1 posted on
12/22/2004 10:36:58 PM PST by
kattracks
To: kattracks
I don't know of anyone who could have done the job better than Rumsfeld.
2 posted on
12/22/2004 10:39:53 PM PST by
DB
(©)
To: kattracks
3 posted on
12/22/2004 10:42:18 PM PST by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)
To: kattracks
Well, William (Billy) can kiss where the sun don't shine.
I don't see how Mr. Rumsfeld has been a liability. These things would have happened in some form as they did anyway.
Actually, I'm surprised more "bad" hasn't happened.
So keep the Secretary in place.
To: kattracks
Just another way to pick at Bush. I grow weary of the games. Gatorade, anyone?
5 posted on
12/22/2004 10:43:30 PM PST by
Just Lori
(I stand behind our troops, but I'd rather stand BESIDE them!)
To: kattracks
Hmmm... Kriston, Perle, Adelman... I wonder what these men have in common...
7 posted on
12/22/2004 10:50:07 PM PST by
NYC GOP Chick
(www.Hillary-Watch.org)
To: kattracks
It will not escape many that this gleeful attack on Rumsfield is a thinly disguised attack on Bush and on conservative thought. Citing an extremist like Kristol as if he speaks for conservatives is silly. This sums out to more Anti America rhetoric that you and several dedicated others are intently and regularly engaged in.
11 posted on
12/22/2004 11:03:28 PM PST by
CBart95
To: Miss Marple
Rumsfeld's civilian colleagues at the Pentagon are furious because they consider Kristol a manipulative political operative, critiquing the war in Iraq after years of promoting it.Hmm....
16 posted on
12/22/2004 11:36:02 PM PST by
Howlin
(Search, use it.)
To: kattracks
Was the change of regime in Baghdad worth going to war? Yes .. he was aiding and abetting the terrorists
Could Saddam Hussein have been removed from power by other means?
After 12 years of fail UN policies .. my guess would be No
Is the use of U.S. military power to topple undemocratic regimes good policy?
We get control and take care of Iraq .. we have a pretty good chance of cleaning up the rest of the mess in the middle east
Take a look of a map of Iraq .. and then take a look at all the bordering countries
As for taking Iraq being a cake walk and the Iraqis thanking us??
Taking Iraq was a cake walk .. it's the terrorist coming from OTHER countries that is causing us the problems
And yes the Iraqis did wave the American Flag, throw flowers and thank our soldiers when they liberated them from a monster like Saddam ... And we have the pictures to prove it
As for Krystol ... He's just wearing in his knee pads for McCain getting Rummy's job
25 posted on
12/23/2004 12:11:23 AM PST by
Mo1
(Should be called Oil for Fraud and not Oil for Food)
To: kattracks
neocons vs. neocoms.
36 posted on
12/23/2004 5:12:26 AM PST by
the invisib1e hand
(if a man lives long enough, he gets to see the same thing over and over.)
To: kattracks
William 'Bill' Kristol is an opportunistic, lying, two faced, back stabbing, McCain butt-boy MAGGOT. And those are his
good points!
I wouldn't trust him to walk my dog -- and I don't HAVE a dog.
In short, that *%^$ turns my stomach.
39 posted on
12/23/2004 6:50:14 AM PST by
Condor51
(May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. - Gen G Patton)
To: kattracks
Could Saddam Hussein have been removed from power by other means? Is the use of U.S. military power to topple undemocratic regimes good policy? There are no clear answers. Earth to Robert Novak:
The answers are, respectively, NO (Remember the UN Oil For Fraud Program that Saddam literally 'ran' from Baghdad?) and,
YES. Maybe we should have left Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, and the Taliban in power along with the Soviet Union.
So the fact is, Mr. Novak, certain things do appear to be rather clear...
45 posted on
12/23/2004 7:34:20 AM PST by
Paul Ross
(1 month to go before Iran has nukes, courtesy AG Khan, North Korea and Red China.)
To: kattracks
"Kristol a manipulative political operative, critiquing the war in Iraq after years of promoting it."
This is exactly right. Kristol is blaming Rumsfield for his and his fellow neocons stupidity.
He is a whiny little cr@p weasel who refuses to take responsibility for his own mistakes. Why anyone ever listened to him is a mystery to me. Bush and Rumsfield's only mistake was listening to this turnip head in the first place.
47 posted on
12/23/2004 7:39:47 AM PST by
monday
To: kattracks
More claptrap from East Coast Elite "journalists" who believe they still make policy with gossip.
Their 30 year bubble over us is busted.
Common sense, maturity, logic and facts, will prevail if we keep our heads.
To: kattracks
The use of the word "neocon" is an implicit sign of stupidity. Those that use it might as well wear a sign around their neck that states:
please
speak slowly
and
use small words
For the author to offer it up as the first word in his article's title is to revel in his doltish nature.
50 posted on
12/23/2004 7:48:06 AM PST by
avg_freeper
(Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
To: kattracks
Kristol is a communist in conservative drag.
51 posted on
12/23/2004 7:48:18 AM PST by
cynicom
(<p)
To: kattracks
William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard. His position was, in effect, a declaration of war by the neoconservatives against the secretary of defense.
>>>
Little william can suck my toes...Rummyphobia is a RINO-RAT disease...and McCain, Hagle, Collins, Vacant Lott - they can all rot in hades. Shi*birds, all of them.
54 posted on
12/23/2004 7:53:06 AM PST by
ApesForEvolution
(You will NEVER convince me that Muhammadanism isn't a death cult that must end. Save your time...)
To: kattracks
Has Kristol ever been gainfully employed?
60 posted on
12/23/2004 8:49:01 AM PST by
verity
(The Liberal Media is America's Enemy)
To: kattracks
I quit listening to kristol the day I heard him say he thought McClain was going to win the gop nomination. The day I heard that I knew instantly that Kristol was just another wishful thinking loudmouth know it all.
Kristol has never been right about anything.
John
69 posted on
12/23/2004 9:29:12 AM PST by
jrfaug06
To: kattracks
Thus, the neocon message is that the war was no mistake but has been badly conducted. [true to come extent]
While Adelman does not blame his friend Rumsfeld, the accountability of the secretary of defense is implicit. [the war plan was largely the creation of Tommy Franks actually, and Rumsfeld and Bush enthusiastically signed off on it]
Kristol's call for Rumsfeld's dismissal removes culpability for those who beat the drums to go to war. [BS]
Getting rid of Rumsfeld does not answer agonizing questions. [clearly]
Was the change of regime in Baghdad worth going to war? [It sure was] Could Saddam Hussein have been removed from power by other means? [almost certainly not - we tried] Is the use of U.S. military power to topple undemocratic regimes good policy? {Damn straight it is in certain situations where the stars are aligned right]
There are no clear answers. [true] To say simply that all would be well in Iraq, save for Don Rumsfeld, only begs these questions. [nobody is saying that; that is a canard and a straw man]
103 posted on
12/24/2004 9:59:58 AM PST by
Torie
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson