Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, March 21, 2019

To listen to Donald Rumsfeld chastise President Obama over Syria is to listen to a man stunning in his chutzpah and pathological in his arrogance. He has never taken responsibility for the disastrous invasion of Iraq, nor has he ever acknowledged its horrors.

Last week, Rumsfeld told CNN that, while the Iraq war “unquestionably has affected some people’s judgment and attitude and impressions,” the unpopularity of Obama’s proposed Syrian intervention lies squarely at the president’s feet. Obama should have provided “stronger leadership and greater clarity,” according to Rumsfeld.

What gall. The “clarity” that the Bush administration provided as a pretext to depose Saddam Hussein was a deadly mix of hubris, ignorance and falsehoods. It was laced with a detachment that depended on sending other people’s sons and daughters, husbands and wives, fathers and mothers to war. And memories of that folly — potent memories — hang heavily over discussions about military intervention in Syria.

As well they should. Outside the affluent enclaves of the armchair hawks, neo-cons and intellectual interventionists, countless average Americans still live with the lingering aftermath of both Iraq and Afghanistan. When America goes to war … well, America doesn’t go to war. The men and women of the nation’s working classes shoulder the load, bear the burdens and live with the war wounds — physical and psychic.

Obama has promised that his proposed Syrian intervention would not involve “boots on the ground” but would be limited to surgical airstrikes to discourage its murderous tyrant, Bashar al-Assad, from using chemical weapons again. That’s a worthy goal, and I appreciate Obama’s nuanced approach to the Syrian mess.

Unlike his critics, I am heartened by the president’s realism, his restraint, his lack of enthusiasm for another intervention in the Middle East. But that’s not enough to persuade me that this risky intervention in Syria is worthwhile. One of the many lessons from Iraq — and from Afghanistan, for that matter — is how little influence we have over other cultures.

There is precious little the United States can do to persuade Assad, who will do whatever it takes to hold on to power, to stop using chemical weapons. This is an existential battle for him and his family, who have held power in Syria for decades. He and his supporters are willing to kill every person who opposes him — men, women and children — using whatever weapons he has at his disposal. Period.

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 1175

89 responses to “Armchair Hawks Should Have No Role In Syria Debate”

  1. John Pigg says:

    Who is this Cynthia Tucker?

    Her assessment and analysis is spot on. There is a stunning amount of intellectual hypocrisy engulfed in Rumsfelds ranting against the Presidents lack of leadership. At least McCain stays true to his belief in American military superiority and his belief that the US can change the world the force of arms. It just took him a bit to get over his election blues.

    She also makes a point that far to few people make in the “media”. The people who take the brunt for our ignorant and shortsided policies in the Middle East are not intellectual talking heads on Fox or MSNBC. These consultants offer nothing to our country and would never risk their salary or their safety to support the specific policies they advocate for.

    The real beneficiaries to these policies are the American people. Iraq, taught our society that we cannot blindly accept what our leaders have to say on our geopolitical strategies. Often times the dictators they befriend, or the policies they support are shortsided and do not reflect American values.

    I respect this piece not because I agreed with everything, but because it addressed the fact that there is no guarantee that bombing will resolve anything, and that the true beneficiaries of this policy are not our leaders, it is our soldiers, our tourists, and our people.

    Kudos Ms./Mrs. Tucker

  2. dellmartin says:

    Donald Rumsfeld… the epitome of hypocrisy, can’t wrap his arms around the fact that President Obama is not getting in front of the American people and lying like he and his colleagues and puppets did when they were in power. Giving thoughtful consideration to what must be done and the consequences of such action? Balderdash! That’s no way to run a country! To this day, the miserable threesome, Cheney, Rummy and W, have said if they had to do it all over again, they’d do the same thing, even though they have admitted the WMD myth was just that, untrue. They won’t admit they lied and Rummy even went so far as to say Colin Powell’s presentation was wrong, pretending it wasn’t them that made him get up and lie. Whether Powell knew the truth and knowingly lied (which I tend not to believe) or they just convinced him by lying to him about their “evidence” (more likely), the fact is the three amigos are responsible for the deaths of thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens. Anyone out there lose a loved one or a limb in Iraq? Are you outraged that it happened so these three could personally benefit from it? My prayers are always for you.

    • Sand_Cat says:

      A good post, but let’s be clear about one thing: no one could have “made” Colin Powell do anything other than possibly quit. I find it very hard to believe that he actually bought the claptrap he was spouting; in the parts of the presentation I saw, he looked distinctly uncomfortable. It doesn’t matter what he says now when judging his actions then: he was a very key part of the miserable FOURSOME, and no one should try to paper that fact over because he says now he’s sorry. Don’t forget that W & Cheney might never have been in control if Colin Powell hadn’t joined those offering adult supervision.

    • CPAinNewYork says:

      Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and all of the neocons should be tried for treason.

      I would include Dubya, but he’s too stupid to be brought to trial.

    • dpaano says:

      If you watched “Hubris” on the Rachel Maddow show, you’d know that General Powell was highly pissed when he found out that he was given the wrong information that he put forth to the United Nations! I don’t blame him….he is an honorable man and they ruined his good reputation by giving him invalid information. What a bunch of cowards!

      • dellmartin says:

        Yes, I did see it. I don’t understand why he stays with a party of cowards and crooks. Or maybe it is good that he stays in the repub party. Perhaps there are a few moderates left in the party that would look to him for guidance.

  3. daniel bostdorf says:

    Particularly Runsfeld as he and his boss Ronald Reagan back in the 1980’s Supplied gas and weapons of mass destruction to Saddam in Iraq that untimately were used by Saddam against his own people.

    The attack on Halabja on 16 March 1988 was the most notorious act of chemical warfare in modern times, and an estimated 5,000 people, mostly women and children, were killed when Iraqi jets dropped poison gas on the town. Many others died later of cancer and other illnesses, and the legacy of chemical contamination persists.

    Please see this investigative piece here from August 26th 2013:

    from the article:

    CIA ‘helped Saddam Hussein carry out chemical weapons attack on Iran’ in 1988 under Ronald Reagan

    U.S. fed intelligence to Iraq about whereabouts of Iranian forces

    Iraq deployed mustard gas and sarin in 1988 on the back of the information

    U.S. administration supported Iraq during the eight-year conflict

    Up to 20,000 Iranian troops were killed by mustard gas and nerve agents from Iraqi forces during the war

    • RSDrake says:

      That’s where the US “moral ground” is hypocritical. Attacking Syria is a bad idea for this reason alone, much less the other overriding ones.

      • daniel bostdorf says:

        Let us wait for the UN investigation report, and then have GOP Congress decide the real moral ground of removing Assad’s weapons of mass destruction….or not.

        If there is no tangible evidence, then I stand corrected….and then believe this story just posted today here about the adminstration withholding evidence:

        Then I will admit that we need more information.

        Otherwise, if sarin or anything else was utilized, te we must remove it, seeks removal of Assad at the UN, and and have the UN charge HIM with war crimes against humanity.

        After reading the above, I am keeping an open mind …

        • RSDrake says:

          Here is what the Russans found – needs to be substantiated. All the more reason to wait before going on another “fool’s errand.”

          Russia Releases Key Findings on Chemical Attack Near Aleppo Indicating Similarity With Rebel-made Weapons

          By RT

          September 05, 2013 “Information Clearing House – “RT” – Probes from Khan al-Assal show chemicals used in the March 19 attack did not belong to standard Syrian army ammunition, and that the shell carrying the substance was similar to those made by a rebel fighter group, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated

          A statement released by the ministry on Wednesday particularly drew attention to the “massive stove-piping of various information aimed at placing the responsibility for the alleged chemical weapons use in Syriaon Damascus, even though the results of the UN investigation have not
          yet been revealed.”

          By such means “the way is being paved for military action” against Damascus, the ministry pointed out.

          But the samples taken at the site of the March 19 attack and analyzed by Russian experts indicate that a projectile carrying the deadly nerve agent sarin was most likely fired at Khan al-Assal by the rebels, the ministry statement suggests, outlining the 100-page report handed over to the UN by Russia.

          The key points of the report have been given as follows:

          • the shell used in the incident “does not belong to the standard ammunition of the Syrian army and was crudely according to type and parameters of the rocket-propelled unguided missiles manufactured in the north of Syria by the so-called Bashair al-Nasr brigade”;

          RDX, which is also known as hexogen or cyclonite, was used as the bursting charge for the shell, and it is “not used in standard chemical munitions”;

          • soil and shell samples contain “the non-industrially synthesized nerve agent sarin and diisopropylfluorophosphate,” which was “used by Western states for producing chemical weapons during World War II.”

          The findings of the report are “extremely specific,” as they mostly consist of scientific and technical data from probes’ analysis, the ministry stressed, adding that this data can “substantially aid” the UN investigation of the incident.

          While focusing on the Khan al-Assal attack on March 19, in which at least 26 civilians and Syrian army soldiers were killed, and 86 more were injured, the Russian Foreign
          Ministry also criticized the “flawed selective approach” of certain states in reporting the recent incidents of alleged chemical weapons use in August.

          The hype around the alleged attack on the eastern
          Damascus suburb of Ghouta showed “apparent attempts to cast a veil over the incidents of gas poisoning of Syrian army soldiers on August 22, 24 and 25,” the ministry said, adding that all the respective evidence was handed to the UN by Syria.

          The condition of the soldiers who, according to Damascus, suffered poisoning after discovering tanks with traces of sarin, has been examined and documented by the UN inspectors,
          the ministry pointed out, adding that “any objective investigation of the August 21 incident in eastern Ghouta is impossible without the consideration of all these facts.”

          UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday said the UN investigators are set to return to Syria to investigate several other cases of alleged chemical weapons use, including the March 19 incident in Khan al-Assal.

          • daniel bostdorf says:

            Let us wait for the UN investigation report that is not intrepreted by Russia, China, Iran, USA or anyone else.

          • dpaano says:

            Of course the Russians are going to say that…..they don’t want the US bombing Syria! Where would they buy their oil….who would buy their arms??? However, I, too, believe that the chemical weapons could have been fired by the rebels….by Al Quaida rebels, who are fighting with the anti-Asaad rebels. They will do anything to bring the U.S. into another war to try to bring down our President.

    • karen_green says:

      There is an old joke. “How did we know Hussein used to have weapons of mass destruction? ” answer “we have the receipts”

  4. elw says:

    Wow, that how to say things simple, strait and clear. Thank you Cynthia Tucker other journalist could learn a lot from you. Donald Rumsfeld and Kissinger and all they other warmongers from the Bush era will long be remembered for their underhanded, unthoughtful handling of the Middle East and the financial sector. The only place they have any influence is with FOX News and the shrinking number of people who are still proud to be Republicans.

  5. RSDrake says:

    I clearly remember the ramp up to the Iraq War and heard Gen Shinseki, then Army Chief of Staff, tell Congress about the size of the force needed to accomplish the mission in Iraq. Rumsfeld ignored the recommendation and went in with insufficient resources. He was wrong about what it would take and the existence of weapons of mass destruction.

    You may remember Hans Blix, who headed up the UN investigation and could find no evidence of WMDs. He was ignored. There was sufficient doubt at the time that invading Iraq was a good idea. Rumsfeld pressed ahead anyway.

    I think we do not need Rummy’s advice on Syria.

    Attacking Syria also has the earmarks of a “fool’s errand.” We don’t know who set off the chemical weapons; a missile attack is not likely to deter further attacks (but may increase them depending on who set them off); the replacement Tomahawk missiles will cost $3 million each (multiply that by 100 or more); and there probably will be innocent civilians killed if an attack is executed.

    The cost in blood and treasure is not worth “sending a message,” possibly to the wrong guy?

    • aloepharm says:

      @RSDrake:disqus … also, remember ” this wil take 6 day, 6 weeks maybe 6 months” remark from Rumsfeld? That’s when I knew he was a big B.S. artist and the whole thing was a lie

      • RSDrake says:

        He was of course disillusioned by his internal USD (Policy) staff who cherry picked intelligence to support Rumsfeld’s initiative. Rumsfeld was a “my way or the highway” type of guy, which Shinseki (Army Chief of Staff who said 300,000 on the ground were needed – he subsequently had to resign) found out the hard way. Under those conditions, I expect much of staff who knew better just let ti go rather than tell the emperor “he had no clothes.” They should have shown some courage like Richard Clarke did.

        Many knew iti would cost more (Rumsfeld said $2 Billion max) and would take many more “boots on the ground.”

        “My way or the highway” managers overwhelming fail in the long run.

    • dpaano says:

      As you said, we DON’T know who set these off….for all we know, it was Al Quaida rebels who just want to get us involved and make our president (and our country) look bad….I certainly wouldn’t put it past them.

  6. middleclasstaxpayer says:

    Why don’t we hear any criticism of Obama, who could only muster a meager 9 other nations for “token” support, while NOT ONE other nation offered support for a military attack on Syria.??? Even the hated Bush had a large & overwhelming 40 country coalition & strong support from even the Clinton’s for a military attack. Obama has NONE from ANY nation???

    • RSDrake says:

      Could it be that this is a dumb idea and everyone else knows it?

      • middleclasstaxpayer says:

        You are 100% correct…..the only one who doesn’t get the picture is the wizard Obama.

        • RSDrake says:

          As a middle class taxpayer, I am concerned about shooting off a couple of hundred Tomahawk missiles with a replenishment cost of $3 million each …

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            Again your thoughts are 100% correct, yet Obama wants things “his way” whether they make sense or not, and despite the fact that 90% of Americans are against Obama’s ideas regarding Syria. But you should be used to this, after being forced into the ACA, which nearly 80% of Americans are also against. If you have children ages 26 to 35, you are in for a very unpleasant surprise when you attempt to insure them (or renew their current health insurance). The ACA refers you to the Kaiser Family Foundation website for estimates on ACA insurance costs. Better look at this info sitting down, as costs are skyrocketing for even those already insured.

          • julianenglish says:

            Funny how you anti ACA folks always fail to mention that it passed both houses of congress before the president signed it. Also, when you unpack the ACA to its components, the public widely approves of it. Since the GOP has made killing the ACA their very top legislative priority, and poured millions upon millions of $ into their anti-obamacare propaganda campaign, its supprising that more people aren’t opposed. Even with this massive propaganda war, most americans do recognize it as a move in the right direction.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            You’re dreaming if you think the majority is in favor of the ACA. If you have any children ages 26-35, you will be SHOCKED at the cost increases planned. My 30 year old son’s premium is predicted (by the ACA’s Kaiser Foundation website) to increase 230%, from $193 /month to $454/month…do you think that’s “affordable” for the SAME coverage he has now???? These new ACA-inspired rates will CRIPPLE our economy & our kids!!!

          • julianenglish says:

            I don’t know what assumptios you’ve used on the Kaiser website, but i tried various options and the highest i got for a non smoking individual without employee coverage is $251/month. Low income people pay even less, after subsidies. And one health problem that sends you to the hospital more than covers it. Much less something like my cancer, which required a 200,000 stem cell transplant. And it is a fact that, when presented with the various parts of the ACA, the vast majority are supportive. It is only when you say the word “obamacare” that people get their backs up. In any event, im not thrilled with it either. Id much prefer something like the Danish model, but the far right (pockets amply full of insurance and big pharma cash) scream “socialism” anytime someone suggests a truly rational national health plan.

          • Sand_Cat says:

            You’re miles off topic. SHUT UP!!!

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            You’re right…we should be talking about Obama’s reckless war-mongering, although HE thinks it’s a good idea???

          • Sand_Cat says:

            Why don’t you just dry up? If this were George W. Bush’s presidency, you’d be screaming about all the unpatriotic and un-American liberals preventing W from protecting America’s credibility, and you know it.
            So I’m sure you stood up and called Rumsfeld and Bush on all their lies and their wanting things “their way,” right?

          • idamag says:

            lying again. 23 percent of the people want to go into Syria right away. 48% of the people want to wait until the UN finishes their report and let the UN go into Syria. 29% are not sure. Pew Report.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            Obviously you failed math in school…..I stated that 80% of US citizens are AGAINST an incursion into Syria. The figures YOU provided coincide with my estimate almost exactly…IE: 48% NO, 29% unsure…..48 + 29+ 77%…close enough, don’t you think???

          • silas1898 says:

            Tomahawk missile makers gotta eat too, Middle class taxpayers put those things together. But are the computer chips Chinese??

          • RSDrake says:

            I understand that defense workers need jobs too, but shouldn’t we spend $600 million ($3 million x 200 Tomahawks) on something like bridges, roads, caring foe wounded warriors, etc. than blowing up a bunch of missiles on ungrateful rebels and a dictator just to “send a message.” All we get for the $600 million is a “message” that will be followed, ignored, or inspire retaliation. In any of these outcomes, I do not see the value.

          • idamag says:

            If this jerk hates paying taxes, now, what will he do when we need to raise taxes to support military action?

    • Landsende says:

      Could it possibly be that these other nations are gun shy after being lied to by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice and are still involved in a war in Afghanistan which could have been over long ago if not for the lies that caused us to attack Iraq and Sadaam Hussein who had nothing to do with 9/11. If Bush had went after Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda to begin with, they would not have had time to strengthen and we wouldn’t still be losing men and women in Afghanistan.

      • middleclasstaxpayer says:

        You have “conveniently” forgotten one important fact….Bill Clinton had Bin Laden in his grasp but FAILED to act, allowing this world terrorist to escape & live, and to attack us on 9/11. As to the Iraq incursion, even the vaulted & revered Clinton’s believed the intelligence at the time and fully supported the war efforts. For now, the vast majority of world leaders do NOT believe ANYONE should attack Syria, but the wizard Obama is not listening. Who’s the “cowboy”, as Russian leader Putin put it, now???

        • Landsende says:

          Please expound on Bill Clinton having Bin Laden in his grasp.

          • julianenglish says:

            Oh, you know. Bin Laden and Bill were on the same track team in college, where they vaulted together.

          • RSDrake says:

            It was a decision to let the Afghan soldiers participate in the capture not understanding that it only takes one in the crowd to tip off Bin Laden – which they did. CIA and Special Forces were livid. This was at Bora Bora.

        • idamag says:

          Again, another lie.

          • middleclasstaxpayer says:

            Are you denying the well-known fact that Bill Clinton, when president, had Bin Laden located but failed to take any action to detain or kill him???

          • Sand_Cat says:

            Are you denying the fact that George W. Bush had Bin Laden located but failed to take any action to detain or kill him, allowing him to slip away? And good thing for him, too. Bin Laden was the best friend Bush and Cheney ever had, and they probably realized it pretty quickly after 9/11, if not before.

          • idamag says:

            It is sure funny that I never heard of Bin Laden until 9-11. That is when we had the proof (Bin Laden was involved. We cannot go into foreign countries because we have suspicions. When Bin Laden was finally caught we were doing something that is frowned on. We went in surreptitiously and executed a man on foreign soil. That is because, after 9-11, he had become our number one enemy and was bragging about his part in that heinous act. If we had done the same thing before 9-11, we would have lost all credibility with foreign nations.

      • idamag says:

        I am sure the American people are a little shy, also.

    • idamag says:

      Lies, lies and more lies. You will go to hell for lying. Bush did not have that many countries for support. He had China.

  7. JDavidS says:

    Good ole Rummy… Every time this “chicken-hawk” opens that hell-hole he calls a mouth, nothing but lies and bullshit seep out. An extremely strong argument for retroactive abortion.

  8. itsfun says:

    Apparently Ms. Tucker believe she is the one to decide who get to comment and who doesn’t. These types that believe the first amendment is only for them and not us common folk.

    • latebloomingrandma says:

      The First Amendment is for everyone, however, that that not mean that some people don’t just spout BS or lies. It’s also a right to call them on it as Ms. Tucker has done.

  9. jcurtis595 says:

    Here is the real problem. We all know Rumsfeld is a war criminal, a liar and the sponsor of the worst foreign policy mistake in American history, YET TIME AND AGAIN THE MEDIA PRINTS HIS COMMENTS. Why? Why do I see this article here? Why isn’t every reporter just saying no to anything he says (other than a confession in court in a criminal prosecution of him). Its the media that gives his hubris legs, his arrogance wings and his lies a public forum.


    • THS_Warrior says:

      Earth to jcurtis595: Hello? Hello? Can you hear me? This is America sport.
      The American media will always give Donald Rumsfeld prime time exposure and will always print most if not all of his relevant comments because (1) he is famous; and (2) because he has lots of followers, and (3) because the media likes to make a profit being the media.
      If you really and truly believe that the media should be required to ignore pond scum like Rumsfeld then IMO you are anti-American and should be deported to some place like Iran or Syria where no one cares what you think.

  10. julianenglish says:

    Daniel: we installed the shah; his own megalomaniacal arrogance brought him down. Otherwise, I agree with you.

  11. Martin says:

    How can you no doubt of the hypocrisy or stupid ideology of somebody that writes that the ones would go to war are “the Walmart workers and rookie police officers and cable installers”. Our present armed forces are all voluntary soldiers! I am against Syria intervention for many reasons, but, this is Pulitzer winner???!!!

    Wake up you robots

  12. howa4x says:

    There is an excellent documentary by Frontline on PBS showing the disastrous decisions made by Rummy and Dickie boy that led to the insurgency. He was warned by the generals to take the remnants of the Iraqi army and turn it into a national police force. Rummy’s surrogate Paul Brenner who was put in charge of the occupation, locked himself in a room to write the constitution, didn’t take the general’s advise and allowed the army to go home with their guns. Not only that they only hired Christian conservatives to serve as Brenner’s staff. He understaffed to Occupation force and we lost control of the country. The lies told leading up to the war should have been turned into an impeachment hearing, for W and Lon(Cheney) the national ghoul. The Neo Cons should go into hiding. Their cowboy attitudes handcuffed Obama in dealing with Syria. The presidents smartest move would be not to even bomb at all, and instead get the Hague to Indict Assad, his brother and his wife on war crimes charges. This way there will be no more vacations on the Riviera for the cutest couple since stepping out of Syria would mean arrest. That would bring him to the negotiating table fast. As for arming the insurgents, I think we’ve had that experience in Libya, and it never turns out the way it’s planned.

  13. disqus_ivSI3ByGmh says:

    Rummy, like his buddy Cheney, was “too busy” to serve during ‘Nam, so he got his daddy to buy him a bunch of deferments. I stopped listening to his crap years ago.

  14. ORAXX says:

    Sending the children of the working class off to fight wars of choice, far from home on another country’s soil, is as easy as spending other people’s money. War always sounds better in the abstract, than it does to the people who’ve actually lived it.

  15. daniel bostdorf says:

    Syria Chemical Weapons Footage Shown By Obama Administration To Senators.

    Graphic video attached of Assads’s war crime, if proven by UN Inspectors report, of using banned chemical weapons.

  16. diverdown48 says:

    The invasion of Iraq was not the problem. It is the insidiously devastating evil that followed the declaration of victory by W on the deck of the aircraft carrier.
    When Cheney came up with the brilliant plan to make himself extremely richer by appointing Paul Bremmer head of the occupation of Iraq he sealed the doom of thousands of American servicemen and women and tens of thousands of Iraquis.
    Disband the Iraq army and build a new one which is not done in a day.
    Soldiers know who the most patriotic citizens of a country are. They are a country’s armed forces who put their lives on the line to protect the nation while making an honest income for their families.
    The Iraqis had the 4th largest army in the world at one time. The decision to disband this well trained veteran force meant a decade of war was certain. To say no one wants war is a nice thing but not true. If you own thousands of shares of a company that profits from war the answer changes. War profiteering is not a new thing.
    Cheney, the former CEO of the giant war profiteering Haliburton, had every incentive to make sure the US stayed in a war zone for a long time.
    During the invasion the US military had dropped leaflets on the Iraqi army telling them the fight wasn’t with them, it was with Saddam and if they went home and stayed there until the battle was won they would be able to come back and resume their duties. Good idea, save lives, get in, get out and the outcome for our service people and the Iraqis is very good. Iraq’s army of veterans had fought not only the US but the Iranians for ten years. They had also kept Islamist like al quaeda out.
    They quit fighting in huge numbers risking being executed by the Iraqi Republican Guards for deserting.
    When the fight was won these patriots expected to resume their jobs and provide for their families.
    Not so fast. Bremmer carried out Cheney’s plan and ordered the US military to disband the Iraq army even though the US generals knew what would happened and argued against this evil plan. The well trained army would be without income and feeling betrayed by the US for not honoring the leaflet pledge would sell their services to the highest bidder. And their were several including the Iranians and Al Quaeda.
    So while the US was building a new army the old one started an insurgency that was well planned by the Haliburton share holder supreme, Dick Cheney.
    We could have been in and out of Iraq in 2 years if we had not had to nation build which actually meant training a new army fighting the old army and Islamist al quaeda, which had not been in Iraq before the US invasion.
    Cheney came out of the war smelling like a rose while the country lost trillians of dollars and thousands of patriots. Not the self proclaimed ones, the real ones wearing the uniforms.

  17. diverdown48 says:

    In spite of my previous post the bottom line is even Rumsfeld has the right to shoot off his mouth under our freedom of speech guarantee. He probably owns stock in a war profiteering company also.
    People who profit from war want war just so long as it is not their family doing the fighting.

  18. diverdown48 says:

    We have to do something. Killing tyrants and terrorists seems like a good thing. Those who use biological warfare have to be destroyed. Assad must go. He endangers not only his own people but if unpunished our own troops will face the future horror of being gassed on the battlefield.
    Those who have used poison gas have been dealt with. The Germans in WWI and WWII, Saddam in Iraq and now Assad.
    What we do or don’t do now will bring consequences in the future. The best plan is to stand up to those who use chemicals and show them and others their fate will be death if they cross the line drawn by the civilized world.

    • idamag says:

      Using chemical weapons is a violation of international law. We have an international body to take care of that. If the US makes the first move, they will be paying $$$$$$. That is why we need UN action. We are still hurting from the attack on Iraq. We can’t afford another war. However, if you insist, why don’t you recruit a mercenary army. You will have to do some fund raising to pay the mercenaries and for your propaganda.

      • diverdown48 says:

        Why don’t you do as you suggest since it is your idea. I served my time in the US Army. When the international body is unable to act because of the veto of Russia and China then someone has to step up to the plate.
        I don’t have to do anything. The senate will approve action, the house will reject it and the President will order the hit. It is going to happen.
        Live your dream world. None of your asinine ideas will work.
        The history of US actions without UN approval are rampant.
        Try Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Iraq, et al.

    • Sand_Cat says:

      Our soldiers also face the prospect of not being treated as POWs and undergoing torture. Shouldn’t we deal with the criminals responsible for those actions before getting all holy about Assad?

      • diverdown48 says:

        If getting all holy about Assad is wanting to see him get his just rewards for indiscriminately bombing, gassing and strafing women and children in the thousands, yes, I am getting all holy.
        I am thinking you have no problem with dictators killing innocents.
        You go ahead and hug your cat but get your head out of your…. sand.

  19. daniel bostdorf says:

    Syria chemical arms: ‘Global red line’ crossed. Arab League foreign ministers have agreed that the Syrian president’s alleged use of chemical weapons crossed a “global red line”.

  20. idamag says:

    It is easy for those, who don’t fight, to send our young people to be killed and maimed. The numbers of casualties do not register, to them, as people’s sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, and parents.

  21. tobewan says:

    TNM gave no place to comment in subsequent article on gay couples.
    Equality in marriage has to be – One Man, One Woman
    So, NO! Wont sign in on Tom Wolf’s shameful efforts!

  22. daniel bostdorf says:

    Political solution being proposed by Putin.

    Assad blew it by using chemical weapons and Russia, China, Iran know it….

    Assad simply needs to immediately step down and turn over weapons of mass
    destruction. Then…allow the UN to broker a demilitarized zone in Syria
    to get Assad out, and a governing council established for

    Russia to push Syria to surrender chemical weapons.

    see breaking news at A.P.

  23. daniel bostdorf says:

    Guess what—new news and great news…Syria is very positive about surrendering chemical weapons!

    Read more here it is developing fast…hopefully no strike…

    • dpaano says:

      If this is on the level….I’m ecstatic! But, I’m taking a “wait and see” attitude on whether Asaad actually does what he promised.

  24. dpaano says:

    Unless you’ve had your feet on the ground, Rumsfield, you can’t play in the game!! This guy is absolutely useless (was then; is even moreso now) and no one should be listening to his mumblings EVER! He should be in prison with Cheney and Bush for taking this country to war under false pretenses!
    Secondly, there is NO way you’re going to force democracy on the Middle East. As I said when the Iraq war started, these countries have been ruled by tribes for centuries….to make them into democratic states is nigh on to impossible. They have no idea of the concept of democracy or how to deal with it! The best we can do is just stay out of their way and let them fight it out on their own, no matter how devastating.

    Another question….if Israel, Egypt, and Turkey are so concerned, why aren’t they stepping in to handle Asaad….they are more in tune with his thinking than we are, but I don’t hear anything from them about doing anything….they just want to wait for the U.S. to step in in use our taxpayer money to fight their battles. Don’t we give them enough money and arms to handle their own problems……especially Israel, who is supposed to have a superior military? Just my opinion, of course…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.