Posted on 06/10/2015 5:09:51 AM PDT by lbryce
Donald Rumsfeld, one of the leading architects of the Iraq war, reportedly said in a recent interview that then-President George W. Bush was "unrealistic" to pursue democracy in the country.
Rumsfeld, who served as Bush's defense secretary from 2001 to 2006, allegedly made the comments in an interview with the Times of London.
"I'm not one who thinks that our particular template of democracy is appropriate for other countries at every moment of their histories," Rumsfeld is quoted as saying.
"The idea that we could fashion a democracy in Iraq seemed to me unrealistic. I was concerned about it when I first heard those words."
However, Rumsfeld later pushed back against the Times article, telling Fox News' Greta Van Susteren that the article was inaccurate.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Nation building fails again
You are the first fan of Robert McNamara I’ve met outside the Washington Post (he supposedly dated Katherine Graham and got appointed to its board of directors).
The billions the US is spending on global warmongering isn't helping the disintegrating middle class.
????
Islam is not compatible with democracy or a republican form of government.
Should have created three separate states out of Iraq; one each for the KUrds, Shiites, and the Sunnis, with some imposition for the devision of the oil resources.
'Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it — eastern Iraq — the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you’ve got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.
Wow, MSNBC couldn't have said it better. Sounds like it came right from the mouth of Rachel Maddow or Al Franken or Bernie Sanders. Dear, you have outted yourself as a liberal, and you probably didn't even realize it.
Dude settle down. I wasn’t talking about McNamara!!! Read more carefully. I was talking about comparing Rumsfeld TO McNamara. Slow down a bit before hitting that keyboard.
Dude settle down. I wasn’t talking about McNamara!!! Read more carefully. I was talking about comparing Rumsfeld TO McNamara. Slow down a bit before hitting that keyboard.
Tillman was in Afghanistan, not Iraq.
I don’t believe you report about him.
Dear God that might be the post of the year. All so true
actually, that statement is even more foolish than I first thought. Oil is one of the lowest profit margin products there is. (Google profit margin if you need help). Government makes far more money on oil and gasoline than any part of the private sector does. And meanwhile, we've seen gas prices fall some 2 bucks a gallon in the past year. You are just way out on the delusional far left limb here.
Yes, I suppose it tales adults to admit the real reasons a CIC will send someone’s children into harm’s way.
But I don’t remember a discussion about the free flow of oil. ‘Regime change - Saadam’s gotta go!’; ‘Gotta get rid of WMD’s’; ‘We’re fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here’...
Dosen’t seem to be too many ‘adults’ in the Bush Administration.
Bush Sr. went in to save Kuwait from Iraqui aggression. Because of oil. But we all knew what he was doing. And GHWB intentionally stopped short of invading Iraq. And for the same reasons he told Junior to lay off.
So, while it’s cute to say ‘everybody knows that wars are more or less about natural resources’, fact it the Bushies painted a much different picture, and it flew with the public because of 9/11, even though they changed their story about why we were over there.
Pat Tillman would NOT have volunteered to go to Iraq if he wasn’t fooled into thinking it was all about retaliation for terrorist attacks on US soil. And he would be alive today.
Perhaps not. But the reality is that no multi-cultural state is compatible with "democracy." The fantasy driven policy of our State Department, in promoting "democracy" in the Third World, has been responsible for one social disaster after another.
We have been watching these tragedies growing out of that folly for over half a century; and very few seem willing to draw logical conclusions as to cause & effect. (Democracy In the Third World.)
As for George W. Bush's level of understanding on the issues involved. His Second Inaugural Address must stand out as one of the most intellectually confused efforts in American History. If words have meanings, it is logically indefensible. (George W. Bush or George Washington)
The responsibility of the winning power in a war is to leave a country stable in departing. It is even outlined in the Geneva Convention on warfare.
In most cases that is viewed by the whole world as leaving a people with some form of self-determination. Leftists love democracy as do islamists. It promotes one person, one vote, one time — and then the take over of the socialist or islamist government. It is easy to set up a parliamentary democracy. It is damn near impossible to design a representative republic of laws for another nation without that tradition.
We feel for the leftist democratic eye-wash.
Well first of all, you're right about no adults in the Bush Administration as far as messaging and PR goes. They were too gutless to say that oil was a factor, AND then say why oil MUST be a factor. The Bushies, with Rove in charge of PR, always defaulted to what the public thinks now instead of trying to educate the public.
And it seems to me you are making another mistake here....oil can be a reason, but so can the other items you mentioned. It's NEVER just one thing. Never.
You are a bit wound up. You might consider not drinking whatever it was or taking whatever pill you had.
What ‘report’ do you not believe? that he was killed by friendly fire, or that he was writing letters home about being disillusioned about the war? That Tillman had a stellar pro football career ahead of him but instead chose to fight for what he was told was terrorism?
These are things I have at one time or another read from sources I believe to be reliable. I think I mentioned that already. I do not have first hand knowledge of these letters - which I also alluded to.
Frankly, what you believe is irrelevant to the facts.
Okay, I’ll buy that.
Basically, but; take Egypt with years of having their Army officers trained here plus every CPT in their army who was in my infantry officers advanced course in 72-73 had an MBA from Syracuse. It takes educated folks for a democracy and Egypt has them. Iraq’s military has no such mid level highly educated and well trained leaders. That is why they flee. Same as the damn Viet officers with very few exceptions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.