Archive for category Rumsfeld
This is a question that must have been asked 12 years ago when the US invaded Iraq. Well the initial predictions were positive. The war will be quick, cheap, we will be hailed as liberators, there will be peace, so on and so forth. Of course none of that happened. They were dead wrong, but even me when I witnessed the reports of chaos in Iraq, I could not comprehend that this would happen. What is the worst that can happen? ISIS can happen. The relatively new Islamic terrorist group is different from other organizations because they are successful. They have the oil fields, they are surrounding Baghdad, they have both Iraqi and American weapons in their inventory and they are gaining more ground. This is made worse by their tendency to be very destructive. So far, over 1,700 Iraqi troops have been executed. So yes, that is the worst that can happen and the Bush administration is completely at fault no matter how indirectly this is. Maybe this is a question Obama should consider, especially with an upcoming midterm and a country filled with pissed off liberals.
Ed Kilgore has a good rant on Bush’s Toxic Legacy:
The mess in Iraq right now, along with the remarkably limited options for any constructive U.S. action to avoid humanitarian and political disaster, and the hostility of American public opinion to doing anything at all, provide fresh reminders that Barack Obama will leave office as he entered it: dealing with the unfinished business and toxic legacy of the George W. Bush administration. From Iraq, to Gitmo, to the NSA, to the housing sector, to the banking sector, to a completely fouled up non-system of campaign finance, to an out-of-control fossil fuel industry, to a long-range structural budget deficit, to a politicized judiciary, and to a radicalized Republican Party: the trouble never ends, and all created by a swaggering crew that inherited peace and prosperity and a budget surplus after the most dubious ascension to power in American history.
It’s worth pondering isn’t it?
Posted by Firmage Ed in 9/11, Abu Ghraib, Afghanistan, Biological Weapons, Bush Administration, Bush Failures, CIA, Civil liberties Infringement, Conservative, Crimes, Democracy, Democrats, Dick Cheney, Drone Strikes, George W. Bush, Guantanamo, Hezbollah, Human Rights, Iran, Iraq, Israel, John McCain, Liberal, Libertarianism, Mahdi Army, Mormon LDS, National Politics, nazis, Neocons, NSA Surveillance, Nuclear Weapons, Oliver North, Pakistan, Proof Bush Lied, Rumsfeld, Syria, Syria, Terrorism, This Blog, War Crimes on June 5, 2014
I’m so sorry to write this missive as a lead article (for 15 minutes) but I don’t remember how to find the comments and respond to them. The lonely little side-bar response to my article I’ve not seen, except for half a sentence. It seemed to be saying that the old days are gone now, and so we need NATO and the JN. I agree. With NATO, it is the trip-wire provision that we go to war, automatically if any NATO nation is attacked, regardless of who the attacker is. This takes not only the United States Congress, but the president, as Commander in Chief, from the decision to go to war. I support both the UN and, if handled correctly, NATO. But President J. Reuben Clark and I oppose the automatic going to war. Just like the fools, the ancient general staffs of all sides in WW I. No one wanted that war. There was no Adolph Hitler in that war that destroyed the entire 20th century. Better to have shot the general staffs, who came to deserve exactly that. What President Clark called for, and I, are what the United States has always done, before NATO. That is, to have treaties of peace and friendship with our allies and then, should hostilities commence, such treaties would call for all parties to go to war, or not, as their constitutions provide. In this way, we don’t declare war against a nation, and surely all the people, have not yet been born. How, pray tell, do we justify going to war against, and for, people not, or no longer, live on earth. With a few caveats, ditto for the UN. No provision of law allows the UN to overreach Congress in the decision for war or peace. For anyone interested, read my book with the late Francis Wormuth, To Cain the Dog of War. It is by odds the best book ever written on the way we go to war. Every single war we’ve ever fought, including our wars against the Indian tribes, is there analyzed. Francis did not live to see this book in print. I worked two years after his death to finish it. And I updated it 4 or 5 times, alone. I still put my dear friend’s name first, because I am honored to be linked, now, forever. Something like Mormon marriage through time and eternity. ed firmage xoxo
Former SecDef Donald Rumsfeld and former CENTCOM Commander General Tommy Franks
Via Think Progress. Through a Freedom of Information Act request, the George Washington University National Security Archive has obtained a newly declassified top secret document that details talking points that emerged from a meeting between Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and CENTCOM Commander General Tommy Franks on November 27, 2001.
Under a section titled “How start?” participants in the Rumsfeld-Frank meeting discussed possible ways to provoke a conflict with Iraq, including an attack by Saddam Hussein against the Kurdish north, the U.S. discovering a “Saddam connection” to 9/11 or the anthrax attacks, or a dispute over WMD inspections. It appears from the language of the talking points that the Bush administration had already decided to go to war with Iraq and was looking for an excuse to invade.
It’s up to historians to connect the dots. For example, the Bush administration’s torture regime was instituted because they were desperately trying to get detainees to say there was a connection between Saddam’s regime and al-Qaeda.
This headline may seem like all the others, but get a load of the details:
The Pentagon’s plan to fire ballistic missiles at terrorists isn’t just a nuclear Armageddon risk. It’s a ludicrously expensive way to accidentally start World War III: each weapon could cost anywhere from a few hundred million to $1 billion.
Not surprisingly, this is a Donald Rumsfeld idea. Surprisingly, the Obama administration wants to move ahead with it.
Randy Newman said it better than any politician:
UPDATE: Rachel Maddow highlights a cheaper alternative missile system that terrorists can afford.
For many months after leaving Washington DC in disgrace, former President Bush refrained from public statements. Now he’s speaking out, reminding us of his administration’s multiple catastrophes.
Via Think Progress:
Eight years ago, President Bush asserted with great bravado that al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden would be taken “dead or alive.” “I don’t care, dead or alive — either way,” Bush said at the time. This weekend, while attending a conference of business leaders in New Delhi, India, Bush struck a different tone:
Asked whether al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden could be alive, Bush said “I guess he is not dead.”
He, however, noted that Laden is hiding and “not leading victory parades” or “espousing his cause” on TV.
He expressed confidence that Laden will be brought to justice which “he deserves to be” and it was a matter of time.
After failing to make good on his threat, Bush now says it’s enough that bin Laden is off TV. Which he is, sort of. The al-Qaeda leader’s last known videotape was aired in September 2007, and his most recent audiotape was in September 2009.
Sadly, U.S. intelligence seems to know nothing more about Osama bin Laden than what Donald Rumsfeld told us in 2002: “He’s alive or dead. He’s in Afghanistan or somewhere else.”
During her recent visit to Pakistan, Secretary of State Clinton made an interesting statement about the al-Qaeda leadership:
“I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn’t get them if they really wanted to,” Clinton said in an interview with Pakistani journalists in Lahore. “Maybe that’s the case. Maybe they’re not gettable. I don’t know.”
UPDATE: George W. Bush isn’t leading victory parades either, observes BarbinMD on DailyKos.
Thank you Desiree Fairoo, Medea Benjamin and Code Pink for your unflinching pursuit of justice and you guardianship of the highest American principles.
It is utterly surreal that any of the Bush administration, especially Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush are walking around free men. This is our national embarrassment.
All of them are directly responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis as well as the deaths of over 4000 American soldiers, victims of Iraqi terrorists fathers and sons protecting their homes and families.
The sickening, uncomfortable smile on Rummy’s face as he is confronted by these great Americans betrays the underlying truth that Rumsfeld remains a free man only by virtue of our collective national shock and the broken and still paralyzed culture of justice and law in the homeland.
Code Pink is become a great American institution producing brave heros of the peace movement on the order of the Tim DeChristopher.