Rumsfeld forbade post-war planning for Iraq.
By on Sep 9th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
Rumsfeld forbade post-war planning for Iraq.
According to Brig. Gen. Mark Scheid, in 2003, Rumsfeld said “he would fire the next person” who talked about the need for a post-war plan. “The secretary of defense continued to push on us that everything we write in our plan has to be the idea that we are going to go in, we’re going to take out the regime, and then we’re going to leave,” Scheid said. “We won’t stay.”
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
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Graham
Guantanamo
Hannity
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Limbaugh
Liz Cheney
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Race
Radical Right
Religion
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
This seemed most evident in the events documented in PBS Frontline's "Rumsfeld's War," though maybe not in so many words. Too bad this fall guy won't fall.
September 9th, 2006 at 12:42 pmPerhaps Rumsfeld didn't want to have any talk of post-war Iraq, because he was plannaing to attend the $1 million super bowl party being planned by Halliburton, for Halliburton, at taxpayer expense.
September 9th, 2006 at 12:44 pmAs I understand Rummy is something of an investment banker, so I find it hard to believe that this man would not have a plan.
Either he bought into Chalabis parade of flowers or he is just one nefarious person operating with a hidden agenda.
Of course we know the bases that are being built are somewhat permanent so the idea that he was going to 'just leave' seems to be a great big fibb.
September 9th, 2006 at 12:46 pm"He said we will not do that because the American public will not back us if they think we are going over there for a long war."
And of course the Idea all along has been to create a long and insane war with 'no course'.
Rummy; Stay the course
September 9th, 2006 at 12:52 pmStaff; We didn't plan a course.
Rummy; Exactly.
Rumsfeld himself is one of the biggest problems dealing with Iraq > Rummy must be forced to resign or to be tried for war crimes ASAP!
September 9th, 2006 at 1:09 pmAs none of the players saw war action this is what you get.
September 9th, 2006 at 1:14 pmRummy taught classes and never went to war.
Bush was drunk and skipped out as he is a coward at heart.
Cheney got the unheard of 5 deferments to show how much he loved his country. By the way you only are allowed 3 deferements so Cheney really didn't want to serve his country.
The invasion, easdropping and destroying the constitution is a front as the Bush Administration and friends rob the US Treasury. We need to be praying GOD SAVE AMERICA FROM THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
Nonsense. The plan has always been to stay according to PNAC in which Rumsfelds is a member.
September 9th, 2006 at 1:15 pmSo the republicans that constantly lie and say they "had a plan" are proven to be the liars we all know they are. Democrats have been saying the fascists have no plan, "staying the course" is not a plan, and the republicans have denegrated them mercilessly for 5 years. Now we have the statements of the generals involved proving the democratic contention, do you think any of the Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Rielly crowd will be apoligizing soon?
September 9th, 2006 at 1:29 pmAnd this is a surprise ... why?
September 9th, 2006 at 1:31 pmAmerica's Least Wanted
old news
September 9th, 2006 at 1:34 pmThe plan was "stay the course"... All the details are in draw up in Fantasyland.
September 9th, 2006 at 1:36 pmRed Wolf, Fascism doesn't start and become pervasive overnite. The republicans are fascists, that's about 30% of the population, unfortunately that 30% of the population control all three branches of government. Being incompetent doesn't prevent one being a fascist. And more importantly in this case, because GW is incompetent, it doesn't stop Cheney, Rumsfeld, Frist, etc from being intelligent fascists. The Bush Administration is fascist.And by the way, the "Left" is not ProJihad, that the republicans, the "fear" they can whip up keeping terrorists and Osama alive keep the American people afraid. So when GW let OBL escape at Tora Bora, when the Bush family continues to do business with the Bin Laden family for 30 years to this day, when GW gives Port Security to the UAE, the financiers of 9-11 I KNOW IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THE RIGHT IS PROJIHADIST, not the left.
September 9th, 2006 at 2:04 pmFascists are effecient at least!
They got the effecient crap beat out them and got their country destroyed and many kiled for being so effiicent.
September 9th, 2006 at 2:06 pmYeh effeciency wins wars...Not.
#14- please explain how if Bush is a Fascist that makes anyone else a member of any other political party.
September 9th, 2006 at 2:06 pmAnd #14, I'm not sure what country you're from but here in America trying to insult someone by calling them a "Stalinist" doesn't really work like in does in eastern europe. Perhaps you could update your "American cultural colloquial expressions" list and maybe use a racial slur, or use the "n" word, or perhaps make a comment about somebody's mama.
September 9th, 2006 at 2:10 pmPro Jihad Left
Jihad means war...neo-cons want war. Not the 'left' which I am not. I am Sovereign, as your Lord.
Progressives want to clean out corruption and it is not a political party because it is made up from many parties and religions. Let me reminf you it was the progressives that cleane up the slums wrought by the robber barons, it was the Progreessive that stopped child labor, and it was the progressives that got you an 8 hour work day.
But I suppose you bush lover want to destroy the costitution, re instate child labor and create more slums and pollut the rivers and atmosphere for some greenbacks
September 9th, 2006 at 2:15 pmJust like Joan of Arc was eventually diagnozed with schizophrenia, I think later generations will diagnose Dumsfeld with severe mental disorders (not that we don't already know). The man is seriously delusional and out of touch with reality.
September 9th, 2006 at 2:19 pmIts plausible that Rumsfeld believed we would get in and get out, but I don't want to cut him that much slack. On the other hand, Big Oil saw the value in keeping that much oil off the market. We're helping Big Oil sustain high oil prices by occupying Iraq and doing nothing to fix their oil production. That was probably part of Cheney's secret energy meeting with oil execs.
September 9th, 2006 at 2:26 pmRumsfeld is like one of two old friends living out his last years at the rest home. He adamantly knows the answers to all the world's problems; can't be bothered by details or reality of the real world. He just likes to talk about what other people should do and how many bowel movements he's had lately.
Where are the prunes?
September 9th, 2006 at 2:32 pm#20,
September 9th, 2006 at 2:32 pmMass insanity is the only plausible excuse for the Bush administration. We all know Bush's brain is addled from years of alcohol and drugs, on an attention deficit disordered mind.
Cheney is insane because no one can be that cold and evil if he had a functioning brain. Are we sure it is only his ticker that is stainless steel?
Rumsfeld is insane because he remains delusional about the state of affairs in Iraq, Afghanistan, and not to mention, the military.
Rice is insane because she is in love with her (fantasy) husband, GW.
I don't want to demean mental disorders, but there is surely something impaired about all of them in the White House.
[...] Rumsfeld banned post war reconstruction of Iraq. 2 Comments » [...]
September 9th, 2006 at 3:23 pmI'd never heard about this before, Revolute. Where did you hear about this? I'm not really questioning that it is true, it seems well within the realm of reality
--- ----
Trinary Suka:
you said:
See this website from the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL)
September 9th, 2006 at 3:57 pm[...] (Via Think Progress.) [...]
September 9th, 2006 at 4:03 pmTrinary Suka:
September 9th, 2006 at 7:56 pmyou said: Of course we know the bases that are being built are somewhat permanent…
See this website from the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL)
Comment by P — S
==
Thank you for that confirmation P--S.
Enjoy bashing Republicans because one day us Libertarians will take over the GOP and defeat the left once and for all!
your evendumber that I first thought. The Progressive movement has never been a 'political party'
The progressive movement was borne from the industrial age when the robber barons left us with slums.
The progressive movement included people from all religions and they did not basj christianity, many were chrisitians Red Wolfe goofball.
The progressive movement cleaned up slums and enacted laws against child labor. You decry progressives yet if it weren't for them you would might have ended up in a factory working for pennies a day instead of posting inaccurate ideologies. The libertarians today are much closer to the democrats and the independent parties than that of the GOP.
The current Bush cabal wants to destroy the constituion in case you forget,[That Gottdamn piece of paper] We are fighting for the working man and for the constitution not against it as bush and the gop is.
I have no Idea how you have so confused polity, nor do I really care, but please pull your head out.
September 9th, 2006 at 8:06 pmUs Liberatarians belive in complete freedom. This country was founded for individual liberty not a Neo-Feudal sysytem that would be the result of the Left’s action. Enjoy bashing Republicans because one day us Libertarians will take over the GOP and defeat the left once and for all!
what a goofball.
You believe in complete freedom so you can defeat the left?
September 9th, 2006 at 8:07 pmDo you realize what an illogical, hypocritical, unfree, biased statement this is?
Rumsfeld forbade post-war planning for Iraq.
That's ok he evidently forbade pre-war and during the war planning too.
September 9th, 2006 at 9:42 pm#25
September 9th, 2006 at 9:58 pmI just saw your post. You can check out Huffington post for one source, but there have been several news stories reporting the $1 million super bowl party paid for by tax payers for Halliburton.
We can add that to the $9 Billion that remains "unaccounted" for in the early months in Iraq.
Candidate for Ill. Rep. Duckworth lost both legs when her unprotected helicopter was hit by an RPG -- she learned that her cargo was a shipment of "shoeboxes of cash money."
BTW, there is an anti-RPG system available with 98% accuracy, but our military won't cancel a $77 million Raytheon contract which won't provide the same anti-RPG system until 2011.
What the f*ck is up with Rummy? He needs to be gone...
September 9th, 2006 at 10:22 pm[QUOTE][B]
‘The Implication That There Was Something Wrong with the War Plan is Amusing’ - April 20, 2006 Rumsfeid US Secretary of Defence [/B]
[/QUOTE]
Sigh
September 9th, 2006 at 10:42 pmIt would be funny if it wasnt so serious :cry:
Colin Powell was simultaneously saying to El Presidente not to invade Iraq unless he wanted to own it. So they ignored the soldier and followed to advice of career business men with a passing interest in politics as profiteering by other means. Luminaries as Wolfowitz and Perle and Crystal whose real agendas were not WMDs but obvious to all nontheless.
If above is true about Rumsfeld, then the man is a dangerous imbecile.
September 10th, 2006 at 7:56 am[...] Originally Posted by over9five "I can't argue with you. Arguing with a simple minded fanatic is pointless." Translation: "I can't argue with you. Debating all your valid points will make me look simple minded". Valid points? I'm not sure what you're reading. All that BAP has done is make a lot of wild, unsupported accusations that somehow it's "the liberals" who are to blame for our current troubles. If there's a valid argument in there please point it out to me. For the last 6 years Bush has basically had a blank check. In absolutely all matters having to do with the "war on terror" generally and Iraq specifically he has gotten every single thing he has asked for. He has had the full support of a republican controlled legislature, a generally conservative judiciary, and an American public that has been pretty much inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt on conducting foreign policy. The most watched news network in the USA, FOX news, is unabashedly conservative and has unequivocally supported him every step of the way. And now, six years into it and faced with the biggest debacle since Vietnam, it's suddenly "the liberals" who are to blame? This is a joke right? The biggest criticism you can make of the Democrats at this point is that they have basically abdicated their role as the opposition party and rolled over for fear of being labeled "unpatriotic". Who exactly are these "suites and ties" sitting inside the beltway who have somehow managed to tie the hands of our military? Name me one, and tell me what exactly he/she has done. Really, I'd be interested to hear it. Prior to the war in Iraq, Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki said publicly that the administration of a post war Iraq would require several hundred thousand troops in order to be succesful. His honesty got him publicly humiliated by Wolfowitz and turned into a lame duck by Rumsfeld. Read what Mark Scheid has to say. Who was it that tied the hands of our military again? Some guy in a suit and tie? But hey, maybe we should just do like Over9five says and make some videos of our troops cutting off people's heads while shouting "God is great". I'm sure that will go long way to fixing things. "Liberals"....please... __________________ Chuck Norris shakes two tylenol from the bottle, every time. [...]
January 3rd, 2007 at 7:01 am