Here’s a farewell Christmas song for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on his last day in the job — his “final throes,” as the Washington Post blogger puts it. Most think the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will be Rumsfeld’s legacy, though his efforts to transform the military for a post-Cold War mission were noble. Columnist Cal Thomas predicted on our pages this week that Rumsfeld’s “principled stand” against the enemy “will be proved right.”
Meanwhile, Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, the Army’s chief of staff, warned Thursday that the Army’s 507,000 active-duty soldiers “will break” under the stress of rotations and needs to expand by 7,000 or more soldiers a year.
Get to work, Secretary Gates.
As for Rumsfeld’s future: The best idea I’ve heard is “Dancing With the Stars.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JWink on Jail consultants straining patience
- Howserfan on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Mrage on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
32 Comments
Final throes of a beleagered dead-ender.
Cal Thomas, who didn’t fight in Vietnam, wants so badly to win this one this time so he can be “proven right.”
Trouble is, if we cut and run, his side will claim we didn’t fight long and hard enough (cf. Vietnam’s 10 years and 58,000 American dead). And if we sit and spin, we lose more soldiers and spend more money for nothing.
So Mr. Thomas gets to claim victory either way. No matter how it turns out, we coulda woulda shoulda done more . . .
I had recently watched an interview with Don Rumsfield, once again stating it was not he but the American people that did not have a clue. It was sad truly sad that he did not get the bigger picture he said we did not.Yes for us to lose with our tail between our legs would be the final blow in a good beating we have from the distraction from the real war on Terror. But all we can do is to slow down what will be another enemy state.We need to work on the damage to our standing in the region rather then to try and make a silk purse out of the sow’s ear that Iraq has become.
writerdog – I guess he is also saying the Baker commission also doesn’t have a clue. I notice today that Condi Rice is saying that we will mostly continue to stay the failed course.
Ahhhh, Rummie — we hardly knew ye.
Rummie, you big dummy!
Fred Sanford
no rm … we knew him all too well.
I did that just for you, Ben. :) Seriously, my friend!
“I notice today that Condi Rice is saying that we will mostly continue to stay the failed course.”
I heard on NPR that she is saying no direct talks with Syria or Iran. Is there more to it than that?
I read a pretty good article in Time this week that many, but none more than this administration, say they are not going to do something in terms of a foreign policy change as they are preparing to make the change they are denying. I wonder if we are setting up some 3rd party proxie to do the talking with Iran and Syria for us.
;^) rm …
Steven …
“Rice’s remarks indicated that, despite a maelstrom of criticism of Bush’s policies by outside experts and Democrats, the administration’s extensive review of policy in Iraq and the region will not yield major changes in its approach. Rice said that Bush could be “quite expansive” in terms of a policy review and that the new plan would be a “departure.” But the president will not radically change any of his long-term goals or commitment to Iraq, she said.
Indeed, Rice argued that the Middle East is being rearranged in ways that provide the United States with new opportunities, what she repeatedly called a “new strategic context.”"
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/12/15/wp-rice-rejects-overture-to-iran-syria/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.msnbc.msn.com%2Fid%2F16213163%2F
“Middle East is being rearranged”
Civil War in Iraq
Possible Civil War in Lebanon
Increased influence by Syria and Iran
Possible Saudi/Wahabi/alQuada involvement in Iraq
Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Exactly when has Condi Rice ever said anything that was not directly from George W. Bush’s mouth? Condi will never cross GWB. She will continue to flap her gums and get into everyone’s face and keep repeating the same old tired crap.
I think Condi Rice will do to her possible future the same thing that Colin Powell did – self-destruct.
Colin Powell will be on Face the Nation Sunday. Could be interesting.
Thanks for the heads up, Ben.
Gotta tivo that one.
Will he continue to shill for Bush even though they repaid his performance at the UN with a swift kick in the ass, or will some of Powell the decent human being re-emerge after getting absorbed by The Borg?
I’m thinking the “house negro” stays a “house negro,” but we’ll see . . .
More news tonight that the House of Saud is threatening to support the Summis in the Iraq civil war. Saud is the dource of the Wahabi who spawned alQuada and Osama bin Ladin.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Not content with the civil war we created in Iraq, Condi now directs her enegy to supporting Abbas with millions to beef up his military, in order to escalate the tensions and killings between the democratically elected Hammas, and Abbas (our guy).
He was a great Secretary of Defense. I’ll miss him!
Great Secretary of Dense.
too bad about Powell. He’s a great man, but he fell in with the wrong crowd.Give Condi credit. She works for Bush and she’s been a loyal trooper. What kind of people would you want working for you?
I loved watching Mr. Rumsfeld testify before Congress. He was the only person who could ask himself the questions and than answer them without taking a breath. What do they call a person who can do that? I will miss you too, Rummy.
Spyder,I would want people who are at least capable of abstract thought!
Indeed Tracy. I hope you’ll agree that a person doesn’t rise to Condi’s level without being capable of “abstract thought”. Like it or not, Condi is part of a team. In this particular case, being a team player means carrying the team banner.Condi may be one of the enemy, but she’s not stupid or incompetent. While I dislike the team she’s on, she has my respect for her accomplishments and ability.
PS: I haven’t seen any instance where the Bush administration has demonstrated respect for abstract or independent thought.
Agreed Spidie.That remark was more of an indictment of Bush.
Condi Rice is only doing the bidding of George W. Bush and that is her only thought and goal. If she had an independent thought, she would not be where she is – under George W. Bush at all times. She likes it there obviously.
Rumsfeld was his usual arrogant self, right to the last. In a way, he was a perfect fit with Mr. “I’m the Emperor-President!” Bush.
As to Cal Thomas, he never met a Conservative he thought was wrong, and if he had his way Rum-Dumb would still be in power.
sunny, i have people who work for me. When they’re on my time, I expect them to do my bidding. Working for George Bush may seem incomprehensible to you or me, but it doesn’t indicate independent thought or lack of it. IMHO, Condi has risen above a lot of hurdles to get where she is today, and she has my respect for it. Do I agree with her? No. But I find reason to respect a lot of people I may not like personally or agree with.
Thanks for the agreement, Tracy.I find your sense of humor…refreshing.
Yea Joe, he was great at personifying Bush’s FAILURES!
But smart employers respect employees that will tell them the truth and not just ‘yes men’. So what does that say about George W. Bush? Colin Powell tried to tell him and got his ass kicked out.
I know why Condi does what she does, I just have to wonder about the intelligence of her ‘employer’.
“If she had an independent thought, she would not be where she is – under George W. Bush at all times.”
I’m assuming you mean figuratively “under George W. Bush…”, right? ;)