OK, why did they wait till today for Rumsfeld to step down? It might have helped them win some elections, keep control of the Senate. Was there some sort of gamble? If so many seats are lost...
Frankly I don't think Rumsfeld is the main problem. Go higher up the food chain. I blame Cheney the most and Bush second. I'm sure Rumsfeld make some crucial errors but I don't know that troop numbers is the main one. We just had no idea how to win the hearts and minds, no idea how to nation build. We build buildings real well, but to understand how a different culture thinks...
Who cares about Rumsfelds resignation! It's almost a shrug. What's done is done, and I don't see anyone in this administration being able to extricate us with a good situation on the ground. This is like changing make-up. Sorry. There's just too much ungly underneath for it to do any
good.
4 comments:
While there's plenty of blame that rightfully belongs to Bush and Cheney, Rumsfeld is hardly an innocent bystander. People who are in the know and who feel free to voice their concerns have been severely critical of the former SecDef. Honestly, have you ever seen such an array of high ranking military officers calling for his ouster? That must have been difficult.
It will be interesting to see how the Dems handle Congress. Impeachment of the president would be unwise, both in terms of politics and statesmanship. Instead you'll see a lot more oversight of the executive, which is their constitutional responsibility and something which has been lacking.
After holding both the White House and both parts of Congress for several years you must admit that the GOP had a very fair opportunity to prove itself. It failed, as simple as that. Now it's time to accept the decision of the American public and allow the other side have its turn. President Bush made some nice gestures of willingness to work with the Dems. We should too.
Hi Prof. Schenck, Mr. Moore and Jose: It is interesting that often people comment on this war in Iraq, now, in the negative, which is it seems to me an emotional, not a logical response, and here are my points on that:
1) Clearly in the months following 9/11 the U.S.A. backed the President's decision to pursue terrorists by military means.
2) Clearly the U.S.A. did not listen to the President when he told them three years ago, repeatedly, that this would be a protracted and lengthly war.
3) Clearly people aren't familiar with the classic text by Toffler "War and Anti-War" - Little Brown and Co. 1993, in which the experts on futurism explain that the only way to overcome terrorism is an all out assault on EVERY front- note that please, every front- and clearly the U.S.A. isn't doing this.
4) We now have a situation which is misrepresented by a media which is outgunned by the bloggers, but clearly, people aren't listening to what those bloggers are saying. Were they hearing clearly what the front line reporters in uniform were saying- I wonder if they'd continue to believe this war to be unwinnable?
So as you can see, I don't think it's political...hmm?
Dr. D.,
Thanks for sharpening the thoughts of us all. From my perspective, the Devil is in the details. For example, my position on Iraq has not mapped with American emotional opinion. In fact, somewhere in here I reject the right of most Americans to be too indignant with Bush right now since they re-elected him with such vigor when it was already clear to me at that time that he had made a huge mistake.
I supported our action in Afghanistan, so I am not coming from a pacifist position. And Craig's disagreement with Bush is quite significant since he has often disagreed strongly with me on Lebanon and such, so I think his thoughts here are especially significant, since more often than not he agrees with your position on how to fight terrorism.
The details of which I spoke are of course the fact that our attack on Iraq was not an attack on terrorism per se but a macro-plan to bring democracy to the Middle East and thus create a climate that would destroy terrorism from the inside out.
But it hasn't worked. Terrorism is much stronger in the world right now than it was before our invasion. Iraq is in a worse state than it was in under Saddam Hussein--it is now a spawning and training ground for terrorists.
You can't defeat these terrorists by force alone. It requires a massive PR campaign that they have consistently beat us at. We did the easy reconstruction--buildings. We needed to invest in the people.
I am not necessarily for immediate withdrawal. But I am at a great loss to know what we can do.
Dr. Schenck: Eloquently put, nothing is harder it seems than beating swords into plowshares? In the U.S. it seems to me there is a tendency to "over-politik", in that not all results are political. It is nice to see you note that in the U.S. we are capable of being naive when it comes to the media and our political leaders. My sense of the President's election to a second term wouldn't be vigorous, in point of statistics his opponent did fairly well considering the blitz's which were promulgated against him (that's another discussion for another time and place)and those which he just naturally brought upon himself, Bush's election was not a mandate, but rather a "hold your nose" and vote event? [strictly personal opinion there] NOW- to the meat of the matter - what if the solution to terrorism is in fact simple- but- also, horrible? America has always been an open nation, our borders have been established to bring in, not keep out, those who would come. My fear is that we are now changing into a nation which isn't welcoming "your poor, your tired, your huddled masses." rather we are becoming as Robin Williams says “The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying, "Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses." She's got a baseball bat and yelling, "You want a piece of me?"” Reference site We agree, you don't beat terrorism with massive infusions of troops - but we don't agree as to how you overcome it- my belief is you must overcome it with most dreaded of all situations- counter terrorism that is for real. You might remember a movie some years back - "Swordfish"? - But away from such dire stuff - let's remain positive and hopeful in the face of what is often overwhelmingly negative surroundings and say - Happy New Year - and may 2007 be our shining moment in history!
Post a Comment