1
   

Retired Generals finally calling for Rumsfeld resignation

 
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 10:09 am
Good catch. I looked at it and didn't think to interpret it backwards.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 10:16 am
sumac, the article was published today from statements Hagel made yesterday. http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2006/04/17/local/doc44442561a463f148134467.txt
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 11:23 am
Anon:

Quote:
There should be a legal point where a soldier can stand up and say "Get Stuffed", but there isn't. Don't misconstrue my hatred of the military for the people in it, as I have great compassion for those that come home and are carryijng the marks of war whether they are physical or mental. I think a large part pf the existing military probably are people I'd rather not have in my house, but that doesn't mean I hate them. I hate the structure of the military, and the ability for them to do whatever they want whether it is legal, moral, or not.

"I was just following orders" just reminds me too much of Nazi Germany!!


The truth is, a soldier is protected from having to follow orders that are immoral or illegal. The fact is, it never happens that a soldier refuses a direct order on those grounds, because its just too damned scary. I also believe that the few times it does happen, we never hear about it. You may protest to high heavens that this is not true, but if pressed, I can find the military legal fineprint. If I was ordered to kill innocent civilians I know are innocent civilians, I would refuse to - wouldn't you?
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 11:42 am
This military has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians!

Anon
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 11:52 am
I'm trying to find common ground between us, anon - but if you're determined to rant - rant on....
0 Replies
 
detano inipo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 12:21 pm
Some soldiers commit suicide when faced with orders to kill innocent civilians.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 12:28 pm
some just frag.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 12:41 pm
Some comply, and then go nuts forever.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 12:46 pm
This exchange between snood and anon is very upsetting and illustrates the damage this war is doing to the American social fabric.

Really, you'd think Vietnam would still be remembered by the civilian government trying to coerce our brave army into doing something it's not meant to do,,,,but nooooo...we gotta go through the useless slaughter again. Except this time...we can't cut and run like we did in '74
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 01:58 pm
we didn't "cut and run," we achieved "peace with honor"
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 01:59 pm
It is a pretty jacked up deal all the way around.....
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 03:56 pm
snood wrote:
I'm trying to find common ground between us, anon - but if you're determined to rant - rant on....


If you get deployed to Iraq, perhaps you will have the good fortune to be blown up in close proximity to nine of your friends and co-workers. Perhaps you will also luck out and be cut and burned from top to bottom. Perhaps you'll get really really lucky and have to require 11 surgeries to straighten out your legs! I wrapped up the party fun time just last year (35 years later) by getting both knees totally replaced. Call that cry-baby if you wish, but I could face it all much better if we had learned our lesson from the lies and greed that was VietNam! I thought we had learned about wreaking war for fun and profit. I thought we had chewed up enough of our young both mentally and physically!

Tragically, we have not only failed to learn, we have become worse than what we claim to be fighting! Did you ever read "Pogo"? He observed "We have found the enemy, and it is us"! Dys and I once had a quick exchange about feeling like war criminals just because we were in VietNam. It's not an easy feeling to shake, and I still wake up at night about it. I was FORCED to go, or suffer jail. If I had been a man, I'd have gone to jail! I didn't volunteer to go to VietNam. I was no war hero, and I wasn't on the front lines. Nonetheless, I was part of it ... I made it possible by not saying "Get Fukked"!! So in a way, I deserved what happened to me for being there. I deserved it for making it possible through my own acquiesence. Like I said, I could face it much better if we had learned.

This military is there because they WANT to be. This is not about defending the United States. This is not about punishing the people responsible for 9/11. This is not about weapons of mass destruction. This is not because Saddam was a bad man. This is not about delivering democracy to the people of Iraq. These are all lies Snood. It's all Bullshit! This is about Dick Cheney and his initial desire to complete the conquest of Iraq in 1992. He wrote a paper about it. This is about PNAC and control of the Middle East. This is about neo-cons and their New World Order. This is about money, this is about greed, this is about power, and it is about control.

Anyone who supports this adventure is just as guilty as those perpetrating it, and frankly, I think it is treason and punishable by death.

You can say I like to rant if you wish, but quite frankly Scarlett, I don't give a damn!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 03:57 pm
dyslexia wrote:
we didn't "cut and run," we achieved "peace with honor"


We were lied to, and then they fukked us ... no kiss included!

Anon
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 06:11 pm
Recent Calls for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld to Resign Validate AFGE "No Confidence" Vote
American Federation of Government Employees | Press Release

Monday 17 April 2006

Union says civilian defense workers have lost faith in Rumsfeld.
Washington - The American Federation of Government Employees today said that recent calls by former top generals for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign validate AFGE's recent "no confidence" vote.

AFGE's Defense Conference (DEFCON), a coalition of AFGE union locals representing Department of Defense (DoD) employees, voted "no confidence" in Rumsfeld on March 7. That vote was in direct response to a decision by DoD to appeal a federal judge's ruling against Rumsfeld over new personnel regulations, known as the National Security Personnel System (NSPS).

"Clearly Defense Secretary Rumsfeld has lost the confidence of the civilian defense workforce, and in light of recent news reports and commentaries, it appears he has lost the confidence of military leaders and soldiers as well," said DEFCON Chair Don Hale. "For the sake of military morale and effectiveness, it is time for Rumsfeld to go."

AFGE long has argued that NSPS would sabotage worker morale by inviting abuse of management authority and permitting favoritism through subjective rules on promotions and pay. AFGE, as part of the United DoD Workers Coalition, brought suit against NSPS in federal court last year. On Feb. 27 AFGE and the UDWC won a stay against the new work rules when Federal Judge Emmet G. Sullivan prohibited DoD from implementing major parts of NSPS. Sullivan said NSPS eviscerated collective bargaining rights, failed to provide employees with a fair way to appeal disciplinary actions, and did not provide for an independent third-party review of labor relations rulings.

NSPS was designed to cover more than 700,000 civilian DoD employees. Portions of the new rules not blocked by Judge Sullivan's decision pertain to a plan to replace the objective General Schedule pay system with subjective rules that AFGE fears will worsen employee attitudes toward the DoD leadership and scuttle morale.

"As a former Marine, I understand that ego and pride must not get in the way of national interests and mission effectiveness," said Hale. "Sometimes situations get so bad that the only honorable thing to do is step aside so that someone else can put things back in order. The time to step aside has come for Rumsfeld."

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) is the largest federal employee union, representing 600,000 workers in the federal government and the government of the District of Columbia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) is the largest federal employee union, representing 600,000 workers in the federal government and the government of the District of Columbia.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 06:49 pm
Rumsfeld's Fall Drags Hawks in Its Wake

by Jim Lobe
Despite White House efforts to put an end to the controversy, the battle over the fate of Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld shows little sign of abating.

And the outcome, which is by no means certain, could well determine the trajectory of U.S. policy in key areas - including Iraq, Iran, and even China - through the remaining two and a half years of George W. Bush's presidency.

While the unprecedented calls by six retired generals for his resignation have focused primarily on his competence, management style, and strategy for invading and occupying Iraq, Rumsfeld's departure would almost certainly cripple the coalition of neoconservative and aggressive nationalist war hawks in and around the administration for the remainder of Bush's term.

That is why the hawks outside the administration, led by the neoconservative editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, appear anxious to persuade Bush himself that the current campaign against his defense secretary is really aimed at him.

"[O]n Friday Mr. Bush said he still has every confidence [in Rumsfeld]," the Journal stated. "We suspect the president understands that most of those calling for Mr. Rumsfeld's heart are really longing for his."

Teamed with his former protégé and longtime close friend, Vice President Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld has enjoyed remarkable influence over U.S. foreign policy, as well as Pentagon operations, for most of the past five years.

Indeed, within five hours of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and the Pentagon itself, it was Rumsfeld who was the first to suggest that the U.S. respond by attacking Iraq, as well as al Qaeda. According to contemporaneous notes taken by an aide, he called for the U.S. to "go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

Like Cheney, he has also been a steadfast hawk on Syria, Iran, and China, and his efforts to greatly expand the Pentagon's role in covert action at the expense of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and in dispensing military aid to foreign allies at the expense of the State Department have given his department unprecedented influence in bilateral relations with friends and foes alike.

Given Bush's record low approval ratings - as well as the dissent Rumsfeld's performance has stirred up among the military brass and, for that matter, on Capitol Hill - any successor likely to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate will almost certainly have to be less hawkish and not nearly as closely linked to Cheney. This would deprive the vice president, who was clearly the most important influence on U.S. foreign policy during Bush's first term, of his most important and effective ideological and operational ally.

http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=8868
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 07:09 pm
Anon, I guess my stance is this-
I'm not your enemy in this. I raised my hand, as thousands of others did, and made a vow that seemed reasonable and honorable at the time I made it. I needed steady employment and structure in my life desperately, and at that time I felt I could single-mindedly agree to defend our endeavors as a country, as a trade-off for the security and stability serving would give me personally. When you ain't got nothin', you ain't got nothin' to lose, you know? But I am very against this president, and this war. And I have about 4 years until retirement. And I don't see myself quitting my job and marching in a protest. And I don't think I am a coward. And I shudder to think there might be thousands of others in my predicament. I guess I just would like you not to condemn us all as criminals and traitors. In a way, we don't have a lot of choice, either.
0 Replies
 
ralpheb
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 07:35 pm
I must throw this out. Snood, If you are so against the president and the war you can always leave. As long as you wear that uniform and collect the paycheck you loyalty should remain with the Commander-In-Chief. If you are not willing to give it up then you are compromising your values.
And yes, I could have walked out in 2003 with my 20 years in. I stayed in and accepted my deployment because I felt, and still believe, that since I enjoyed the luxury of job security and a paycheck that it was my turn to live up to my end of the agreement.
There is no may I do this out of blind obedience or out of stupidity.
How easy would it have been to stay home with the wife and kids and not hear my son on the phone constantly asking if I would be home soon.
I have no Idea how many deployments you have under your belt. But, all of us in uniform who have raised our hands a second time, in my opinion, lose the right to bitch about anything the military does.
But again, that's just my modest opinion.
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 07:38 pm
Retire in 4 years? How young do you guys get to retire?

You seem to be extremely young to be retiring in 4 years, Snood!
0 Replies
 
ralpheb
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 07:44 pm
most of us come in the military at 18 with a max age of 24-27. So if we stay active duty for 20 years we retire at the old age of 38-45 and we receive a pension for a long time. Those of us(like me) who are Guard don't see our pensions until 60. I'll have to wait a while before I get mine.
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Apr, 2006 07:47 pm
Damn! I'd love to retire at such a young age. I'm looking at another 23 years :-(
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 07/04/2024 at 10:01:14