Rumsfeld's Priorities

Victor

A few weeks old, but it deeply frightens me that Rumsfeld thinks this way.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060829-011437-8690r.htm

Rumsfeld: Fascism threatens U.S.
August 29, 2006


SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (AP) - Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday accused critics of the Bush administration's Iraq and counterterrorism policies of trying to appease "a new type of fascism."
In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration's critics as suffering from "moral or intellectual confusion" about what threatens the nation's security and accused them of lacking the courage to fight back.
In remarks to several thousand veterans at the American Legion's national convention, Rumsfeld recited what he called the lessons of history, including the failed efforts to appease the Adolf Hitler regime in the 1930s.
"I recount this history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism," he said.
Rumsfeld spoke to the American Legion as part of a coordinated White House strategy, in advance of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, to take the offensive against administration critics at a time of doubt about the future of Iraq and growing calls to withdraw U.S. troops.
Rumsfeld recalled a string of recent terrorist attacks, from 9/11 to bombings in Bali, London and Madrid, and said it should be obvious to anyone that terrorists must be confronted, not appeased.
"But some seem not to have learned history's lessons," he said, adding that part of the problem is that the American news media have tended to emphasize the negative rather than the positive.
He said, for example, that more media attention was given to U.S. soldiers' abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib than to the fact that Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith received the Medal of Honor.

...

Piece on Sgt. Smith http://www.medalofhonor.com/PaulSmith.htm

Frederico

Does anyone actually think Rumsfeld does a good job? His record is appalling, as a war hawk he's up there amongst the worst; dismisses hindsight, torture, protests, media, public opinion, etc. The guy is probably indirectly responsible for the deaths of more people than many dictators. He's one scary individual.

bonkey

Frederico wrote:

Does anyone actually think Rumsfeld does a good job?

It depends what you define "his job" as.

I think he does a great job at giving the press something to get sidetracked on.

His ability to make odd statements about virtually any topic that will leave commentators chewing on for days is priceless to the current Administration.

And, by acting as a shield in this manner for the one man who can actually get rid of him, his worth is beyond estimation.

If, on the other hand, you meant whether or not he does a good job of filling the official brief of SecDef......then I'm guessing it was a rhetorical question.

Frederico

bonkey wrote:

It depends what you define "his job" as.

I think he does a great job at giving the press something to get sidetracked on.

His ability to make odd statements about virtually any topic that will leave commentators chewing on for days is priceless to the current Administration.

And, by acting as a shield in this manner for the one man who can actually get rid of him, his worth is beyond estimation.

If, on the other hand, you meant whether or not he does a good job of filling the official brief of SecDef......then I'm guessing it was a rhetorical question.

Yeah its like saying Mugabe does a great job at "what he does". I wouldn't be surprised if he really tries to push an attack on Iran before he leaves.

lostexpectation

he's like the hapless owner of the east indian company(haliburton) bringing civiliation and the Raj to Indian and the east along with cheney

LostinBlanch

Frederico, bonkey,

seems like the US Army doesn't think he does a good job (as secretary of defence anyway). They've refused to submit a budget this year as a protest. Three retired generals are leading the charge against him, at least they're free to speak and can't be got at by him and his lackeys.

Article below

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2375105.html
Top soldier challenges Donald Rumsfeld over cutbacks that will leave forces billions of dollars short
DONALD RUMSFELD, the US Defence Secretary, is facing a new challenge to his authority after the US Army’s Chief of Staff refused to submit a budget plan for 2008 in protest at the demands the Pentagon is placing on America’s overstretched military.

General Peter Shoomaker’s behind-closed-doors challenge was disclosed yesterday as another wave of criticism was launched — this time at a forum conducted by Senate Democrats — from a group of ex-Generals who have already called for Mr Rumsfeld to quit after six years as Defence Secretary.

General Schoomaker took the highly unusual step last month of delaying submission of the Army’s budget plan, arguing that the service requires either a much bigger budget than the Administration has proposed or relief from some of its worldwide commitments.

The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that General Schoomaker was seeking $138.8 billion (£72.5 billion) for 2008, or nearly $25 billion more than the limit originally set by Mr Rumsfeld. The Army’s budget this year is $98 billion.

The overstretch is hitting troops serving in Iraq the hardest. The 1st Brigade, 1st Armored Division, is being extended in Iraq because the unit that is scheduled to replace them — the 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, needs more time to prepare. If it had deployed as scheduled, it would not have had the minimum 12 months at home between combat tours.

The 3rd Infantry has already served two tours in Iraq, including the initial invasion of the country in March 2003.

The Army has an active-duty force of about half a million soldiers. About 400,000 have done at least one tour of combat duty in Iraq or Afghanistan and more than one third of those have been deployed twice.

Yesterday three retired military generals bluntly accused Mr Rumsfeld of bungling the war in Iraq, saying that US troops were sent to fight without the best equipment, and that critical facts were hidden from the public. “I believe that Secretary Rumsfeld and others in the Administration did not tell the American people the truth for fear of losing support for the war in Iraq,” retired Major General John Batiste said.

It is rare for retired military officers to criticise the Pentagon while military operations are under way, particularly at a public event likely to draw widespread media attention.

A second military leader, retired Major General Paul Eaton, assessed Mr Rumsfeld as “incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically”. “Mr Rumsfeld and his immediate team must be replaced or we will see two more years of extraordinarily bad decision-making,” he said.

The national security issue has been the key battlefield in the campaign for congressional elections in November, where the Republican’s control of the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate is being challenged.

Although President Bush’s personal popularity shows some signs of recovery, opinion polls still show widespread dissatisfaction with the way the war has been run.

Over the weekend leaks of a government-produced National Intelligence Estimate showed that it had concluded that the war has helped to create Islamic radicalism and that the terrorist threat has grown since the attacks of 9/11.