Praise for the Rumsfeld War Plan

LordOpie · Apr 1, 2003

aww crap, i'm agreeing with N8!

Love Rumsfeld or hate him, but he's a badass. It's a bit surreal to watch him. Hell, he's trying to pick fights with Syria and other countries now. That's like standing in a bar with you hand on the opponents head while he's swinging madly and you look around and go, "hey, i've got a free hand and i really only need to stand on one leg... bring it!"

Spud · Apr 1, 2003

Gotta love the guy.

SandMan · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by Spud

Gotta love the guy.

Priceless!!

Trond · Apr 1, 2003

Rumsfeldts plan is forsaking the lives of many civilians.

Look at the pics on this side - BTW they're NOT nice so stay away if you don't feel like looking at real war pics - 11 civilians killed again tonight - mostly children

.

http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2003/04/01/365473.html

here's the front page of the newspaper...(listed the pic only - it'll be gone soon when another article comes in)

http://gfx.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2003/04/01/bombe2.jpg

Tenchiro · Apr 1, 2003

That is funny, I have seen numerous news articles wehere military commanders are criticizing Rumsfeld and comparing him to Robert S. McNamara.

EDIT- Here are a few.

Rumsfeld's Design for War Criticized on the Battlefield

Report: Rumsfeld Ignored Pentagon Advice on Iraq

US war planners accuse Rumsfeld of "micromanaging" Iraq forces

Spud · Apr 1, 2003

Hey, isn't that big Donny on point?

LordOpie · Apr 1, 2003

anyone who complains about how the war is going is an idiot. I'm not saying this cuz I know jack about war, but by comparing the progress and loss of life versus previous wars, specifically 1991... well, fvck, there's no comparison.

We can make him faster, stronger, better...
*que six million dollar man music*

US, Brits, et.al. are doing a great job.

Spud · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by LordOpie
anyone who complains about how the war is going is an idiot. I'm not saying this cuz I know jack about war, but by comparing the progress and loss of life versus previous wars, specifically 1991... well, fvck, there's no comparison.

We can make him faster, stronger, better...
*que six million dollar man music*

US, Brits, et.al. are doing a great job.

That is a pretty broad statement. Dare I say knee-jerk statement. There are three articles Tenchiro posted suggesting that military professionals have some serious concerns regarding the actions of the civilian Secretary of Defense.

Your statement would suggest that these guys are idiots?

Im not convinced Rumsfeld is any better at military planning than diplomacy. I would suggest he work on his golf game and let the generals and diplomats go about their business.

eric strt6 · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by Spud
That is a pretty broad statement. Dare I say knee-jerk statement. There are three articles Tenchiro posted suggesting that military professionals have some serious concerns regarding the actions of the civilian Secretary of Defense.

Your statement would suggest that these guys are idiots?

Im not convinced Rumsfeld is any better at military planning than diplomacy. I would suggest he work on his golf game and let the generals and diplomats go about their business. [/i]

amen to that

just don't let him play at my club, we hold ourselves to a higher standard of ethics

Spud · Apr 1, 2003

Nice Red Herring - I never suggested that the plan was flawed or that our troops performance has been lacking. There are questions in the Pentagon regarding Rumsfelds plans. Thats been reported from a number of sources. Arguably, our people in the Pentagon are the best trained planners with unparalleled resources and it concerns me that Donny ignores their advice. I hope hes right, otherwise a lot of young troops could be paying.

DRB · Apr 1, 2003

Are you so naive to think that Rumsfeld came up with this plan all by himself?

There is a lot more to this then just this simple battle plan. A large chunk of the military has an axe to grind with Rumsfeld because he wants to change the military to be more mobile and responsive to localized threats. The 4th ID is an example of what he is looking to do. Under his plans the Army would virtually do away with its heavy armor divisions and meld them into existing infantry units. This has a lot of old timers chafing (a la Stormin' Norman) that the old ways are being tossed aside.

Again there is a lot riding on this in regards to the future of the military so everyone is getting their jabs.

DRB · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by N8
Of course not. However, he will get the leftwing media blame if things go wrong.

He no is no more soley responsible for the Plan than Pres Klinton was for the economic boom of the 90's.

Its not the left wing media out to get him you dolt.

Its the old time military establishment that is challenging him. They want their big weapons systems and he is against that. Its the defense contractors and their lobbyist that are out to get Donny boy right now. Most if not all of the complaining is coming from old time soldiers that think you need 100000 tanks to every battle. They want to replace weapons systems with new ones when the old ones are virtually indestructible (ie the M1 Abrams).

He is asking questions about why so many of the defense contracts are over budget and late. That scares the daylights out of them.

The same old timers that saw little or no use for special operation troops. One Army special forces A detachment can train in the neighborhood of 500 to 750 indiginous personnel to fight for themselves with minimal cost. But see that's not big bang or heavy metal. Just 10 soldiers in the middle of nowhere.

Just when the old timers had marginalized light infantry units like the 101st and 82nd. He encourages their use due to the flexibility and mobility they provide you.

I can go on (and did once already)....

Spud · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by N8
......

He no is no more soley responsible for the Plan than Pres Klinton was for the economic boom of the 90's.

N8 , go read your header for the original post and your comment at the end of your first post.

!

Praise for the Rumsfeld War Plan

N8 Notes:
1. Mr. Rumsfeld ROCKS!!!

ohio · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by DRB
Its not the left wing media out to get him you dolt.

He is asking questions about why so many of the defense contracts are over budget and late. That scares the daylights out of

The same old timers that saw little or no use for special operation troops. One Army special forces A detachment can train in the neighborhood of 500 to 750 indiginous personnel to fight for themselves with minimal cost. But see that's not big bang or heavy metal. Just 10 soldiers in the middle of nowhere.

I can go on (and did once already)....

I'll be damned if I don't actually want Rumsfield to succeed on this one!

I must be losing it.
*slaps self in face repeatedly, and makes crazy bubble noise with lips and finger*

Tenchiro · Apr 1, 2003

Maybe it is just me, but even the lowliest infantry dude peeling potato's in Iraq deserves more credit and praise for this effort than some rich politician who helped provide Saddam with American weapon systems in the first place.

Silver · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by DRB

The same old timers that saw little or no use for special operation troops. One Army special forces A detachment can train in the neighborhood of 500 to 750 indiginous personnel to fight for themselves with minimal cost. But see that's not big bang or heavy metal. Just 10 soldiers in the middle of nowhere.

I agree with a lot of your post, but this strategy troubles me. It seems to be a very fertile ground for blowback.

DRB · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by Tenchiro
Maybe it is just me, but even the lowliest infantry dude peeling potato's in Iraq deserves more credit and praise for this effort than some rich politician who helped provide Saddam with American weapon systems in the first place.

What weapons system would that be? I have seen it 10000 time on this website that we provided all sorts of weapons to the Iraqis.

What would they be?

You made the statement back it up.

DRB · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by Silver
I agree with a lot of your post, but this strategy troubles me. It seems to be a very fertile ground for blowback.

Define blowback?

Silver · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by DRB
Define blowback?

Jane's

Tenchiro · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by DRB
What weapons system would that be? I have seen it 10000 time on this website that we provided all sorts of weapons to the Iraqis.

What would they be?

You made the statement back it up.

Here is one example I found.
_____

US Gave Germs to Iraq in "80's
By MATT KELLEY
.c The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (Oct. 1) - Iraq's bioweapons program that President Bush wants to eradicate got its start with help from Uncle Sam two decades ago, according to government records getting new scrutiny in light of the discussion of war against Iraq.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent samples directly to several Iraqi sites that U.N. weapons inspectors determined were part of Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program, CDC and congressional records from the early 1990s show. Iraq had ordered the samples, claiming it needed them for legitimate medical research.

The CDC and a biological sample company, the American Type Culture Collection, sent strains of all the germs Iraq used to make weapons, including anthrax, the bacteria that make botulinum toxin and the germs that cause gas gangrene, the records show. Iraq also got samples of other deadly pathogens, including the West Nile virus.

The transfers came in the 1980s, when the United States supported Iraq in its war against Iran. They were detailed in a 1994 Senate Banking Committee report and a 1995 follow-up letter from the CDC to the Senate.

The exports were legal at the time and approved under a program administered by the Commerce Department.

''I don't think it would be accurate to say the United States government deliberately provided seed stocks to the Iraqis' biological weapons programs,'' said Jonathan Tucker, a former U.N. biological weapons inspector.

''But they did deliver samples that Iraq said had a legitimate public health purpose, which I think was naive to believe, even at the time.''

The disclosures put the United States in the uncomfortable position of possibly having provided the key ingredients of the weapons America is considering waging war to destroy, said Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. Byrd entered the documents into the Congressional Record this month.

Byrd asked Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld about the germ transfers at a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. Byrd noted that Rumsfeld met Saddam in 1983, when Rumsfeld was President Reagan's Middle East envoy.

''Are we, in fact, now facing the possibility of reaping what we have sown?'' Byrd asked Rumsfeld after reading parts of a Newsweek article on the transfers.

''I have never heard anything like what you've read, I have no knowledge of it whatsoever, and I doubt it,'' Rumsfeld said. He later said he would ask the Defense Department and other government agencies to search their records for evidence of the transfers.

Invoices included in the documents read like shopping lists for biological weapons programs. One 1986 shipment from the Virginia-based American Type Culture Collection included three strains of anthrax, six strains of the bacteria that make botulinum toxin and three strains of the bacteria that cause gas gangrene. Iraq later admitted to the United Nations that it had made weapons out of all three.

The company sent the bacteria to the University of Baghdad, which U.N. inspectors concluded had been used as a front to acquire samples for Iraq's biological weapons program.

The CDC, meanwhile, sent shipments of germs to the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission and other agencies involved in Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. It sent samples in 1986 of botulinum toxin and botulinum toxoid - used to make vaccines against botulinum toxin - directly to the Iraqi chemical and biological weapons complex at al-Muthanna, the records show.

Botulinum toxin is the paralyzing poison that causes botulism. Having a vaccine to the toxin would be useful for anyone working with it, such as biological weapons researchers or soldiers who might be exposed to the deadly poison, Tucker said.

The CDC also sent samples of a strain of West Nile virus to an Iraqi microbiologist at a university in the southern city of Basra in 1985, the records show.

AP-NY-10-01-02 0445EDT

Copyright 2002 The Associated Press.

DRB · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by Tenchiro
Here is one example I found.

I'm not going to waste my time retyping just going to cut and paste it AGAIN.

First, the level of support from the US that Iraq received during the Iran/Iraq war consisted of little or no material support. It mainly consisted of intelligence data and photographs. As many weapons that folks claim were sold to Iraq by the US, he would have a military made up almost exclusively of US weapons. Is that what we found in the first Gulf War? Is that what you are seeing on TV now? There are certain example of US produced direct war materials being shipped to Iraq via unapproved third country transfers, 300 2000lb bombs in 1986. Additionally, there was a transfer of artillery repair parts in 1984. Most of these parts were found to be carriage items (axles, wheels, etc) The fact of the matter is that at the time Iraq didn't need US weapons. Virtually all of Saddam's weapons systems were of Soviet and French design.

Even the dual use items (civilian helicopters and parts, air control systems, and a variety of electronic items) sold to Iraq during that time frame for the most part were found to have gone to civilian uses. There were reports of US manufactured helicopters being used to spray poison gas on Kurds. But the fact of the matter is that the Iraqi military never employed US helicopters, but that is not the case of French and Soviet designed helicopters. (The ones used to spray the Kurds were actually Russian built MI-8s).

Now for the anthrax. The US did transfer numerous cultures of "bacteria, fungi and protozoa" during late 1983. It is unknown in common circles as to the exact content of those cultures other than the above description. Based on CDC records, where all of these cultures came from, Anthrax spores were certainly among those cultures. So yes the US did give anthrax to Iraq. However, and I need to make this very clear, every single chemical and biological weapon destoryed by the UN in the 1990's was of Soviet design. Every sample of chemical weapon tested by the UN and Internation Red Cross during the Iran/Iraq war and attacks on the Kurds was found to also be of Russian design. The anthrax strains destroyed in 1995 were ones that were known to have been produced at the Soviet Biological weapons facility in Stepnagorsk, Kazakhstan. And were virtually identical to the strain found in a "mysterious" outbreak amongest the residents of Sverdlovsk (strangely enough outside of another biological weapons lab.)

Furthermore, the tactics and delivery systems employed for the use of the chemical weapons against Iranian and Kurdish forces were rght out of Soviet tactical manuals on the battlefield use of chemical weapons.

Tenchiro · Apr 1, 2003

Another article with some info;

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/us_iraq_history_1_020917.html

In addition, the United States eased up on its own technology export restrictions to Iraq, which allowed the Iraqis to import supercomputers, machine tools, and even strains of anthrax. Weapons control experts say Saddam's regime could have used the anthrax to make biological weapons. "It was part of our overall policy of supplying him with a lot of very alarming things which allowed him to build up his weapons of mass destruction capability," said Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control.

DRB · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by Tenchiro
Another article with some info;

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/us_iraq_history_1_020917.html

None of these support your statement "american weapons systems"

Tenchiro · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by DRB
None of these support your statement "american weapons systems"

As that first article shows, we did ship them everything they needed to make some really nasty stuff, and it isn't like I can go out on google and find invoices from stuff we sent to Iraq when they were at war with Iran. But it is common knowledge that we supplied them well enough to win that war, whether that was with weapons or the means to get them elsewhere.

At that time Donald Rumsfeld was the Middle East envoy for the US and even if he didn't have a hand in any of this directly, he certainly had a hand in our relations with Iraq so this type of thing could happen.

Tenchiro · Apr 1, 2003

http://www.wf.org/iraq-west.htm

Here is as much of a laundry list as I can find, take the source at face value though I have no idea what that site is about or what their politics are.

They at least footnote everything to documnent their sources.

DRB · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by N8
Dolt...

While it is a well known fact the Old Guard wants him out, it is the media who will keep sturring the pot... over publicizing decent... showing dead women and kids on the tele... This division will be exploited to the max by the left.

Rumsfeld has many enemies within the pentagon. That is what happens when you cut generals pet projects and contract out DoD job functions.

Bull the decent is going looking for interviews to slam him at every turn. Even Fox and the National Review (certainly not liberal) are getting in on the act.

The "left" is the least of his worries.

LordOpie · Apr 1, 2003

Originally posted by Spud
That is a pretty broad statement. Dare I say knee-jerk statement. There are three articles Tenchiro posted suggesting that military professionals have some serious concerns regarding the actions of the civilian Secretary of Defense.

Your statement would suggest that these guys are idiots?

Ok, I mis-spoke. If they really believe there's a problem, then they're idiots. I don't think they do. I believe the generals, et.al. are just posturing and playing the political game. I think they figure, if he succeeds, no one will remember their comments, but if he fails, they'll remind everyone that they said he was going to.

The facts speak for themselves as for the progress. That's really not something that can be disputed. Lots of ground covered, lots of area secured, low coallition deaths...

I suggest that people wait for Monday to second guess the coach (sorry, I'm thinking about NFL too much

)

As DRB said...

A large chunk of the military has an axe to grind with Rumsfeld because he wants to change the military to be more mobile and responsive to localized threats. ... This has a lot of old timers chafing (a la Stormin' Norman) that the old ways are being tossed aside.

kghoscht · Apr 2, 2003

I thought some of you here would be interested in this:

Report for Congress - Iraq: US Military Operations

I leave you to draw your own conclusions...

DRB · Apr 2, 2003

Originally posted by LordOpie
I suggest that people wait for Monday to second guess the coach (sorry, I'm thinking about NFL too much )

Draft in 3 1/2 weeks.

nicklin · Apr 3, 2003

Yeah, he is badass, just think, he picks fights with a country wose entir military buget worth less than two of our B2's. Wow, let's wipe out France just on the side. And, maybe, we can wipe out Belgium too. That way we'll really be a bully of the world, like we're not yet.

LordOpie · Apr 3, 2003

Originally posted by nicklin
Yeah, he is badass, just think, he picks fights with a country wose entir military buget worth less than two of our B2's. Wow, let's wipe out France just on the side. And, maybe, we can wipe out Belgium too. That way we'll really be a bully of the world, like we're not yet.

What do you have against Belgium? Did ya choke on a waffle?

valve bouncer · Apr 4, 2003

Originally posted by LordOpie
What do you have against Belgium? Did ya choke on a waffle?

LOL, personally I'll never ever forgive those bastards for inflicting Brussels Sprouts on the rest of the world

Praise for the Rumsfeld War Plan

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

MOTHER HEN

Monkey

Monkey

Monkey

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Attention K Mart Shoppers

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Monkey

MOTHER HEN

Monkey

Resident Curmudgeon

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Monkey

unemployed bum

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

unemployed bum

Monkey

The Fresno Kid

Attention K Mart Shoppers

find me a tampon

unemployed bum

unemployed bum

find me a tampon

Attention K Mart Shoppers

unemployed bum

Attention K Mart Shoppers

unemployed bum

Attention K Mart Shoppers

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Attention K Mart Shoppers

unemployed bum

MOTHER HEN

Chimp

unemployed bum

Monkey

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

MOTHER HEN

Master Dildoist