Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News > "Oops. I thought I are smart": Rumsfeld
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Thread: "Oops. I thought I are smart": Rumsfeld Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Mar 31st, 2003 04:58 PM
mburbank Vince, instead of atttacking poster personally, why not weigh in on the topic. What do you think of Rumsfeld's war plan so far? Should we have had more ground troops? Should we have weighted until troops originally intended to enter from the North made it to other points? Are our supply lines stretched too thin?

Qualified or not, Rumsfled has long been a proponent of Military 'tranformation' to rapid response. Wht do you think so far? Is this a good nstrategy or not?
Mar 30th, 2003 06:44 PM
AChimp Sorry, I must have been having sex at the time.
Mar 30th, 2003 06:36 PM
VinceZeb Woah, I love how you are shown how much of a moron you are and then don't admit it when you were so wrong!
Mar 30th, 2003 04:31 PM
AChimp Whoa! An aviator! No wonder he's relying heavily on bombardment from 1000 miles away and other flying contraptions.

Maybe he was expecting the troops who were supposed to travel through Turkey to sprout wings and fly there.
Mar 30th, 2003 04:25 PM
VinceZeb http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/rumsfeld-bio.html
Mar 30th, 2003 02:15 PM
AChimp Well, going by recent information:

Ranxer's credentials: none
Rumsfeld's credentials: none
Mar 30th, 2003 01:52 PM
VinceZeb ranxer, listen to yourself.

We started the war then because we had credible evidence that Saddam and generals were meeting in a certain area. The fact that we could curtail our whole war on that little bit of information and start it was truly awesome and shows why our military is Super Cool #1.

I also have no respect for the intelligence of someone that has his cute little capitalist American flag covered with symbols of companies and the big bad police state solider. What kind of point are you trying to prove? Democracy in of itself is nice, but is flawed because 51% of the people can fuck over the other 49%. Especially in our 30 second attention span society, people vote with their feelings not with their brains.

Oh yes ranxer, I would like to compare Rumsfeld's credentials as to yours about military planning and strategy. And how would YOU handle it, since you are so full vital knowledge that the world should know.
Mar 30th, 2003 01:22 PM
ranxer the chickenhawks are relying on the military to fix thier screw ups..

like my sign at the protest in my town read: 'Faith in the Troops / NO FAITH in the Bush Regime'

the military is full of professionals doing thier damnedest to keep thier asses from getting shot which is exactly what the bush schmucks wanted. others fighting for them and taking the spotlight off the bushfucks. the bush regime is a criminal regime in soooo many ways and the ways keep adding up. has anyone noticed that the bushcrook is more scripted now? i'm amazed it's taken them this long to shut up that simpletons ad lib bull crap. i have NO simpathy for the Republicants anymore.

geeze, they even started the war on a full moon, not to mention a holy week for some of the folks they wanted to revolt on saddam.

pathetic
Mar 30th, 2003 12:30 PM
AChimp Well, the point is certainly not contained in the last sentence like you seem to have inferred.

Why has Rumsfeld ignored the advice of people with real military experience? He himself has none.
Mar 30th, 2003 12:10 PM
Ronnie Raygun The U.S. has planned all along to send extra troops to Iraq as the conflict progressed.

What's the point?
Mar 30th, 2003 11:44 AM
AChimp
"Oops. I thought I are smart": Rumsfeld

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Mar29.html

Report: Rumseld Ignored Pentagon Advice on Iraq



Reuters
Saturday, March 29, 2003; 5:33 PM



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly rejected advice from Pentagon planners that substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in Iraq, New Yorker Magazine reported.

In an article for its April 7 edition, which goes on sale on Monday, the weekly said Rumsfeld insisted at least six times in the run-up to the conflict that the proposed number of ground troops be sharply reduced and got his way.

"He thought he knew better. He was the decision-maker at every turn," the article quoted an unidentified senior Pentagon planner as saying. "This is the mess Rummy put himself in because he didn't want a heavy footprint on the ground."

It also said Rumsfeld had overruled advice from war commander Gen. Tommy Franks to delay the invasion until troops denied access through Turkey could be brought in by another route and miscalculated the level of Iraqi resistance.

"They've got no resources. He was so focused on proving his point -- that the Iraqis were going to fall apart," the article, by veteran journalist Seymour Hersh, cited an unnamed former high-level intelligence official as saying.

A spokesman at the Pentagon declined to comment on the article.

Rumsfeld is known to have a difficult relationship with the Army's upper echelons while he commands strong loyalty from U.S. special operations forces, a key component in the war.

He has insisted the invasion has made good progress since it was launched 10 days ago, with some ground troops 50 miles from the capital, despite unexpected guerrilla-style attacks on long supply lines from Kuwait.

Hersh, however, quoted the former intelligence official as saying the war was now a stalemate.

Much of the supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles has been expended, aircraft carriers were going to run out of precision guided bombs and there were serious maintenance problems with tanks, armored vehicles and other equipment, the article said.

"The only hope is that they can hold out until reinforcements arrive," the former official said.

The article quoted the senior planner as saying Rumsfeld had wanted to "do the war on the cheap" and believed that precision bombing would bring victory.

Some 125,000 U.S. and British troops are now in Iraq. U.S. officials on Thursday said they planned to bring in another 100,000 U.S. soldiers by the end of April.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:02 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.