Retired general denies any coordinated effort to get Rumsfeld f...

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld from the Commander of the 1st Infantry Division Maj. Read more
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
kinlee

Hermitage, TN

#2 Apr 14, 2006
Rummy needs to go.
skutter9000

Arcadia, CA

#3 Apr 14, 2006
Rummy, you're doin' a heck of a job!
Ridge

San Francisco, CA

#4 Apr 14, 2006
This revolt of the Generals is unprecedented and should not be taken lightly. This many career Officers with nothing to gain need to be listened to. The only reason they are stepping forward is for the good of the country. You may disagree with them but to say that their concern is not genuine is not believable.
Seven day Hedonist

Chicago, IL

#5 Apr 14, 2006
Having served in the Military. This kind of mindset is totally frowned upon. Disloyalty among the ranks is highly discouraged.

I believe all of these generals! Rumsfeld must go as well as the rest of the administration.
Lance Winslow

United States

#6 Apr 14, 2006
Ridge this is obviously a Democratic Attack on the Administration, in advance of the US doing something about Iran. Pure pathetic politics.
metoo

Baltimore, MD

#8 Apr 14, 2006
roflmao sure it is. meds up!
Lance Winslow wrote:
Ridge this is obviously a Democratic Attack on the Administration, in advance of the US doing something about Iran. Pure pathetic politics.
Donnie

Austin, TX

#9 Apr 15, 2006
It is clearly a conspiricay to overthrow the government of the U.S. It is indded strange that self-described "liberal" minds have become so addled that they are now supporting a military coup.
SKNK

Sweden

#10 Apr 15, 2006
Thank you dear Mr. Mrs. Ms. Realist, at least and finally someone had the gust to tell the truth and that is:“US is not, and never has been a “democracy”. And you continue,“If Democracy worked, Greece would be the superpower of the world”. And you continue:
“The US is a constitutional Republic”. Thank you sir, madam or whatever,

My questions are: then why your “Neo-Conservatism” regime is always talking about “Democratization” of another nation, which in term means that: what you don’t have, you simply cannot implement and therefore it becomes a lie, isn’t it? By you saying that:“The US is a constitutional Republic”, which I think you mean that; you are not regarding yourself a “Superpower” or a “superior nation” under the protection of your constitution, then what is the different between you and the Greece, or the Persian Empire, or Roman Empire in your colonial ambitions? Not being a democratic regime yet pretending under the “Capitalism Democracy” with no “Functioning social economic or political democracy ”, again you are lying which in terms and in time of development makes you what you have become, a militaristic system with social economic and social political agenda based on that concept “lies”; however, according to your constitutions for government to conduct war by lying to its people is unconstitutional and therefore is punishable by Law, that is to say if your Attorney General is not Biased, but in this case and all other cases he is and has been.

Under the protection of your constitution, if you are not considering yourself as a Militarism regime; then you and your “Neo-Conservatism” and its world wide “democratic” approach yet with the US militarism system at work, your system as you have said is:“US is not, and never has been a Democracy”, Therefore, and again you are lying to yourself and to the world that you are. The question in USA is or have become a “Superpower or a Superior nation” with a “Democracy system” like no other, which in such understanding and approach your system is actually asking to become one, not that you are, but for you and your “Neo – Conservatism” the only way to become as such, is to have a militarism system powerful enough to destroy other nations off this earth and that is what your “Neo –Conservatism” which in terms is a kinder and gentler way in saying; is a “Neo – Fascism” is doing, the one that have all kind of tools to use for its Imperialism Agendas. No wonder Madeline Albright have said:“what is the use in having this superior army if we can not use it”.
Lance Winslow wrote:
Ridge this is obviously a Democratic Attack on the Administration, in advance of the US doing something about Iran. Pure pathetic politics.
Donnie

Austin, TX

#11 Apr 15, 2006
SKNK wrote:
My questions are: then why your “Neo-Conservatism” regime is always talking about “Democratization” of another nation, which in term means that: what you don’t have, you simply cannot implement and therefore it becomes a lie, isn’t it?
No, the word “Democratization” is used because it is a better word than "Republicanization". The process of “Democratization” involves helping the peole of a country move their government toward a structure that allows more political participation. Earlier examples were the “Democratization” or Japan, Italy and Germany after World War Two.
SKNK wrote:
“The US is a constitutional Republic”, which I think you mean that; you are not regarding yourself a “Superpower” or a “superior nation” under the protection of your constitution, then what is the different between you and the Greece, or the Persian Empire, or Roman Empire in your colonial ambitions?
The difference is that we have no colonial ambitions and they all did. What was the point of asking such a stupid question? Anyone who read your question became less intelligent as a result of reading it.
SKNK wrote:
Not being a democratic regime yet pretending under the “Capitalism Democracy” with no “Functioning social economic or political democracy ”, again you are lying which in terms and in time of development makes you what you have become, a militaristic system with social economic and social political agenda based on that concept “lies”; however, according to your constitutions for government to conduct war by lying to its people is unconstitutional and therefore is punishable by Law, that is to say if your Attorney General is not Biased, but in this case and all other cases he is and has been.
No lies are involved. Your sentence is pure gibberish, like the rest of your post.
Lance Winslow

United States

#12 Apr 15, 2006
Lets get rid of Rumsfeld and give 30 nuclear warheads and 10 nuclear bombs to the Iranian Leadership, which sends insurgents into Iraq to Kill Coalition Troops, supports International Terrorist Organizations and has promised to blow Israel off the map.

We will not have to worry about all the deaths this causes because some retired Generals say so, which have been enlisted in the Democrat Campaign Committee for the next set of elections.

By doing this we can have World havoc and Chaos, International Terrorists with nuclear attacks in major US and European Cities and Israel. And places like Bali, Indonesia, Philipines and Canada too. Then the Democrats can save the day and stay in power and blame the Republicans.
lucky wisconsin

Shalimar, FL

#13 Apr 15, 2006
SKNK wrote:
Thank you dear Mr. Mrs. Ms. Realist, at least and finally someone had the gust to tell the truth and that is:“US is not, and never has been a “democracy”. And you continue,“If Democracy worked, Greece would be the superpower of the world”. And you continue:
“The US is a constitutional Republic”. Thank you sir, madam or whatever,

My questions are: then why your “Neo-Conservatism” regime is always talking about “Democratization” of another nation, which in term means that: what you don’t have, you simply cannot implement and therefore it becomes a lie, isn’t it? By you saying that:“The US is a constitutional Republic”, which I think you mean that; you are not regarding yourself a “Superpower” or a “superior nation” under the protection of your constitution, then what is the different between you and the Greece, or the Persian Empire, or Roman Empire in your colonial ambitions? Not being a democratic regime yet pretending under the “Capitalism Democracy” with no “Functioning social economic or political democracy ”, again you are lying which in terms and in time of development makes you what you have become, a militaristic system with social economic and social political agenda based on that concept “lies”; however, according to your constitutions for government to conduct war by lying to its people is unconstitutional and therefore is punishable by Law, that is to say if your Attorney General is not Biased, but in this case and all other cases he is and has been.

Under the protection of your constitution, if you are not considering yourself as a Militarism regime; then you and your “Neo-Conservatism” and its world wide “democratic” approach yet with the US militarism system at work, your system as you have said is:“US is not, and never has been a Democracy”, Therefore, and again you are lying to yourself and to the world that you are. The question in USA is or have become a “Superpower or a Superior nation” with a “Democracy system” like no other, which in such understanding and approach your system is actually asking to become one, not that you are, but for you and your “Neo – Conservatism” the only way to become as such, is to have a militarism system powerful enough to destroy other nations off this earth and that is what your “Neo –Conservatism” which in terms is a kinder and gentler way in saying; is a “Neo – Fascism” is doing, the one that have all kind of tools to use for its Imperialism Agendas. No wonder Madeline Albright have said:“what is the use in having this superior army if we can not use it”.

<quoted text>
man get life, what you say is just crap regardless of it being right or wrong, let's face it might makes right. simply put the US could kick sweden in the nuts and you would just have to take it.
SKNK

Sweden

#14 Apr 15, 2006
Dear Sir or Madam. You say that you don’t have a colonial ambitions, yet your militarism is still occupying Japan and Italy, you are simply there and using the Airbase to attack and invade other countries, secondly, when you say “helping people of a country move their government toward a structure that allows more political participation”, if you don’t have any geopolitical and or economical interests in and of that country, whom gives you the right to even ask for that government to be changed or overthrown by your CIA or other agencies – or your military invasion - Coe De Etta. Therefore it is obvious that when you people don’t have the basic understanding of democracy then you are able to call yourself a “superpower” or a “civilized and Superior nation”, yet without your militarism you wouldn’t be neither of those. Hitler did have the same ambition and said the same thing “that we the German have no colonial ambition” later he invaded Poland.
Donnie wrote:
<quoted text>No, the word “Democratization” is used because it is a better word than "Republicanization". The process of “Democratization” involves helping the peole of a country move their government toward a structure that allows more political participation. Earlier examples were the “Democratization” or Japan, Italy and Germany after World War Two.

<quoted text>The difference is that we have no colonial ambitions and they all did. What was the point of asking such a stupid question? Anyone who read your question became less intelligent as a result of reading it.

<quoted text>No lies are involved. Your sentence is pure gibberish, like the rest of your post.
SKNK

Sweden

#15 Apr 15, 2006
If there was a functioning democracy in the USA and for that matter in England these people should have been prosecuted for social ethical lies, war crimes, act against humanity and genocide committed in creating wars and Coe De Etta’s in other countries:

1- Elliot Abrams
2- John Bolton
3- Douglas Faith
4- William Kristol
5- Bernard Lewis
6- Donald Rumsfeled
7- Richard Perel
8- Paul Wolfowitz
9- George W. Bush
10- Tony Blair
11- Bill Clinton
12- Madeline Albright
13- Henry Kissinger
SKNK

Sweden

#16 Apr 15, 2006
If there was a functioning democracy in the USA and for that matter in England these people should have been prosecuted for social ethical lies, war crimes, act against humanity and genocide committed in creating wars and Coe De Etta’s in other countries:

1- Elliot Abrams
2- John Bolton
3- Douglas Faith
4- William Kristol
5- Bernard Lewis
6- Donald Rumsfeled
7- Richard Perel
8- Paul Wolfowitz
9- George W. Bush
10- Tony Blair
11- Bill Clinton
12- Madeline Albright
13- Henry Kissinger
lucky wisconsin wrote:
<quoted text>man get life, what you say is just crap regardless of it being right or wrong, let's face it might makes right. simply put the US could kick sweden in the nuts and you would just have to take it.
SKNK

Sweden

#17 Apr 15, 2006
Monday, March 27, 2006
Presidential State of Emergency
The United States is currently under a Presidentially declared National State of Emergency (see below). Under this condition the Rights of people guaranteed by the Constitution are suspended. The new President Designee will cancel the National State of Emergency and the Constitution will be the law of the land once again. Much re-education of our lawyers, judges, and law enforcement people will need take place do to the restoration of the basic rights of the people.
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 3, 2003

Notice: Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Libya On January 7, 1986, by Executive Order 12543, President Reagan declared a national emergency to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States constituted by the actions and policies of the Government of Libya. On January 8, 1986, by Executive Order 12544, the President took additional measures to block Libyan assets in the United States. The President has transmitted a notice continuing this emergency to the Congress and the Federal Register every year since 1986.

The crisis between the United States and Libya that led to the declaration of a national emergency on January 7, 1986, has not been resolved. Despite the United Nations Security Council's suspension of U.N. sanctions against Libya upon the Libyan government's handover of the Pan Am 103 bombing suspects, Libya has not yet complied with its obligations under U.N. Security Council Resolutions 731 (1992), 748 (1992), and 883 (1993), which include Libya's obligation to accept responsibility for the actions of its officials and pay compensation.

Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to Libya. This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE, January 2, 2003.

Many do not realize this, and since 1986 our constitutional rights have been on hold. What is even worse is the current administration is using this original national emergency with Libya as a loophole for the continuation of itself, and that the situation with Libya will probably never be resolved if THEY don’t want it to. Hence you have a indefinitely lasting national emergency. This is why Bush acts the way he does, and gets away with it, for there is nothing 'legally' that anyone can do about it.

We all have to remember that Libya has complied with all UN resolutions and paid what its government been asked for, yet George W. Bush and other presidents been using this “Executive Order” when it’s been suitable for them to use it and start a war yet they cannot be prosecuted for. So my question is, is there any “Functioning Democracy” in USA or for that matter in England, and if there were or there is why these Prime Minister and or presidents both from Democrats and Republican whom been and or are creating wars not been prosecuted for war crimes, genocide, act against humanity from Viet Nam war up to Iraq war?
SKNK

Sweden

#18 Apr 15, 2006
"Since the overthrow of the Iranian government in 1953, the CIA has engaged in similar disguised assaults on the governments of Guatemala (1954); the Congo (1960); Cuba (1961); Brazil (1964); Indonesia (1965); Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia (1961-73); Greece (1967); Chile (1973); Afghanistan (1979 to the present); El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua (1980s); and Iraq (1991 to the present)-- to name only the most obvious cases. These operations have generated numerous terrorist attacks and other forms of retaliation -- what the CIA calls "blowback" -- against the United States by peoples on the receiving end. Americans do not have the information to put it into context or understand it." --Chalmers Johnson for the San Francisco Chronicle, 22 Feb. 2004. This a question "why do they hate us"?

In 1992 Martin Almada brought to light massive archives that document Paraguay's role in the U.S.-sponsored Operation Condor, a regional network of repression against opposition to the military dictatorships in the Southern Cone. The documents were also used to build the international case against Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. These reams of papers are not for the weak-stomached. Paraguayans call them "The Archives of Terror." [2]( http://www.americaspolicy.org/columns/amprog/ ...)

The "Dirty War" in Argentina: In October 1976, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and high ranking U.S. officials gave their full support to the Argentine military junta and urged them to hurry up and finish the "dirty war" before the U.S. Congress cut military aid. A post-junta truth commission found that the Argentine military had "disappeared" at least 10,000 Argentines in the so-called "dirty war" against "subversion" and "terrorists" between 1976 and 1983; human rights groups in Argentina put the number at closer to 30,000. documents at National Security Archive ( http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB104 ...)

In Guatemala, the string of genocidal dictators began with the U.S.-abetted, cold war coup to overthrow democratically elected Jacobo Arbenz in 1954.[3]( http://www.americaspolicy.org/columns/amprog/ ...) It's not over yet [4]( http://wola.org/central_america/guatemala/gua ...),[5]( http://www.wola.org/publications/hidden_power ...)

In Ecuador ChevronTexaco stands accused of severely contaminating the surrounding region during 20 years of oil drilling and production in what once was untouched rainforest with pristine rivers and lakes.[6]( http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php... ...) The
The arrival of Donald Rumsfeld in Bogotá on August 19 [2003] did not portend anything but the further ratcheting up of imperial terror in South America." [9]( http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm... ...)

"For the past several years, South America's non-violent social movements--the Argentine piqueteros, the Brazilian landless, the Ecuadorian indigenous people, the Bolivian coca growers, Colombian and Peruvian trade unionists and community organizations--have offered a beacon of hope to the world, since they have blocked a series of neoliberal privatization efforts in the cities and held counterinsurgency in check in the countryside. As recently as nine months ago, there were reasons for relative optimism, since the movements had translated mass mobilization into electoral power: Lula and the PT had won in Brazil, Evo Morales and MAS had lost the Bolivian presidency by less than 1.5% but promised to form a formidable opposition, Lucio Gutierrez was going to have indigenous leaders in his government in Ecuador, Chávez was close to defeating the opposition in Venezuela.
Lance Winslow

United States

#19 Apr 15, 2006
Please stop posting the list of the most influential people of the 20th Century.
SKNK

Sweden

#20 Apr 15, 2006
Wlfowitz In his dissertation on nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, he argued that the United States "needed to look beyond simply defending traditional allies against the communist bloc" and that areas "with natural resources vital to the U.S. economy ought to be as much a part of a strategic defense umbrella." Wolfowitz wrote that "anybody with the capability to threaten those areas must be regarded with concern. In true Wohlstetter fashion, Wolfowitz argued that even the hint of nuclear weapons in the Middle East would be a matter of the gravest concern."

So the question remains, why the Israelies have the Bomb???
Lance Winslow

United States

#21 Apr 15, 2006
I agree with those comments by Wolfowitz's comments, don't you? The United States must protect its allies, interests and assets, as well as the American People which of course are primary, while these others are to regarded with "Much Concern". Obviously. Good point Mr. Wolfowitz, I concur.
SKNK

Sweden

#22 Apr 15, 2006
Mr. LW whom alls would agree with but you, you think I been spending my time to talk to him, the Big Boss all this time, no, when I talk to you and you answer I think I been talking to all the Bosses.
Lance Winslow wrote:
I agree with those comments by Wolfowitz's comments, don't you? The United States must protect its allies, interests and assets, as well as the American People which of course are primary, while these others are to regarded with "Much Concern". Obviously. Good point Mr. Wolfowitz, I concur.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 4 min WasteWater 5,684
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 6 min WasteWater 270,030
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 6 min Peace_Warrior 609,806
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 12 min Gods r Delusions ... 578,897
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 13 min Hidingfromyou 817,413
What do u think of Jesus Christ?(God) (Oct '06) 31 min Your Lord Satan 69,888
Help Stop Persecution Of Christians Worldwide! 49 min Right2Life 1
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 8 hr Clearwater 176,199
More from around the web