Rumsfeld criticizes Dubya and his own Iraq War

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

I do not think any of them believe that bringing democratic crap. It was just part of the argument projected to especially convince a domestic audience and the west in general.

Their true intent...they intended to fuck up Iraq period.

I believe their true intents were:

1. Enable American Oil companies to exploit Iraq's oil reserves.

2. Create a cash cow for the Military Industrial Complex at taxpayer expense.

They were highly successful at #2.

#1, not so much.

[donquixote99]

3. Have bases in Iraq stuffed with troops and airplanes, to make sure everyone in the region did what we wanted. That didn't work out either.

[Oerets]

My guess is the checks have quit coming in so now he's looking for a book deal.

Just how can anything he says be believed??

Barney

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Oerets

My guess is the checks have quit coming in so now he's looking for a book deal.

Just how can anything he says be believed??

Barney

Good guess.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by Oerets

My guess is the checks have quit coming in so now he's looking for a book deal.


Barney

The checks are still coming in, a book deal would be gravy and would keep Rumie in the news.

[Tom Joad]

What is it about Republicans that they can never, ever, take personal responsibility for their screw ups?

John Stewart's take:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_GrDrcORTA

[JCricket]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

Rumsfeld:

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know.
There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things we know we
don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

My motto:
True wisdom is knowing you know nothing(with absolute certainty)

I think Socrates said something like this.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I believe the NeoCons did indeed have the idea that they could install a functioning democracy in Iraq and that it would spread throughout the Mideast. Instead, we got ISIS.

A democratic Mideast is what the Democratic leadership bought and there were lots of Democrats who would get behind a good reason to kick Sadam's ass. Let's not forget it was Obama who left a power vacuum in Iraq.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by nailer

A democratic Mideast is what the Democratic leadership bought and there were lots of Democrats who would get behind a good reason to kick Sadam's ass. Let's not forget it was Obama who left a power vacuum in Iraq.

Not a power vacuum, but lousy leadership.

But I guess I'll grant you a 'military power vacuum,' vis-a-vis what became ISIS. I assume you think, in hindsight, that we should have kept a bunch more troops there. So how would you have gotten around the Iraqi regime's unwillingness to sign an acceptable SOF? Support a coup and install a puppet?

Think before you answer....

[mpholland]

Originally Posted by nailer

A democratic Mideast is what the Democratic leadership bought and there were lots of Democrats who would get behind a good reason to kick Sadam's ass. Let's not forget it was Obama who left a power vacuum in Iraq.

Not a big Obama fan here, but he did inherit that situation, and he was fucked no matter what he did. I suppose he could have let it go on and we would have a few thousand more grieving parents here by now and still the same outcome after an inevitable withdrawal at some point.