I don't care if Rumsfeld resigns

[bluestateguy]

Because anyone who replaces him will be replaced by Bush. Bush gets to appoint the replacement. And the replacement's replacement, until January of 2009.

Would you honestly think that anyone appointed by Bush would be any better than Rusmfeld?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. I agree in half.

Your point is correct. However, it's the disgrace of the whole thing that most people want. History recorded and such. It's why I care about it on a minimal level.

[babylonsister]

2. By affiliation, we should be demanding Il Dunce's resignation.

Someone needs to be held accountable-


Reid says recent calls for Rumsfeld's ouster aimed at Bush Updated at 11:54 AM

Reid says recent calls for Rumsfeld's ouster aimed at Bush

By: TOM GARDNER - Associated Press Writer

RENO, Nev. (AP) -- Recent calls by a half-dozen retired generals for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's ouster probably are aimed as much at President Bush as at the Pentagon boss, Sen. Harry Reid said Monday.

"It's a question of Secretary Rumsfeld that I think is more a question of leadership from the president," said Reid, D-Nev..

The retired generals have categorized Rumsfeld as a micromanager who did not listen to military leaders about the conduct of the war in Iraq. Some suggested that intimidation by Rumsfeld might have discouraged officers from disagreeing even when they felt policies were flawed.


"These are generals -- not some nay-sayers. I think the president should listen," Reid said.

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/04/18/military/417...

[Mr_Spock]

3. I like having a crippled administration

leave the bum, see if I care

[RufusEarl]

4. If you replace crippled with wounded,

we all know what a wounded animal is capable of doing.

[Mr_Spock]

8. Yes, but I'm going to stick with crippled

Rumsfeld is such a weak old bastard - I think he knows that reacting to criticism in a reckless way would just make him look weaker and less in control. He may actually be unable to initiate any more troop deployments due to his lack of confidence.

[RufusEarl]

10. I hadn't thought of that,

but it's plausible. Like you said in this environment he may not be able to do much, and of course thats a good thing.

[BuyingThyme]

5. Rumsfeld (and Cheney) will select Rumsfeld's replacement.

Bush has absolutely no say in it. None. The international stuff is controlled by the neo-cons.

[lectrobyte]

6. I sort of agree. Six years of damage already done. But... he would

know. It would be a kind of reckoning.

[RethugAssKicker]

7. Me tool... I could care less... We need to focus on Bush and Cheney

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Resign, hell.

He should be arrested next time he leaves the country, and sent to the dock at The Hague.

[Marr]

11. The problem is the neocons' idea of preventive war,

not just Rumsfeld's incompetent handling of that inherently flawed policy. And yeah- I agree that one crony is pretty much like the next anyway.

[saltpoint]

12. Bush: "I'm the replacer." Well, you're right that we don't have much

to expect from future Bush appointees, especially after all the previous ones.

On the other hand, if no pressure is applied to replace Rumsfeld, it implies support for the entire administration's conduct of foreign policy.

Under Clinton, Republican William Cohen served as Sec. of Defense, and so far as anybody knows, he didn't preside over torture camps.

You're right -- Rumsfeld would be replaced by someone we probably won't like. But as long a he stays he is a constant reminder of a very bad administration, and progressives are too appalled at Bush generally and Iraq specifically to let this one pass.