If so, I will call the war in Iraq the 'democrats war' and not 'Bush's war'. Afterall, we were told that we could NOT enlist the help of the dems, because we should 'stay the course'...the very strategy that is responsible for the situation in Iraq...so, should we still blame congress for approving the use of force? Or would it be alright to make Bush accountable for the handling of the Iraq war?
2007-06-18 06:55:32 · 10 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Nope. Rumsfeld was in Bush's cabinet. Congress had no say in his position.
2007-06-18 06:59:16 · answer #1 · answered by Jeremiah 5 · 6⤊ 1⤋
No, they did not appoint Rumsfeld. You know my views on the larger question.
It IS interesting, though, how war opponents didn't value his opinion as a veteran either.
Many think it's a valid criticism to point out that "neither Bush nor Cheney served" as reasons to oppose them. Apart from the fact that Bush DID serve, in the National Guard, Rumsfeld was a Navy pilot for several years, I believe. That never came up with the "you didn't serve" crowd. If it shouldn't have, then why was it made an issue for Cheney, and Bush?
PS he was actually in the Navy, and the reserves, for decades:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/rumsfeld-bio.html
His military service doesn't make him right about the war. Just as people's lack of service doesn't make them wrong.
Oops - did I hijack the question?
2007-06-18 08:14:13 · answer #2 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If any individual attempted to sabotage the struggle it used to be Democrats like Dick Durbin and Hillary Clinton who adversarial the Surge. It used to be Hillary who first voted for the struggle after which voted to reduce investment for the troops. This is the girl who might be Commander-In-Chief of our army. And then there have been the idiots who classified General Petraeus as General Betrayus. Were you a kind of idiots who converted their track whilst the Surge started operating?
2016-09-05 20:11:45 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rumsfeld was around for a long time.
He was there during Bush senior and during GW, "the war president"
This is one big private club
2007-06-18 06:59:37 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. Beef Stroganoff 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Where do you get the Dem's appointed Rumsfeld???
This is a Bush-Cheney (AKA head draft dodger) war.
2007-06-18 07:00:55 · answer #5 · answered by madjer21755 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
You know how long Rumsfeld has been around?
He was the Secretary of Defense during Vietnam.
2007-06-18 07:03:21 · answer #6 · answered by Josh 4 · 8⤊ 1⤋
Rummy has been around forever and belongs to Bush's cabinet.
2007-06-18 07:15:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The president doesn't control the armies per se, generals do. Congress funds and declares wars. Democrats undermine troops and anyone who opposes their views. Republicans are victims of the Democrats in the media.
2007-06-18 07:03:16 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
it's Bush's war...plain and simple... Even Bush has been quoted as saying "This is MY War!"...
2007-06-18 06:59:59 · answer #9 · answered by Gemini 5 · 7⤊ 2⤋
"I am a war President. I make decisions with War on my mind." - GWB
2007-06-18 07:07:54 · answer #10 · answered by George 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋