Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

GWB says he listens to his generals on the ground. Yeah right!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Tim4319 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:40 AM
Original message
GWB says he listens to his generals on the ground. Yeah right!
If he listens to his generals so much, how come Donald Rumsfeld still has a job? But, as you can tell from this article, there is a lot of "good news" :sarcasm: that is not getting reported!

<<snip>>
Rumsfeld has lost the support of the uniformed military officers who work for him. Make no mistake: The retired generals who are speaking out against Rumsfeld in interviews and op-ed pieces express the views of hundreds of other officers on active duty. When I recently asked an Army officer with extensive Iraq combat experience how many of his colleagues wanted Rumsfeld out, he guessed 75 percent. Based on my own conversations with senior officers over the past three years, I suspect that figure may be low.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/13/AR2006041301238.html




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tim4319 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. White House if gives Rumsfeld their stamp of approval!
Edited on Fri Apr-14-06 07:49 AM by Tim4319
This is the problem I have with those who dodge going to war during their eligible years, now conducting a war campaign. They have no clue of what is really going on! But, they want positives to get reported.

<<snip>>
Rebuffing another round of cries for the resignation of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the White House expressed confidence that the controversial official was "doing a very fine job".

http://www.newkerala.com/news2.php?action=fullnews&id=42167
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rustydog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. He listens to them daily I'm sure...
But he hears Rumsfeld, Cheny and Wolfowitz
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
3. Welcome to bush world.
Up is down
black is white
and it is bright in the middle of the night.

"GWB says he listens to his generals on the ground."

I would be real interested to find out what the real vote from the military was ...
but Haliburton handled that contract.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:50 AM
Response to Original message
4. Cheney will not let the shrub remove Rummie.
The two of them are a tag team. Without Rummie, Cheney will be outnumbered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ms liberty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. It's not just that though...
The Chimpster has known Rummy for a VERY long time...see footage of the 72 Repuke Convention. During the speech by UN Ambassador George H.W. Bush, the camera pans to show his eldest son sitting in the crowd, watching him speak. Sitting next to the Chimpster is a younger, but very recognizable Rummy. In the footage, it is OBVIOUS beyond words that Shrubby was high as a kite, and they both seem quite chummy.

When I first saw it, I felt like I was going to hurl.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Damn, that's interesting...
I'm donning my tinfoil hat for that image. I always thought Cheney was his handler, but maybe it's been Rummy all along.

:tinfoilhat:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ms liberty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. Cheney was probably there, too...
Wasn't he in the administration by then? I'm thinking he came in with Ford, wasn't Ford the Veep nominee that election? I can't remember exactly when Agnew left the scene. Of course, even if Ford wasn't the nominee, he was a Senator before being the Veep (wasn't he?), so if Crashcart was with Ford prior to Ford's being Veep, Ford still would have been at the 72 Convention, so it's likely Crashcart was, too...

Getting a little convoluted there!!! We need someone who has a stronger knowledge base of the criminals of that era!!! Paging our Watergate experts!!! H2OMan? UnderstandingLife? Anyone else I haven't named?!!!

It may be that the 72 Convention was a harbinger of misfortune in more ways than one!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
etherealtruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. I "think" Rummy was Ford's chief of staff ...
and Dickie Cheney was directly under him... but I could be wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
15. Excellent point...
I don't think people realize just how evil and seditious these two are. It goes all the way back to the G. Ford years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. These guys planned this take over for decades.
Newt was simply a foot soldier when he came up with the idealistic outline. Now that they have control, AND responsibility, we see them for what they are. opportunistic, criminal, unethical, lying cheating, greedy scum who are destroying our planet's ecology, our nation's economy and our global relationships as we head down the path towards world war.

Thanks, guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
5. How can we ask any American to die for something that no one
believes in? Retired Generals tried to tell junior not to invade Iraq. Now the Generals are coming out of the woodwork and junior still will not listen.

What progress has been made?

It was gonna be a short and inexpensive war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tim4319 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. He is a spoiled brat!
He must get his way!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:54 AM
Response to Original message
6. I think you are corrct, Anti-F
They are a long standing team, one likely would be in trouble without the other. Great idea, let's shitcan the both of them!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
8. Why are these generals waiting until they retire to voice their
criticism? Is it because they are afraid to say anything while they are still in active service? I don't think I have heard anyone give an explanation as to why they wait to say these things if they feel so strongly about it and it really puzzles me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasProgresive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. They wait until they are reg. citizens again
They no doubt feel constrained by the chain of command. In normal times Generals would feel free to advise the civilian leaders but when those civilians have a barely hidden agenda the brass can see the writting on the wall. Disent and be RIFTED (reduction in force). with a reduced pension. Go along and maybe you can do something to aid the men and women under you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetheonlyway Donating Member (948 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. if you're IN THE ARMY and you voice
opposition to the war, you could get 15 months in jail. that's what happened to Kevin Benderman a conscientious objector that served 2 tours of duty and on being sent back a 3rd time (10 year army career) said, "no way, I'm not pointing my gun at iraqi children anymore' he was given a kangaroo court and 15 months in the slammer....

so it's pretty much a dictatorship that punishes anyone that speaks out against it.. I wouldn't be surprise if dubya isn't sitting in a room with rumsfeld figuring out how to axe the retirement salaries of these 5 generals speaking out against rummy...

people don't get it... the bush administration with the likes of abramoff, have no problem killing someone or outting a CIA agent if it gets in the way of their plan for world domination...

when you control the legislative, judicial and executive branches, what's to stop you from just punishing anyone who gets in your way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. Look what happened to General Eric Shinseki
When General Shinseki was Chief of Staff of the Army during the run-up to Operation Iraqi Liberation, he publicly stated that we needed to send twice as many soldiers into Iraq as we did or we'd get bogged down in a quagmire. The Powers that Be responded to Shinseki by publicly announcing his successor a year before General Shinseki retired--essentially neutering him.

General Shinseki was absolutely right, as it turned out.

In today's Modern Action Army, the quickest way to get the boot is to be a high-ranking officer and criticize the maladministration.

Once they retire they can say damn near anything they want. What's Bush going to do? Reactivate them so he can throw them back out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nonconformist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
11. Excellent point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
13. General Boykin perhaps...
Published on Thursday, May 20, 2004 by the Guardian/UK
The Religious Warrior of Abu Ghraib
An Evangelical US General played a Pivotal Role in Iraqi Prison Reform

by Sidney Blumenthal


Just before Boykin was put in charge of the hunt for Osama bin Laden and then inserted into Iraqi prison reform, he was a circuit rider for the religious right. He allied himself with a small group called the Faith Force Multiplier that advocates applying military principles to evangelism. Its manifesto - Warrior Message - summons "warriors in this spiritual war for souls of this nation and the world ... "

Boykin staged a traveling slide show around the country where he displayed pictures of Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. "Satan wants to destroy this nation, he wants to destroy us as a nation, and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army," he preached. They "will only be defeated if we come against them in the name of Jesus". It was the reporting of his remarks at a revival meeting in Oregon that made them a subject of brief controversy.

There can be little doubt that he envisages the global war on terror as a crusade. With the Geneva conventions apparently suspended, international law is supplanted by biblical law. Boykin is in God's chain of command. President Bush, he told an Oregon congregation last June, is "a man who prays in the Oval Office". And the president, too, is on a divine mission. "George Bush was not elected by a majority of the voters in the US. He was appointed by God."

Boykin is not unique in his belief that Bush is God's anointed against evildoers. Before his 2000 campaign, Bush confided to a leader of the religious right: "I feel like God wants me to run for president ... I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen."

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0520-03.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. Wow, MIHOP or LIHOP!!!!!

Boykin is not unique in his belief that Bush is God's anointed against evildoers. Before his 2000 campaign, Bush confided to a leader of the religious right: "I feel like God wants me to run for president ... I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen."

So he knew 9/11 was going to happen? Did he help plan it or did he just know about it and let it happen?



President Bush, he told an Oregon congregation last June, is "a man who prays in the Oval Office". And the president, too, is on a divine mission. "George Bush was not elected by a majority of the voters in the US. He was appointed by God."

No he wasn't elected by a majority, he was appointed by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is not God. Please don't worship the Justices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tim4319 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. These people do not worship the same God I do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
14. That would imply that...
he has a clue who the Generals on the ground are. Wow, what a surprise, Chimpy's telling lies again.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
23. I love how he sends out his top puppets to say "we are not puppets"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC