I think its a little risky to remove the head of the military in the middle of a conflict. Dispite the wrongs that he may or may not have commited. And even if he is guilty and should resign getting rid of rumsfeld i dont think would solve anything, you cant take down the hydra by knocking out one of its heads (to use an old legend of zelda analogy). Rumsfeld would in effect just be anouther scapegoat like the low level soldiers claim to be that are getting hit for the abuse scandal. I really think that the only solution in this situation is for the US to give up authority in iraq and give it to the UN or something along thoes lines.
Ultimetly Rumsfeld is responsible for what happnes in iraq. But that doesnt mean that he knew it was happening or that he condoned what was happening. And as fighter said its not a good idea to reamove a major military leader right in the middle of a war.Why give it to the U.N. The U.N. Is useless, it has never done anything for world peace. IT certainly isnt an effective oraginization. The idea behind it is good but it just doesn’t work.
how would UN ever be able to do anything if they never get the chance, but are allways put aside for US-gov crazyness?
anyway, that’s beside the topic
i think Rumsfeld knew or should have known what was goin on… which makes him either incapable and stupid or a madman… my guess is a combination of both with a larger ‘madman’-part…
The UN had some legitimacy before Iraq but since all the shit happened we’re back to the US “policeman of the world” scenario. Would the UN regain what it formally had should the US put Iraq into it’s hands…no, but at least the Iraqi terrorists would be viewed as violating a world-wide led operation rather than anti-american. Would the attacks stop? I’d hope and expect them to lessen. Thus I say give the power to UN, and allow a full blown public enquiry to see exactly what went on in Iraq and who was responsible, and while they’re at it…have a look at cuba.
Sometimes I’m simply astounded by all the lies these high end officials can get away with saying. I for one am of the opinion that the race for #1 *sshole in the country is between Donald Rumsfeld and…Dick Cheney. Bush seems like more of a pawn who doesn’t really fully understand the consequences of what he’s doing, but I think Rumsfeld and Cheney really do and don’t care. By the way I base this on absolutely nothing, these are simply general impressions I get.
In the past few days, both the CIA and the Pentagon have denied the veracity of this article. Do they think we’re so stupid as to accept their denial on the merits of their sense of honesty and transparency uber alles? To answer my own question; Yes, they do. And with good reason.
It’s been nearly a thousand years since King Henry II said aloud of Thomas a Beckett, “Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?” Don’t you think we would have caught-on to that management ploy by now? And yet here was Bush dousing the works with combustible fuel and leaving the matches with his underlings, only to express “shock” and “outrage” when he hears of the fire.
Was Rumsfeld or Bush ultimately to blame? Ultimately, it’s neither. The ultimate responsibility rests with an apathetic and gullible American people. The worst horrors of this modern age are committed not by the wolves, but by the sheep.
