Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rumsfeld Apologists Never Say He was Correct

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
louis c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 07:36 AM
Original message
Rumsfeld Apologists Never Say He was Correct
I've noticed from the chorus of guarded support for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld (and by extension, President Bush) that no one says "that was a great decision to invade Iraq and a great battle plan that was devised."

It seems that the criticism centers around the opinion that Generals should never disagree publicly with their civilian superiors, even when they are retired.

Now, it seems like we will have another KKKarl Rove political attack against these critics, complete with Pentagon memos (talking points).

Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/17/rumsfeld_gets_more_backing_over_iraq/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. True. Unfortunately kool-aid drinkers don't recongise that fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Not only kool-aid drinkers
But those like General Myers, who have family members working for BushCo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_U_L8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
3. In a way, they are right
the real blame goes to Bush,
Rumsfield is his surrogate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Bush? Try Cheney... Bush is a Cheney surrogate!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Bush has no power, except in public perception
That is his job. If Bush goes before the camera and says "Rummy must go," then the public hears it and says, oh, okay. But that is his entire purpose, to cheerlead for those pulling his strings, Cheney and Rumsfeld. The only thing Bush can be blamed for is being stupid. And even that probably has more to do with Bar's drinking during pregnancy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. "scapegoat"
Edited on Mon Apr-17-06 08:43 AM by louis c
Rumsfeld's supporters have used the word "Scapegoat" in referring to Rumsfeld.

Isn't that term used to pin the blame on someone for a FAILURE?

Are they admitting that the policy in Iraq is a failure or the strategy is a failure or both.

And if Rumsfeld is a "scapegoat" for this apparent failure then who is really to blame?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Words only mean
what they mean for them to mean.

They make the definition of "is" sound straighforward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_U_L8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Bush is Commander in Chief
whether that's just an honorary title or not...
BUSH is responsible and should be held accountable.
He weasels out of everything by feigning to be a nitwit.
Well.. nitwit or not... I want to see some asskicking around here.
Someone fucked that war up and OUR people are dying for it.
If the Chimp is truly held responsible... the rest will go down.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis-t Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
8. The other talking point you hear is:
"Well, I didn't hear them complaining BEFORE they retired."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Of course not
If they disagreed publicly, that would be grounds for dismissal.

MacArthur and Truman 1949.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-17-06 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
10. I caught a retired AF LtCol this morning berating the Generals -
Can't think of the guy's name; he was on MSNBC. Anyway - he questioned why these Generals have come out all at once, and also said they're damaging troop morale and shame on them.

The swiftboating is underway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 11:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC