"These people don't have a legitimate gripe.''
TREW
2,037 Posts
[war in iraq-related] donald rumsfeld expands his vocabulary
TREW
2,037 Posts
Comments
"I'm an evil, impotent, constipated, hate-filled, old fuck. THAT is a "legitimate gripe".[/b]
You should try spell-check Sabadabadabooboo....
If only there was a similar product for clearing shit out of internet message boards....
i got your legitimate gripe right here.
hahaha
i love how this thread degraded!
Let's look at what Rumsfeld said in this speech plus General Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
1) On using the term "insurgency"
He told reporters that the word gives the fighters in Iraq too much legitimacy and disputed whether the word applied to them at all. He told General Pace to use the term "Enemies of the legitimate Iraqi government" instead. He also encouraged reporters to look up the word "insurgent" in the Dictionary to prove the fact that it didn't apply in Iraq.
Webster's Dictionary defines insurgent as "rising up against established authority."
Hmm, fighting against authority vs. fighting against the government????
I guess Rumsfeld meant some OTHER dictionary, as in Rumsfeld's Double Speak.
2) First use of Rumsfeld's new pronouncement?
Rumsfeld didn't want to use the term insurgent anymore when speaking of Iraq. He apparently had this "epiphany" all on his own and didn't tell anyone else, because after he made his little pronouncement, General Pace made a report on fighting in Iraq where he said, "I have to use the word 'insurgent' because I can't think of a better word right now."
Thanks Rumsfeld for your mighty leadership in this situation. You have truly proven that the civilian leaders of the military are in touch with the actual military on fighting this war in Iraq. Once again you have shown that your command and management skills fit this situation perfectly. You don't want to use "insurgent" anymore, but didn't tell the Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff!
3) Rumsfeld and General Pace on prisoner abuse in Iraq
A UPI reporter asked Rumsfeld about what the U.S. should do about torture in Iraq. Rumsfeld said all the U.S. should do if it sees abuse is to say they don't like it. Rumsfeld said, "Obviously, the United States does not have a responsibility" in this situation.
General Pace replied "It is the absolute responsibility of every U.S. service member, if they see inhumane treatment being conducted, to intervene, to stop it."
Rumsfeld cut in and said, "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it; it's to report it."
Pace responded, "If they are physically present when inumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it."
Another example of your amazing leadership of the military in times of war. You are obviously well informed Mr. Secretary about the rules of military conduct. Perhaps you went to too many White House meetings on terrorism where you advocated the use of torture by U.S. forces that you never took the time to actually consult with what the military can and can't do. But rules, hey, what are they good for?!
4) Rumsfeld being divorced from reality on what's happening in Iraq
When asked about the use of white phosophorus in Iraq, he demured to General Pace.
When asked about abuse within Iraq, he said he didn't want to make a judgement about it.
When asked about how badly the Iraqi police are, he passed the buck and said, they're the responsibility of the State Department.
When asked about death squads in Iraq, he said he didn't want to talk about "hypothetical questions." The reporter followed up by saying death squads are not hypothetical but a reality in Iraq. Rumsfeld said that Iraq is a sovereign country, that the allegations of death squads might be politically motivated, and that he didn't know anything about them. "I just don't know." "I Can only talk about what I know." Finally he said, "That's life." Yes, that's what we mean by bringing democracy to Iraq! Death Squads? That's what democracy meant for Central America in the 80s, what was good then must be good now!
Here's a report from the L.A. Times from 11/29/05 on death sqauds and the abuses by Iraqi police
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-death29nov29,0,429267,print.story?coll=ny-leadworldnews-headlines
Here's a report by Knight-Ridder on widespread abuse and torture in Iraq
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13277769.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
I can find a bunch more. But hey, the media, what do they know? Rumsfeld probably doesn't read the newspapers because they're creating "revisionist history" on Iraq and don't report on all the progress being made anyways. Who needs them?
Rumsfeld also claimed tha there were 7 operational Iraqi divisions and 31 operational brigade headquarters of the Iraqi army.
But let's see, the last time the military reported on the state of the Iraqi army was on October 3, 2005. There, generals told Congress that there was only 1 Iraqi battalion, in total 750 soldiers, that was capable of independent combat operations. That one battalion was made up of Kurdish fighters who had been operating since way before the Iraq war in northern Iraq. There were 39 other battalions that could operate but only with U.S. aid. So where exactly are these 7 divisions and 31 brigades?
Doesn't matter. The U.S. as Bush said in today's speech, has trained over 200,000 Iraqi soldiers. Progress is being made! Let's overlook the fact that they've been saying the same number for almost 2 years now. That means either 1) no new soldiers have been trained in nearly 2 years, hence the number has stayed the same, or 2) Almost all of those 200,000 trainees left which meant you had to train another 200,000 to replace them, or 3) Maybe 200,000 never got trained in the first place and you were just making up a big number to impress the U.S. public! But let's not dwell on the negative, that's the "revisionist" kind of history we're sick of hearing about on Iraq. We've had enough of that! Let's talk about the positives damn it!
From now on, there is NO insurgeny in Iraq. Unless you talk to the U.S. military, Iraqis and reporters that is. Go Rumsfeld!
You're a fucking ass!
Saba, why the hatred? If you think there is something legitimate in anything Rumsfeld has ever said or done, make your case.
Remember, you don't debate on soulstrut with the facts you wished you had, you debate with the facts you have. To paraphrase the sec.
Dan
And this is deserving of a serious debate?
Uh, how about my point by point discussion of what Rumsfeld said? You're good at shit talking but have yet to make one valid argument in favor of your opinions. I've addressed your posts on Bush's Supreme Court nominees, Iraq, this Rumsfeld pronouncemnt, and others and never heard anything in reply. Step up.
Crickets.
THIS DOES NOT MEAN WHAT YOU WANT IT TO MEAN RUMMY! IT MEANS THE OPPOSITE.
I wouldn't be surprised if Rumsfeld just heard that Gen. Pace was about to give a speech and ran down there to give a spontaneous speech on his latest "epiphany." Hence, after his statement when reporters began asking him questions he didn't answer anything. He wasn't briefed or prepared, he just had a little brain fart and decided to share it with everyone, including the national press and the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Here's a paraphrasing of my favorite Rumsfeld moment. This was during the actual Iraq war.
Reporter: Excuse me Mister Secretary but could you tell us about this latest bombing.
Rumsfeld: No
Reporter: Are you refusing?
Rumsfeld: Yes
Reporter: Why?
Rumsfeld: Because I don't want to share that information.
Reporter: Do the Iraqis know about this bombing (what you bombed, where, etc.)?
Rumsfeld: Yes
Reporter: Does the Pentagon and the Coalition know about the bombing?
Rumsfeld: Yes
Reporter: So the only people you are keeping this bombing from is the American public?
Rumsfeld: That's true.
He was actually more of an ass than this, but this is a perfect example of "Democracy in Action."
It really looked for a second like sabadaba was going to stand up for him....Too bad, would have been fun.