Re: Rumsfeld Was Right

On May 3, 10:12 pm, Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon_...@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Fri, 02 May 2008 18:37:36 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
On Fri, 02 May 2008 02:52:54 -0300, Curly Surmudgeon
<CurlySurmudgeon_...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

The major policy pushed by Bush's first Secretary of War, Donald Rumsfeld
was a new style of warefare effected by lightning attacks by small units
supported by in integrated air strike, artillery, and command.

And it worked pretty well too, even though his revamping was barely begun
when Bush elected to invade Iraq.  The problem was mission creep.

Along the way "Capturing Saddam" morphed into "stabilization" then into
nation building.  The fault wasn't Rumsfeld's but a political failure of
both the legislative and executive branches.

Many of those in the legislative branch have been thrown out by various
means but the executive remains.  Let's put responsibility where it
belongs, in the White House.

How long are the Republicans going to engage in denial?

Rumsfeld wrote a memo back when telling Bush we should start disengaging..
He was ignored.  Just at the end he wrote a stronger memo with the same
advice.  He was fired for his efforts.  Just like a lot of generals I
might add.

Yes, I've lost count of the generals put to pasture for giving
professional advice to Bush.

That's how it is. You would have bitched long and loudly had those
generals refused Civilian command. Either way, you just like to bitch
and moan.

Iraq is a disaster of biblical proportions.  What happens when Iran eats
the Shiia section of Iran and garners their oil wealth?

Iran will mine oild and sell it.

This is precisely why Bush41 allowed Saddam to remain, to keep the
Iranians from taking over the center of the most productive oil real
estate on earth.

But, but, but that's why Saddam took Kuwait... he wasn't on the
richest most productive oil real estate on earth. Sheesh!

Incredibly stupid man and administration.

-- Regards, Curly

AS IF you could have done better.
.

Relevant Pages