Bush supports embattled Rumsfeld

**min0 lee** · 04-14-2006, 09:10 PM

By Tabassum Zakaria
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush expressed his full support for Donald Rumsfeld on Friday to counter rising calls led by retired generals for the defense secretary to quit over his handling of the Iraq war.
Six retired generals, some of whom led troops in Iraq, have spoken out against Rumsfeld in recent days, accusing him of arrogance, ignoring his field commanders, and micro-management. The calls come amid worsening sectarian violence in Iraq and slumping approval ratings for Bush. "Earlier today I spoke with Don Rumsfeld about ongoing military operations in the global war on terror. I reiterated my strong support for his leadership during this historic and challenging time for our nation," Bush said in a statement.

"Secretary Rumsfeld's energetic and steady leadership is exactly what is needed at this critical period. He has my full support and deepest appreciation," said Bush, who is at Camp David for the Easter weekend.
Rumsfeld dismissed the resignation calls in an interview with Al Arabiya television aired on Friday. "Out of thousands and thousands of admirals and generals, if every time two or three people disagreed we changed the secretary of defense of the United States it would be like a merry-go-round," he said.
Rumsfeld has previously said he twice offered his resignation to Bush during the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal in Iraq, but the president declined to accept it.
Bush's move to issue a statement backing a member of his Cabinet was highly unusual, as has been the open criticism by the retired high-ranking military officers. Asked why Bush felt the need to issue the statement, White House chief of staff Andy Card told Reuters: "The secretary of defense is being challenged and he is doing a great job, and the president said he is doing a great job.

Bush's own job approval ratings have slid to around the lows of his presidency, partly due to growing public doubts about the Iraq war, in which about 2,360 U.S. troops have died.
Bush said Rumsfeld had been given "many difficult missions" including to modernize the military, and "that kind of change is hard."
Critics have accused Rumsfeld of bullying senior military officers and disregarding their views. They often cite his dismissal of then-Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki's opinion a month before the 2003 invasion that occupying Iraq could require several hundred thousand troops, a larger force than was sent. Bush, who has repeatedly said any decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq would be made based on the assessment of military commanders on the ground, said he had witnessed Rumsfeld taking into account the views of the commanders.

"I have seen first-hand how Don relies upon our military commanders in the field and at the Pentagon to make decisions about how best to complete these missions," he said.
Bush has given a series of speeches in recent weeks seeking to explain his administration's strategy on Iraq and convince Americans that the war was justified.
Democrats, who are trying to seize control of Congress from Republicans in a midterm election year, compared Bush supporting Rumsfeld to the president's initial praise for Michael Brown. The former head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency stepped down after harsh criticism over the government's handling of the Hurricane Katrina disaster.
"President Bush's refusal to recognize that it's time to make a change and fire Secretary Rumsfeld is symptomatic of his administration's incompetent and failed leadership," Karen Finney, Democratic National Committee spokeswoman, said. Janis Karpinski, a former Army Reserve general who commanded the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and was punished for the prisoner abuse scandal, said the retired generals were able to openly voice concerns while officers still serving may be afraid to risk their jobs if they speak out.

**min0 lee** · 04-14-2006, 09:11 PM

The retired generals' unease over Rumsfeld could be linked to concerns the Bush administration is considering military action in Iran, Karpinski said in a telephone interview. "'Stop this insanity' seems to be the underlying message," she said.

The Bush administration has said it prefers diplomacy to resolve the dispute over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

**Big Smoothy** · 04-15-2006, 08:42 AM

I just have read several article written in February of 2003.

Unbelievable statements.

Google: Gen. Shinseki. (who was forced to retire after telling lifelong civilian bureaucrat Pau Wolfawitz that the military would need more troops).

I say: keep Rummy.

He's an out-of-touch, 73 year old man.

Baby-Bush has 2 years and 7 months left.

There is no bottom to the pile of quicksand Baby Bush, Rummy, and the Neo-cons are in.

I say: keep the buffoon!

**Trouble** · 04-15-2006, 09:21 AM

Why You had better be asking...how the hell we are going to pay for this war?

The tax base is eroding. The social costs of supporting an burgeoning retiree demographic - one that is not in good physical shape and has not saved much money for retirement, and is used to living well - is growing.

Our manufacturing base (which has never paid its fair share of taxes anyway) is defunct, and gone over seas, where labor is cheap and regulations sparse.

Can a flimsy service economy really support us? What about high tech...why has it been allowed to languish? Well, part of the problem is that industry, it doesn't exactly pay for high tech innovation, it would rather reap the unpaid for rewards from publically supported R&D. As those funds get cut, the innovation edge that formerly marked the US as the technical master of the first world nations, has also eroded.

Note that industry doesn't care about fosering a highly educated workforce - it can hire what it needs - again, from overseas sources in India, China, Koream, for cheap. Get an advanced degree in engineering and science? Why bother? Industry doesn't value it, you're too expensive.

Wrong fucking mentality there. You're making your workforce obsolete at both ends...you bring in immigrants for the low skills jobs AND the high skill jobs. How are your going to keep your domestic workforce employed and paying those tax dollars?

The Federal workforce is aged, and not exactly led by a stellar middle and upper management (somewhere along the last 30 yrs, it became typical to hire poorly qualified and trained inDUHviduals into higher positions from within agencies, rather than from outside). Worse, many agencies program infrastructure was gutted in the last 20 yrs, as cost cutting became imparative to fix the LAST large deficit (which was tiny in comparison to the present one).

We got rule by the rich - the Pres and VP are fucking wealthy, and don't give a rats ass, along with the wealthy aristocracy of Congress, whether the country is in shitty economic shape or not. They'll do their time in their jobs, retire with FULL FUCKING BENEFITS the rest of us will never see, and never get fingered with blame. Heck, they were just doing their jobs right?

After all, they're get their little monetary headpats from special interests, in return for pork barrel projects, right?

Anybody take a long look at what got funded, alongside the money earmarked for Hurricane Katrina relief funds?

Make you think twice about whats actually happening on Capitol Hill.

Yes it does. Bottom line: its very easy to justify starting a war. How you end it, how you make your exit, thats the rub.

America is asleep at the wheel.

**min0 lee** · 04-15-2006, 09:43 AM

Welcome aboard Trouble.

**Trouble** · 04-15-2006, 10:50 AM

Oh, I've been here for a month. Mostly posting helpful comments.

On occasion a chat topic catches my eye. This is one of them. The retired generals are really worried, as you point about, about the saber rattling centered on Iran. We're spread thin between the 230 peacekeeping missions, and active battles in the ME. Can't really afford (logistically) to be in Iran. And, Putin and others need a chance to settle the nuclear power issue using regular diplomatic methods first, before the US considers active use of force.

Its a dangerous game to play.

Know what bothers me most?

US DOD doesn't even stop to consider the long term consequences of its actions, just as NSA hasn't considered the consequences of manipulating politics by placing so-called sympathetic dictators (some 53, at last count, in the past 40 yrs) into various small country (politcal nooks and crannies in every region of the world) as part of the cold war chess. Thats political and economic domination and control, with respect to divvying up extant natural resource access and military might positioning (active bases). No wonder we got extremists coming out of the woodwork in every geopolitical region.

Again, an ill-considered policy that has cost us big, big money. Now we got a military that is not conscripting yet, but its locked its troops into high stress situations, and is doing a damn shitty job of helping the troops deal with debilitating stress. Its covered up, and like Korea and 'Nam, its gonna leave us with a generation or two of seriously fucked up ex soldiers.

You'd think with all of the advances in neuroscience in the last 40 yrs, we'd have a better handle on helping troops deal with prolonged periods of chronic and acute stress. Hell, it *should* be a top priority. But no, these kids and their older lifer reserve officers and specialists, they're considered expendible.

Nobody held culpable, thats the rub.

We're stuck in thinking....short-term, short time turnaround.

**min0 lee** · 04-15-2006, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Trouble

Oh, I've been here for a month. Mostly posting helpful comments.

Oh I know, I also saw your post about Detroit and it was right on point.

Are you a male or female?

**Trouble** · 04-15-2006, 11:01 AM

Does gender matter here, really?

I don't have a gender perspective in my comments. What I do have is hard core realist view, and the outlook ain't pretty, from where I sit.

**min0 lee** · 04-15-2006, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Trouble

Does gender matter here, really?

I don't have a gender perspective in my comments. What I do have is hard core realist view, and the outlook ain't pretty, from where I sit.

No, no,I agree 100%.

Just wondering, I get asked all the time the same question. "Hey Min0 are you a man or a woman" ....or if it's about race issues "Hey min0! are you black or are you white"

**Bazooka Tooth** · 04-15-2006, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by Trouble

Does gender matter here, really?

I don't have a gender perspective in my comments. What I do have is hard core realist view, and the outlook ain't pretty, from where I sit.

I dont think Mino was asking because it mattered, I think Mino was just curious....making small talk...this is a msg board after all....

Didnt mean to sound like a dick there in case I did, just saying

**BigDyl** · 04-15-2006, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by Bazooka Tooth

I dont think Mino was asking because it mattered, I think Mino was just curious....making small talk...this is a msg board after all....

Didnt mean to sound like a dick there in case I did, just saying

**Bazooka Tooth** · 04-15-2006, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by BigDyl

if I am banned IM TAKING YOU DOWN WITH ME!

**min0 lee** · 04-15-2006, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by Bazooka Tooth

I dont think Mino was asking because it mattered, I think Mino was just curious....making small talk...this is a msg board after all....

Didnt mean to sound like a dick there in case I did, just saying

No harm no foul.

I do happen to agree with it. That's one of the reasons I don't tell anyone my gender or race.

People tend to judge you by whats outside instead of whats inside.

**Bazooka Tooth** · 04-15-2006, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

No harm no foul.

I do agree with her.

So Trouble is a her?

lol jk

I know, I didnt mean to sound like an ass, I just noticed that you asked a simple question and got a complex answer back that sounded a little rude...but perhaps not...?

ahhh well, my fault

**min0 lee** · 04-15-2006, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by Bazooka Tooth

So Trouble is a her?

lol jk

I know, I didnt mean to sound like an ass, I just noticed that you asked a simple question and got a complex answer back that sounded a little rude...but perhaps not...?

ahhh well, my fault

I made a mistake, it never gave me an answer.

Another "it" at IM.....

"There can only be one"...Highlander.

**min0 lee** · 04-15-2006, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Bazooka Tooth

So Trouble is a her?

lol jk

I know, I didnt mean to sound like an ass, I just noticed that you asked a simple question and got a complex answer back that sounded a little rude...but perhaps not...?

ahhh well, my fault

No fault in that but thanks.

**Bazooka Tooth** · 04-15-2006, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

No fault in that but thanks.

NP, me and Trouble are talking right now using PM's, but basically here is my outlook...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble
Min asked a simple question and got a simple answer.

You must not have been reading my posts here. A technical response might be complex. A chat board response is pretty simple by comparison.

'Course, a click and glance at my members photos would have answered the question right quick.

Min asked a *loaded* question, which is why he/she stays away from answering it in public when asked.

See my point?

~S

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I suppose, I guess I never realized people looked at gender as a major importance when it comes to taking the person serious or not....

I am not the type of person to put a lot of weight on someone's gender, I suppose I also responded the way I did because I was also curious, just because I like to know who I am talking to, to have a little more knowledge of the person, feels more like a person to person discussion rather than computer to computer discussion if you understand who you are talking to...

I like to meet new people on here, and part of getting to know them is simply asking the basic questions such as age and gender....Not because it matters to your posts, but because its an easy way to make a friend and to know where your boundaries are as far as saying things about race, sex, and age.

**Big Smoothy** · 04-16-2006, 01:12 AM

Originally Posted by Trouble

Why You had better be asking...how the hell we are going to pay for this war?

The Iraq war alone is costing $200 million dollars per day.

This is a fact.

And, great poste trouble. The Americans will have to start paying a lot more taxes. There is no way around it as boomers hit the hospital, prescription medicine, and old folks' homes.

**TJ Cline** · 04-16-2006, 01:20 AM

Originally Posted by Trouble

Our manufacturing base (which has never paid its fair share of taxes anyway)

**Big Smoothy** · 04-16-2006, 01:24 AM

^ The manufacturing base is largely gone now.

Overseas.

**TJ Cline** · 04-16-2006, 01:31 AM

Originally Posted by Mr_Snafu

^ The manufacturing base is largely gone now.

Overseas.

I grew up in Michigan and saw that 20+ years ago son.

**Big Smoothy** · 04-16-2006, 08:21 AM

^ That's what I said.

The manufacturing base is already gone.

Thread: Bush supports embattled Rumsfeld

Thread Tools

Display

Bush supports embattled Rumsfeld

Similar Threads

Fish Oil Supports Muscle Recovery

Carnipure Supports Muscle Recovery

George Bush got memos from Rumsfeld that used Scripture to push Iraq war

Rumsfeld to step down

Who supports the atomic bombing of Japan

Posting Permissions