Defending Rumsfeld's enablers.
Well, it's good to see that Dave got his Karl Rove-approved talking points memo.
In his latest column, Dave touches on the recent controversy of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld being criticized by seven former Army generals who suggest that Rumsfeld should resign. Typical for a conservative attack, Dave points out that the number of former generals criticizing Rumsfeld is pretty small- "six or so in a universe of thousands of retired and active-duty generals." By using this rationale, Dave sidesteps the qualitative argument- pay no attention is to why these generals are speaking out agaisnt Rumsfeld- in favor of the quantitative argument- "look how many generals aren't criticizing Rumsfeld!"
Never mind that, similar as to how some may consider it treasonous to speak poorly of the President, many career military men, who have been trained to follow orders and refuse to ask questions, would consider it treasonous to speak poorly against the Secretary of Defense. At the same time, these career military men surely can't be happy with the mess of the military Rumsfeld has mananged over the past five years. Under Rumsfeld's watch, he allowed the greatest army in history to get bogged down in an insurgency-fueled civil war, stretching the ranks incredibly thin, and leaving are army in a position unable to deal with global trouble spots as they develop. For all the neo-cons' posturing, it should be pointed out that it's due to Rumsfeld's incompetent handling of the army, a military option for a nuclear-armed Iran is currently not possible. By refusing to speak up against Rumsfeld as he royally fucks up the United States army, these "thousands of generals" Dave refers to are, in effect, enabling Rumsfeld through their silence.
Which makes Rumsfeld's critics even more brave and patriotic.
Also, it should be reminded to Dave, Rumsfeld twice offered Bush his resignation during the scandal over detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib. Rumsfeld wouldn't have done that unless he had an inkling that he was doing a lousy job.
As John Perr pointed out on a recent blog post, Rumsfeld has failed the "Les Aspin test." Les Aspin was Clinton's first Secretary of Defense who was hounded by Congressional Republicans and forced to resign after 18 Army Rangers were killed in Mogadishu, Somalia as Clitnon attempted to clean up the mess that the first President Bush had left there.
It only took 18 American soldiers to die for Clinton to lose his first Defense Secretary. 18! Surely as soon as the 19th soldier was killed in this wholly optional and unnecessary war- and completely botched- war in Iraq, Rumsfeld's head should've been on a platter. I mean, to quote George Clooney from "Intolerable Cruelty": "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." Right?
As always, the onus should be on Dubya. Because, remember, he's "The Decider."
In his latest column, Dave touches on the recent controversy of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld being criticized by seven former Army generals who suggest that Rumsfeld should resign. Typical for a conservative attack, Dave points out that the number of former generals criticizing Rumsfeld is pretty small- "six or so in a universe of thousands of retired and active-duty generals." By using this rationale, Dave sidesteps the qualitative argument- pay no attention is to why these generals are speaking out agaisnt Rumsfeld- in favor of the quantitative argument- "look how many generals aren't criticizing Rumsfeld!"
Never mind that, similar as to how some may consider it treasonous to speak poorly of the President, many career military men, who have been trained to follow orders and refuse to ask questions, would consider it treasonous to speak poorly against the Secretary of Defense. At the same time, these career military men surely can't be happy with the mess of the military Rumsfeld has mananged over the past five years. Under Rumsfeld's watch, he allowed the greatest army in history to get bogged down in an insurgency-fueled civil war, stretching the ranks incredibly thin, and leaving are army in a position unable to deal with global trouble spots as they develop. For all the neo-cons' posturing, it should be pointed out that it's due to Rumsfeld's incompetent handling of the army, a military option for a nuclear-armed Iran is currently not possible. By refusing to speak up against Rumsfeld as he royally fucks up the United States army, these "thousands of generals" Dave refers to are, in effect, enabling Rumsfeld through their silence.
Which makes Rumsfeld's critics even more brave and patriotic.
Also, it should be reminded to Dave, Rumsfeld twice offered Bush his resignation during the scandal over detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib. Rumsfeld wouldn't have done that unless he had an inkling that he was doing a lousy job.
As John Perr pointed out on a recent blog post, Rumsfeld has failed the "Les Aspin test." Les Aspin was Clinton's first Secretary of Defense who was hounded by Congressional Republicans and forced to resign after 18 Army Rangers were killed in Mogadishu, Somalia as Clitnon attempted to clean up the mess that the first President Bush had left there.
It only took 18 American soldiers to die for Clinton to lose his first Defense Secretary. 18! Surely as soon as the 19th soldier was killed in this wholly optional and unnecessary war- and completely botched- war in Iraq, Rumsfeld's head should've been on a platter. I mean, to quote George Clooney from "Intolerable Cruelty": "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." Right?
As always, the onus should be on Dubya. Because, remember, he's "The Decider."
posted by true_slicky at 8:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home