Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2008 Archive' started by Crabtownboy, May 2, 2008.
Another interesting article:
It isn't how much he knew; it's how much he chose to know. His arrogance about knowing better than his military commanders blinded him to answers and information that didn't fit his concept of reality.
To go along with this book, which looks really interesting, I refer you to another book that I posted a link to some time back: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/03/danger-room-sma.html
From this book: "...to Rumsfeld’s mind, the quick victory in Afghanistan redeemed the theory—and confirmed his suspicions that the Army’s generals were wrong about everything. They’d been wrong that two armored divisions would be necessary to overthrow the Taliban. Therefore, they were wrong that 300,000 troops would be needed to win in Iraq. So the theory played a huge role in his thinking and planning."
While we can blame the Bush Administration in general for a lot of things, there is a growing amount of evidence that points towards one man in particular, and brings into question what was being told to the President.
Rumsfeld...the libs favorite whipping boy:laugh:
So, you are saying that the General is a liberal? Interesting. :laugh:
Actually, Rev, I'm a conservative. With ties to the military. Rumsfield reminds me of another high-ranking presidential individual, back around the 60's. Something to do with Viet Nam.
I would be happy to see Rummy, as well as other members of this administration, charged and tried as war criminals for crimes against humanity, and treason.
Ron Paul claims over 500,000 Iraqis starved to death under the Clinton administration, due to sanctions.
MP, just the republicans, or are you willing to also charge folks like Al Gore, Hillary, Kennedy, you know, folks like that ?
Bill Clinton is a genius. He managed to get this war completely blamed on Bush, who by all accounts certainly has his share of the blame. But to watch his administration take the whole of the blame for this war makes me realize just how gullible this nation is.
Oh, is this the article which contains this excerpt?
Rumsfeld et al. incompetence? Yes. Ignorance? Hardly, but the point isn't to accept responsibility but to intercept and defer blame.
But, I agree, Bro. Curtis, Clinton played his hand masterly including the intelligence he had prior to leaving office regarding terrorism:
I remember reading a news article that said Rumsfeld had switched to signing the letters sent to the families of dead soldiers, instead of the rubber stamp he had instructed his secretaries to use.
Some of us have real issues with the guy, and it's not a "whipping boy" mentality. You may trivialize how we feel, and call everyone who critisizes him a "liberal", ifyou wish. The credibility you hurt is your own.
I don't see how a liberal or a conservative could not criticize Rumsfeild. He, almost single-handedly, turned the Iraqi invasion and occupation into a total mess.
Do you have anything worthwhile to say, or do you just like to toss out ad hominems for sport? :laugh:
Madeleine Albright thinks the "price was worth it" to starve half a million Iraqis mostly children to death. Just because one of our "security assets" in the middle east got greedy and uncontrollable.
And this is exactly why I call it the Bush/Clinton coalition. They're all guilty as sin for crimes against humanity. And all their die hard supporters are just as culpable for being silent about it as far as I'm concerned. I hope that if this crew ever faces the justice it deserves we bring back public hanging...for old times sake. Fitting end for people who have commited such heinous crimes imho.