Stormin' Norm rips Rumsfeld

New York Daily News ^ | December 14, 2004 | NEWS WIRE SERVICES

[JesseHousman]

Rummy tends to suffer from diarrhea of the mouth.

Need a replacement for him and for Mineta!

[Final Authority]

You make a lot of sense here. You said that we must change the Islamic culture or destroy them. Not a truth on these threads was ever spoken more plainly than that. Question is, how do we change the culture of a people where the essence of the culture is the religion they profess? The answer is, one has to read the last three words of you thought: or destroy them.

Trouble is, we have yet to realize the wisdom you have offered. We will never win a war of attrition, a war of millions of tiny cuts, a war when the opposition straps bombs to themselves and walks into crowds of Jews, Christians, and even Muslims.

[Stingray51]

At the risk of beating a dead horse, the question is not whether we go to war with what we have rather than what might be ideal (of course we do!). The question is whether once a shortcoming has been identified, we get our hind quarters in gear and obtain the additional gear as absolutely fast as possible. I think that is where legitimate questions have been raised and where Rummy (who I think is a very admirable character in many, many ways, including his pushing for military transformation)'s answer turned out to be somewhat less than 100% accurate.

[Final Authority]

The comment about the war being hopelessly lost must have been good because it elicited many comments in return.

I will agree that the definition of winning the war varies but I will offer one definition that I would use and it would be as follows: The war on terror is won and is over when the terror threat is over. If one defines it as reduction in terror to acceptable levels, just a nuisance problem, as Kerry suggested, then will we have won such a war?

If Iran strengthens their resolve to keep nuclear weapons and if such weapons are targeted at Israel and Europe, then did we win such a war?

If during the course of fighting the war on terror, many more thousands of US men and women are killed in the fight while national security is still compromised by internal and external threats, have we won the war?

These questions I ask, not because I am not a fan of GWB, or a committed Patriot, or a defender of freedom, or a person who believes in the US Constitution, but because I am these things.

At some point in time, a decision will have to be made, to take drastic measures to secure this nation from all enemies, that will change the course of history forever. The destruction of a people just may be required to assure that this nation live on and that the free family of mankind live on with us.

[kellynla]

I think you are smart enough to realize that the "reporter" who "sandbagged" Rummy was only interested in embarrassing the United States Army, Rummy and the W administration and was not the least bit interested in how well equipped the armed services are...
Rummy has press conferences often and is not shy about answering questions of the press!

Any person in the armed services knows that if he/she has a problem that they have a "chain of command" to present that problem to...that Spec had absolutely no business hitting Rummy with this "question" that some moron from the press slipped him...and I can guarantee you that the soldier got an earful from his C.O. and if he didn't he should have!!!
And if I was that unit's N.C.O.I.C. those clowns would be clapping their hands while running their asses off for days...

Now I've spent all the time I'm going to spend on this subject. Have a good one...

[fso301]

Extra armour won't do much to protect occupants if a roadside 155mm IED goes off next to a passing Hummer.

[Cold Heat]

Well, the usual procedural logic would be to try first with a firm hand before you resort to the final option which would require time.

There is occasionally some thoughtful sounding rhetoric that comes from them.

The most recent example was in the form of a editorial by a Muslim commentator asking a question to the Muslim people in the area as to why the only places that are currently involved in elections,or have elected governments are as a result of American or Israeli interference.

A critical question indeed,and one that needs to be repeated every day.

[SoFloFreeper]

And even if that soldier had his panties in a wad, those panties were in Kuwait about to go into Iraq, and deserving of our respect.

I didn't say a word about the soldier. Read more carefully please.

[OldCorps]

Annie, I'm not trying to engage you in debate. I only took issue with your position: those who oppose Mr. Rumsfeld are liberals.

That is not the case. I pointed out to you that many active and retired army people are not happy with the slights Mr. Rumsfeld has given our service, and we are not liberals. Nor are we happy with Mr. Rumsfeld's involvement in fighting the war in Iraq. Look at the freepers who use clearly distinctive army 'handles' and see what they have to say. You might notice that Nicko, a retired army warrant officer, also agrees--see post 140.

Regards,

[Ohiomedina]

Sorry about that. I reread your post and it was my mistake.
I assumed the jacka$$ from Chattanooga you were referring to was the soldier who asked the question, and when I assume I make an ass out of me.

[anniegetyourgun]

Please note my original post (8) says "most" who oppose him are liberals.

Otherwise, sounds like inter-force gritching to me.....