do y'unz beleive that the recent prisioner abuse scandal is ground for Rumsfeld to resign, remeber to leave behind any emotional attachment you have for the man, the question is whether or not this current turn in events is enough to fire him.
Yes. Get his ass outta there. But lets not stop with Rumsfeld...we need to lose Cheney and Bush too..and Powell....hell lets lose all of them! It is a shame the way we have treated the Iraqi's. We treat them the way we treat dogs at the pound. Has no one realized that these are PEOPLE just the same as you and me? We need to stop electing people that are so out of touch with reality. I could talk forever on the subject of our gov't...
I think its more the people who Rumsfled works under than him in particular. I feel that he is more like a scapegoat, not that he is totally innocent. Just that someone has to be the target for the public's frustration and anger.
Rumsfeld definitely should not be used as a scapegoat, the people under him involved still need to suffer the consequences as well. But that doesnt make Rumsfeld any less responsible. They didn't do anything about these incidents until the story gained media attention. Don't think that they hadn't known of this before hand. They didnt care about it until the story broke. "But in an exceptional move, and breaking with its usual silence, the International Committee of the Red Cross said it had warned Washington months ago that US troops had beaten and even killed Iraqis being held in detention." http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/08/1083911458141.html
Adding to that, I just feel that its not only a matter of whether Rumsfeld gets fired or not. I also feel that the people above him, under him, everyone in the admistration should get something.
From what I saw of this morning's paper, Rumsfeld has said these atrocities were committed on HIS watch and HE takes responsibility for them but for some reason SHOULDN'T resign? Wtf? Absolutely he should resign. If he wants to help the Bush Administration save any face at all, if he truly wants to be accountable for what happened, such action is necessary. The problem, as I see it, is that he doesn't HAVE to do a damn thing because everyone on the Bush cabinet is basically untouchable. Rumsfeld has said he's been pondering giving up his post but won't do it because he doesn't think he should be forced into it "for political reasons" i.e. Democrats who are fed up with his shit calling for his resignation. Any wrongdoing the administration is responsible for gets Bush's "deepest" apologies, but no action is taken because any suggestions that these leaders be removed from power is brushed off as a conspiracy by the liberal media or some sort of opportunistic power play by Democrats looking for any reason to create a stink. Well why the fuck shouldn't we oust these despots!? Let's review. Bush: a) STOLE a national presidential election, for chrissakes b) enabled his family to deny thousands of eligible minority voters their rights c) passed the friggin' PATRIOT Act, effectively wasting our collective flavor d) continues to ignore the rights of states to determine their own laws WITHOUT interference from the federal government (fuck John Walters) e) got us bombed (others may disagree, I think 9/11 would not have happened had Bush not been handed the presidency) f) didn't find Osama Bin Laden g) fucked up Iraqis' lives for years at our expense when enough fucked-up American lives are ALREADY ignored h) fluffed a bunch of corporate dicks i) blamed Canada Anyway, fuck Bush and his cadre of fanatics. Please join me in voting his ass to the curb this November.
Yes he should resign... if he is taking responsibility for it, why not? There are a lot of people that should be cracked down on because of things like that..
rumsfeld should be fired, every answer he gave in friday's inquiry was so indirect, he couldn't even answer the questions himself, he is the secretary, he should be able to at least answer the questions asked of him, all he did was throw it on gen. smith if you ask me, its like he left it up to his panel to answer the questions for him becasue he didnt know the answer's.....is this a good secretary of defense?...but bush wont fire him becasue he has too much knowledge of what bush really knew before we went into iraq....
I'm reading more and more articles that claim the abuse is systemic and widespread. It's probably a minority of soldiers, but still it's a large enough minority that it doesn't look like they were afraid of repercussions. Otherwise why would they take photos? I don't like Rumsfeld and I don't like the Bush administration. However, I don't think Rumsfeld should be fired at this point. This kind of institutional abuse isn't something that one Secretary of Defense causes over the course of three years. If, however, he doesn't conduct a thorough investigation and if he doesn't make real changes, yes he should be fired. I'm not talking about a band-aid indictment of 7 soldiers and banning cameras, either. 1.) Change the way soldiers are trained. No more ridiculous claims that they haven't been educated in the Geneva Convention. 2.) Take the commander out of the criminal prosecution loop. Right now commanders get to decide whether to hand out administrative punishments or to pursue prosecution for people in their unit. Clearly commanders don't want their unit to be tainted by scandal; that's a huge conflict of interest. 3.) Regulation of civilian contractors. These guys currently aren't held accountable to anyone. "In 1998, for example, DynCorp security agents in Bosnia were implicated in a highly publicized sex-slave scandal. The firm quickly recalled at least 13 agents from the country; none faced criminal prosecution." Read more here: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/28/MNGHC5SKQS1.DTL
Rumsfeld, the whole administration and government, all of it needs to go. This country needs a revolution...testing, 1-2, testing. Trin
I for one am going to vote against the bush admin when the time comes.I'm just wondering if my vote will count..........................it didn't last time.
Rumsfeld is obviously a selfish man who is willing to send other people off to die for his own personal gain. I wouldnt care if Rumsfeld was a democrat or republican, because i am not so shallow as to judge someone on their "category" of the political spectrum. Rumsfeld needed to resign or get fired the day he came into office. Obviously he is a military junkie, and gets off on waging wars and planning wars, "Treating people just like pawns in chess" as black sabbath would say. Anyone who WANTS to start war does not belong in the white house or pentagon. Peace and Love, Dan
I relished seeing Rummy get grilled in the Senate and House hearings. I hope the old douche steps down, that is only if someone worse doesn't take his place... seeing the advisors Bush likes to choose that seems possible enough.
Hanzo You said: STOLE a national presidential election, for chrissakes Guess you have a short memory? No one, let me repeat, NO ONE followed Al Gore’s lead as who to be running against GWB! And, if Al Gore is the rightful President and he had choked on a pretzel watching a football game and died then the President would be…what’s that guys name??? You know the Jewish guy who ran with Al. I can’t remember and neither can 97% of Democrats that would have had him be President right now. Joe something… wasn’t it? Rumsfeld rules! If Senator Kerry’s senior political advisor got caught in a parking lot jerking off wearing nothing but his socks should Kerry drop out? Oh! That would be different…. Rumsfeld has his stuff together! If he didn’t he would be gone long ago! Heads will roll, but not his! Changeyourlatitude
I definitely think so. Supposedly he has known about the abuses since January/February. I do not think people like Lyndie England should be turned into hate figures to cover up for the hatred from higher up the chain however. Personally I think she's a loathsome disgusting woman who should be charged and punished for her actions, but the media should not focus its attention on her, or others like her. The truth is, attrocities just as bad as those pictured go on in Guantanamo Bay every day with the blessing of the US administration, paying lip service to international law. How can soldiers in Iraq, disgusting as their actions may be, be expected to hold human rights in high regard, when their superiors will not even recognise them?
Joe Liebermann, conservative Democrat... he sucks I won't argue. But hey, better than President Dick. Damn right it'd be different. Kerry's advisors can jerk off all they want, that's totally different than mismanaging this war and practically turning a blind eye to soldier abuse of Iraqis until the press brought it to the public.
Peace You wrote: atrocities just as bad as those pictured go on in Guantanamo Bay I disagree with you on the Cuba issue. I don’t know how prisoners are handled in UK but I see nothing wrong with how those guys are treated. I think they should be out growing the food they consume. Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time! Let them eat the fish they catch, bananas and coconuts they collect. I see no atrocities in Cuba. What precisely are the atrocities? These guys are the scum of the earth, just as the child molesters and murders in your jails. The crap in Iraq is just selling press. It was disgusting but every nation has a worse record in their history. With modern instant 24-7 news they have to talk about something. This is the “something” they are talking about now. It’s old news! LuciferSam Of course you are correct it would be different. Yet, the news would be talking about it instead of old news. I don’t think a political blind eye has been turned to the abuse scandal. It seems the world has it front and center. Just because someone won’t fall on their sword doesn’t mean a blind eye. By the way, I had a West Point graduate in my unit caught doing that exact same thing in the parking lot. People break, even without Rummy’s help. Changeyourlatitude
