Why is Rumsfeld still here?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Sep 29 2006, 04:08 PM) [snapback]325810[/snapback]</div>

It's a dirty job but someone has to do it. The liberals don't want to as evidenced by their "Cut N' Run" solution to terrorism and by Clinton's inaction. Don't get me wrong I believe Bubba had a great desire to off that SOB-OBL but when the going got tough the Bill went golfing or for a BJ in the Oval.

Wildkow

p.s. OK got my waders on ready for the offal to flow, BABY! :lol:

 

I thought the administration said a number of times that they always listen to their generals. I guess they have selective hearing. :huh:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Sep 29 2006, 04:08 PM) [snapback]325810[/snapback]</div>

'because Rummy's W's friend, and friendship is more important than the competence of the people running the so-called Department of Defense.

 

Besides that, someone has to control Bush's puppet strings. h34r:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Sep 29 2006, 09:12 PM) [snapback]325920[/snapback]</div>

Sure and I bet your definition of competent is someone who will "Cut N Run"?

Seems to me terrorism is more wide spread than just AQ in Afgan. BTW, flights of our military jets enforcing the UN's NoFly zone were targeted and shot at on a daily basis and the 9/11 commission report said that Saddam was preparing to restart their WMD program. Should we have waited for them to drop one on us?

Wildkow

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(huskers @ Sep 29 2006, 04:32 PM) [snapback]325814[/snapback]</div>

Nope they just recognize politically motivated testimony when they smell it or step in it.

Wildkow

p.s. Or in the case of the whacko left when their lips are moving.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Sep 29 2006, 04:08 PM) [snapback]325810[/snapback]</div>

Oh my God! Eight or nine?
Time to replace the Secretary of Defense!!! :angry:
I'm surprised the MPs aren't grabbing Rumsfeld by the arms, marching him out the Pentagon doors, and kicking his butt down the stairs.

Eight or nine retired generals and admirals . . . out of THOUSANDS!!!! :huh:
http://www.slate.com/id/2139847/sidebar/2140026/

Don't Ask, Don't Tell got more of a response out of retired flag officers than Rumsfeld ever will. :mellow:

Isn't politiKs grand. [insert puke smiley here]

 

We're talking about an administration that would rather see thousands of soldiers killed and injured than to admit maybe, just maybe, it may have made a mistake. Of course Rummy isn't going anywhere.

We only have a couple of years left of this arrogant idiotic administration; hopefully in January, 2009 there will be a someone moving into the White House who cares more about the U.S. than they do their own butts.

 

More like why was he put in charge in the first place.

The Administration is not listening because they are RETIRED generals. And ACTIVE generals aren't going to criticize. So you have a sort of Catch-22.

Rumsfeld will be just another nail in Bush's "legacy coffin" once he's out of office and the flood of books comes out analyzing his administration. Should be a hoot.

 

I believe at the present time, Rumsfeld is the best man for the job. Who do you think can do a better job and why?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ditto @ Sep 30 2006, 12:57 PM) [snapback]326053[/snapback]</div>

Any of those three generals, because unlike Rumsfeld, they actually served in Iraq so they know what it's like and what's going on.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ditto @ Sep 30 2006, 11:57 AM) [snapback]326053[/snapback]</div>

I urge you to follow the link on my sig to Frontline and watch the documentary "Dark Side". It might change your mind about Bush and Co.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Sep 30 2006, 08:36 AM) [snapback]326023[/snapback]</div>

People who care more about the country than they do about their own butts (and bank accounts) don't go into politics. An honest person can get elected in local politics in a small town, but not at the state or national level.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Sep 30 2006, 10:53 AM) [snapback]326074[/snapback]</div>

Why would a dittohead do that unless Rush told him to do so?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ditto @ Sep 30 2006, 09:57 AM) [snapback]326053[/snapback]</div>

The wrong secretary was fired:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Sep 30 2006, 06:34 AM) [snapback]325992[/snapback]</div>

The fact that YOU may find it unheard of doesn't surprise me.

Eight or nine retired generals involving themselves in politics is not the groundbreaking, unheard of event you may think it is. For decades, retired generals and admirals have been crossing the military tradition line of being apolitical.
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/6671.html
Do they have the right? Yes. But make no mistake, active duty officers tend to be very apolitical. The vast majority don't even vote. They wish to remain neutral servants.

BUT, retired ones can play politics with the best of them . . .
''He is a very progressive guy and many of these guys [in uniform] still want their heavy divisions," said retired Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney, attributing much of the bitterness toward Rumsfeld to generals wishing to preserve their fiefdoms.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles...history/?page=3

Retired officers don't remain quiet out of fear of reprisal (their retirement benefits are secure), or because they were told to keep quiet. Most remain apolitical out of force of habit from years of being apolitical, and yes, many are loathe to criticize current military leadership. They know they are no longer privy to classified information and they know first hand how situations change from one moment to another.

Surprise yourself at how many of the Presidents of the United States were former generals or colonels . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unite...y_military_rank

And you know what "this behavior" is?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Sep 30 2006, 06:29 PM) [snapback]326214[/snapback]</div>

Niiiiiice

It kills me to read the "Decepticons" (Extreme Leftist Libs) and their anti-American propaganda (If you dont see the country the same as they do) Your in the wrong. Posts spread their twisted look of half truths or rumors.. Anything to promote their cause.. (I hate to compare them to Hitler) but it could be said they are acting just as he did except to the opposit extreme. When they can see your not following them they resort to name calling and or insulting what you may believe in again because its not what they see as truth.....
Ahh a new name: "Deceptanazi" You know who you are.. (their the ones that will take offence to this reply) B)

Not all Libs are bad, just the EXTREME LEFTIES...