretary of Defense have put a lot of our men and women who serve in the military in hospitals and body bags.
Looking at the military backgrounds of those 3 gentlemen, one sees that ....
.......well, we go to war with what we have, not what we wish we had.

ND13

I love how some of you seem to think you know how to wage war in a foriegn land. Sorry, but you don't, so leave it to the experts. War is ALWAYS messy and will ALWAYS be questioned, during and for years, decades, and centuries later.

tommyboy

mrbigbluelight wrote:

No, WE go to war, while you sit safely back in Washington.

Unbridled arrongance on the part of the President, Vice-President, and Secretary of Defense have put a lot of our men and women who serve in the military in hospitals and body bags.
Looking at the military backgrounds of those 3 gentlemen, one sees that ....
.......well, we go to war with what we have, not what we wish we had.

nicely said blue, but your last few sentences will be criticised a lot... thanks for starting thread: WWIII volume 2.;)

marker

mrbigbluelight wrote:

The strategy of how the war has been conducted up to this point was formed by Donald Rumsfeld, plain and simple.
The military commanders on the ground have shown a lot of courage, not just by facing the enemy, but by openly stating that more troops are needed on the ground to secure Iraq properly. Why did that take courage ? Because this directly opposed Rumsfeld's philosophy of "lean and mean".

"We're listening to our commanders on the ground". BS.

Johnson tried to run the war in Vietnam from Washington, and it didn't work.
Rumsfeld tried to run the war in Iraq from the safety of his think tanks, and it didn't work.

Put the suits on the ground, with rifle in hand, amidst the dangers of IEDs, RPGs, and other explosive devices, and guess what: you don't have the same suits making smug statements, as Rumsfeld did, of : "Well, we go to war with what we have, not with what we wish we had".

No, WE go to war, while you sit safely back in Washington.

Unbridled arrongance on the part of the President, Vice-President, and Secretary of Defense have put a lot of our men and women who serve in the military in hospitals and body bags.
Looking at the military backgrounds of those 3 gentlemen, one sees that ....
.......well, we go to war with what we have, not what we wish we had.

I nominate this for post of the year! :cool:

marker

ND13 wrote:

I love how some of you seem to think you know how to wage war in a foriegn land. Sorry, but you don't, so leave it to the experts. War is ALWAYS messy and will ALWAYS be questioned, during and for years, decades, and centuries later.

Maybe it will be now.

marker

ohskigod wrote:

that man was screwed no matter what he did..LOL

True.

TroyD

brettw22 wrote:

The problem is the 'bare minimum' part.....that aspect is why we're still there and will continue to be for much longer than we should......

Well, it's a catch-22. If we go in with 500K troops, we've got a couple problems.

1. You are REALLY an occupation force. Which would piss off the locals even more than we already have.

2. Cost. People are already screaming about the cost of the war. Quadruple the size of the force and see what happens

3. You actually prolong the turning over of things to the Iraqis. Rather than sink or swim, you allow them to paddle around the shallow end longer.

Be there much longer than we should? Lest ye forget we still are an occupation force in Japan and that's been, what, 60 years?

BDT

brettw22

There will always be costs involved with war......but careless spending is where people get (and have become) truely pissed. When it's the equivelant of throwing bundles of money into a bonfire, there needs to be a check in place to fix the system that says burn all you want. If we spent a fraction of the amount of money that's been dumped (yes dumped) into the middle east, our country would be much better off. In fact, we might even have funding for a wall to secure a border.....hell......it might even be built already with that kinda money.

I'm not saying that we wouldn't still have a presence, but if we would have gone in hard and fast at the beginning, this process would be further along than they currently are. "Progress" stopped quite a while ago, and it seems that we're just treading water anymore. Treading water isn't getting things done, and it's not getting the Iraqis to step up either (at least, not nearly enough).

Early B.

Hmmmm. I guess I'm still wondering why we went into Iraq in the first place. No WMDs. It was all a lie.

So who has benefitted from this war? Well, we know Haliburton has. So have the oil companies.

markmarc

Rummy forgot (or didn't know) two of the main rules of warfare:
One, the number of troops to occupy a country is FAR greater than the number to conquer. The Confederate Army under Gen. Lee never tried to occupy land, why, because his goal was attack and move. Our plan for Iraq was attack and move, occupation wasn't a thoughtout part of the plan. proof was evident from day one, when we would overtake weapons depot, put a new lock on the gate and move on. Why, because we didn't have the troops to occupy.

Two, know your enemy. We had no clue as how incredibly deep and festering the deep internal divisions between the Sunni's, Shi'ites, and Kurds were. Not to mention the critical importance of tribal allegiances. It's interesting to note that the Green Beret's have been working the tribal angle and have had the most success in creating stable pockets of outlying communities.

We can only hope that the mistakes of this war will be drilled into the heads of military leaders and their civilian overseers at the Pentagon forever.

univera

ND13 wrote:

I love how some of you seem to think you know how to wage war in a foriegn land. Sorry, but you don't, so leave it to the experts. War is ALWAYS messy and will ALWAYS be questioned, during and for years, decades, and centuries later.

Noel, you couldn't be more correct, which is exactly why we shouldn't be there in the first place. If you don't know what the hell you are doing, don't drag us into this muck.

TroyD

The strategy of how the war has been conducted up to this point was formed by Donald Rumsfeld, plain and simple.

And you know this how? Last time I checked, the buck stopped on the CinC's desk.

The military commanders on the ground have shown a lot of courage, not just by facing the enemy, but by openly stating that more troops are needed on the ground to secure Iraq properly.

Do you agree with everything, to the letter your boss makes you do? Have you ever thought that you could do with more resources only for the boss to say no? Does that mean he didn't listen?

Johnson tried to run the war in Vietnam from Washington, and it didn't work.
Rumsfeld tried to run the war in Iraq from the safety of his think tanks, and it didn't work

Apples/oranges

Put the suits on the ground, with rifle in hand, amidst the dangers of IEDs, RPGs, and other explosive devices, and guess what: you don't have the same suits making smug statements, as Rumsfeld did, of : "Well, we go to war with what we have, not with what we wish we had".

Young people have always been the tools that old men make war with. Always has been, always will be. Truth be told, there is a LOT of truth to that statement. To which, a LOT of the truth in that statement is due to the actions of previous administrations.

Unbridled arrongance on the part of the President, Vice-President, and Secretary of Defense have put a lot of our men and women who serve in the military in hospitals and body bags.
Looking at the military backgrounds of those 3 gentlemen, one sees that

Well, I would rather have someone who is confident and steadfast in thier convictions rather than someone who rules by public opinion. I'd also say that military service is irrelevant, to be honest. Historically, we've had good presidents and bad, military service doesn't seem to be the crucial thing.

BDT

bobman1235

Early B. wrote:

Hmmmm. I guess I'm still wondering why we went into Iraq in the first place. No WMDs. It was all a lie.

So who has benefitted from this war? Well, we know Haliburton has. So have the oil companies.

Oh JESUS. Did you copy and paste that from your favorite right wing conspiracy blog, or is it just part of your auto-text at this point? Honestly, hate the current administration all you want, but if you really think war is as cut and dry as someone wanting to make some money with Haliburton / oil interests, holy crap, just blow your brains out, PLEASE.

Polkersince85

IMHO. Battle plans work until the attack begins. We are up against a advisary that wishes to destroy us...physically or financially. The WMD issue was a setup by Iranian agents, took years to do but worked. Sadam is gone, a large portion of our army and navy is now in range of Iranian nuclear missiles. We need to do some things quick or we will get hit hard. Anybody want to fiddle.

marker

bobman1235 wrote:

Oh JESUS. Did you copy and paste that from your favorite right wing conspiracy blog, or is it just part of your auto-text at this point? Honestly, hate the current administration all you want, but if you really think war is as cut and dry as someone wanting to make some money with Haliburton / oil interests, holy crap, just blow your brains out, PLEASE.

OK, enlighten us all then. What was it really about?

marker

Polkersince85 wrote:

.... We are up against a advisary that wishes to destroy us... financially.

We're doing a pretty good job of that ourselves.:( :mad:

danger boy

I was surprised by the sudden announcement.. but why resign so quickly? Was it because the shift in power changed?

Polkersince85

marker wrote:

OK, enlighten us all then. What was it really about?

From your responses, you may still be young enough to join and go see for yourself what we are doing over there. It may answer some of your questions.

tommyboy

bobman1235 wrote:

Oh JESUS. Did you copy and paste that from your favorite right wing conspiracy blog

right wing? your calling him a conservative
or do I have my wings mixed up:p

Please Justin, delete this thread now before hell breaks loose!