Rumsfeld: Constitution Won't End Violence

[sabra]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/23/AR2005082300660.html

Rumsfeld: Constitution Won't End Violence

By JOHN J. LUMPKIN
The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 23, 2005; 1:52 PM

WASHINGTON -- A new constitution will not end all the violence nor solve all the problems in Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday, acknowledging the continuing violence "has to be a heart-wrenching thing" for the families of U.S. servicemen and women lost there.

"The process has been delayed a bit, but democracy has never been described as speedy, efficient or perfect," Rumsfeld said during a Pentagon briefing. Earlier, Iraqi lawmakers delayed a vote on the draft constitution to give negotiators more time to persuade Sunni Arabs to accept it.

The head of the committee drafting Iraq's constitution said an extra three days may be not enough to win over the Sunni Arabs and that the constitution may have to be approved by parliament as is and taken to the people in a referendum.

Rumsfeld dismissed the idea that objections from Sunnis could lead to civil war. President Bush, asked earlier about the possibility that a constitutional conflict could trigger a civil war, said: "The Sunnis have got to make a choice: Do they want to live in a society that's free?"

[hatrack]

1. Wow, thanks, Don - I would never have guessed that!

:puke:

[SodoffBush]

2. Don is truly a genius, isn't he?

[bemildred]

10. Yup. Clock hands move "clockwise", I hear. nt

[TheFarseer]

3. way to go captain obvious

Wow, a piece of paper produces by an illegitimate government won't stop the violence?

[maddezmom]

4. so if the violence is going to continue, but it's not a civil war

is rummy prepared to give it a new name?

from an earlier article:

CSM - Does it matter if you call it a civil war?

Iraq's constitution could be seen as a draft 'peace pact' for warring parties.

By Dan Murphy | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

BAGHDAD – Finding a way to head off civil war is at the heart of all the major initiatives - including the talks over a new constitution - in Iraq. But by most common political-science definitions of the term, "civil war" is already here.

"It's not a threat. It's not a potential. Civil war is a fact of life there now,'' says Pavel Baev, head of the Center for the Study of Civil War at the Peace Research Institute in Oslo, Norway. He argues that until the nature of the conflict is accurately seen, good solutions cannot be found. "What's happening in Iraq is a multidimensional conflict. There's international terrorism, banditry, the major foreign military presence. But the civil war is the central part of it - the violent contestation for power inside the country."


What this means in practical terms, is that an immediate US withdrawal isn't likely to bring peace to Iraq, say analysts. Nor is simply "staying the course," if it isn't matched by a political peace treaty among the warring parties - a role that a new constitution, facing a midnight tonight deadline, could fill.

The academic thumbnail definition of a civil war is a conflict with at least 1,000 battlefield casualties, involving a national government and one or more nonstate actors fighting for power.

more:http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0822/p01s02-woiq.html

[gademocrat7]

5. What a revelation

The violence that he helped create.

[ninkasi]

6. Rumsfeld's brain is apparently not functioning too well

Apparently,along with his boss, Rummy seems to have forgotten that any constitution which makes Islamic Law the law of the land, will automatically take away freedom for more than half of the population. I suspect that any parent who has lost a child in this illegal invasion is wondering why their loved one had to die, when the cause they thought they were fighting for was a lie.

He can dismiss the idea of the Sunni's refusing to sign the agreement, and the notion that the whole thing will end in civil war, because he is completely out of touch with reality. This whole administration is composed of a group of psychotics, and the people behind the scenes who control them. It doesn't seem to faze them that every prediction they made going into this war, ever prediction they have made as things get worse and worse, has been proved to be wrong. Nothing shakes Rummy, or Chimp, from their delusions.

We owe it to the ones who have lost their lives, and the ones who grieve for them, to stop this atrocity now, before even more blood is shed. Bush lied, we know it, and the rest of the world knows it. Rummy needs to be taken to the Hague in chains, along with the rest of the neocons who repeated the lie over and over. We need to get our troops out now.

[Javaman]

14. They must really hate us for our freedoms...

because they are omitting them from their constitution.

But wait...

I thought we were there to bring them freedom...

But wait...

If we are bringing freedom, yet the are limiting freedom what did we bring them?

But wait...

If they are limiting freedom, then that's not freedom...

But wait...

Then the freedom that we brought them, wasn't really freedom?

But wait...

They are getting to decide their freedom, even if it's based on Islamic law...

But wait...

Doesn't Islamic Law limit freedom???

But wait...

If their gov't is based on Islamic law, aren't they like Iran?

YES! Let the purging begin! That is of course after the Shi'ites wipe out the remaining Sunni's in the little civil war that is bound to follow.

So there you have it sports fans, we just turned Iraq in to Iran.

Does that mean we have to reinvade it?

colossal failure*

[daleo]

25. Rumsfeld has long been insane.

I could see it the first time I laid eyes on him.

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. No shit, genius boy

Next he'll be predicting that sometime tomorrow, there will be a transition from night to day...What a bagiagaloop.

[MidwestTransplant]

8. But what about what dICK said? I thought we were almost there.

[Surya Gayatri]

9. "Rumsfeld dismissed the idea [...of ] civil war"...

New Bushspeak headline in 2 or 3 months' time: "Sunni 'UNREST' Mounts--Outcome of Referendum in Grave Doubt"...watch for it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. This is an importnat step for the Don

first time an event will not end violence... he is tippy toeing into the reality based pool. Careful don... if you do it too often you will realize the Nile is not just a river in Egypt

[agingdem]

12. Ya think?!!

[rodeodance]

13. they are getting good at lowering expectations aren't they.

[Zenlitened]

15. Rumsfeld Says New Constitution Won't End All Violence in Iraq

Rumsfeld Says New Constitution Won't End All Violence in Iraq

Associated Press
August 23, 2005 8:59 p.m.

WASHINGTON -- A new constitution will not end all the violence in Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday, acknowledging that the continuing turbulence "has to be a heart-wrenching thing" for the families of U.S. forces still fighting insurgents there.

"The process has been delayed a bit, but democracy has never been described as speedy, efficient or perfect," Mr. Rumsfeld said during a briefing.

Um, yes it has. It was described that way by you, Rummy, and your fellow neo-con incompetents, who presented this plan:

Day 1: Invade Iraq

Day 2: Be greeted with flowers

Day 3: Pump oil happily every after.


:grr: CRIMINAL incompetence.


Full story:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB112480111881520465,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us

[ronnykmarshall]

16. NO SHIT!!

What a fucking genius!!!

There is a special place in hell for that mother fucker.

[NYC]

17. Untidy?

Is that what he said before about democracy? So now democracy is untidy and non-speedy. For that matter, it is also undemocratic. How else explain that women won't have rights?

[jeffster]

18. haha

Perhaps more violence will end violence in Iraq! :eyes:

[PassingFair]

19. Now where is that little guy, oh, here he is:

:rofl:

[Webster Green]

20. These fuckwads wouldn't know democracy if it bit them on the ass

And it will....soon!

[IndianaGreen]

21. US troops will be caught in the middle of a civil war.

The irony is that our troops will be ordered to defend an Iraqi government hell-bent on forcing women to wear the veil, and in closing bars and liquor stores owned by Christians.

[NYC]

22. Is that the "noble cause"

Cindy Sheehan wants to know about?

[Mika]

24. No irony really. US mil defended Kuwait and Saudi.

re: "..government hell-bent on forcing women to wear the veil, and in closing bars and liquor stores owned by Christians."

[blue northern]

23. A 'constitution' issued at the order of an occupying army

will never end ANY violence.
It could in fact be the seed for more and continuing violence.
It's not going to buy any reprieve for any of the parties on the ground in Iraq.
The sham elections that the neo-cons pushed for have produced similar results.

[napi21]

26. He's not willing to admit that there is already a civil war there!

As part of ShrubCo, Rummy won't admit the obvious! There's already a civil war in Iraq! I don't know if the right thing is to pull all the troops out now is rght or not, but I can see enough to know that what we are doing now is not working!
Either change your strategy or admit failure, Mr. Rumsfield!

[Imagevision]

27. Since January elections more Iraqi civilians were killed, the year

has been a total failure/disaster for our own as well!

http://costofwar.com/

[TheCowsCameHome]

28. The man is a genius. But who gave him the answer sheet?

What a fool.