Rumsfeld’s Amnesia: ‘I’ve Avoided Predicting The Timing’ of Withdrawal From Iraq
By on Mar 23rd, 2006 at 2:46 pm
Rumsfeld’s Amnesia: ‘I’ve Avoided Predicting The Timing’ of Withdrawal From Iraq
Rumsfeld Now:
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld declined to predict on Thursday when U.S. forces would completely leave Iraq, a decision President Bush has said would be up to a future U.S. president and a future Iraqi government. “I’ve avoided predicting the timing,” Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon.
Rumsfeld Then:
The Gulf War in the 1990s lasted five days on the ground. 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. [11/14/02]
It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months. [2/7/03]
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
79 Responses to “Rumsfeld’s Amnesia: ‘I’ve Avoided Predicting The Timing’ of Withdrawal From Iraq”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Bush Legacy
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Franken
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Krauthammer
Kyl
LGBT
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Sanford
Sotomayor
Steele
Supreme Court
Terrorism
ThinkProgress
Tiller
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Rummy: “I’ve avoided predicting the timing†of withdrawal.
March 23rd, 2006 at 2:49 pmAnd that's how I knocked up America.
Damn those tape recording thingies!
Sincerely,
Donny Rummy
March 23rd, 2006 at 2:51 pmIf Rummy weren't such a slave to the Phant's taking points, I wonder how bad his "amnesia" would be?
It's too bad for America that we have so many liars and sick-o-Phants in the current administration.
March 23rd, 2006 at 2:56 pmYou'd think it was 1806 (b4 electronic medium) instead of 2006 the way this administration double-speaks, contradicts, flip-flops, and lies. I didn' say that....blah, blah,blah.
March 23rd, 2006 at 2:56 pmWatch this
March 23rd, 2006 at 2:57 pmThe first quote talks about troop withdrawl from Iraq and the second and third deal with how long combat will last. They don't exactly mesh with eachother on topic but I think it goes to show this administration had no real plan for this war and never has intended to leave the country. If Rummy can say that he only believes that combat would have only lasted 6 months at the most and then says he has never really thought about troop withdrawl, I think that says a lot. Occupation of a major oil producing Middle Eastern country. He probalby has fallen asleep with a kickstand and that thought in his head for years.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:01 pmYes always good to leave a war for your children to solve.
Bono is Brian Peppers!
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:10 pmCant play Quake 3
Its a good thing that newspapers have archives and other public records exist, or Rumsfield amnesia would get so bad that he would forget where he lived.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:16 pmBush refuses to fire those who work for him who are grossly incompetent. Perhaps that explains why every company Bush started ended up in bankruptcy -- run the country like a business, yep, that's a good idea.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:17 pm#6, I think the basic point here is that Rumsfeld hasn't been shy in talking about how long the conflict would last. It's disingenous for him to claim that he's avoided talking about withdrawal when he assured the public before the war that we wouldn't be engaged in a long conflict in Iraq.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:19 pmNot to defend Rumsfeld but there is s difference between combat operations and occupation. I think the older statements that he made referred primarily to the initial combat.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:23 pmFaiz - You have REALLY stretched here!!!! Who on earth CAN predict how long a war will last?? YOU??? One can GUESS - One can HOPE - I have heard Rumsfeld and Bush say on numerous occasion that one does not KNOW how long we'll be in Iraq. (Good thing past Presidents haven't had to deal with the selective memory of TP.) Slow news day, huh??
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:34 pmI agree JPV, however his pollyana thing, was meant to reasure the US public that we would be done and our troops home in a few months.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:36 pm"Faiz - You have REALLY stretched here!!! mighty aphrodite"
You mean like how you 'stretched' and claimed that in 15 years you fit in 3 years of college, law school, 12 years of military service, 4 pregnancies, marriage, and a career in private practice?
Before you accuse others of 'stretching', you might want to spend more time in create a fake 'bio' that's consistent. Otherwise, your 'credibility' is right up there with Mike Brown.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:38 pmHey, Aphrodite, how's it going? I think that your question about who can predict how long a war will last shoud have been addressed to Rumsfeld 3 years ago. He seemed quite confident then that the war wouldn't last longer than 6 months. You don't suppose he was lying in order to convince Congress and Americans to go to war, do you? And Wolfowitz was quite confident that Iraqi oil would pay for the war, how's that coming along?
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:39 pmHi Jane - All is well! I'm not going to disagree with what Rummy said three years ago - but I know that comment was not his ONLY comment on the issue of duration. There are most likely 75 - 100 comments on record (with TV interviews and press conferences) and TP chooses the three that suit the official TP ideology??? This site can do better than the Guardian (that socialist rag) or the old Daily Worker - I think...
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:51 pmMy best to you and Wayne!!
Here's something ThinkProgress should write about.
JABBS has a post about a U.S. soldier blogging from Iraq and complaining that he's being "fed nothing but propaganda."
Sound familiar?
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:59 pmHis comment three years ago was in contrast to what he was being told by his advisors and by what the army war college predicted so it hink I have a problem with what he says. What he said was no where near the truth back then and he knew it as he said it. IN addition to his official advisors it is not in the PNAC plan to leave Iraq so he definately knew what he said back then was false as he was saying it.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:00 pmMighty Moron,
That's because the first rumsfeld comments were used to 'sell' the war, but once 'sold' he changed his story - much like yourself, when you get in trouble.
As for 'suiting the ideology', I can see you discount the contradictions without a second thought - the mark of a true 'apologist' and 'prolitariat'. Nice work - nazi/commie boy.
I read an interesting question the other day, when did the NeoCons convince conservatives to become the new 'communists' who spread freedom and equality around the world. Interesting question isn't it - I'm curious how an anti-commie like yourself deals with the fact that you've adopted such a 'communist' view of the world. It would make most people schizoid I imagine - but you seemingly already cornered that condition long before Iraq.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:01 pm#10 - Faiz, I see your point but this one is a stretch to me. What we should be talking about is what Rummy did not say in 2003 which was pretty clear to anyone who read between the lines - Cheney's Iraqi oil field maps being shown to his secret 2001 Energy Task Force (what about that Al Qaeda readiness committee you were supposed to chairing while you were playing Napoleon, Dick?). So where was the braindead media in asking the followup - "So if its five months that means we'll be out of Iraq when?"
PNAC always intended to stay, that was what should have come out if someone had bothered to ask the damn question.
Rummy was lying by omission.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:04 pmI'm back, people. Respect. Obviously, when he gave the six month time-table, the SECDEF was referring to the invasion and occupation phase of the Iraq campaign. Invasion and occupation was over back when the Prez made his historic landing on the aircraft carrier. We've been in the stablization and nation-building phase since then. Get a clue!
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:04 pm"Rummy: “I’ve avoided predicting the timing†of withdrawal.
And that’s how I knocked up America."
Comment by Zookeeper — March 23, 2006 @ 2:49
He's more into the rythym method of nation-building.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:05 pmThe entire tone 3 years ago was Sadaam ordered 9/11, weapons of mass desctruction, and we will win, and spread democracy, and have cheaper gas in a few months. Carefully parsing each statement it can be argued that Bush never directly linked Sadaam to 9/11, or Iraq to Al Queda. However it is dishonest in the extreme, because the underlying feeling of all of those statements, linked Sadaam, 9/11, Al Queda etc.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:05 pm#17, well David 70% of them think they are there because Saddam planned 9-11, so I'm not surprised. When you have Rush Limbaugh broadcasting to the Armed Services Network without a balancing opinion. Not surprised at all.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:06 pmI don't know why you keep reporting the discrepancies in statements by anyone in this administration. They're all proven, blatant liars and will continue to contradict themselves, ignore reality, and make the most incredibly assinine statements on a daily basis without retribution, so what's the point? If confronted they will laugh in your face and call you a terrorist.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:07 pmSomeone with a strong stomach (&&& LOTS patience and alcohol) should take RyAnnie to a Comedy Club - that poor thing has no sense of humour....But I guess those who take THEMSELVES as seriously as some do - a sense of humour would be a major accomplishment.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:09 pmI find that people will often accuse others of lacking the same qualities as themselves. IE sense of humour.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:16 pmI’m back, people. Respect. Obviously, when he gave the six month time-table, the SECDEF was referring to the invasion and occupation phase of the Iraq campaign. Invasion and occupation was over back when the Prez made his historic landing on the aircraft carrier. We’ve been in the stablization and nation-building phase since then. Get a clue!
Comment by A REAL AMERICAN — March 23, 2006 @ 4:04 pm
Respect is earned, troll, and that's why Bush's poll numbers are tanking; he squandered his, and yours. Next.
Whenever some one claims to be "real" they're fake as Bush's reasons for going to war. Describe how "occupation" differs from the current situation, puppet governments not withstanding.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:16 pmWhat are the three best things about Amnesia?
1. You can hide your own easter eggs
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:18 pm2. You meet a new person every day and
3. You can hide your own easter eggs
"Someone with a strong stomach (&&& LOTS patience and alcohol) should take RyAnnie to a Comedy Club - that poor thing has no sense of humour….But I guess those who take THEMSELVES as seriously as some do - a sense of humour would be a major accomplishment."
Comment by mighty aphrodite — March 23, 2006 @ 4:09 pm
Krikey mate, careful or they'll suss yer' not a real yank!
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:18 pm#28-
The occupation to which I refer was the actual occupying of the country, and preparation for the stabilization and nation-building we are doing right now as we speak. It would be extremely irresponsible for us to simply leave the country in ruins after going in and kicking ass. Victorious nations have an obligation to help the defeated nation pick up the pieces and re-build. How long were we in Germany and Japan after WWII? Oh yeah, I forgot. WE ARE STILL THERE! If you can't get a clue, then BUY one.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:22 pmRight now I'm having amnesia and déjà vu at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before. Donald Rumsfeel
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:23 pmso IYF you admit that "liberating the Iraqi's" is really secondary, and the bush administration is nation building and controlling the oil in Iraq?
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:26 pm"Someone with a strong stomach (&&& LOTS patience and alcohol) should take RyAnnie to a Comedy Club - that poor thing has no sense of humour….But I guess those who take THEMSELVES as seriously as some do - a sense of humour would be a major accomplishment. Comment by mighty aphrodite"
Ah, and now back to the 'sexual' attacks again. See, I was nice, I didn't call you Mighty Hermaphrodite, or point the obvious that there's no way in the world you're a 'womyn' in any sense of that word - and you attack with the gender. You have a real 'fixation' on sex and gender dissociativeness don't you?
Now as for the comedy club, you confuse not having humor, with not being funny. It's the same problem O'Liely, O'Rourke & Dennis Miller have, and why Al Franken is a beloved USO comedian, whereas these RepublicanCONs just aren't funny.
There's a reason successful and funny Comedians aren't conservatives - you guys are pathetic - not funny. And while it is certainly funny at times to laugh at how pathetic you are - that doesn't make you funny, only those that make jokes at you.
I laugh daily, and often at how stupid you are - but thanks for your 'concern' about my humor, now if you only showed the same concern for all of the people dying in Iraq, or living in poverty in this country - you might become an authentic human being and a real american. As it stands, you're just a sham, a fraud and an unfunny BORING idiot that hasn't said anything witty or original since you've arrived.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:31 pm"Invasion and occupation was over back when the Prez made his historic landing on the aircraft carrier. We’ve been in the stablization and nation-building phase since then. Get a clue! Comment by A REAL AMERICAN "
Another example of how we need a charity campaign for 'Dictionaries for Republicans'. When you 'stabalize' a nation things get more and not less stable. What you meant to say is that we've been 'destabalizing' Iraq - that would be a more accurate statement.
But then again, when has a Nazi Poser like yourself who merely pretends to be an american without exhibiting any american values ever cared about 'accuracy'.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:33 pmRyan-
What about Larry the Cable Guy? He is pretty funny, and also a conservative.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:34 pm#34 - I can't decide if I don't like Dennis Miller because he isn't funny or because he is an idiot - I mean republican. Are there any other right wing comedians? I don't think I have ever seen/heard one.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:35 pm#36 Larry the Cable Guy is just gross. He is no where close to being funny.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:36 pmJules,
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:37 pmI believe there are a handful of conservative comedians, but for the most part entertainment industry types with the expception of fox news tend to more liberal views.
#31
I got a clue now that you are a name switching Troll, Real American/InYourFace
That just blew whatever creditbility you ever had with me.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:39 pmNo, wait,you never had any credibility anyway.
GIT 'ER DONE! Larry the Cable Guy is the shiznit. Not to mention one of the most popular comedians out there right now. Only Blue State elitist liberals like yourself would consider him to be "gross".
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:41 pm#40-
What's in a name? Would a rose by any other name smell not as sweet? I'm just following in the footsteps of the great Dem leaders like Kerry. I switch my name as regularly as these guys switch their postions on key political issues. I'm just trying to fit in with you liberal pukes.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:44 pm#36, seen Larry, thought he was funny, but then he doesn't play to the political side much - he's largely poking fun at himself. Dennis Miller, doesn't do the self-deprecation and I don't find his hostility funny.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:44 pmThe occupation to which I refer was the actual occupying of the country, and preparation for the stabilization and nation-building we are doing right now as we speak.
Comment by IN YOUR FACE! — March 23, 2006 @ 4:22 pm
Let's see what your Supreme (mis)Leader has to say about nation building:
Let me tell you what else I'm worried about: I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place
--George Bush, during a speech in Chattanooga, Tenn., on Nov. 6, 2000.
Bush Backs Into Nation Building
I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation building core from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do. And when it gets overextended, morale drops. (...) [Somalia] Started off as a humanitarian mission and it changed into a nation-building mission, and that's where the mission went wrong. The mission was changed. And as a result, our nation paid a price. And so I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building. I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win war.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:44 pm--George Bush. October 11, 2000
The Second Gore-Bush Presidential Debate
[...] [...]
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:45 pmSomeone with a strong stomach (&&& LOTS patience and alcohol) should take RyAnnie to a Comedy Club - that poor thing has no sense of humour….But I guess those who take THEMSELVES as seriously as some do - a sense of humour would be a major accomplishment.
Comment by mighty aphrodite — March 23, 2006 @ 4:09 pm
No, the opposite - you just are not funny. And it's not a liberal - neocon thing, because I think IRI is funny when you get through all the pig excrement he covers in it.
Ryan, is also very funny. And smart - especially when he points out that your biographical timeline does not add up...
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:54 pmFirst, could one of you trolls please explain what an elitist is? Because as I recall in one of Bush;s speeches to his "base" he called them elite. They were very rich, sigh, I am not.
Second, I do not live in a blue state. Double sigh.
Third, I love how republican's "change their position" but liberals flip-flop. You see trolls this is why you lose credibility, you are not consistent.
March 23rd, 2006 at 4:55 pm#42
It really is funny that you highlighted your own dishonesty. What forget which one you posted with?
March 23rd, 2006 at 5:09 pmHow many threads do you post with more than one name, trying to make it look like more trolls agree with you? Must be a sad lonely person in real life. And totally dishonest without any ethics, like the repugnicans you defend.
Bull F*king Sh*t
here the sec of the army saying otherwise
"Our working budgetary assumption was that 90 days after completion of the operation, we would withdraw the first 50,000 and then every 30 days we'd take out another 50,000 until everybody was back. ( Planning for Postwar Iraq as ordered by Rumsfield)
Thomas E. White - Former secretary of the Army
And republicans who backpeddle on such clams by saying that Presiedent Bush has always been consitent with saying Iraq wuls be a long war.
March 23rd, 2006 at 5:13 pmI then ask you how the president could NOT have known f the prewar planning ?
Rummy needs a vacation.
March 23rd, 2006 at 5:16 pmdon't be so dense, people! the point IS - rummy has talked about a withdrawal numerous times, yet today he states “I’ve avoided predicting the timing,†well, not enough...
and, how many is that now? ned/wallace/patriot/unrealamerican/inyourface/etc...
March 23rd, 2006 at 5:16 pmi could be wrong...
Admin:
Could you update the main Blog
With the quote from White which I posted above: So that people who are still questioning whether rumsfield was talking about combat vs reconstruction get there facts straight.
March 23rd, 2006 at 5:19 pmGIT ‘ER DONE! Larry the Cable Guy is the shiznit. Not to mention one of the most popular comedians out there right now. Only Blue State elitist liberals like yourself would consider him to be “grossâ€.
Comment by A REAL AMERICAN — March 23, 2006
Another gap-toothed hick trying to sound like a ganster wannabe; predictable.
Hey, real stupid, your semantic crap doen't cut it; we are there, ergo WE ARE STILL OCCUPYING the country. Geez, did your teachers let you get away with such crap? Obviously so. Pathetic.
March 23rd, 2006 at 5:41 pmRumsfeld is mentally ill and a criminal > he looks and acts like Himmler! He needs to be tried for war crimes and given at least 20 years hard labor at GITMO!
March 23rd, 2006 at 5:50 pm"What about Larry the Cable Guy? He is pretty funny, and also a conservative. Comment by A REAL AMERICAN"
Really - conservative you say?
Yeah, he's a 'bastion' of CONservative values. And he isn't very funny, especially when you compare him to other comics. Heck, Dennis miller is funnier than Larry - and that's not saying much. I mean come on, jokes about second hand lingerie? That's not 'funny', that's 'crass'. And that's typical of you reichwing morons. You think being CRASS is funny. It's why large tvrd buckets like MizzWrong and Mighty Moron come and just say rude things. Because they're crass and uncultured they think a cheap, stupid and mean laugh is funny. It isn't funny, it's pathetic - just like you.
March 23rd, 2006 at 6:19 pmWell, Rummy, so much for your pre-war contingency planning. I don't know about you, but all my important events have a plan B" in case things go awry. Guess that's too mundane for a man running the Defense Department.
March 23rd, 2006 at 6:20 pmIncompetent, senile old fool, playing poker with the lives of others, and using their money to feed the pot.
normally I agree with you Ryan, but I do think the "you might be a redneck" comedians are pretty funny including Cable Guy. Except when they venture into
March 23rd, 2006 at 6:25 pmpolitics. When liberals do political humour it is funny, but then again I am liberal. So I guess it is about who's OX is being gored. I very much do not think Dennis Miller like humor is NOT.
Mighty Aphrodite:
I suggest you read The Art of War by Sun Tzu. It is folly to begin a war without a plan for ending it.
There is no discernable evidence that this Administration ever had an adequate plan for ending what they started.
March 23rd, 2006 at 6:52 pmConservatives can keep Larry the Cable Guy, I'll stick with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.
March 23rd, 2006 at 7:04 pmMe too.
March 23rd, 2006 at 7:13 pm#58 He had a plan for ending the war. His plan was to be greeted as liberators and set up a democratic model within six months of the invasion.
March 23rd, 2006 at 7:21 pm[...] Today Donald Rumsfeld regarding how long he believed the U.S. would be in Iraq. He claims he never made a time estimate, but a 2002 statement from Rumsfeld says, “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.” [11/14/02] (Think Progress) [...]
March 23rd, 2006 at 7:54 pmAnd Mighty Moron,
I hate to be bothered to 'educate' you yet again, but the ACLU doesn't get involved in 'gangbanger' cases, they get involved in cases where the civil rights of people are being violated. The chances of you being pro bono involved in a legal case with 2 ACLU attornies is beyond laughable!
It's even more humorous when you consider that the ACLU has only been involved in less than 30 legal cases in the last 5 years NATIONALLY!
Bahaha, what an idiot you are! Do you know NOTHING? Wow Reichwingers are stupid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ACLU_Cases#2000s
Which one of these cases were you involved in again?
March 23rd, 2006 at 7:58 pmUnbelievable - My "timeline" was NOT supposed to "add up" - Pssst...I NEVER thought you were 17 - - 18, maybe.....
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:03 pm#58 Briseadh na Faire: Excellent point!! What I'm pondering now is if FDR planned for the precise end of WWII??? Did the Manhattan Project fit his criteria for a specific deadline - or, perhaps he was "results" oriented. Hmmm....
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:06 pm#63 - Did you say something....I guess not....
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:08 pm"Unbelievable - My “timeline†was NOT supposed to “add up†- Pssst…I NEVER thought you were 17 - - 18, maybe….. Comment by mighty aphrodite "
So in otherwords you've been lying about your 'history'. I'll accept you admitting that you're a liar - works for me.
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:17 pm"Excellent point!! What I’m pondering now is if FDR planned for the precise end of WWII??? Did the Manhattan Project fit his criteria for a specific deadline - or, perhaps he was “results†oriented. Hmmm…. Comment by mighty aphrodite "
Mighty Moron, funny you ask. Once again for a 'military' person you seem woefully ignorant. Much has been written about the post-war planning that FDR did, perhaps you should read something for a change other than propaganda Nazi sites, you wouldn't be such a boring stupid old hag.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684810271/beldarblog-20/002-3871234-1997641
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:24 pm"RyNNe, is also very funny. And smart -" - "Comment" by unblievable
**** This does NOT surprise me ONE bit! Actually, this explains ALOT....
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:35 pm"**** This does NOT surprise me ONE bit! Actually, this explains ALOT…. Comment by mighty aphrodite "
I see your responses are just as (in)coherent as ever.
Did you trip and hit your head again while getting off the shortbus today?
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:46 pmMighty Aphrodite,
Thank you for the compliment. But I would have expected a better rebuttal. As an attorney, you should know better than to raise a fallacious argument. It is far too easy to distinguish Bush's War from FDR's conduct in WWII.
FDR did not initiate WWII with a preemptive first strike. FDR did not set the timetable for America's entry into the war but had to react to circumstances.
Bush, on the other hand, initiated the war with Iraq. He placed his armies, navies and airforces into the theater of battle on his timetable. He chose the day to begin the assault. Yet his plan apparently failed to take into account all but the best-case scenario. As a result events seem to be heading towards a worst-case scenario.
I hope for your client's sake you are better at analogizing case law than you are at historical figures.
March 23rd, 2006 at 11:59 pm"I hope for your client’s sake you are better at analogizing case law than you are at historical figures.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire "
(S)he isn't any better at case law. The poor thing didn't even know what 'mens rea' meant (s)he thinks warrantless spying is constitutional. That's something that no legitimate or respected attorney actually believes or states. Only the partisan hacks dare argue this, and they've been trashed by their protege's for their stupidity.
March 24th, 2006 at 12:33 am[...] Think Progress [...]
March 24th, 2006 at 2:34 amAphro is no lawyer - guaranteed. No lawyer writes so terribly or incoherently; not even the truly bad ones. Just another liar, like his boss.
Ryan, the trolls really go after you. Since they can't diffuse your spewing of facts and relevance, they resort to the sexual smears. They are obsessed with anything sexual. They apparently don't reread their own posts or they might be really embarrassed to represent their party with such non-arguments.
They have nothing and no message. They are desperate and clinging to any bastion of the party that they let Rove and the like dismantle. They have put a permanent stain even worse than Nixon, who starts to look more respectable every day, comparatively speaking.
At least when they are spinning their yarn over here, they aren't doing anything to help themselves and their party out of the jam they are in. Just no sense of logic. Was there a special school that trained these wierdos?
March 24th, 2006 at 11:27 amActor Charlie Sheen has recently come out publically saying the U.S. government not only knew that 9/11 was going to happen, but that they ORCHESTRATED the attacks. Many of us in the blogosphere have known this for years, but now, finally, someone with a TV show that attracts 10 million viewers per night is speaking out. We finally have our voice.
In an amazing turn of events, Charlie Sheen's statements have gotten the attention of CNN's Showbiz Tonight, and their host, A.J. Hammer, and Infowars.com host (and radio host) Alex Jones, considered the world's foremost authority on Bush's criminal cabal, was featrued on CNN last night (March 23, 2006) for a full 20 MINUTES.
A.J. Hammer and Showbiz Tonight have a poll up right now on CNN.com, in fact, that asks, "Do you agree with Charlie Sheen that the U.S. government covered up the real events of the 9/11 attacks," and the percentage of people saying "yes" has been going up steadily. At the time of this writing, 82% of over 13,000 people say yes, the government is covering up the real story - in other words, that "Bush did it."
PLEASE GO TO CNN.COM AND VOTE IN THEIR POLL, AND LET THEM KNOW WE'RE NOT TAKING THEIR LIES AND BULLSHIT ANYMORE.
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/showbiz.tonight/
This is our chance to garner MSM attention for the truth, people! Please do all you can, and send the links to all your friends and family!
March 24th, 2006 at 11:35 amhttp://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/showbiz.tonight/
#71 - Briseadh na Faire posts "As an attorney, you should know better than to raise a fallacious argument"....Except your argument re: FDR not striking pre-emptively was not THE argument. The argument was regarding the timetable for concluding the war. See the difference? "Start" vs. "Finish"?? Your tangental arguments will cause much trouble for you down the road... Don't try this at home....
PP - When one considers the "argument" of that "other one" - half truths and "sophisticated name calling ("moron", "reichwing Nazi") - it's easy to conclude it has no argument.
March 24th, 2006 at 1:46 pmIt's amazing how some conservatives/republicans actually believe that we went to Iraq to give them freedom and it has nothing to do with oil? Is this pure ignorance or what? I don't get it. Not to mention how they feel what a "moral" man W is? That's all I keep hearing from conservatives "Oh he's a good/moral man". What's moral about lying to the country and having 2000+ soldiers killed on a selfish motive? If it is about freedom, are we willing to lose American lives to save Iraqi lives? Are we that generous and kind?
March 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pmRummy would look good in a nazi uniform. Even his name fits.
March 24th, 2006 at 6:34 pmMighty Aphrodite, #77:
Again, a lawyer would know that ALL the facts of a situation affect the outcome. And one of the critical facts in analysing a war plan is how the war got started in the first place.
Since FDR's involvement at the onset of America's declaring war on the Axis powers is diametrically opposite to Bush's preemptive strike your analogizing exit strategies is so inappropriate it does not even make a tangential argument.
Your analogy also disregards an essential element to conducting warfare: the nature of warfare has not remained static over the past 60 years. Yet, if you were to carry out the analogy, FDR, or more appropriately, the Allied powers had a plan. The plan was carried out. Italy was overrun by Allied forces and surrendered. Germany was next. The plan was modified in the Pacific. Unwilling to fight the war of attrition Japan had hoped for, Truman ordered the first nuclear attack. Japan surrendered shortly thereafter.
Bush apparently did not take any contingencies into account. Overwhelming force was met with a disappearing army and a drawn out 'insurgency." There was no surrender. Even though Saddam was captured, he maintains his claim that he is the lawful President of Iraq. That claim under international law is not without merit, as you well (should) know. I say "should" because I don't know if you have studied international law. I have, including a stint on the International Law Moot Court Competition Team at my law school.
One other point: Raising the issue of FDR's war planning is irrelevent to the facts of this issue. Assuming this Administration failed to adequately plan for this war, how is that excused by pointing to any other administration? If anything, pointing fingers at previous Administrations merely concedes that this Administration failed to learn the lessons of the past.
Since War has such devastating consequences, the decision to go to war, and the planning for war MUST have the highest duty of care of any decision a government can make.
If you're going to try to justify the actions of this Administration, you'll have to present a better argument that what you've put forth so far.
March 24th, 2006 at 8:01 pm