NEW YORK An editorial set to appear on Monday -- election eve -- in four leading newspapers for the military calls for the resignation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003352525
How did the libs get to the military press?!? At least we know W will stand by his man!
The papers are the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times. They are published by the Military Times Media Group, a subsidiary of Gannett Co., Inc. President Bush said this week that he wanted Rumsfeld to serve out the next two years.
2006-11-04 02:47:33 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Let me help you out a little, quoting the article you linked:
>quote<
"So long as our government requires the backing of an aroused and informed public opinion ... it is necessary to tell the hard bruising truth."
That statement was written by Pulitzer Prize-winning war correspondent Marguerite Higgins more than a half-century ago during the Korean War.
But until recently, the "hard bruising" truth about the Iraq war has been difficult to come by from leaders in Washington. One rosy reassurance after another has been handed down by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: "mission accomplished," the insurgency is "in its last throes," and "back off," we know what we're doing, are a few choice examples.
>end quote<
Remember those statements by Rumsfeld, et al? What makes you think "libs" have anything to do with the call to fire Rummy? In the first place, Gannett is a huge free-market, free-enterprise public business; that's not very "lib". I think Bushbots like to call anything or anyone not agreeing with their fantasy view of the world as "lib".
In the second place, a lot of military and ex-military at various levels of rank agree that Rumsfeld is an idiot and deserves to be fired. Now I don't know about you but I'm unaware of many "lib"s in the military, period.
2006-11-04 05:06:01 · answer #1 · answered by spongeworthy_us 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
This may come as a shock, but it's no longer just liberals who want Rumsfeld out. A great many conservatives have come to agree that he is damaging our war efforts (you can support the war without supporting how Rumsfeld is executing the war-- thay's not a liberal-conservative issue, but common sense).
In any case, our senior military officers have wanted him gone for 3-4 years now. He disrespects them, he fails to listen to their (professional) advice, and he continues to try to impose a civilian agenda on a military structure.
Unless you can make the case that a bunch of three and four star generals and admirals are liberals, I think you need to back down. The military papers are plenty conservative. Rumsfeld is a disaster in the Defense Department. If the liberals want him out for their own reasons, fine. Conservatives want him because he's not doing the job the way it needs to be done (and it's really hurting the Republicans running for Congress on Tuesday, if you haven't noticed..
2006-11-04 16:50:23 · answer #2 · answered by The Padre 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Exactly! Most of them are bird hawks, and those who served as a table jockey or spent their time within the O membership, don't have any suggestion what truly grunts move by way of. So they turn out to be the "hero's" having received any conflict they participated in, unmarried handily. John kerry is a well instance, so is Al Gore, who labored for the celebrities and stripes in which's they get the ones chest filled with medals? HUM........ And worse examples comprise Barack no provider Obama, Joe Draft dodging Biden, Bill Clinton beneath who is management extra died then in Iraq!
2016-09-01 07:02:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The fact of the matter is that Rumsfield is not well respected in the military. He is protected from the criticism of military service members by rules that forbid their criticizing appointed public officials.
The Army Times is simply reporting what they have been hearing from military leaders for the past 5 years.
BTW - Rumsfield bungled Iraq by not listening to the generals before the war even started.
If the news media had done a better job of informing the American people what is happening in Iraq, maybe the administration would not have been placed on the defensive by defeatist and biased reporting and he would have been replaced.
2006-11-04 04:30:14 · answer #4 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Because those are the newspapers that Military families buy and if you think any of them will buy a paper telling them what great job good old Rummy is doing then you need to stop watching Fox News, or at the very least taking it like its gospel.
2006-11-04 03:11:41 · answer #5 · answered by Jared H 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Bwhahahaha. You people are pathetic. Like I always say:
Republicans are the party of smear and fear
2006-11-04 03:55:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Rumsfeid has done an outstanding job .
He listens to his " on the ground commanders " and stays out of the way .
2006-11-04 03:02:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋