Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Donald Rumsfeld said giving the order to kill Osama Bin Laden was an 'easy call', except when he pulled the plug on a similar raid over fears of infuriating Pakistan   (politico.com) divider line 50
    More: Fail, Donald Rumsfeld, Osama bin Laden, Pakistan, military officials, American Living, C-130, SEAL Team, Porter J. Goss  
•       •       •

2602 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 May 2012 at 3:49 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-05-02 11:44:46 PM  
7 votes:
They must feel small inside when a community organizer and college professor has killed more terrorists in 3 years than they did in 8.
2012-05-02 09:13:04 PM  
7 votes:
So was sending 1/3 of the force you needed to secure a nation the size of California. That was an easy call, right asshole?

I hope you get ass cancer and die a horrifically slow death in front of your crying family.

Signed,

Former employee
2012-05-03 01:18:04 AM  
6 votes:

Mark Ratner: but wasn't this before the expanded use of drone strikes in Pakistan?


It doesn't matter because the important distinction is that Rummy and Bush said they'd respect the sovereignty of Pakistan. They would NEVER have approved the mission because of fealty to Pakistani concerns. The badasses in talk refused to impugn on their broseph to achieve tactical goals. Therefore, his point is moot. He never would have approved a mission, Bush never would have authorized the mission, and Romney needs to just find a f*cking sports team to destroy, because he ain't going to be President.

It could have been one guy... Rambo. Even then, Rumrunner would have nixed it. He didn't want to piss off Pakistan because Musharraf was under the gun with his Teahadists. Turns out, they never really gave a f*ck about our plans, they were just arming the other guys for our eventual withdrawal. Rummy backed the people who supply arms that kill our own people because he subscribes to decades-old foreign policy initiatives. Even the walking-drunks at the state department know more than he does about the best course of action.
2012-05-03 01:03:48 AM  
6 votes:
Donald Rumsfeld is a genuinely despicable human being. He was one of the largest enablers of a pointless waste of lives that served only to fatten the wallets of his friends. He has done nothing but bring misery and death into the world. And there are people who think this bag of shiat is a hero.

He should be in f*cking jail, not polluting the discourse with yet more idiocy.
2012-05-02 11:46:19 PM  
6 votes:
It's always an easy call when you don't have to accept the responsibility for the act.
2012-05-03 05:15:11 AM  
4 votes:
The Democrats have bungled the last few days as usual. The talking point shouldn't be Obama making the tough decision, it should be Obama having the drive to make finding bin Laden a priority. It's too easy for Republicans to say, "anyone would have made that call" once he had been located. But Obama focused on finding bin Laden from day one, as he said he would during his campaign, while the Republicans mocked him and said there were more important things to do. Now, the Republicans are free to trot that debate out again and say that while getting bin Laden was good, other things should have taken priority, but of course that would be a futile argument.

No one can say whether or not Romney, or any other person on Earth, would have made the same decisions once bin Laden was found, though reports indicate that the majority of Obama's advisers suggested bombing rather than a raid, but you can use his words and the words of others from 2004-2008 to assert that he would not have directed intelligence agencies to search so doggedly for bin Laden like Obama did.
2012-05-03 09:30:17 AM  
3 votes:
I watched him say this on FOX news while at a bar with some friends the other night. The guy next to us immediately blurted out the same thing as the headline, loud enough for everyone to hear. A couple old guys at the bar got all pissy and called him a couple of the typical Republican words. He told them he served in the USMC and was a Vet of Iraq, then asked them what they've ever done for this country besides cheer-leading for wars of aggression. They grumbled to themselves for a while and left. F'nCSB.
2012-05-03 08:56:06 AM  
3 votes:

Zerochance: rubi_con_man: Obama had, from his early days of campaigning, told everyone - including the Pakistani - that he'd be hitting Osama Bin Laden wherever he was - even if it meant crossing into Pakistan.

This cannot be repeated enough. This is actually one of the areas in which Obama has actually been consistent with his campaign. In one of the debates with McCain, he specifically stated (and I think he even cited Pakistan as the country) that if a foreign government was harboring OBL, and they were either unwilling or unable to hand him over, he'd use military force to nab the sum'biatch. McCain of course, compulsively disagreed, so for him to even be saying anything about this is just unbelievably beyond-the-pale.


Yes. Obama EXPLICITLY stated he would go into Pakistan, without the help of the Pakistan government.

That was EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.

Aug 4, 2007, Romney attacks Obama over Pakistan warning
Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney criticized Democrat Barack Obama on Friday for vowing to strike al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan if necessary as the Obama camp issued a strident defense of his plan.

Link
2012-05-03 06:39:15 AM  
3 votes:

Daedalus27: Rumsfeld is an asshole and a farkup, we can all agree on that. It is a slightly different set of circumstances to compare why one mission was greenlighted and the earlier mission was nixed. Different political climate in Afghanistan where the state was seen as improving toward what we wanted them to do compared with the more recent Pakistan where the civilian and military branches of government are basically operating seperately with no hope of improved relations.


True. But Rumsfeld is an utter failure in regards to Afghanistan, as is everybody else on Bush's team. All of them should be banned from talking about it without first saying, "I should preface with what I'm about to say about Afghanistan with the fact that the Bush administration completely screwed America over in our handling of the Afghanistan war, and we got a lot of American soldiers needlessly killed with our stupidity, and for that, we are eternally regretful."
2012-05-03 03:57:33 AM  
3 votes:
him and cheney still being alive is proof enough for me that god is not real
2012-05-03 03:53:36 AM  
3 votes:

WTF Indeed: They must feel small inside when a community organizer and college professor has killed more terrorists in 3 years than they did in 8.


They would if killing terrorists was the goal instead of enriching cronies.
2012-05-03 12:53:48 AM  
3 votes:

Mark Ratner: Also, they say the mission ballooned from a small number of elite special forces to a few hundred military personell.


You mean overwatch? Actually having cover when doing a mission? 75th Ranger Regiment stands ready to pull security for SFOD-A and D teams and SEALs now have a Force Recon Team to call upon. They can be a pretty large force in comparison to individual teams. If the military leadership determines the best course of action is to have support, depending on the mission, you can't dismiss that out of hand without knowing the facts.

Too many lives at risk? I'd want to see the OPORD before making that determination. Old Rumbag f*cked up so many things I'd doubt the sky was blue if he told me so, or any of his enablers.

The veracity of the argument is that f*ckstick has the temerity to say that anyone would have done what Obama did when Rummy couldn't find his ass with both hands, a map and a 12-digit grid.
2012-05-02 11:40:59 PM  
3 votes:
"It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."

This man speaks little other than complete bullshiat.

FOAD, asshole
2012-05-03 09:08:58 AM  
2 votes:
Guntram Shatterhand: The real thing that gets under Republican skin is that--much like the economy-a Democrat cleaned up a Republican's mess, showing that Democrats are a thousand times better at leadership and doing what they say they will do than a Republican.

From observation, it seems that the Republicans make grand, attractive promises (will introduce nothing but jobs bills, massive success, restoring America, etc), and consistently under-deliver. Democrats make fewer and more moderate promises, but deliver on them.

I get the appeal of the Republicans' wonderful sounding goals, but it comes down to whether the electorate wants someone in office based on hollow hyperbole or realistic attainable promises.
2012-05-03 08:01:47 AM  
2 votes:

Descartes: *sigh* It wasnt' Bin Laden. Anyone would have made the call to get Bin Laden.


Except for a president McCain or Romney. They even told you so.

This was a campaign promise for Obama and he delivered.
2012-05-03 07:43:47 AM  
2 votes:

rubi_con_man: Obama had, from his early days of campaigning, told everyone - including the Pakistani - that he'd be hitting Osama Bin Laden wherever he was - even if it meant crossing into Pakistan.


This cannot be repeated enough. This is actually one of the areas in which Obama has actually been consistent with his campaign. In one of the debates with McCain, he specifically stated (and I think he even cited Pakistan as the country) that if a foreign government was harboring OBL, and they were either unwilling or unable to hand him over, he'd use military force to nab the sum'biatch. McCain of course, compulsively disagreed, so for him to even be saying anything about this is just unbelievably beyond-the-pale.
2012-05-03 07:42:13 AM  
2 votes:
The real thing that gets under Republican skin is that--much like the economy-a Democrat cleaned up a Republican's mess, showing that Democrats are a thousand times better at leadership and doing what they say they will do than a Republican. The only things the Republicans can do is make excuses, which is what all of them are doing with this Bin Laden biatching.

So America has only one choice to vote for from this day forward: the Democrats, who manage to finish things, or Republicans, who manage to bungle and fail at their own goals. The Republicans are failures, plain and simple.
2012-05-03 07:33:56 AM  
2 votes:

NobleHam: The Democrats have bungled the last few days as usual. The talking point shouldn't be Obama making the tough decision, it should be Obama having the drive to make finding bin Laden a priority. It's too easy for Republicans to say, "anyone would have made that call" once he had been located. But Obama focused on finding bin Laden from day one, as he said he would during his campaign, while the Republicans mocked him and said there were more important things to do. Now, the Republicans are free to trot that debate out again and say that while getting bin Laden was good, other things should have taken priority, but of course that would be a futile argument.


Interestingly , the NBC news show last night that told the story of the three or four days over which the strike was being rolled out made that point - that Obama had, from his early days of campaigning, told everyone - including the Pakistani - that he'd be hitting Osama Bin Laden wherever he was - even if it meant crossing into Pakistan. When asked if the phone call to the President of Pakistan was awkward, he cited this fact and said that no, it wasn't as difficult as it might have been, because he'd been consistent and unwavering and undeterred by political considerations.

It also made it clear that this wasn't strictly an assassination mission - they had planned to transport him alive back to Afghanistan - but it simply didn't work out that way, and the President himself said "We didn't really expect a man like him would come along peacefully, but we had plans to handle it if he had"
2012-05-03 06:44:54 AM  
2 votes:

Descartes: *sigh* It wasnt' Bin Laden. Anyone would have made the call to get Bin Laden.

You guys are embarrassing... if Bush or McCain had did this and publicized it for cheap politics like this, the same cheerleaders would be the first critics, but because Obama is on our team you just let it pass. This partisan shiat is gonna destroy our country.

The target was a meeting of Qaeda leaders that intelligence officials thought included Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin Laden's top deputy and the man believed to run the terrorist group's operations.


Are you farking kidding me? Al-Zawahri was and is at least as an important target as OBL, And who knows how many other top al Qaeda leaders there could have been there, 2? 4? Catching al -Zawahri and two or three of al Qarda's top men at the same time is an even easier decision to make than even the OBL raid. Furthermore, if the military raid was "too risky" why not use a drone strike? Why leave them all alive at all? And where the hell was Bush when all these decisions were being made? How the hell does Rumsfeld get to make the call? No, this lack of balls is inexcusable, and the Republican side having to come up with excuses every time a Republican farks up monumentally is ridiculous and what is really hurting this country.
2012-05-03 06:33:18 AM  
2 votes:

Descartes: *sigh* It wasnt' Bin Laden. Anyone would have made the call to get Bin Laden.

You guys are embarrassing... if Bush or McCain had did this and publicized it for cheap politics like this, the same cheerleaders would be the first critics, but because Obama is on our team you just let it pass. This partisan shiat is gonna destroy our country.


Bush and McCain DID politicize Bin Laden, and 9/11, without even finding him, for a decade. Obama has nothing to be ashamed of.
2012-05-03 04:45:31 AM  
2 votes:
This really is the stupidest argument they have.

/And they got Rummy saying it too now, imagine my surprise.

Everyone is on record opposing Obama's ultimately successful plan to get Bin Laden.

Every one of them.

Hellz, even Hills called it 'naive' at the time.

I said then and I'll state again here.

Saying what you're gonna do and then doing what you say is how you earn respect IRL.

He meant what he said and he said what he meant and Obama (like Horton) was correct.

100%.

As opposed to unindicted war criminal and serial liar Donald "I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that" Rumsfeld.

His inability to ever be right about anything is what some people call "a known known".

Once again, a vote for McCain in 2008 was a vote to let Osama keep breathing indefinitely.

/See also: a vote for Bush in 2004.
2012-05-03 11:28:25 AM  
1 votes:

lennavan: Glaring BS and you want to ask that question?


Yes. Because he'll have to explain why he seems Carter is the low-bar for this sort of thing, which brings Carter's failure with Operation Eagle Claw into the spotlight. Which brings up the duel problems of explaining how a president that launched a risky special operation in a foreign country is the low bar, and why is it fair to give credit to Carter for the failure while not doing the same for Obama.
2012-05-03 11:15:30 AM  
1 votes:

WizardofToast: Yes. And there was the risk of failing. Remember Jimmy Carter's Operation Eagle Claw? Carter tried to save American captives in Iran and the crew got lost and crashed one of the helicopters. Obama was farking lucky it went off perfectly


And you are a farking idiot that seems to think that everything we do in the military is simply down to luck, and nonoe of that endless planning shiat and training for missions. Yeah. Obama got lucky, and the success of theat mission just wasn't down to:

1. Leadership
2. Training
3. Professional Competence
4. Skill

But Obama and the people involved were simply "lucky" because we simply can't give him credit for being involved, making informed decisions, and allowing his professional military to do the job....

/but luck is always good to have
2012-05-03 11:04:27 AM  
1 votes:

Mark Ratner: Lionel Mandrake: Mark Ratner: The article said it was for a meeting of top Al Qaeda people, but they don't mention that Bin Laden was one of theim. Also, they say the mission ballooned from a small number of elite special forces to a few hundred military personell.

Rumsfeld gets a pass from me on this, sorry to say.

Why did Rummy allow it to balloon?

I always thought he was in favor of a smaller, leaner fighting force in general, but I doubt he was in charge of the actual logistics of the mission.

Yes, he's the defense secretary, but the mission's details would be planned by top military officials.

From what I've read and seen on TV, the Bin Laden raid was basically a 50/50 call, but involved 60 navy seals (some as backups that weren't actually there).

I'm just glad he's dead. Justice, baby. Sweet justice.


You can'tt give him a pass, because this guy was all sorts of involved in the manning documents from the Iraq war, and he constantly beat down senior military officials when it came to numbers and forces. And look how that turned out.

Plus, if you are going to do a deliberate detention operation, you need lots of people to infil, secure the detainees, and an overwatch force. And oh by the way, you will have to have a pretty sizable TRAP team and QRF ready to support if you lose a bird and the infil force gets in a TIC situation. So a large force is necessary especially since they were picking up multiple detainees.

So I don't give Rummy a pass on jack shiat. He was a waste of space as SecDef and his blundering was the direct genesis of many people getting hurt or killed that didn't need to be. He's a jackass of epic proportions and any discussion on use of the military in any topic should immediately discount him.
2012-05-03 10:52:53 AM  
1 votes:

impaler: The glaring BS here though, is that under the very specific condition of going into the specific country of Pakistan, to get the specific target of Al Quida, and doing it specifically without the help of the Pakistan government, many stated they wouldn't.

Rarely is such a hypothetical scenario, discussed pre-election, ever actually realized. Mitt Romney himself gave his answer to what he would do here. For him to change it now just solidifies his flip-flopping persona in people's minds.

I really wish some reporter would ask him what he meant by: "even Jimmy Carter would have [made the call].
"


Glaring BS and you want to ask that question? Fair enough, that'd be interesting I suppose. But I think the even larger glaring BS was Mittens on the morning show the other day lambasting Obama for politicizing killing OBL and then later that day...

thepoliticalcarnival.net
2012-05-03 10:20:47 AM  
1 votes:

King Something: MithrandirBooga: Is it just me, or are the Republicans genuinely pissed off that Bin Laden is dead?

/convinced more and more that party is full of traitors every day

It's not just you.

The Republicans are genuinely pissed off that Bin Laden is dead and a black Democrat gets credit for it.


I don't really think we understand how badly the Republican base feels humiliated and ashamed right now, and the totality of the black stain they feel is all over their pride. I mean, we get a sense of it from their crazy blogs and their schizophrenic attacks on common sense. But the fact that any reasonable person can see the constrast between Bush and Obama is doing them in.

I'm genuinely worried about what that means for the future. We have the closest thing to a religious war brewing on our hands as I can think of in America without actually being about religion.
2012-05-03 10:08:18 AM  
1 votes:

mrshowrules: Cagey B: Donald Rumsfeld is a genuinely despicable human being. He was one of the largest enablers of a pointless waste of lives that served only to fatten the wallets of his friends. He has done nothing but bring misery and death into the world. And there are people who think this bag of shiat is a hero.

He should be in f*cking jail, not polluting the discourse with yet more idiocy.

He's just an idiot. Putting him in charge in the DoD is what is despicable. Like the horse judge in charge of FEMA.


My favorite is still appointing Bolton as the UN ambassador. I get the logic of appointing a pushy jerk as the Secretary of Defense, but making an asshole one of the top diplomats is just ridiculous.

You're telling the world, "We don't care what you think. Have fun trying to deal with this guy."
2012-05-03 09:47:51 AM  
1 votes:
How does this guy sleep at night?

guy farked up a war, not something little like a marriage or blurting out that santa doesn't exist in front of a couple of 5 year olds...a war. Thousands died due to his failures.

Not only is he fine with that, but he's cocky about it. Then Obama does something that certainly should be universally applauded (maybe al quada wont cheer but..) and this guy who has made mistakes that would cause any man with a conscience to fall on the nearest pointy stick has the ability to crap on it out of pure political spite on national TV!?!?

WOW!
guy's a sociopath or something, I'm not a doctor, but I can tell you he's sick.
2012-05-03 09:40:17 AM  
1 votes:

qorkfiend: I'm a little curious as to what those other two thought were Rumsfeld's redeeming qualities.


I'm gonna go with "He's a Republican".
2012-05-03 09:34:09 AM  
1 votes:
There are 3 things about which members of the previous administration should remain silent -

The economy they helped to wreck
The war in Afghanistan they ignored fior 8 years
And the terrorist they trapped only to allow him to escape and vanish in 2001
2012-05-03 09:17:23 AM  
1 votes:

hlahbays: Of course it looks like an easy call to all these idiots. Everybody is a brilliant football coach on Monday morning when you already know the outcome. It would also look like an obvious mistake to them had things gone sideways.


The glaring BS here though, is that under the very specific condition of going into the specific country of Pakistan, to get the specific target of Al Quida, and doing it specifically without the help of the Pakistan government, many stated they wouldn't.

Rarely is such a hypothetical scenario, discussed pre-election, ever actually realized. Mitt Romney himself gave his answer to what he would do here. For him to change it now just solidifies his flip-flopping persona in people's minds.

I really wish some reporter would ask him what he meant by: "even Jimmy Carter would have [made the call]."
2012-05-03 09:08:01 AM  
1 votes:
Of course it looks like an easy call to all these idiots. Everybody is a brilliant football coach on Monday morning when you already know the outcome. It would also look like an obvious mistake to them had things gone sideways.
2012-05-03 09:07:57 AM  
1 votes:

MithrandirBooga: Is it just me, or are the Republicans genuinely pissed off that Bin Laden is dead?

/convinced more and more that party is full of traitors every day


I said it once, will say it again.

Republicans: Supporting terrorists since Jan 20, 2009.
2012-05-03 09:04:37 AM  
1 votes:
The opinion of this clueless tool who farked-up two wars is irrelevant.
2012-05-03 08:37:51 AM  
1 votes:
To the Bush administration, bin Laden was more valuable alive than dead for their domestic U.S. strategy. If you remember, the Department of Homeland Security could be counted on to announce a new terrorist threat every time Bush's poll numbers began to slide. Keeping Americans in a constant state of fear was key to getting re-elected.
It's the same with abortion and immigration -- the GOP will never resolve those disputes because they need their core of crazy voters to stay in power.
Fortunately, Republicans overestimate the power of Fox propaganda (at least among independents) and underestimate the intelligence (and memory) of the public at large. It also helps that Obama has destroyed the myth of Republican expertise in military affairs.
By the way, Romney's loaded up his foreign policy staff with the same neocon dream team that gave us Iraq.
2012-05-03 08:37:24 AM  
1 votes:
Rumsfeld Declares Major Combat Over in Afghanistan

In an announcement marking a major victory in America's ongoing war on terror, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld declared Thursday that "major combat activity" has ended in Afghanistan. Later in the day, from aboard an aircraft carrier in the Pacific Ocean, President Bush planned to announce that military combat is over in Iraq.

A Bush administration source told Fox News that Bush's "compact" address to the nation from aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln (search) will be "not too far short of a victory statement."

Rumsfeld, seeking to reassure allies jittery about reconstruction and humanitarian efforts, made his announcement in a joint news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai (search) in Kabul.


He opened the news conference with the good news: "We're at a point where we clearly have moved from major combat activity to a period of stability and stabilization and reconstruction activities."

The defense secretary said the U.S. military will still be involved in trying to stabilize the security situation in Afghanistan, which he said has "porous borders."

"People can in fact return and do things that are unhelpful to the success of this government," he said.

Karzai said Afghanistan has made great progress since the Taliban (search) was overthrown and a new government installed, but he said much more needs to be done.
...
McNeill said he hopes U.S. forces could be out of Afghanistan by the end of summer 2004.
...
Rumsfeld has insisted his trip is not a "victory tour," waiting for President Bush to make a formal announcement of the end of major combat operations, which is expected Thursday. Some of the commanders in Iraq were less circumspect.

"We won the military fight, clearly," said Maj. Gen. Buford Blount III, commander of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division, which is occupying Baghdad. He said he hoped his division could start returning home by June.

Retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, who is heading the reconstruction effort in Iraq, said the quick victory prevented the humanitarian crisis he had feared. Americans, Garner said, "ought to be beating our chests every day."

Link
2012-05-03 08:36:21 AM  
1 votes:
Every time the GOP criticizes about the OBL killing I think about the video he did where he was looking for him behind the couch in the White House.

From 2001 to 2008 you spineless farkwits dropped the ball and pansied out time and time again. It was the one thing that could have been a shining light over all the other abject failures.

But you didn't.

Obama took a big risk and could have failed miserably. But he succeeded and is due the credit for not only that but showing exactly what sort of help were getting from Pakistan.
2012-05-03 08:17:14 AM  
1 votes:

Descartes: *sigh* It wasnt' Bin Laden. Anyone would have made the call to get Bin Laden.

You guys are embarrassing... if Bush or McCain had did this and publicized it for cheap politics like this, the same cheerleaders would be the first critics, but because Obama is on our team you just let it pass. This partisan shiat is gonna destroy our country.


Google "2008 GOP 9/11 tribute" for the video they played at the RNC that year and tell me the Repubs didn't politicize the deaths of thousands of people to try and get their man elected. I'd link it myself but it was revolting and literally made me want to cry at the time it happened. 9/11 porn at its "best."
2012-05-03 07:23:35 AM  
1 votes:
I sometimes think Rummy is a douchebag.
These times are the same as when I think about Rumsfeld.
2012-05-03 07:23:29 AM  
1 votes:

Mentat: It's always an easy call when you don't have to accept the responsibility for the act.


Rummy hasn't ever accepted responsibility for anything that failed. Common among retreads from the Nixon administration who were mysteriously tapped by Bush the Lesser for positions of power.
2012-05-03 06:54:07 AM  
1 votes:

Descartes: *sigh* It wasnt' Bin Laden. Anyone would have made the call to get Bin Laden.

You guys are embarrassing... if Bush or McCain had did this and publicized it for cheap politics like this, the same cheerleaders would be the first critics, but because Obama is on our team you just let it pass. This partisan shiat is gonna destroy our country.


You are insane if you don't see who's responsible for 99% of divisiveness currently at play in American politics.

Also you really think Dems wouldn't be happy if a Rep killed Osama Bin Laden?

Dems rallied around Bush after 9/11.

Republicans dismissed Obama accomplishments after OBL got taken down.

Give your head a shake and try to get those three metal balls back in those holes and then try thinking your post through again.
2012-05-03 06:45:25 AM  
1 votes:

Descartes: *sigh* It wasnt' Bin Laden. Anyone would have made the call to get Bin Laden.

You guys are embarrassing... if Bush or McCain had did this and publicized it for cheap politics like this, the same cheerleaders would be the first critics, but because Obama is on our team you just let it pass. This partisan shiat is gonna destroy our country.


What are you complaining about? This is one of the perks of being the incumbent President. Good things that happen on your watch, you get credit for, even IF your involvement was nothing more than giving an order. And you also are blamed for anything bad that happens, even if it is beyond your control (ex: gas prices). Past Republican administrations played up their accomplishments, and future ones will too.

Frankly, this whole line of argument just makes today's GOP look more like whiny biatches than they already are.
2012-05-03 05:18:34 AM  
1 votes:
republicans wanted to keep Bin laden alive as a Bogeyman for as long as possible. As long as he was still kickin', the recruiters made their quotas, and the money to the Military-Industrial Complex kept rollin' in.
2012-05-03 05:12:43 AM  
1 votes:

WizardofToast: "You mentioned there was a tough decision," Rumsfeld said on Tuesday night on Fox News. "I don't think it was a tough decision. We've seen a lot of instances where presidents over the years have had to make decisions like that."

Yes. And there was the risk of failing. Remember Jimmy Carter's Operation Eagle Claw? Carter tried to save American captives in Iran and the crew got lost and crashed one of the helicopters. Obama was farking lucky it went off perfectly.


No. Obama personally demanded backups for the copters originally scheduled. When one failed, the backups were ready. Obama 's idea and order. It's called planning, and frequently, planning is a big help.
2012-05-03 05:01:14 AM  
1 votes:
Well thank GOD you will never be president then Rummy. You obviously don't have the balls to do what needed to be done. You are respoinsible for bringing Cheney down on us so that is two strikes (at least) against you. Now go and play with an armed cruise missle.
2012-05-03 04:43:41 AM  
1 votes:

WizardofToast: "You mentioned there was a tough decision," Rumsfeld said on Tuesday night on Fox News. "I don't think it was a tough decision. We've seen a lot of instances where presidents over the years have had to make decisions like that."

Yes. And there was the risk of failing. Remember Jimmy Carter's Operation Eagle Claw? Carter tried to save American captives in Iran and the crew got lost and crashed one of the helicopters. Obama was farking lucky it went off perfectly.


Well it didn't go off perfectly. Remember that little fender bender in the yard with one of the helicopters? Still the farkup on the mission was not a killer one fortunately and the rest of the mission went about as well as could be expected.

Rumsfeld is an asshole and a farkup, we can all agree on that. It is a slightly different set of circumstances to compare why one mission was greenlighted and the earlier mission was nixed. Different political climate in Afghanistan where the state was seen as improving toward what we wanted them to do compared with the more recent Pakistan where the civilian and military branches of government are basically operating seperately with no hope of improved relations. Mission size is important as the numbers at risk and casualties potentially available were dramatically different. You don't know what was necessary, but it is a little easier to approve the smaller raid of 60 on a couple of helicopters vs several hundred with multiple aircraft and supporting elements. Rumjsfeld shouldn't say its an easy call on the Bin Ladin raid and I don't think we can necessarily condemn canceling the earlier raid given the available facts and political climate at that time.
2012-05-03 04:15:22 AM  
1 votes:
So not only is Rummy incompetent, but he's also a liar.
2012-05-03 01:09:03 AM  
1 votes:

Mark Ratner: Lionel Mandrake: Mark Ratner: The article said it was for a meeting of top Al Qaeda people, but they don't mention that Bin Laden was one of theim. Also, they say the mission ballooned from a small number of elite special forces to a few hundred military personell.

Rumsfeld gets a pass from me on this, sorry to say.

Why did Rummy allow it to balloon?

I always thought he was in favor of a smaller, leaner fighting force in general, but I doubt he was in charge of the actual logistics of the mission.

Yes, he's the defense secretary, but the mission's details would be planned by top military officials.

From what I've read and seen on TV, the Bin Laden raid was basically a 50/50 call, but involved 60 navy seals (some as backups that weren't actually there).

I'm just glad he's dead. Justice, baby. Sweet justice.


I dunno...I think if he said "keep it small" the planners would have kept it small.
2012-05-03 01:07:29 AM  
1 votes:

Cagey B: Donald Rumsfeld is a genuinely despicable human being. He was one of the largest enablers of a pointless waste of lives that served only to fatten the wallets of his friends. He has done nothing but bring misery and death into the world. And there are people who think this bag of shiat is a hero.

He should be in f*cking jail, not polluting the discourse with yet more idiocy.


and if that isn't enough, he went about all of that while acting like a really smarmy dickbag.
2012-05-03 12:39:03 AM  
1 votes:

Mark Ratner: The article said it was for a meeting of top Al Qaeda people, but they don't mention that Bin Laden was one of theim. Also, they say the mission ballooned from a small number of elite special forces to a few hundred military personell.

Rumsfeld gets a pass from me on this, sorry to say.


Why did Rummy allow it to balloon?
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report