Powell and Rumsfeld gone in 2005?

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by preemptingyou03, Aug 19, 2004.

  1. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    When President Bush is reelected, there is some rumblings that both of these men will walk away from the job. Powell, I could sort of guess. God bless him... he's a good man, but he just doesn't fit in with this administration. This administration has a mindset and Powell simply doesn't accept it. Rumsfeld, however, if he were to leave, that would be a huge setback. Rumsfeld is key to transforming the military.

    Ok, to all Bush supporters how there, if Powell and Rumsfeld leave, how would you shake up the cabinet? There is also rumblings that Tom Ridge and Ashcroft will retire.

    I'd put Armitage as Sec. of State and Wolfowitz as Sec. of Def. Then, Rudy Giuliani as Sec. of Homeland Security and John McCain in charge of the Justice Dept.

    Armitage is a hawk, Wolfowitz is a hawk, and Giuliani and McCain are well respected by both parties.
     
  2. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    uhhh help me out here. What Transformation are you talking about? The force is already professional, talented, and well led from the junior NCO/PO up to the JCS. The trigger pullers are well trained and better paid than ever before. The benefits are second to none anywhere in America. This force is capable to perform small unit peacekeeping or whip China on an open plain. The only real problem I see is that there is too much political control going on. We should already be out of Iraq and Najaf/Falluja should've been burnt to cinders months ago (and the damn mosque too for that matter).
     
  3. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    Obviously we have a difference of opinion. I'm pro-Bush, as are you, (it seems) but you want to "burn to cinders" areas of Iraq and leave that country. I disagree. We're there to help those people not to burn them. We're there to establish an ideological victory against Islamic estremism, not to destroy a nation, which we could have done easily anytime we wished.

    The transformation I'm talking about is making the military lighter and quicker. Rumsfeld had a vision for our military coming into office and he's working on it. He's one of the biggest reasons I'm as pro-Bush as I am.
     
  4. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    You're right, I am probush. But I forcefully believe that once you "let slip the dogs" etc, then the politicians should back off. This on again off again stuff is politically driven and places troops in body bags. Believe me, I dig diplomacy. But if your enemy is so blind then you must kill them, with the least amount of casualties as you can get. If you worry about a mosque, that your enemy is using to shoot at your troops from, you will lose.

    I would love to see nothing but rebuilding going on. But, when the people we are their to save do not want to shoulder any of the burden......... It was one thing when SH had not been captured and his military still was effective. But now, the Iraqis must stand and deliver to earn the rest of the reward we offer.

    The transformation is bunk. We have a light, lean, mean, and very competant force. They are called Marines. Man for Man they are the best fighters anywhere. The Army of the USA is supposed to be huge, massive, and unstoppable force of nature. Marines will never, ever, win the war. That is the Army's job.

    Over the past several years the Army tried to redefine itself by getting lighter. I think that it is a waste and sends mixed signals to some dedicated professionals (soldiers). Marines kick in the door and kill anything that moves. Then step aside and let the Army invest the building while Marines are kicking in the next door. Now if you put the Air Force in charge of taking real estate, they will get a three year lease with an option to buy. :dance:
     
  5. HGROKIT
    Offline

    HGROKIT Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Federal Way WA, USA
    Ratings:
    +19
    I was so with you util this comment (12 years active duty A.F).

    I will remind you however, that the AF mission is not "taking real estate"; it is close air support, interdiction and oh lest I forget, dropping a bomb or two.
    :whip:
     
  6. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62

    the air force does 'close air support'? I thought they were for dropping long range weapons and aerial superiority while the marines did close air support
     
  7. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    I did that to see if you and PR would rise to it. 50% aint bad. And any method of taking down a building that doesn't involve me toting back a wounded Marine is all good. So, lease or bomb, your call. :)
     
  8. HGROKIT
    Offline

    HGROKIT Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Federal Way WA, USA
    Ratings:
    +19
  9. HGROKIT
    Offline

    HGROKIT Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Federal Way WA, USA
    Ratings:
    +19
  10. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329

Share This Page