Slashdot Mirror


Rumsfeld Stepping Down

macinrack writes to tell us that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, architect of the unpopular war in Iraq, intends to resign after six stormy years at the Pentagon. Officials said Robert Gates, former head of the CIA, would replace Rumsfeld.

11 of 899 comments (clear)

  1. Sore loser by gorehog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure sure, run away just as we get the chance to ask some real questions.

    Seems to me like he's just trying to hide. Cut and run.

    Fact is, he'll still have to answer subpeonas.

    1. Re:Sore loser by GrayCalx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seems to me like he's just trying to hide. Cut and run.

      Definitely could be... but since he's tried to resign twice now and been told by Bush he couldn't, it doesn't seem like a huge surprise that he finally did. Seems like a lot of people forget the times when he tried to leave.

  2. Re:Good at war, bad at peace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That strategy being bomb key locations (and some not-so-key ones just to be safe), then declare victory? I've seen Risk games with more strategy than that. WWII had strategy, this was barely practice for a real war.

  3. Which war are you talking about? by Alphager · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which war did Rumsfeld help win? Afghanistan? The Taliban are retaking cities everyday. Iraq? You know that more US soldiers died after the declaration of "victory" than during the so called "war" ?

  4. Re:Good at war, bad at peace by antv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To be honest, his strategy for initially winning the war was really damn good. He is honestly a man I would want leading out troops in a traditional war. (minus the body armor stupidity...)


    His strategy for war was mediocre at best. Rumsfeld was lucky enough to fight a war against a country 10 times smallert than USA (25 mil vs 300 mil population), with 20 times less money, 50 smaller army and weapons from 1980. In a traditional war you want competent people like Gen. Zinni and Gen. Shinseki, who were fired by Rumsfeld for, well, accurately predicting current disaster in Iraq.

    --
    Obama 2012: our incompetent asshole is slightly less of an incompetent asshole than the other incompetent asshole !
  5. The sad thing is... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This happens only after Republican blood was spilled in the election. The blood of thousands of soldiers spilled on the battlefield didn't count for squat.

    1. Re:The sad thing is... by deepestblue · · Score: 5, Insightful
      OK, this fucking pisses me off.

      What about the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians?

  6. Re:Good at war, bad at peace by xENoLocO · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What war?

    I don't recall any declarations of war...

    --
    "The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
  7. Why Flamebait? by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure sure, run away just as we get the chance to ask some real questions.
    Seems to me like he's just trying to hide. Cut and run.
    Fact is, he'll still have to answer subpeonas.

    I agree, to a point, the timing to coincide with the GOP losses indicate, more than regret that his execution of Iraqi Freedom, but an attempt to duck a real grilling. He won't have a lot of people running interference for him now. This is going to really isolate Bush. It should be a very interesting 2 years.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  8. Re:Good at war, bad at peace by MouseR · · Score: 5, Insightful

    6.5 years ago, the entire world was telling the US there was no cause of warring on Iraq. There was no plausible link w/ 9/11, no WMDs to be found, no threat whatsoever.

    When US did invade and then finally conceded there were no WMDs, the entire world went "told you so" while the US poked their ear drums going "Lalalalalala".

    The obvious answer today was as obvious for the rest of the world back then.

    But every time an outsider brings it up, it's "you're not with us you're against us" kinda crap. The US citizens were BS-ed out of reason into accepting this early on and now comes the time for the Bush family and their friends to account for what they did.

    It's going to be a tough time for Gates to fix the situation. Let's hope his Iran/Contra dealings gave him enough experience...

  9. Grunts Killed by People in Authority by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Most of us are familiar with the notion of losing your job due to the actions of your manager or those who are higher in the chain of command. For example, if the CEO (like the idiot at Ford) makes a poor decision to invest the entire company's fortunes in a failed product line (e.g., sport-utility vehicles at Ford), then the grunt at the bottom will be the first person to pay the price of the poor decision. He will lose his job in a layoff.

    Consider the equivalent situation in politics. According to several in-depth reports (notably from "Frontline" at PBS), Donald Rumsfeld and the rest of the White House (with the exception of Colin Powell) completely screwed up the post-war occupation of Iraq. Rumsfeld himself intervened in several important decisions and overruled the suggestions of senior commanders in the field.

    Who pays the price? Nearly 3000 American soldiers died, and 50,000 soldiers are wounded.

    Though Rumsfeld was fired today, he will still live well on his multi-million-dollar corporate pension. Yet, how will we restore the lives of 3000 dead soldiers and 50,000 severely wounded soldiers?