the reason they took it off the web is because anybody could make a tactical nuke within a year. You saw it Geezer, now we have no choice but kill you. Since we can't know who else saw it, we have to kill them too.
So, Geezer, when are ou gonna accept that we have to kill all the Iraqis in order to save them from themselves? And that it's stupid to begin with to invade a country to save it, as opposed to knocking it over? Don't you realize that's what war does? How can you be so stupid?
You Republicans are just determined to be stupid, aren't you?
Text of the Editorial calling for Rummy to be fired or quit.
---------------------
Time for Rumsfeld to go
"So long as our government requires the backing of an aroused and informed public opinion ... it is necessary to tell the hard bruising truth."
That statement was written by Pulitzer Prize-winning war correspondent Marguerite Higgins more than a half-century ago during the Korean War.
But until recently, the "hard bruising" truth about the Iraq war has been difficult to come by from leaders in Washington. One rosy reassurance after another has been handed down by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: "mission accomplished," the insurgency is "in its last throes," and "back off," we know what we're doing, are a few choice examples.
Military leaders generally toed the line, although a few retired generals eventually spoke out from the safety of the sidelines, inciting criticism equally from anti-war types, who thought they should have spoken out while still in uniform, and pro-war foes, who thought the generals should have kept their critiques behind closed doors.
Now, however, a new chorus of criticism is beginning to resonate. Active-duty military leaders are starting to voice misgivings about the war's planning, execution and dimming prospects for success.
Army Gen. John Abizaid, chief of U.S. Central Command, told a Senate Armed Services Committee in September: "I believe that the sectarian violence is probably as bad as I've seen it ... and that if not stopped, it is possible that Iraq could move towards civil war."
Last week, someone leaked to The New York Times a Central Command briefing slide showing an assessment that the civil conflict in Iraq now borders on "critical" and has been sliding toward "chaos" for most of the past year. The strategy in Iraq has been to train an Iraqi army and police force that could gradually take over for U.S. troops in providing for the security of their new government and their nation.
But despite the best efforts of American trainers, the problem of molding a viciously sectarian population into anything resembling a force for national unity has become a losing proposition.
For two years, American sergeants, captains and majors training the Iraqis have told their bosses that Iraqi troops have no sense of national identity, are only in it for the money, don't show up for duty and cannot sustain themselves.
Meanwhile, colonels and generals have asked their bosses for more troops. Service chiefs have asked for more money.
And all along, Rumsfeld has assured us that things are well in hand.
Now, the president says he'll stick with Rumsfeld for the balance of his term in the White House.
This is a mistake.
It is one thing for the majority of Americans to think Rumsfeld has failed. But when the nation's current military leaders start to break publicly with their defense secretary, then it is clear that he is losing control of the institution he ostensibly leads.
These officers have been loyal public promoters of a war policy many privately feared would fail. They have kept their counsel private, adhering to more than two centuries of American tradition of subordination of the military to civilian authority.
And although that tradition, and the officers' deep sense of honor, prevent them from saying this publicly, more and more of them believe it.
Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large. His strategy has failed, and his ability to lead is compromised. And although the blame for our failures in Iraq rests with the secretary, it will be the troops who bear its brunt.
This is not about the midterm elections. Regardless of which party wins Nov. 7, the time has come, Mr. President, to face the hard bruising truth:
Donald Rumsfeld must go.
It is times like these that I earn my salt around here. First, the article implies that four different “military magazines” are calling for Rumsfeld to resign. That is FALSE. These are the same publication except they are “wrapped up” Army Times, Air Force Times, Marine Corps Times, Navy Times.
These are not “professional military publications.” Examples of military professional publications are “Proceedings of the Naval Institute” and “The Officer” by the Reserve Officers Association.
The Army Times….. used to have wide circulations. They are now part of the Gannett Group (USAToday) and the writers for these four “military papers” alos work at USAToday!!!!!
Paid circulation for these “publications” is following all the print papers. Before the internet, soldiers used to buy the “paper” PRIMARILY to get the promotion board lists and schedules.
With the advent of the internet, those lists are now online and it is a waste to wait around to get it in print when they are online and everyone knows the release date in advance.
Look at it another way, Why do men buy Penthouse? Do they buy it to read the “political articles” and yes Penthouse has political articles.
Judging from the “subscription offers” that they have been recently sending me, they will not be in business a long time.
The bottom line is that the “Military Times” weekly papers are not professional publications, circulation is collapsing, and the staff is shared with USAToday.
but they're being sold to the services, and they aren't saying antying they think will hurt circulation - are they?
So - is that your idea of earning your pay? BTW, what IS your pay here?
I am sorry, I had posted my reply with out giving credit to where I got it, the top of the article which I got form http://stoptheaclu.com/ was cut off for sime reasin here is the the whole thing.
The Skinny On Those Political “Military Magazines”
by Oak Leaf on 11-04-06 @ 11:08 am Filed under War On Terror, News
Well some troll provided a link to a UPI Headline, “Military mags to call for Rumsfeld ouster” and here is the whole article:
SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 3 (UPI) — Four publications of the Military Times Media Group plan to call on U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to resign, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
The Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times will issue the call in an editorial scheduled to run Monday, the newspaper said.
The Chronicle published the text of the editorial on its Web site Friday.
The editorial says the truth about the war in Iraq “been difficult to come by from leaders in Washington.” Instead, the editorial says President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld have issued “one rosy reassurance after another.”
The editorial notes that Bush recently said Rumsfeld would keep his job for the remainder of Bush’s term in office.
“This is a mistake,” the editorial says. “Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large.”
The editorial characterizes military officers as “loyal public promoters of a war policy many privately feared would fail,” and says “they have kept their counsel private, adhering to more than two centuries of American tradition of subordination of the military to civilian authority.”
END OF San Fransisco API article....
It is times like these that I earn my salt around here. First, the article implies that four different “military magazines” are calling for Rumsfeld to resign. That is FALSE. These are the same publication except they are “wrapped up” Army Times, Air Force Times, Marine Corps Times, Navy Times.
These are not “professional military publications.” Examples of military professional publications are “Proceedings of the Naval Institute” and “The Officer” by the Reserve Officers Association.
The Army Times….. used to have wide circulations. They are now part of the Gannett Group (USAToday) and the writers for these four “military papers” alos work at USAToday!!!!!
Paid circulation for these “publications” is following all the print papers. Before the internet, soldiers used to buy the “paper” PRIMARILY to get the promotion board lists and schedules.
With the advent of the internet, those lists are now online and it is a waste to wait around to get it in print when they are online and everyone knows the release date in advance.
Look at it another way, Why do men buy Penthouse? Do they buy it to read the “political articles” and yes Penthouse has political articles.
Judging from the “subscription offers” that they have been recently sending me, they will not be in business a long time.
The bottom line is that the “Military Times” weekly papers are not professional publications, circulation is collapsing, and the staff is shared with USAToday.
Others: Sister Toldjah
Blue Crab Boulevard
Macsmind
Flopping Aces
QandO
Argghhh!
BIG DOGS WEBLOG linked with Who Exactly, Is Saying Rumsfeld Must Go?
Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Bush wants Rumsfeld, Cheney for rest of term
we already know the military leadership has engaged in unprecedented criticism of the administration's plans.
Now we know publishers who sell to the military aren't worried that they'll lose money calling for Rumsfeld's head. That means that they are betting that the rank & file readers have lost confidence in Rumsfeld, because the problems in Iraq are too pervasive.
Your source clearly has an axe to grind; and you're not answering the questions. It smells exactly like the swiftboat tactics of denying clear facts without any better information.
The reason for this is not simple politics. It's politics mixed with religion. Religious people have nothing but faith, faith that doesn't respond to objectivity, or facts. They have no qualms about lying to other people, as we have seen. They're the scum of the earth, the lowest of the lowest.
Knock yourself out. I ain't stopping you. I'm sure you'll deceive yourself, as much as anybody else; and if you drag gullible people down with you, we need to cull out your type anyway - there's too goddamn many people wasting oxygen these days anyway.
Can't you come up with something better than a cheerleading drunk for a candidate?
And what did you have? Afaggot little panty waist who lied about his military service? What a faggot
Is the Pope catholic? Is Rjr a nitwit? Naw, he's Bush's bitch. That's pretty rough, bitch of a faggot pantywaist who not only lied about his military service, but can't hold his likker either - so he was puking all over you. Not all bad, it improved both your looks and smell.
I haven't read the miltary times Bush Whacker, but I do know what all you Dems are saying. It's crazy. The Dems call Bush every name in the book, ridicule his kids, his entire past, his father, everything he stands for, everything the GOP stands for, everything the libertarions stand for and then OH YEAH- YOU HAVE TO GET RID OF RUMSFELD.
Do you really think Bush is going to listen to you Dems?
Who should he replace him with? John Kerry. There's a real winner. His little slip offered you a glimps as to how he really feels about the military-- uneducated losers.
Kerry and the rest of the Dems have never supported the military because they have wanted the mission to fail from the very beginning.
Did you actually read the quote or see the video of what Kerry said? It was pretty clear to anyone with a brain that the reference to "getting stuck in Iraq" was a shot at Bush, not the US troops.
John Kerry is a spoilt east coast snot nosed blue blood. He has nothing and I mean nothing but a feeling of superiority and contempt for not just military personnel but blacks, hispanics and basically anyone who was not born into the uppper class. He was a major problem child naval officer and he is not well liked in the senate either.
because if you put Bush up to that description, what do you have? Bush is nothing but phony accent and pharmaceuticals, playing to somebody's sense of inferiority.
So you think Kerry was a "problem child", and you aren't asking how the hell he got decorated 5X.
But Bush wasn't a "problem child" who still can't remember where he was, and still won't release his record.
You fellows have nothing but lies. You're reduced to lying about anybody who wants you to behave responsibly.
It's long past time to take Republicans off the corporate welfare, and make them stand in line for general relief at the county, like the rest of the losers they helped put there. You're a bunch of pathetic losers. If I gave a shit about you, I'd start a church to suck the last dime out of you.
Kerry decorated 5 times? Dont give us that shit, hes a fucking scumbag who HATES this country. He should be in jail
The Republicans love this country, for the same reason anybody loves Xmas goose, they're gonna gut & eat it.
Democrats live for the power. Thefuckers haveno regard forthis country and just laugh at the poor
and haven't learned not to shit where they eat
In your own words, "saddam could have WMDs" - so could anybody, asshole.
We used to have a jerk in Iraq that could be intimidated with a couple volleys of Tomahawks. Now we have complete fucking anarchy. Good job, George. Any moron could have figured it out, but not you.
So go do a seance with Teddy Haggard, he'll have the answers.
You are 100% correct except that he wasnt born a blueblood. This gold digger was smart enough to marry for $$. America's Gigolo
he's been hanging around Democrats too long.
YO, GEORGE!!! FUCK OFF AND DIE!!!!!!!!!
Just straight up. No double talk no explaining anything. Just-- Hey *&%$+=# [fill in the blank], go fuck yourself. Just a breath of fresh air. Maybe Kerry will do that the day he retires to private life-That would be awesome if he named names. What's there to lose if he is really going into private private life.
I think the Dixie Chicks should just be straight up. Instead of some lame little 5 second little cut-down of Bush. Why not- "Hey Bush, go %$#@ yourself. Simple and clear. I'd love to here Bush call the Dixie Chicks "Dumb cunts from Texas and I'm ashamed that they're from Texas." Unfortunately- probably will not happen.
Speaking of Texas. Lyndon Johnson sort of told people off on a regular basis. Problem was the people he was talking to couldn't hear him but his aides always heard him.
One time after a tough day of something. He boarded airforce1 and stood at the door waving but while he was waving he was saying: "I piss on all of ya." And when they closed the boarding door, Johnson stripped down to his boxer shorts and enjoyed the flight back to Washington in nothing but his shit stained boxer shorts.
you won't vote for a man unless he's a lying ass burglar who caused more US casualties than LBJ, after we knew better - you won't vote for a person unless they're either fucking you, or truly as stupid as you.
GOP = dumbass faggots.
Dumbass, maybe. Not faggots. You have all the fucking homosexuals parading around in your party ,running around marrying each other.
we gotta get some Hell's Angels, and some fairies. 1st you gotta beat the shit right out of the Republicans, to show them you're tough. They you gotta buttfuck them, because they like that. Shows 'em you're tough.
Well, that's pretty tiresome, and I'm not gonna waste wood on some Republican's ass. How about we just tell them to show us how tough they are, and do it to themslves?
YO KERRY!! GO CHOKE ON YOUR OWN DICK, ASSHOLE!!
they're already busy choking on each others' dicks.
isn't it damned handy to have critics who were trying to tell you to wake the fuck up from the 1st day, so you can blame it on when the inevitable happens?
HAVEN'T YOU FUCKERS EVER HEARD OF VIETNAM??! I FUCKING TOLD YOU THIS WAS GONNA BE A MASSIVE FUCKUP!!
-- Modified on 11/5/2006 5:32:58 PM
ambush imaginable. If you can kill enough Americans, that's a real victory for you, isn't it? That makes you look real tough, that you're willing to sacrifice American teenagers without thinking.
Exactly WTF do you think you can accomplish, and what is the price, and what is the plan? You don't FUCKING KNOW, do you?
Get this, moron!! You CANNOT save a country from itself at the point of a gun. When you go to war, you have to be ready and willing to KILL every last motherfucking one of them that so much as looks cross-eyed at you.
Your idea of war as a fucking Sunday picnic is precisely because you were NEVER INVOLVED, and same with almost all Republicans - you point a weapon at a man, you better not give a shit if you kill him or not, because the odds are real good you're going to have to.
I don't care that Republicans are fucking pantywaists. What I care is that they're DUMBASS pantywaists.
You fuckers are sickening, disgusting, immoral pukes. We'd shove a rail up your ass and run you out of town if it would undo any of those 20K casualties you caused by your INFINITE STUPIDITY.
You know, if some lieutenant had been that stupid, he wouldn't have made it back. The noncoms would have fed him to the dinks, and good riddance.
NY Times just inadvertenty proved it. They just wrote a story critical of the Bush team for posting on a webpage a captured Iraq manual for making a tactical nuke. The trigger mechanism, equations, components, everything. It was all in this discovered document. Iraq has all kinds of machine tools (milling machines, lathes,etc) the electonic/electrical components. The only thing they needed was ---YELLOW CAKE.--- TURNS OUT SADDAM COULD HAVE BUILT A TACTICAL NUKE IN one year.
Well, That document is now off the internet. also, The NY Times is gonna have to eat crow. hahaha They can't have it both ways. It was necessary to invade Iraq because of WMD. NY Times shot themselves in the foot.
Jack is right about USA being to nice. When you go to war, you have to break things and kill people and you just have to accept the slaughter of the innocent. Only by winning as quickly as possible can you keep the innocent casualties at a minimum. Also, lots and lots of tactical mistakes. and the USA trying to be to nice is a major factor in everyone of them.
Saddam should have had a military tribunal trial and hanged within 6 months of his being captured. The pace of his trial makes the USA look impotent and emboldens our enemies.
the reason they took it off the web is because anybody could make a tactical nuke within a year. You saw it Geezer, now we have no choice but kill you. Since we can't know who else saw it, we have to kill them too.
So, Geezer, when are ou gonna accept that we have to kill all the Iraqis in order to save them from themselves? And that it's stupid to begin with to invade a country to save it, as opposed to knocking it over? Don't you realize that's what war does? How can you be so stupid?
You Republicans are just determined to be stupid, aren't you?
but somehow "we" doesn't seem to include "you".
What IS the deal on that, Geezer? You want *me* to kill everybody who read that, because *you're* too chicken?
But somehow you're the hard-headed tough guy here?
Hard-headed alright. World's hardest headed twinkie.
Chickenhawk Republicans sure weren't going.
Nixon, Agnew, Foley, Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh - it doesn't occur to anybody that if we'd elect more people who came onto interns, instead of pages, we'd have fewer fucking wars, and more fucking money; and the babes would be putting out more, and we wouldn't need to hire illegal Mexicans and Chinese and Arabs to do our dirty work. But then, I can't blame a babe for not wanting to fuck a Republican.
Fucking losers. Why don't you STFU and crawl back under your rocks??!!
Andwhat do you have? CLUELESS FUCKS like Lugosi, Satan(Hillary) KErry, Kennedy, Frank and all these scary sp's that will RUIN this country becausevthey hate it
Satan would be better than that list of lesbos, fags, and panty waists I just listed
Army Times is a left wing tool- owned by Gannett, dont be fooled pinkos!
keep running your mouth RJR. Talk all the way till the polls close, when you get bitch-slapped to the back of the hall.
Wow, I am so impressed.You communists will win 15 seats and win the house, and still not win Senate. Wow, what a HUGE mandate!!!