Just 2 days after Cheney said Rumsfeld was the greatest defense secretary in history. That's what's great about our government, when a politician can say one thing today and do the exact opposite tomorrow.
2006-12-19 15:01:08 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
C'mon, Andy...Rumsfeld's mantra was a smaller, efficient force, can't have it both ways
2006-12-20 11:16:48 · update #1
It's a repudiation of the US voters, who already knew he only listens to his dog because he said so.
2006-12-19 15:40:47 · answer #1 · answered by Reba K 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This is truely a sad moment. If Rumsfeld had listened to his generals at the Congressional hearings before this war started, the necessary troop levels would have been sent to Iraq at the start of the war. General Shinseki was calling for 500,000 troops to be sent, and was chastized severly for it. I wonder if people will remember THIS about the great Rumsfeld.
Way to go Andy, when all else fails, blame Clinton.
2006-12-20 01:47:24 · answer #2 · answered by Third Uncle 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's just one of many flip-flops you'll see with this administration. This is the same President who first opposed a Department of Homeland Security before he approved it. ;)
Anyway, we all know better than to trust Cheney. And Rumsfeld is one of the biggest embarassments to the military since the Bay of Pigs.
2006-12-19 23:32:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, this is in response to the Democrats and Clinton destroying the ability of the United States to protect ourselves. I was in the Navy when Clinton was elected to office and I watched him drop the Army form a firm 780,000 to ~400,000 people. He also wanted a 160 total floating force for the Navy and he did major cutting of both the Marines and the Air Force. President Bush has tried his hardest to accomplish everything that has been demanded of him without adding additional members to the Army. Now that Iraq still needs us to help restore the new government and to continue the fighting and peace keeping missions that both Clinton and President Bush got us into, we need more troops. At last count we still have around 10,000 troops in the formal Yugoslavia region.
2006-12-19 23:21:00 · answer #4 · answered by andy 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
A bit, but the military's been downsizing for a long time, so the blame can't all be placed there.
2006-12-20 00:44:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
He is merely folllowing what the committee of both parties decided that was needed. This was what the committee of repubican and democrats asked for.
2006-12-19 23:03:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
You have to remember....this is a clueless idiot grasping at straws to try to save his reputation....what's left of it.
2006-12-19 23:05:23 · answer #7 · answered by opjames 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋
sure
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AmTvJas1lJ7Gh0GgYSZrN_Psy6IX?qid=20061219182437AAQVQUz
2006-12-19 23:04:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋