NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, bushites. This isn't some retired general, this is the whole military. They have lost faith in Rumsfeld and want him gone. Care to tell them to shut up?

(CNN) -- An editorial to be published Monday in independent publications that serve the four main branches of the U.S. military will call for President Bush to replace Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

"Basically, the editorial says, it's clear now, from some of the public statements that military leaders are making, that he's lost the support and respect of the military leadership," said Robert Hodierne, senior managing editor for the publications' parent company Army Times Publications.

"That they're starting to go public with that now, with their disagreements, added up with all of the other missteps we believe he's made, that it's time for him to be replaced," Hodierne.

Army Times Publications publishes the Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and the Marine Corps Times.

It is the second time the publications have called for Rumsfeld to resign.

Bush has maintained that Rumsfeld will stay on the job until 2008. (Watch Bush say Rumsfeld is staying on the job -- 1:20 )

In May 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal broke, an Army Times editorial said, "This was not just a failure of leadership at the local command level. This was a failure that ran straight to the top. Accountability here is essential, even if that means relieving top leaders from duty in a time of war."

The timing of Monday's editorial was prompted not by midterm elections, scheduled for Tuesday, but by Bush's statement earlier this week that he intends to keep Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney in their posts through the end of his term, Hodierne said.

No one running for midterm elections, he noted, would have the power to replace Rumsfeld.

Swaying conservative voters "is not our aim," said Hodierne. "Our aim is simply to say, for the good of the service, for the good of the country, it's time for this guy to go."

Owned by the Gannett Company, Army Times Publishing is the world's largest publisher of defense and military-related periodicals, Hodierne said.

The four weekly newspapers are distributed in the general stores and commissaries on military around the world. They have a combined circulation of about 250,000, he said.

In exactly two and a half minutes, MeansToAnEnd will come in with an "explanation" of why this is somehow false.

He ignored them before. Why would he act any differently now?

They are understandably upset -- after all, they are embroiled in a long and hard struggle and desire to go home. However, we would be amiss if we considered the opinions of some "cut-and-runners" regarding Rumsfeld. It would be like asking some hippies if they like war.

Oaky, so my timing was off. Nobody's perfect.

They are understandably upset -- after all, they are embroiled in a long and hard struggle and desire to go home. However, we would be amiss if we considered the opinions of some "cut-and-runners" regarding Rumsfeld. It would be like asking some hippies if they like war.
Hippies who happen to be high-ranking members of the US armed forces?

Hippies who happen to be high-ranking members of the US armed forces?

I was giving an example. Who knows what vested interests the high-ranking generals may have? The troops obviously have a conflict of interest, since they would prefer to go home, while Rumsfeld would prefer to bring peace, freedom, and stability to the Iraqi people.

I was giving an example. Who knows what vested interests the high-ranking generals may have? The troops obviously have a conflict of interest, since they would prefer to go home, while Rumsfeld would prefer to bring peace, freedom, and stability to the Iraqi people.

Sometimes it's hard to believe you actually believe what you type.

They are understandably upset -- after all, they are embroiled in a long and hard struggle and desire to go home. However, we would be amiss if we considered the opinions of some "cut-and-runners" regarding Rumsfeld. It would be like asking some hippies if they like war.

:rolleyes:

Don't you mean "remiss", MTAE?

;)

And are you actually impugning the troops?

:eek:

They are understandably upset -- after all, they are embroiled in a long and hard struggle and desire to go home. However, we would be amiss if we considered the opinions of some "cut-and-runners" regarding Rumsfeld. It would be like asking some hippies if they like war.

Wow, you know what happens when you assume right?

Nowhere in the ariticle does it say that staying in Iraq is the problem, MTAE. Simply put, Rummy is incompetent, the military knows this, they want him gone to be replaced by someone who knows what the hell he is doing.

You fail at argumentative logic, as you assume far to much, and have very few facts to support your statements.

Sometimes it's hard to believe you actually believe what you type.

What? You don't believe that the troops would rather be at home than fighting in Iraq? Well, it's getting better in Iraq, of course, but it is still in desperate straits. It is much nicer back in the USA.

Sometimes it's hard to believe you actually believe what you type.

It is doublethink in its purest form: being highly suspicious of the motives of everyone in the US military -- the tough, experienced experts that Bush claims to trust -- yet blindly accepting anything Bush and his cronies say like it's Gospel truth.

It's so blatant, I hardly believe him either. It's hard to imagine anyone who's standards and beliefs about people's motives could be at odds that much...

I was giving an example. Who knows what vested interests the high-ranking generals may have? The troops obviously have a conflict of interest, since they would prefer to go home, while Rumsfeld would prefer to bring peace, freedom, and stability to the Iraqi people.

Such confidence you have in the integrity and courage of your military men and women.

Such confidence you have in the integrity and courage of your military men and women.

MTAE has stated very clearly before that the military men and women are idiots for joining the military.

His logic is astoundingly simplistic and childish. Oh, to be so innocent.

MTAE has stated very clearly before that the military men and women are idiots for joining the military.

His logic is astoundingly simplistic and childish. Oh, to be so innocent.

Wow. He funny lady.

It is doublethink in its purest form: being highly suspicious of the motives of everyone in the US military -- the tough, experienced experts that Bush claims to trust -- yet blindly accepting anything Bush and his cronies say like it's Gospel truth.

I put my faith in democratically-elected officials, yet I reserve the right to be suspicious of those who are in positions of power without the consent of the people.

What? You don't believe that the troops would rather be at home than fighting in Iraq? Well, it's getting better in Iraq, of course, but it is still in desperate straits. It is much nicer back in the USA.

Maybe they want to "bring peace, freedom, and stability to the Iraqi people", or maybe just clean up the mess they made there, whatever.

I put my faith in democratically-elected officials, yet I reserve the right to be suspicious of those who are in positions of power without the consent of the people.
I don't think Rumsfeld was ever elected. Plus, the majority of people, both civilian (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/12/20/poll/) and military (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/13/AR2006041301238.html), want him ousted. Why no suspicion for him?

They are understandably upset -- after all, they are embroiled in a long and hard struggle and desire to go home. However, we would be amiss if we considered the opinions of some "cut-and-runners" regarding Rumsfeld. It would be like asking some hippies if they like war.

Cut and runners, like military people still serving.

I put my faith in democratically-elected officials, yet I reserve the right to be suspicious of those who are in positions of power without the consent of the people.

Huh. So in other words you question everything the Dems do and nothing the Repubs do. At least, that's what it's looking like, MTAE. And I get the distinct feeling you are ignoring my first post. But alas, what can one do to stop a troll?

I don't think Rumsfeld was ever elected. Plus, the majority of people, both civilian (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/12/20/poll/) and military (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/13/AR2006041301238.html), want him ousted. Why no suspicion for him?

Bush was democratically-elected, and so I put my faith in him to do what he feels is correct. He staunchly supports Rumsfeld, so I have no reason to question Rumsfeld. I don't think that I know more than the president about the intricacies in Iraq, and you don't either.

You fail at argumentative logic, as you assume far to much, and have very few facts to support your statements.

I am simply pointing out a conflict of interest between the soldiers and the task of staying in Iraq. Are you negating the fact that soldiers would prefer to be home instead of in Iraq? That is my only assumption, and it happens to be correct.

Cut and runners, like military people still serving.

They are forced to stay in Iraq for the duration of their conflict, regardless of their own personal preferences.

Bush was democratically-elected, and so I put my faith in him to do what he feels is correct. He staunchly supports Rumsfeld, so I have no reason to question Rumsfeld. I don't think that I know more than the president about the intricacies in Iraq, and you don't either.
Seeing as Bush is the Commander in Chief, he either has appointed or has approved of the current military leadership, no? He'd can them otherwise, if he's as bold and determined as you say. So, since these commanders and generals are as trusted and more experienced than dear ol' Rummy, why do you not accept their complaints at face value? Oh, that's right... they're not Bush androids.

Bush was democratically-elected, and so I put my faith in him to do what he feels is correct. He staunchly supports Rumsfeld, so I have no reason to question Rumsfeld. I don't think that I know more than the president about the intricacies in Iraq, and you don't either.

Actually, technically speaking, talking true democracy... Gore won in 2000. But that's beside the point.

And I would think that the people in Iraq would know far more about how to fight in Iraq than Rummy, but hey, that's my opinion.

Bush was democratically-elected, and so I put my faith in him to do what he feels is correct. He staunchly supports Rumsfeld, so I have no reason to question Rumsfeld. I don't think that I know more than the president about the intricacies in Iraq, and you don't either.

A retarded monkey understands more about Iraq than this president. This president is the stupidest president we have ever had. He doesn't understand anything at all.

I am simply pointing out a conflict of interest between the soldiers and the task of staying in Iraq. Are you negating the fact that soldiers would prefer to be home instead of in Iraq? That is my only assumption, and it happens to be correct.

Yes, however that is assuming that these people are willing to cut and run in Iraq. Take WW2, for example. I'm sure plenty of soldiers wanted to be home than in Europe. Yet, they were willing to put that aside and fight. Conflict of interest doesn't mean that they necessarily want to go home, it just means they are willing to put aside they own personal wants for something else.

I am simply pointing out a conflict of interest between the soldiers and the task of staying in Iraq. Are you negating the fact that soldiers would prefer to be home instead of in Iraq? That is my only assumption, and it happens to be correct.

So you're saying that our troops moral is so low that they don't even believe in what they are doing? Why do you think their moral is so low? Who's job is it to keep their moral up?

Oaky, so my timing was off. Nobody's perfect.

Only by one and a half minutes. Impressive.

So you're saying that our troops moral is so low that they don't even believe in what they are doing? Why do you think their moral is so low? Who's job is it to keep their moral up?

The reason the troops' moral is so low is because their brave efforts to bring peace to Iraq is constantly undermined by the Democrats and the liberal media.

/jk

I was giving an example. Who knows what vested interests the high-ranking generals may have? The troops obviously have a conflict of interest, since they would prefer to go home, while Rumsfeld would prefer to bring peace, freedom, and stability to the Iraqi people.

Why are you insulting the troops intelligence?

Why must you always attack our troops?

Boy... I see why the right does this now. It could get addictive.

Why are you insulting the troops intelligence?

Why must you always attack our troops?

Boy... I see why the right does this now. It could get addictive.

Look, if you wanna hate America move to France MTAE.

God that is addictive!

So you're saying that our troops moral is so low that they don't even believe in what they are doing? Why do you think their moral is so low? Who's job is it to keep their moral up?

I'm sorry -- I normally wouldn't do this, but you misspelled "morale" three times in that post. The troops' morale is so low because they are continuously being assaulted by the liberal media. Whenever a soldier commits a war crime, it gets splashed on all the TV screens. Whenever there is a particularly hard day of fighting, it gets reported on the "news." However, the successes of the troops are never displayed as prominently. It is enough to disgruntle anybody.

Look, if you wanna hate America move to France MTAE.

God that is addictive!

I love America and our troops. I simply believe them to be quite unintelligent overall.

Just saw this on the news - interesting stuff, although I'm not sure how representative it is of the US military as a whole.

That said, MTAE is good, but he's no UN Abassadorship. I'm sorry, but my allegiance is still with UNA. Until such time as greats like "China attacked Pearl Harbor!" and "I have my sources but I'm not going to tell you them." are beaten, I shall see MTAE as merely an amusing contender to the crown - a crown that rests fittingly upon the head of UNA.

I'm sorry -- I normally wouldn't do this, but you misspelled "morale" three times in that post. The troops' morale is so low because they are continuously being assaulted by the liberal media. Whenever a soldier commits a war crime, it gets splashed on all the TV screens. Whenever there is a particularly hard day of fighting, it gets reported on the "news." However, the successes of the troops are never displayed as prominently. It is enough to disgruntle anybody.

That dastardly liberal media - publishing war crimes. Someone, think of the war criminals!

I'm sorry -- I normally wouldn't do this, but you misspelled "morale" three times in that post. The troops' morale is so low because they are continuously being assaulted by the liberal media. Whenever a soldier commits a war crime, it gets splashed on all the TV screens. Whenever there is a particularly hard day of fighting, it gets reported on the "news." However, the successes of the troops are never displayed as prominently. It is enough to disgruntle anybody.

Really, they never mentioned we outed Saddam?

Wait. . .That was three years ago! That's why its not in the news! We already accomplished our mission, so we cant have any more successes. Right?

We did the job already. Why ae you expecting so much of our admittedly stupid troops? They cant do any better.

I have the distinct impression that MTAE is ignoring most of what I say because he cannot refute it. Thus, I win.

*raises the roof*

Seriously, I want answers, MTAE.

I love America and our troops. I simply believe them to be quite unintelligent overall.
Alrighty... I know this has been done, and isn't exactly revolutionary, but I'm calling it: MTAE is not real. He is not serious. He is a troll.

After all that crap you spewed about Kerry, there is no way that you could honestly say what you just did.

I have the distinct impression that MTAE is ignoring most of what I say because he cannot refute it. Thus, I win.

*raises the roof*

Seriously, I want answers, MTAE.

Or, he could be another UNA. People...come on. Y'all are being played like a perfectly-tuned flute and dancing to his tune.

Yes, however that is assuming that these people are willing to cut and run in Iraq.

The way I see it, there is great potential for a conflict of interest. Even though such a conflict cannot be proven empirically does not negate its existence. I believe that the troops no longer want to fight and want to come home; while there are no facts to substantiate my assertion, there are no facts supporting the inverse, either. However, if you apply a modicum of common sense, you will realize that at least a portion of the troops in Iraq now believe the war to be a lost cause and want to go home. Therefore, the troops would rather oust Rumsfeld and install somebody who wishes to withdraw the troops from Iraq. It's not complicated.

I'm sorry -- I normally wouldn't do this, but you misspelled "morale" three times in that post. The troops' morale is so low because they are continuously being assaulted by the liberal media. Whenever a soldier commits a war crime, it gets splashed on all the TV screens. Whenever there is a particularly hard day of fighting, it gets reported on the "news." However, the successes of the troops are never displayed as prominently. It is enough to disgruntle anybody.

Really? Because according to the troops their morale is low because they have lost confidence in the civilian leadership. You should tell them they are wrong. You should tell the troops, "Your morale is low because of the liberal media, not because Rumsfeld and Bush are stupid." Maybe then they'll understand although they're stupid, too, so you'll have to explain it slowly.

That said, MTAE is good, but he's no UN Abassadorship.

I wonder why. Allow me to ponder this for a second. Ooh, I know! Because I, unlike UNA, am not a troll! Get it? Good. I have never posted such ridiculous topics, devoid of even a shred of reason, as he has.

I may disapprove of this war as much as the next guy. However Rummy shouldn't go, everything isnt his fault. If things are going poorly its because of Bush or the troops on the ground. Perhaps they aren't fighting hard enough or something. But Rummy's smart, he should stay on (IMHO)

After all that crap you spewed about Kerry, there is no way that you could honestly say what you just did.

To which crap would you be referring? It is disgusting for Kerry to slander our armed forces, regardless of the veracity of his statements. It would be like him calling Americans, as a whole, white.

Okay, bushites. This isn't some retired general, this is the whole military. They have lost faith in Rumsfeld and want him gone. Care to tell them to shut up?

Even some of us retired non-generals and our wives would like him to retire. He isn't exactly our (retired military) friend. He advocated dumping our health care sytem (Tricare) and dumping us into the overloaded VA system.

I wonder why. Allow me to ponder this for a second. Ooh, I know! Because I, unlike UNA, am not a troll! Get it? Good. I have never posted such ridiculous topics, devoid of even a shred of reason, as he has.

I wonder, then, how would you know whom UNA was, if you joined in September, and I am fairly sure he died off long ago, then you should not know whom he is unless you are a puppet, or a new nation because your old one was banned.

And yes, you are a troll. Your topics are ridiculous, and seem to only have the purpose of angering people.

Look, if you wanna hate America move to France MTAE.

God that is addictive!

The right just wants the terrorists to win!

Why do they hate America?

I was going through rhetoric withdrawal! I can't help myself!!!

Ooh, I know! Because I, unlike UNA, am not a troll! Get it?

Yeah, actually you are. Either that, or just a dumbass who contradicts his own supposed principles and has no sense of ethics or morality. My vote is both.

The right just wants the terrorists to win!

Why do they hate America?

I was going through rhetoric withdrawal! I can't help myself!!!

What right wants the terrorists to win? Do you mean the American left wants the terrorists to win? :confused:

Yeah, actually you are. Either that, or just a dumbass who contradicts his own supposed principles and has no sense of ethics or morality. My vote is both.

hahahah lolz pwnzorz!

ZING! :D

I wonder, then, how would you know whom UNA was, if you joined in September, and I am fairly sure he died off long ago, then you should not know whom he is unless you are a puppet, or a new nation because your old one was banned.

Actually, I initially joined these forums in early 2004. However, the views which I expressed were puerile at first, and I was readily banned. After that, I migrated to the NewGrounds (http://newgrounds.com/bbs/forum.php?id=4) political forum, which I still frequent. Recently, when I was bored, I again began posting in NSG.

And yes, you are a troll. Your topics are ridiculous, and seem to only have the purpose of angering people.

No, my topics have the sole point of shedding light on some murky areas in which liberals seldom dare venture. I attempted to widen the world view of liberals by espousing sharply contrasting views to their own. Perhaps they angered liberals because my outlook is diametrically opposed to theirs, but I did not resort to flaming nor did I solicit negative responses.

Ya know, I'm kinda hoping Corny will make a comeback and start a diatribe on how the entire military is talking out of its ass calling for Bumsfailed's resignation.

:D

To which crap would you be referring? It is disgusting for Kerry to slander our armed forces, regardless of the veracity of his statements. It would be like him calling Americans, as a whole, white.
Well, lessee... you criticized Kerry for supposedly insulting the troops (which he didn't), then turn around twice and call them stupid yourself, then immediately go back and say that Kerry's comments on the troops were "disgusting".

It'd be like me saying:

"Anybody who supports torture is an anti-American monster. By the way, I think torture is a fine idea and should be used indiscriminately. Also, I don't know if I mentioned it, but torture is a terrible thing, and its advocates should be ashamed."

Anybody else tired of topics turning into Meanstoanend comedy routines? Tell a joke, sure... but all topics are becoming one if that guy is involved.

Well, lessee... you criticized Kerry for supposedly insulting the troops (which he did), then turn around twice and call them stupid yourself, then immediately go back and say that Kerry's comments on the troops were "disgusting".

Corrected by a retired troop.

They are understandably upset -- after all, they are embroiled in a long and hard struggle and desire to go home.
No shit. It's a 'war' that can't be won. Like Vietnam...
However, we would be amiss if we considered the opinions of some "cut-and-runners" regarding Rumsfeld.
As if.

Many members of the military want to go home. Listen to them. If the generals are telling Bush that your troops need to leave, they need to leave.

Full stop.

In exactly two and a half minutes, MeansToAnEnd will come in with an "explanation" of why this is somehow false.
You were wrong. It took 4 minutes, which begs a question.....


Is MTAE your sockpuppet? :D

Ya know, I'm kinda hoping Corny will make a comeback and start a diatribe on how the entire military is talking out of its ass calling for Bumsfailed's resignation.

:D
Come on, there are lots of new puppets here....surely one must be Corny?

With Eutrusca being deleted and Corny gone, who will stand up for Rummy the Dummy?

What right wants the terrorists to win? Do you mean the American left wants the terrorists to win? :confused:

A) We both know that that statement is a lie and a distortion

and

B) Read the white text, and you'll realize we were joking.

Corrected by a retired troop.
With all due respect, your wrong. Just look at the facts, his script, the context, common sense, or even some conservative pundits. Besides, I don't see you making a fuss when MTAE here clearly and blatantly states that our troops are stupid. I smell bias...

Corrected by a retired troop.

Simply not true. The far right has been spinning this issue harder than a generator in a nuclear plant, but it just isn't the case. Kerry misspoke. It's that simple.

I despise the way that the far right has chosen to attack any member of the military who is not also a Bushevik extremist. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Besides, I don't see you making a fuss when MTAE here clearly and blatantly states that our troops are stupid. I smell bias...

Not all of them, just in general. Also, that doesn't apply to troops who were conscripted or were somehow coerced to join.