Is it time for Rumsfeld to go?

[satellite66]

Don the same kind of thinking that lost your war is being used by your side for this war. Did you not learn anything? The difference is that the No Viets did not follow us home. Do you think that the terrorists will not either?

[strangelove]

Don has made some really good points, while satalite really has nothing interesting to say. If you have nothing to say pro or con about Donald Rumsfeld then keep your party politics out of this thread. This thread asked the question is it time for Rumsfeld to go?

[quicksilverdon]

quote:Originally posted by satellite66

Don the same kind of thinking that lost your war is being used by your side for this war. Did you not learn anything? The difference is that the No Viets did not follow us home. Do you think that the terrorists will not either?

Wrong. THe same kind of empty promises Nixon gave ("peace with honor") are being spouted now. We could've left at Nixon's first term with the same results.
Terrorists are coming across the Mexican border now. We need to get our troops out of the crosshairs of snipers - keep some in Iraq in bases, move others to Afghanistan and take that back from the Taliban, ready to re-enter Iraq if Iraq goes totally in the crapper, but by and large, let the Iraqis duke it out. We wanted democracy in Iraq, right? Well, the vast majority of Iraqis want us out - or don't you believe that fact, either?
We didn't win in Vietnam for the same reason we're not winning in Iraq - the majority of the people don't support us being there. If the majority of people wanted us there, and cooperated with us, the insurgency would die down - but they'll let our troos drive into an ambush and not say a word...

[satellite66]

We lost in Vietnam because the liberal media and the left failed to support the effort or the troops. Cronkite showed his bias and called it a no win. The difference between then and now is that the media is not a liberal monopoly as it was.
You blame Nixon but it was your beloved dems that got us into and then failed to support the effort in Vietnam.

[strangelove]

You keep saying Dems this Democrats this, but what do you really mean. Last I heard Democrates and Republicans were on the same side. It's Al Qaeda and Taliban who are the sworn enemies of America. If you would quit criticising your own team, maybee we could work together and get things done in Iraq, and get to the real business of things and go after the real terrorists that are hiding in the mountians of Afganistan and Pakistan.

[quicksilverdon]

quote:Originally posted by satellite66

The difference between then and now is that the media is not a liberal monopoly as it was.

Wow! That contradicts just about every one of your other posts - I'm gonna report you to the RNCC - the "Liberal Media" myth is a cornerstone of the BS barrage...

[calicranberry]

quote:Originally posted by strangelove

Don has made some really good points, while satalite really has nothing interesting to say. If you have nothing to say pro or con about Donald Rumsfeld then keep your party politics out of this thread. This thread asked the question is it time for Rumsfeld to go?

i agree. QSD has made many great points, without going down the "its all the other sides fault" road. try thinking for yourself and decide what is best, rather than spew rhetoric.

other thoughts and questions....

what is the point of being an american and living in freedom if you are not free?

why are we not invading countries that really do have wmds, or at least leaders that are working on them (i'm speaking of iran and north korea)?

i posted on another thread that ronald reagan is rolling in his grave, so are the fathers of our country.

as for rummy. he should have gone a long time ago. what has he done right since the invasion and the bold "mission accomplished" speech? more US people have died there than as a result of 9/11, (along with an undisclosed number of iraqis) and for what? we are not safer now, we are breeding a new generation of terrorists and people that hate america. want to be safer? invest the money we spent in iraq in security here, like better airport screening, better port and cargo screening (instead of selling ports to potential enemies?), more pay for first responders, and more money for more first responders. maybe spend some creating a better terror fighting international intelligence system.

for those people that like to blame the past "left" governments the current situation, why not blame the right and bush senior for not finishing the job in iraq years ago. it should have become our 51st state then.

don't flame me as a liberal lefty. i just voted for arnold, and my governor can kick your governor's ass!

[strangelove]

The Aah-Noo-ladah will pump you up.

Yeah what happened to more port security, that could create more jobs and secure the ports of entry throughout the Country. Shouldn't the Homeland Security be doing something about that. You know what people will say though, "It will create a huge Government Bureaucracy." When what it sould really do is make things safer and create more jobs.

[quicksilverdon]

Apparently - Rummy resigned!! [^]
I'd like to see Colin Powell be asked, but I wouldn't blame him if he wouldn't take it.

[thegoldpt]

It was a good move.. Time for fresh ideas.. I do agree him going was a good move