Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Your man changed the topic, and he got outed. Go talk to Publius, not those who corrected him.
I just put it in to perspective. And if Rumsfield is a constitutional destroying war criminal then Truman, LBJ, FDR, and Woodrow Wilson are as well. The troops, my self included with two deployments in the the 5th Marines/ 1st Marine Division (infantry), are sick and tired of the left politisizing this shit!
I can see compairing Vietnam with Rums but not WWI and II
Rumsfeld, if he travels in certain countries abroad, will be arrested and be turned over to international tribunals for war crimes.
In America, he should be remembered as the SOD who not only refused to follow the prophetic recommendations of General Shinseki but had him retired. Rumsfeld should publicly acknowledge his failings and apologize to the American people.
He admits to planning to invade Iraq immediately after 9-11.
No proof then...no proof now
Add how badly he botched the unwise invasion and you realize why history will have such contempt for Rumsfeld
You were drawing comparisons to leaders from when to leaders of Iraq. Your fallacy about "the left" is that FDR, Marshall, Eisenhower, Patton, etc, were liberals to conservatives, yet Rumsfeld was guilty of aggressive war unlike the above.
I have no idea who is liberal and who is not in our combat units, and neither do you. I do know many vets who have returned from Afghanistan and Iraq stating that in their opinions the wars were absolute mistakes. I served many years in the armed forces on active duty, most of the guys were conservatives, but many were not. And that is an anecdotal fact for me.
You make the same mistake about Americans' right to dissent during times of non-declared war. They have that right, it is not disgraceful, and in fact it is unpatriotic to suggest that such dissent is wrong. Johnson, Nixon, and Bush could all have asked for Declarations of War that would have given Congress the right to limit dissent. They failed to do that, so the administrations had to live with it.
WE have had morons on the board state that soldiers were not harassed and spit on coming back from Vietnam. Truly, we have had morons write that here even though they have been told so by ones who went through it.
Truly you have no idea about what you are discussing. None.
Colin Powell was the only member of the Bush Administration that had any credibility with the rest of the world - and he was rewarded by being "hung him out to dry!"
I'm sure than nobody regrets misinforming the public about the presence of WMD in Iraq more than Powell himself.
If Powell had been Secretaty of Defense, I'm sure you would have seen a much different war and occupation of Iraq.
You were drawing comparisons to leaders from when to leaders of Iraq. Your fallacy about "the left" is that FDR, Marshall, Eisenhower, Patton, etc, were liberals to conservatives, yet Rumsfeld was guilty of aggressive war unlike the above.
I have no idea who is liberal and who is not in our combat units, and neither do you. I do know many vets who have returned from Afghanistan and Iraq stating that in their opinions the wars were absolute mistakes. I served many years in the armed forces on active duty, most of the guys were conservatives, but many were not. And that is an anecdotal fact for me.
You make the same mistake about Americans' right to dissent during times of non-declared war. They have that right, it is not disgraceful, and in fact it is unpatriotic to suggest that such dissent is wrong. Johnson, Nixon, and Bush could all have asked for Declarations of War that would have given Congress the right to limit dissent. They failed to do that, so the administrations had to live with it.
WE have had morons on the board state that soldiers were not harassed and spit on coming back from Vietnam. Truly, we have had morons write that here even though they have been told so by ones who went through it.
Truly you have no idea about what you are discussing. None.
Rumsfeld is not guilty of Aggresive war. That would be John Kerry and Bill Clinton who called for the war against Iraq.
The Secretary of Defense does what he is ordered to by Congress and the President, nothing more.
Point your fingers at the Democrats, they called for the Iraq war of over five years prior to 2003. At least be factual in your accusations.
*****************************************************************Colin Powell was the only member of the Bush Administration that had any credibility with the rest of the world - and he was rewarded by being "hung him out to dry!"
I'm sure than nobody regrets misinforming the public about the presence of WMD in Iraq more than Powell himself.
If Powell had been Secretaty of Defense, I'm sure you would have seen a much different war and occupation of Iraq.
Because its the Secretary of Defense who decides to go to war and how? Powell was and is a loser, Powell did have his chance and blew it, Powell gave us the mess in Iraq during the beginning of the war in Iraq under George Bush sr. and while serving under Bill Clinton.
I guess after eight years of the Democrats losing in Iraq under Bill Clinton Democrats just can not stomach the fact that Republicans had to clean up another mess the Democrats got us into.
In his book "FIASCO," Thomas E. Ricks, senior Pentagon correspondent for The Washington Post states that Iraq's capacity to produce WMD and nucleur weapons was destroyed during Operation Desert Fox, the four-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets from December 16–19, 1998, conducted by the United States and United Kingdom.Mr. Ricks argues that the invasion of Iraq “was based on perhaps the worst war plan in American history,” an incomplete plan that “confused removing Iraq’s regime with the far more difficult task of changing the entire country.” The result of going in with too few troops and no larger strategic plan, he says, was “that the U.S. effort resembled a banana republic coup d’état more than a full-scale war plan that reflected the ambition of a great power to alter the politics of a crucial region of the world.”
This was partly a byproduct of the Pollyannaish optimism of hawks like Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, who slapped down the estimate by the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, that several hundred thousand soldiers would be required to secure Iraq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/25/books/25kaku.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
