Could Rumsfeld still describe critics of the Iraq war as Henny Penny's?
927050
Bush is keeping him on.\n\nTranslation:"The hell with policy and the voice of our military"--Bush.\n\nBUSH has proven to be the INDISPUTABLE "Cowardly Defeatist"
687100
I'm sure there will be several posts to suggest that the recent violence in Iraq this month, and certainly during April, are evidence of a brewing civil war in Iraq, but the reality based upon fact, is simply not there.\n\nSati al-Husri, considered the 'father of modern Iraq,' purported before his death that there would be struggles within the frame of the Iraqi State because of the religious factions existing within her borders.  This is a fundamental issue, and the West has come to recognize it all too well.  \n\nHowever, despite Iraq's cultural/religious inequity, Sati taught his children and grandchildren, that Sunni Muslims of which sect he belonged, could equally coexist with the Shi'a and Kurds. There was no conflict in his family's inner circle.  He proved that enlightened intellectual thought could countermand extremist ideology without compromising religious piety.\n\nBut although al-Husri's ideas are easy to agree with, especially from a Western point of view, they are not so easy to implement, especially in the current climate of terrorism.\n\nThe underpinning to all of the conflict in Iraq is not a brewing civil war among its Muslim factions, but rather an insurgency that cannot see the value of peace in the Middle East.  They tend to look through their extremist eyes with a 'jihadi' philosophy.  The insurgents will attempt to insight the Iraqi people into warring with each other.  This is not for the gain of the Iraqi people; it merely creates the atmosphere of unsettled violence for them. And the insurgents could care less about an Iraqi unified state either. Instead, they want their terrorist agenda to move forward...at all costs.\n\nTo that end, they will foment unrest, spatter the media with words of 'Civil War,' and create a masterful stroke of using the West against itself.  Fortunately, the Iraqi people are resolved to follow Sati al-Husri's example:  Freedom of speech and expression, freedom of religion, and freedom of commerce are the seeds to grow an independent state.  Violence and terrorism have no place in such a united country.  Democracy is the manifold weapon against al-Qa'ida and the Taliban, and the insurgents simply can't stand it.\n\nAs to the $4.00 gallon of gas, I doubt this will come to fruition, much as the media seems to hope it will.  We cannot discount those politicians who have a stake in the November elections either.  They seem to throw out this vague threat as though it were a weapon.\n\nThere is no doubt that we may come close to the mark in some sections of the country, especially over the summer months. But Americans in general will not accept this increase, and the government knows it.  So do the oil companies and our allies producing oil.  It is not in their best interests to price themselves out of the market.  There will likely be caps before the $4.00 per gallon rate is reached.  After all, once again, this is an election year.  Politicos have a reason to make sure the voters are looking at their names with favor. The first place the voter’s feel the pressure of Washington is at the pump.  You may be assured that the first place Washington will compromise is also at the pump.
353974
I believe so.When five retired generals think he should go,that's a pretty good sign that he has not gotten the job done.Personally,I would have aked him to resign long before now.This war has been a farce.Our troops went in woefully unprepared for the combat they are now engaged in.We did not take the insurgents into consideration.Why not? Isn't that part of Rumsfeld's job? The sheer arrogance of this man is appalling.He ,like our president , will never admit to mistakes made.They just keep telling the American citizens to be patient.Baloney.There is no exit strategy now and who knows when we can expect any.We're in such a mess now that I don't know if there is a way out that will allow us to save face with the world or not.There is something wrong when practically all the president's cabinet and colleagues are at the center of controversy every time you turn on the television.
733800
The "experts" aren't always 'expert' in their way of thinking. What is worse than hundreds of Iraqis being killed everyday EVEN THOUGH the United States troops are still there!? You have "violence and chaos" everyday in Iraq. Every single day.\n\nUnfortunately many in the United States simply do not care about other people. They fail to recognize that many Iraqis truly want peace and stability. Those who do want change, want only the lesser of two evils. That US troops go home, rather than to kill them.\nBush wants Iran to stay out of Iraqi affairs. This will not happen as Iraq needs Iran. In fact they have already made up their minds that Iran will be a part of their upcoming decisions. Maliki made a telling statement this morning., He didn't seem to back off of what our president wants. My guess is that Maliki has already talked to not only Iran, but Syria as well.  This is THEIR Middle East.\nThe US has left permanent unforgettable footprints on Iraqi soil. Such footprints have stomped on other nations where the U.S. simply had no business interfering.\nLeave Middle East business to the Middle East before we are all engaged in another world war.
764826
Come again?\n\nDo you mean Rumsfeld's replacement?
695566
In his tiny mind, he wanted idiots (Conservatives mostly) to believe the war has been won and was over. It's three and a half years later and the war isn't close to being over. Can you say "the new Vietnam"? About bringing Democracy to Iraq, that's hogwash. If he wants to bring Democracy to a country, he should try bringing it to the good old US of A. Most Americans think they live in a Democracy. It's never been a Democracy. It was founded as a Republic. "... and to the Republic for which it stands...". Ever heard of James Madison? He once said, "Democracy is the most vile form of government... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
742339
"There are known knowns, things we know we know.  There are also known unknowns, we know some things we don't know.  There are unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know."--Donald Henry Rumsfeld\n\nMaybe he will be portrayed as a deadender or as a genius; it will all DEPEND on the FUTURE.  \n\nHowever, here is what I know.  I know that he pissed off a lot of military leaders trying to make the military lighter and nibbler.  That is what we need on the war on terror.  You see what we need is BALANCE.  We need to have "enough" troops to catch the terrorists while SPEEDing up the communication with FEWER CASUALTIES so we can catch them quicker.  \n\n"You go to war with the Army you have.  They're not the Army you might want or wish to have," said Rumsfeld on December 8, 2004.  This is why I decided to put "enough" in parenthesis.  There is NO such thing as enough because that perception chages constantly.  In fact that advantages of "not enough" is LESS abuse of resources and being CREATIVE, CREATIVE.  This adage has certainly improved my life, being in my twenties, since I DON'T PANIC as much as I used to.\n\nOf course, some of us think that 2800 U.S. troops killed in Iraq is such a "big" number.  Maybe.  Look at the number of dead in other wars and calculate them per year.  Vietnam has 5 K per year MORE than this war so you could credit Rumsfled with this.   He put a democratic/parlimentary government in Iraq and Afghanistan.  I believe those government can flourish in the LONG-TERM because the idea is to put AS MANY PEOPLE IN TYRANNY AS POSSIBLE.  I believe we put TOO MUCH blame on Rumsfeld because as he has been saying all along this will take time.  This is why we should be putting the more blame on the ARAB CULTURE since somehow they are causing the killings BUT I could be WRONG.\n\nHowever, I will admit there were some things he SHOULD have done that could have put the country in better shape currently and made him the only TWO-TERM Secretary of Defense, probably.\n1. Kept Saddam's military that should have been used right away to keep order.  These men only worked for him just to make MONEY.\n2.  Kept the LOWER ranks of the Baathist Party (not in the top 55 most wanted).  They worked for him like the soldiers and know more about this country than the exiles.  They would have been the interim government.\n3. Authorization for U.S. troops to shoot a few looters just to keep order.\n4. Placing a TEMPORARY ban on Iraqis possessing weapons so there would have been fewer insurgent attacks.\n5. Not putting "enough" troops.  This just a MAYBE.\n\nBy the way if anyone is going to be in this position assert your CIVILIAN control, like Rumsfeld, but still listen to the uniform.  The 1947 law that combined the Depts. of Navy and War into Defense says that the Secretary of Defense must have a MAXIMUM OF TEN YEARS OF ACTIVE MILITARY EXPERIENCE.  I understand that the longer one is in the military, the more hostile he or she would be.  I think he is the most active/exciting (because of his "excessive" press conferences) Secretary.\n\nNow going back to the question, I do not know if he will be praised or hated but I gave you what I know.\n\nI am SORRY to say all this.
376949
I believe that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld needs to resign. While in office, his vision for the military simply does not jibe with reality. His concept of "transformation" means cutting down troop levels, purchasing a ton of gold plated fly boy toys, and letting the military-industrial complex (and private military companies) get hold of the taxpayers' hard earned money.\n\nThe perception of Rumsfeld is that with superior technology, America can defeat any opponent, unconventional and conventional. This is evident in the emphasis on technology as opposed to doctrine and training. However, as Col. Boyd (who developed the concept of OODA) once said, "People, ideas, hardware, in that order!" One must remember that in Vietnam, we had superior technology, but we could not entirely eliminate the NVA and VC after how many years of combat (though the VC was decimated after the Tet Offensive). In Korea, the Chinese were able to surprise the UN & US and drive them back, after managing to conceal their entire divisions from the UN/US air patrols. Americans must realize that technology may be a force multiplier, but cannot be relied on too much to fight wars. History has proven time and time again that excellent strategy, training, and quality warriors will always turn the tide of the war while technology helps (and hinders as well). One must also look at Iraq and see what is the major killer of our warriors. IEDs. These IEDs are relatively inexpensive, and are able to defeat our hundred thousand dollar uparmored HUMVEEs and even our million dollar M1A2 Abrams tank. RPGs can take down our helicopters. Why is it that the enemy can find a low cost and effective solution and we cannot? And about the Army's planned brigade combat teams... it guts maneuvering elements (and counts the reconnaisance battalion as a maneuvering element) while enlarging headquarters. Being flexible is important, but this BCT concept on the surface seems to make it more flexible, but in reality makes it less flexible. With less maneuvering elements and a bloated headquarters, it becomes more slower and inefficient.\n\nNot to mention, his performance for the invasion of Iraq was unacceptable. Despite the warnings and objections from the professional generals (about troop levels, post-war planning, etc), he decided to go ahead anyways. Now we are stuck fighting an insurgency in an effort to stabilize Iraq.
942621
Good question. I think so, unless Bush is too stubborn. He has his own study group now to get a competing view. And, you know how Bush's advisors tend to give him the answers he wants. \n\n"Bush Initiates Iraq Policy Review Separate From Baker Group's"\nhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/14/AR2006111401095.html\n\nand there's a Pentagon review as well\nhttp://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/11/world/middleeast/11pentagon.html
881997
I would tell him to put on a more pleasant face, he always looks like he is ready to do battle with anyone. Why did he not listen to his cabinet members about having Rumsfeld step down from his office?.Do you think you would have the same view of the war in Iraq, if you had a member of your family in the front line of fire?
1083780
Finally, Phyllis Schlafly gets her scholarly due. While historians have focused on the periphery of politics -- dwelling into ever narrow corners and cracks of the American Left -- Phyllis Schlafly has had no honest assessment. Plenty of dishonest, superficial assessment based on hand-me-down "that terrible woman" stories, but little more. (...). \n\nProfessor Critchlow is the dean of U.S. policy historians and he has taken a brave step tackling a figure so unpopular among academics. Then again, I am reminded of that member of the chattering classes who said, "I can't believe Nixon won , I don't know a single person who voted for him!" Critchlow batters that academic insularity to explain how and why Schlafly's message spawned "grassroots conservatism." Let's hope some who would rather not hear, do listen. \n\nThe alternative offered by Critchlow's study is, to take a quote from one of her best-selling titles, \n\n"A Choice, Not an Echo" of the silly things constantly said \nabout her and other movement conservatives. \n\nWake up historians (left or right), you have nothing to lose but your ignorance! \n\nSee the site below for much more info.
904992
Nouri al-Maliki should be very concerend. Not that long ago, Bush was saying Rumsfeld was the man for the job. When Bush pats you on the back, it seems like he is showing where the knife should go.
1012289
Nope. Actually, I object also, therefore, I think it is pretty cool thinking the same way as Jodie Foster, Rory Emerald, and Sean Connery. It is only bad when famous people disappear to like Iraq and go off and join forces with them. I don't think that has happened yet, but the key word there is YET!\nFabulous Question!
732084
Well, we know better now that Kissinger and Blair said yesterday that the Iraq war cannot be won.  Sadly,  Saddam was the right man for the job.  We need to find another like him but nicer to the u.s. or just put saddam back in.  Only a dictator can control those sectarian fools.  And we would love to do it but that would not be PC.  Well, I volunteer yourself Mr. Erudite, I think you could do the job.   Anyone else here nominate Mr,. E?
893854
Rummy's speech was all about how nobody was able to understand this war, as it is so complex and all. Aparantly, Americans are too stupid to understand this war, yet we're not too stupid to finance it or to go and fight it...what a crock! \n\nI'll be the first to say I don't know how to fight a war, but when general after general stands up and asks him to resign, that's good enough for me.
401464
The generals calling for the resignation of Rumsfeld have spent their lives in the service of our country.  They understand war; when to consider war; the objectives of war; the acceptable conclusion of war; the exit strategy of war.  None of these criteria have been met with this administration.  What we have with Bush and Rumsfeld is a loose cannon mentality.  \nOf any of the three axis of evil candidates to attack, Iraq was the least of a threat.  Do we really care that Saddam was a cruel and ruthless leader?  Hell, they're all over the world, and to some we send foreign aid. So here we are with our troops distracted in a no win situation in Iraq,  our resources for war pretty well drained because of three or four years of battle, and these guys are ready to go it again.  I don't get it, and neither do they.  I do understand one thing, these guys shoot from the hip.  They have no game plan, and they sure the hell have no exit strategy for the battle in Iraq or any subsequent battles.\n\nPerhaps they need to read up a little more about the downfall of the Third Reich, and particularly Adolf Hitler. Old Adolph had a penchant for ignoring his generals, too! Look what happen to him.
817301
This way we could never say they did not speak up.now is there anyone left who defends Rumsfeld.As for the president he is not a part of the discussion.HE REMINDS ME OF THE SAYING,"A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE IT ONLY WORKS WHEN OPENED"