Rumsfeld

[jimonica]

Re: Rumsfeld

I don't know. I guess I just have a tough time using or relating to the word "evil". Maybe its because "evil" really isn't in my vocabulary. Its not a word I use lightly. Not saying you do, but I save that word for just a few people. <br /> I know of a few people that I deal with on a day to day basis, that are so rotting and couldn't give a carp about anything or anybody but themselves, and if I really wanted to get philosophical about the word "evil", they would definately fall into that category. But, I'll save the label for the few mass murderers of the world. <br />Some confused kid that straps a bomb onto himself and blows himself up along with a half dozen people I'm not sure I would call evil. Stupid, naive and confused? Yes. But evil? Not sure.

 

[ob]

Re: Rumsfeld

I don't think it's the "blowing oneself up" that is being called evil , but the purposeful blowing up of others in the blowing up of oneself vicinity that sorta gets peoples goat so to speak.

 

[QC]

Re: Rumsfeld

Originally posted by jimonica:<br /> But, I'll save the label for the few mass murderers of the world.

This we totally agree on. The only discrepancy between us is that I believe that all murder is evil.<br /><br />I don't believe that Rumsfeld is a murderer any more than I would a local cop that takes a life to defend others . . . The kid in your example is definitely evil or evil doing. Brainwashed? Maybe? Terribly sad example? Yes. Still murder. If not labeled such aren't we in a small way enabling?<br /><br />BTW, this is actually the way that I would like to have all conversation with you. Seems like discussion and determining our differences. I dont' want to win . . .

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Rumsfeld

......I've been really big on Conservatives making up straw arguments lately.....Then is it fair to assume that you believe everything that is written by your fellow conservatives?...

Ouch, ouch, ouch....Please!, It's important to realize an honest transformation. Since the transformation was caused by the Republicans it would be more accurate to re-define Republicans. Let's not mistakingly re-define conservatism.<br />This administration is far from conservative to the point of being liberal.<br />As a conservative I abhor the fraud that has taken place.

 

[jimonica]

Re: Rumsfeld

Right again Skinnywater, there really isn't a whole lot that is conservative about this administration.<br /><br />BTW, I consider myself to be conservative when it come to spending money. I don't like spending unless I see a good return or benefit. We have to get something back for our efforts.

 

[CJY]

Re: Rumsfeld

FISH ON!

Much better OJ, that is what I have come to appreciate. <br /><br />

I was using "really bad people and really bad stuff" cause evil was getting jimonica's and CJY'S panties in a bunch.

You really should get your facts straight before posting such things. Although I could be incorrect, I do not believe I have ever once said anything to you regarding you using "evil" to describe our enemy. I remember the thread(s), and if I remember correctly, I defended jimonicas use of verbage after he came under attack by you. <br /><br />Regarding panties, ahhh, nevermind.

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Rumsfeld

but can anyone comment on Rumsfelds competancy with the war planing and execution or not? can any one explain the iraqi welders welding Iraqi scrap iron on US humvees and tankers when Donny was forewarned ?<br />we all saw it, all knew it yet they did it,<br /> cost a lot of good men and women.<br />cant say he is evil but I can say their blood is on his hands and he will never die with honour like the others.

 

[QC]

Re: Rumsfeld

CJY,<br /><br />You and jimonica are all that is really left of the gang 'O denial of evil <br /><br />No more lumping, that was careless on my part . . .

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Rumsfeld

lots of dribble, no answers on the Humvee thang. what is everyone scairt ?

 

[RubberFrog]

Re: Rumsfeld

I don't think anyone is scared, I just don't think their is any excuse to be had.

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Rumsfeld

so did incompetency send our young men and women into harms way with inadequate gear for the mission ?

 

[JasonJ]

Re: Rumsfeld

Rodbolt, I'll answer your question. Wars almost always end up being reactive, not proactive. In pretty much every war that has been waged, we go in, find flaws in equipment/training due to the enemy using new or different tactics, and we adapt that knowledge to future training/equipment. <br /><br />In this war, the powers that be thought we would just roll in, mop up the resistance, and declare "Mission Accomplished" and we would be heros. They didn't take into account that there would be resistance, and that the resistance would use low-tech but effective means to an end. It takes a long time for the military to "ramp up" for an action. Could there have been better knowledge that there would be the use of IEDs and that our boys would be killed in Humvees that are not as well armoured as our own personal Ford F150s? I suppose. <br /><br />What it boils down to is we went in with the arrogant attitude that it would be like the first Gulf War, easy and painless. We went in because it was thought that there needed to be action done to somebody, and pre-planning and actual intelligent tactical forethought was not part of what this administration is about.<br /><br />They sent armourless Humvees in because they didn't think it was necessary, plain and simple. And after this mess is over, we will have armoured Humvees for the next war, but the next war will be different and will expose another weakness, and we will have to yet again adapt to it, just like every war that had ever been fought...

 

[RubberFrog]

Re: Rumsfeld

Originally posted by QC:<br /> then we should gather up our hard fought for personal arms and march on DC.

You better check with JB first

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Rumsfeld

jasonJ<br /> WHO thought it would be quick and painless? I was there for the first one.<br /> who ya think trained the "insurgents" former FREEDOM FIGHTERS, in the art of asymetrical warfare ?<br /> but ya still, and no others will, answer the question.<br />ya all look like kabookie dancers in a bad play.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Rumsfeld

The reason why the Humvees made it to Irak is really a result of ignorance.The reason why they were not armored is because they were never meant to be. They were sent there because there are so many of them while at the same time there were not enough Bradley fighting vehicles,which really should have been sent there.Besides it is no fun in the non air-conditioned Bradleys when it is 100 degrees outside.<br />Jason ,your logic is really not very logical.After the marines in Lebanon,who had to deal with suicide bombers and RPGs.After Mogadishu and in spite of the experience of the Israeli army in Lebanon (freely shared with the American DIA)there is absolutely no excuse for the refusal to learn from past experience.I do not blame the army,but I do blame the arrogant armchair warriors like Rumsfeld for a lot of unneccessary casualties.These soldiers fell victim to arrogance,stubborness and ignorance of our current administration, which refused to listen to its own generals.

 

[ob]

Re: Rumsfeld

And that's just a side effect of this new type of surgical humanitarian war tactics that the US now engages in.Technically ,we don't need any tanks,humvees ,or ground pounders to fight an enemy.However,anything else is simply not humanitarian with respect to collateral damage or civilian casualties,if we can define who the innocent civilians are from the non uniformed resistance.It's a huge can of worms with no easy solution exacerbated by partisan politics,media frenzy,and a country becoming more and more divided.All while the world watches and scrutinizes.

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Rumsfeld

Rodbolt, if you want perfect, I suggest you move to another universe.<br /><br />Do you know why the brits had much less losses on d-day than the americans. It was because they planned everything very well. They had special equipment to take care of all the obsticles. They offered the same ideas to the Americans and they turned it down. So I guess you wanna hang those in charge too, eh?<br /><br />Hindsight is 20/20. There has never been a war fought that had enough soldiers and all the right equipment.<br /><br />Get over your hatred of Bush and take a honest look at how they handled the war.<br /><br />Bush's ratings have dropped cause a lot of bad things happened at one time. High gas prices, natural disasters, illegal immigration, etc. Alot of these he has little to no control over.<br /><br />And no I dont think he is perfect. I am really POed at him about border security.<br /><br />Ken

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Rumsfeld

The casualties were very low when those same unarmoured Humvees were in high gear. <br />The plan for a fast spearhead into the enemy was a good tactic. Even when we arrived in the citys.<br />Armour obviously isn't a factor when your Army is on the offensive. <br />Armour plateing seems to be a valuable accessory when you are in occupying/defensive/nation building mode.<br /><br />To bad we didn't keep those Humvees in high gear and rifle barrels hot. We would lose less men and kill more enemy.<br /><br />A couple of weeks ago the President said "we are at a turning point in the war in Iraq." Since April was the deadliest month since the start of it, I'm not sure what he means.<br />Maybe he's getting up prepared to fire up those Humvees and beat feet it back to Kuwait?

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Rumsfeld

High gas prices, natural disasters, illegal immigration, etc. Alot of these he has little to no control over.

He may not have control on the cause but he has control on the response. His numbers were sinking before the gas prices and Katrina.<br /><br />Remember that the administration has the benefit of 20/20 hindsight also.

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Rumsfeld

This dead horse deserves no further whackings.<br /><br />I only offer one concluding thought.<br /><br />Who would you have picked for the Presidency, and what would his/her response have been. Would it have been a better response, or just a different response?<br /><br />Vote accordingly.<br /><br />Ken