Dig this....

LadyEagle · Dec 2, 2006

As Gomer said, Surprise, surprise, surprise....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/world/middleeast/03military.html?ei=5090&en=d370be7c39600e08&ex=1322802000&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

Ed Edwards · Dec 2, 2006

Even yet in Iraq - we can snatch defeat
from the very jaws
of VICTORY

Not_hard_to_find · Dec 3, 2006

LadyEagle said:

As Gomer said, Surprise, surprise, surprise....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/world/middleeast/03military.html?ei=5090&en=d370be7c39600e08&ex=1322802000&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print
Click to expand...

Too bad the leak didn't include what Rumsfeld had been tellling the president in the past as well.

Daisy · Dec 3, 2006

NYTimes articles are only free for a week, so here are some selected passages from it:

December 3, 2006
Rumsfeld Memo on Iraq Proposed ‘Major’ Change

By MICHAEL R. GORDON and DAVID S. CLOUD
WASHINGTON, Dec. 2 — Two days before he resigned as defense secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld submitted a classified memo to the White House that acknowledged that the Bush administration’s strategy in Iraq was not working and called for a major course correction.

“In my view it is time for a major adjustment,” wrote Mr. Rumsfeld, who has been a symbol of a dogged stay-the-course policy. “Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough.”
Nor did Mr. Rumsfeld seem confident that the administration would readily develop an effective alternative. To limit the political fallout from shifting course, he suggested the administration consider a campaign to lower public expectations.

*snip*

Titled “Iraq — Illustrative New Courses of Action,” the memo reflects mounting concern over a war that, as Mr. Rumsfeld put it, has evolved from “major combat operations to counterterrorism, to counterinsurgency, to dealing with death squads and sectarian violence.”

The first section of the memo contains two pages of options that Mr. Rumsfeld describes as “above the line” ideas worthy of consideration. Some that Mr. Rumsfeld found intriguing appear to reflect his long-held view that the United States should use relatively modest force in intervening in foreign countries to avoid creating a dependency on American power....

*snip*

One option Mr. Rumsfeld offered calls for modest troop withdrawals “so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country.”

Another option calls for redeploying American troops from “vulnerable positions” in Baghdad and other cities to safer areas in Iraq or Kuwait, where they would act as a “quick reaction force.” That idea is similar to a plan suggested by Representative John P. Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, a plan that the White House has soundly rebuffed.

*snip*

The list of favored options notably does not mention the “clear, hold and build” approach that the White House has touted as its strategy for waging counterinsurgency. That is a troop-intensive approach that calls for clearing contested areas with American and Iraqi troops, holding them with American and Iraqi forces and then carrying out reconstruction programs to win support. Nor does the list make the withdrawal of American forces explicitly contingent on improving conditions in Iraq.

The final page of the memo is a brief list of six “less attractive” options, which Mr. Rumsfeld describes as “below the line.” They include an “aggressive federalism plan,” an international conference modeled on the Dayton accords that produced an agreement on Bosnia and an idea that is currently being seriously discussed by senior administration officials: temporarily sending 20,000 additional American forces or more to Baghdad to try to improve security there and regain momentum.
Click to expand...

LadyEagle · Dec 3, 2006

I thought this part was interesting:

The memo provides no indication that Mr. Rumsfeld intended to leave his Pentagon post. It is unclear whether he knew at that point that he was about to be replaced, though the White House has said that Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld had a number of conversations on the matter.
Click to expand...

The Galatian · Dec 3, 2006

After years, Rumsfeld finally concluded that what everyone outside of Bush's little circle was saying, was true.

Hack had the term for these guys. "Perfumed princes." Highly placed buffoons.

It's a tragedy that thousands of American troops had to die to get him to realize that his neoncon dreams of a democratic middle east could not be imposed by force.

He could have read a little history to realize this, or he could just have listened to his generals. Instead, he publicly ridiculed them, and lied about his motives.

These guys know all the moves, but still can't do anything right.

LeBuick · Dec 3, 2006

Daisy said:

NYTimes articles are only free for a week, so here are some selected passages from it:
Click to expand...

“In my view it is time for a major adjustment,” wrote Mr. Rumsfeld, who has been a symbol of a dogged stay-the-course policy. “Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough.”
Nor did Mr. Rumsfeld seem confident that the administration would readily develop an effective alternative. To limit the political fallout from shifting course, he suggested the administration consider a campaign to lower public expectations.
Click to expand...

They say he wrote this two days before he resigned. I say this was his resignation.

Dig this....

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

Not_hard_to_find Member
Site Supporter

Daisy New Member

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

The Galatian New Member

LeBuick New Member

Useful Searches

Dig this....

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

Not_hard_to_find Member Site Supporter

Daisy New Member

LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

The Galatian New Member

LeBuick New Member

Not_hard_to_find Member
Site Supporter