The Buck Stops ... There.

POSTED BY: NewOldBrownCoat
UPDATED: Monday, November 6, 2006 05:06
VIEWED: 4508
PAGE 5 of 5

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5

SIGNYM

Saturday, November 4, 2006 3:48 PM

In fact, things are going SO well that

Army Times to call for Rumsfeld's resignation

Quote:
(CNN) -- An editorial to be published Monday in independent publications that serve the four main branches of the U.S. military will call for President Bush to replace Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

"Basically, the editorial says, it's clear now, from some of the public statements that military leaders are making, that he's lost the support and respect of the military leadership," said Robert Hodierne, senior managing editor for the publications' parent company Army Times Publications. "That they're starting to go public with that now, with their disagreements, added up with all of the other missteps we believe he's made, that it's time for him to be replaced," Hodierne.

Army Times Publications publishes the Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and the Marine Corps Times.

It is the second time the publications have called for Rumsfeld to resign. In May 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal broke, an Army Times editorial said, "This was not just a failure of leadership at the local command level. This was a failure that ran straight to the top. Accountability here is essential, even if that means relieving top leaders from duty in a time of war."

You can hardly call the Army Times a "mainstream" publication. So it seems that based on negative reports from officers in Iraq, statements from Maliki and the fact that all Iraq War candidates are anti-war, you have to acknowledge that at least SOME aspects of the Iraq Occupation aren't entirely positive.

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

CARTOON

Saturday, November 4, 2006 4:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
What I've heard (and read) is about 50/50.

Thank you.

I can't confirm or deny that. I haven't seen any precise accounting of overall sentiment from the troops. I can only speak about that which I'd seen or heard myself.

One of those who I had a chance to speak with (who I'd met along with his wife), ininitally (and only quite casually) mentioned that he'd been in the service. I inquired where he had served, and he stated that he'd served in Iraq. My next question was, "How was it?" The first words out of his mouth were, "Not at all like what you see on the news." When I asked him what he meant, he ellaborated on how the morale (at least of those he worked with) was high, that they (the Americans) were appreciated by the Iraqi's they had contact with, and how there was far more positive results from their presence, than negative -- and a whole world of difference from what is being portrayed in the media.

That's one example of those to whom I'd spoken personally.

Of those I haven't spoken to personally, but have heard or seen on TV or radio (or read in accounts by the soldiers on the internet), I haven't yet seen one who complained. I'm not saying they don't exist (nor in what numbers they exist), but I haven't seen them.

On an almost daily basis I hear former soldiers who served in Iraq phoning into nationally syndicated radio programs, complaining about the media coverage of the war. I've also often heard relatives (spouses or parents) of currently-serving soldiers phoning in to express their son's complaints to them about how the media (and Democrats, in particular) are portraying their actions there.

I've also seen a multitude of parents who've lost sons in Iraq upset not with the President or the war, but with the Democrats and the media -- the big (and only) exception to this (which I've seen) is Sheehan. (And that leads me to wonder why the media has latched onto her as their sweetheart, while it is basically ignoring the droves of parents who disagree with her -- who, if not for radio, would never get a voice in the media, stating quite the opposite of Sheehan's views.)

That's what I've seen. And it, in no way corresponds to what I'm seeing in the media, or hearing from the Democrats in Congress.

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
OF course he's biased. It would be completely impossible for him to say anything other than what he said.

He may or may not be. Don't assume that simply because Talibani is the president, he can't portray his nation's status in a negative light (if that were the case). Churchill didn't rose-color the situation of the British in 1940. To the contrary, he plainly stated the huge struggle that was ahead, and that as daunting as it seemed at the time, that they would prevail. I haven't heard Talibani express anything of this sort.

Naturally, everything isn't coming up roses in Iraq. It isn't coming up roses anywhere in the world. Every place has its problems -- some more so than others.

The bad things going on in Iraq now are being perpetrated (from what I can determine) by two groups of people.

Group 1 consists of those of various ethnicities against their fellow Iraqi's of a different ethnicity (Sunni vs Shiite, Shiite vs Sunni)--(much like what happened when Yugoslavia broke up after the death of Tito) -- a lot of internal jealousy and hatred, because Sadam used to enforce their "getting along", and now that they don't have to peacefully co-exist anymore, they want to destroy each other (Mountbatten didn't have an easy time of it when India/Pakistan gained their independence in 1947, either -- trying to keep them from annhiliating each other -- and look how many decades later, there's still conflict in that part of the world.)

Group 2 consists of terrorists (mostly who've come into Iraq from abroad) because they realize what a free and democrat Iraq will mean to the viability and vitality of their organizations in that part of the world. They

DREAMTROVE

Monday, November 6, 2006 5:06 AM

Auraptor,

You're passing the buck. You should really give up on these guys, they're not worth it.

The generals in the field are much more in tune with the situation with one or two exceptions:
Janice Karpinsky and Geoffrey Miller.

But Rummy is not the main problem. Cheney, Perle Wolfowitz and co are all worse problems.

But in this administration, the buck truly does stop nowhere

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5