Freep CNN Poll on Rumsfeld

CNN ^ | 09-30-06 | CNN Poll

[OldFriend]

It would be comical if it wasn't so deadly dangerous to our national security.

As an arm of the insurgency it's only making our troops less safe over there, and the US less safe here at home.

[Seattle Conservative]

"The title of their upcoming profile "Rumsfeld: Man of War" complete with a scowling graphic, tells you all you need to know about how balanced this pre-election hit piece will be."

I won't be watching the CNN 'special (hit report on Rummy and the Bush Admin). Instead, I'll tune in to the FNC special on him, which I suspect will be more 'fair and balanced'. I've seen a few clips and it looks like it will be good - Bret even did an interview w Mrs. Rummy.

It's on tonight at 8 Eastern:

"Why He Fights"
FOX News Special
Tonight, 8pm / 1am ET
FNC's Bret Baier gained unprecented access to the Secretary of Defense. Tune in for exclusive interviews that reveal a side of Rumsfeld you've never seen before.

http://www.foxnews.com/foxfan/

[montag813]

The title of their upcoming profile "Rumsfeld: Man of War" complete with a scowling graphic, tells you all you need to know

What do they want, a "Man of Peace" in the Pentagon? That's how we got 9/11 in the first place. We had a poet as SecDef.

[VaMarVet]

I'd say that the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan stand as textbook examples of decisive military victory.

Last time I looked we were still fighting our asses off in Iraq and Afghanistan. Can you please define what you mean by a decisive military victory?

[jess35]

We must have an even kinder and gentler pentagon that respects the rights and traditons of people who viciously murder and torture civilians.

[VaMarVet]

I won't be watching the CNN 'special (hit report on Rummy and the Bush Admin). Instead, I'll tune in to the FNC special on him, which I suspect will be more 'fair and balanced'. I've seen a few clips and it looks like it will be good - Bret even did an interview w Mrs. Rummy.

Your post brought a smile to my face - you just reinforced the premise of Woodward's State of Denial. Way to go...

[SaxxonWoods]

Oh, one could explain it all to you, but why bother? You are just another armchair general who should leave these matters to those who have more experience.

And that's exactly what you will do, since you have no choice, despite all your meaningless caterwauling.

For that I am very thankful.

[SeafoodGumbo]

People like Zinni should be running the show now – not Rumsfeld

Yeah, great idea. Here's Zinni's (your "hero") take on why we went into Iraq (lovingly quoted in Arab News, fond of Zinni, too):

Zinni, a retired general, accused George Bush's administration of launching a war against Iraq in order to help Israel; he accused the top civilian officials in the Pentagon of abject failure. He said that it was time to change the prevailing situation or at least specify who would take responsibility for what is happening - specifically the Jewish officials in the Defense Department, Paul Wolfowitz, his assistant, Douglas Feith and the neoconservatives, who according to Zinni, have hijacked America's foreign policy. He went on to say that these individuals saw in the Iraqi invasion an easy means of controlling the situation in the Middle East and helping Israel. "They went so far as to create intelligence information that served their aims and interests. They must bear the responsibility." Gen. Zinni accused extremist Jews in the government of "imposing a strategy full of holes on us and they must leave. If I were the head of a military organization with that performance record, I would have resigned. It is time for a change as the current path is leading us to Niagara Falls and I believe that it is time to question who is responsible for putting this plan into action. What has occurred is nothing but a fiasco." He stated that he didn't see the US in the region as bringing about positive democratic change but rather "as neocrusaders ... an occupying force."

[jess35]

Let's see....we routed the Taliban and took out Hussein's government. Rumsfeld did his job admirably. The politicians and hacks at the state department, on the other hand, have failed us miserably.

[VaMarVet]

We must have an even kinder and gentler pentagon that respects the rights and traditons of people who viciously murder and torture civilians.

I take it you are a student of military history and in particular an expert on counterinsurgency? < /sarcasm> Why would you make such a statement unless you condone a military philosophy of "kill them all and let God sort them out"?

[montag813]

None of this matters. It doesn't matter who the SecDef is. It doesn't matter what weapons our military has. None of this matters if we have lost our will to be brutal, to be ruthless. To commit to the destruction of the enemy. not giving a damn about "civilian" casualties. In 1945, Gen. LeMay ordered a firebombing of Tokyo that killed 100,000 civilians in a single night. Yet in Iraq we pussyfooted around Fallujah, scared to death of killing a single woman or child. Our media and government elites agonized for days over whether one of the Fallujah gunmen had been going for his gun when a U.S. soldier shot him (on video for some stupid reason). "Who gives a shit?" is what the Pentagon and White House should have said. "He was a terrorist and now he is a dead terrorist. No investigations of our men..next question!" But they didn't do that. They play along with the enemies within, who question and attack the U.S. at every turn.

The West does not seem prepared to do whatever it takes to match the enemy with their own savagery. "Hearts and minds", "Arab street". What is all that shit? What does that have to do with destroying the enemy? I would rather give a can of Spam to every soldier to rub on every killed "insurgent" before burning their bodies--denying them a place with Allah. Yes we would see the Islamic world erupt in fury. And then we should do it again, and harder, and more ruthless and more brutal. Until they get it...that we are not weak. That if Muslims want to fight us, this is how we will deal with them. That we don't give two shits about what Amnesty International or the Arab League thinks. That terrorists don't deserve Geneva Convention treatment. That is the only way we will win this conflict.

[OldFriend]

Son served four years during X42. All promotions were race and gender based. Most having nothing at all to do with merit.

Many many good officers left the military.

As Tony Snow said, we are only now getting back to where we were when slick willie took office.

[Revererdrv]

Why does the enemey within (liberal) want Rumsfeld to go?
Are they afraid Bush may get credit for doing something to prevent more terrorism?

[OldFriend]

Tee hee.....Zinni the ninny, your hero! If only Zinni was a useless twit.....he's a clintonoid ignoramous who did more harm than good.

BTW, you forgot your other hero, General Shinseki!

[SeafoodGumbo]

Here's an interesting story about how ya boy Zinni is on the board of an organization with Mary McCarthy (fired for leaking that CIA secret prisons story), Wesley Clarke, Zbiginew Brz.., etc. Not exactly the crew I want to see running anything. link

[SeafoodGumbo]

Last time I looked we were still fighting our asses off in Iraq and Afghanistan. Can you please define what you mean by a decisive military victory?

By "decisive military victory," I mean the time it took us to vanquish overt forces of the enemy who were wearing uniforms, driving tanks, openly brandishing weapons, etc. We are now fighting terrorists, insurgents, jihadis...call them what you will...who hide in civilian clothes and don't meet us on the open battlefield.

And, in spite of the leftist media's attempt to re-write history, both invasions were brilliant and are no doubt being reviewed by every other military in the world at this very moment.