2006-10-03 11:09:06 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
When the antiquities of humanity were being looted from baghdad's museums after our invasions, Rumsfeld said, "Who knew this country had so many vases?" When challenged by soldiers for sending them to war without body armor, Rumsfeld said, "You go to war with the army you've got." When we toppled Iraq's government, the General in charge said, "We need to use the Iraqi army; we can't let tens of thousands of armed, unemployed men loose into the country." And Rumsfeld said, "Let those people go."
Rumsfeld has no intention of 'winning' in Iraq. The goals, which have been achieved, were to distract part of America and win the support of another part of America while Rumsfeld and his pals systematically looted our treasury and even ran up debt for us to steal some more.
Mission Accomplished.
2006-10-03 11:40:56 · answer #1 · answered by cassandra 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Although I'm a strong supporter of both Pres. Bush and the war in Iraq I do believe Rumsfeld should let his generals prosecute the war. In both the Korean and Vietnam conflicts the civilian leaders were the ones playing "general" and with predictable results. I like Rumsfeld but it may be time for him to step out of the way.
2006-10-03 18:15:24 · answer #2 · answered by Wayne H 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yeah! Why don't we just nuke the whole country? What's wrong with those pansie wimp liberals running the war effort? If we killed every last Iraqi we could cut down the violence by at least 80% and we would get to keep all the oil while we're at it. Rumsfeld is such a wimpy lib.
2006-10-03 19:36:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hell NO!!!
Donald Rumsfeld is so full of himself that he will never take advice from anyone, not even the top generals in the Pentagon.
Rumsfeld has got to go. He should have been a long time ago.
2006-10-03 18:11:36 · answer #4 · answered by Ed A 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
This is not about "winning" a shooting war.
The soldiers are being asked to police a bunch of rabid semi-civilized zealots.
If this were simply about soldiers doing what they do best, every Iraqi soldier, terrorist, and innocent civilian would be long dead and the country would be empty.
Eminently doable, if you want the rest of the world to go apeshiit...
2006-10-03 18:48:10 · answer #5 · answered by aka DarthDad 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
there is a much larger plan at work in the middle east my friend ... what you see on the news is complete bs ... the plan started in the balkans ... now on to large scale militarization in iraq and afganistan ...many other countries are being militarized including georgia and the caucuses forming a strategic triangle around iran ... there is a large buildup currently underway and you will see iran and syria go the way of the dodo before too long in americas and natos quest for domination and energy.
2006-10-03 18:13:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
When will the retired generals that are complaining about Rumsfield re-enlist.
2006-10-03 18:11:27 · answer #7 · answered by Answergirl 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
RUMSFELD WON'T LET THIS HAPPEN BECAUSE HE'S A POLITICIAN, NOT A WARRIOR. GWB SHOULD START LISTENING, BECAUSE HIS CONSTITUENCY WANTS TO SEE A CHANGE, BOTH WITH RUMSFELD AND RICE.
ANY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER WHO DOESN'T REMEMBER A CONVERSATION WITH THE DIRECTOR OF THE CIA REGARDING A PENDING ATTACK ON THE US, NOT ONLY NEEDS TO BE REPLACED, SHE NEEDS TO HAVE HER FRIGGIN HEAD EXAMINED, TOO!
2006-10-03 18:14:30 · answer #8 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
the invasions over, we control the stupid country
2006-10-03 18:21:34 · answer #9 · answered by JL 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
never
2006-10-03 18:11:10 · answer #10 · answered by region50 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋