10
Joining the growing chorus of retired generals calling for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Lt. Gen. Greg Newbold reminds us in an essay in Time Magazine that the Iraq War planners at the White House were for the most part cowards who evaded military service:
"My sincere view is that the commitment of our forces to this fight was done with a casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions — or bury the results."
Meanwhile the Boston Globe reports this morning on documents that tie Rumsfeld directly to the abuse of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison facility. Spiegel Online has picked up the report.
0 comment
Wie wahrscheinlich ist es, dass die Generäle mit ihrer Forderung Erfolg haben? Dass die US-Administration den Irak-Krieg falsch gemanagt hat, wird seit längerem gesagt (wohlgemerkt, nicht, weil viele dadurch sterben mussten, sondern weil es vor allem mehr Truppen bedurft hätte..), aber verändert hat sich nichts. Auch der Vorwurf, dass die Administration aus Kriegsdienstverweigerern besteht ist nicht neu..
“..dass die Administration aus Kriegsdienstverweigerern besteht ist nicht neu..”
Ja, das stimmt. Aber es muss wiederholt werden, denn die Administration sucht jetzt einen neuen (diesmal vielleicht nuklearen) Krieg.
Americans need to be reminded of the character of their leaders…
Hmm, I really don’t feel that it’s the Americans who have been rattling sabers with the Iran issue. I mean, has “the Administration” called for the destruction of other countries using nuclear weapons? Has George Bush publicly supported a Holocaust-denial seminar and personally denied that such an event actually existed?
Has “the Administration” recently test-fired anti-shipping missiles in the Gulf? What about “stealth” ground-effect aircraft, or multiple-warhead theatre ballistic missiles? Hm? Can the report about the tactical nuclear weapons actually be believed, or is it another attempt by a highly left-leaning media outlet to throw some dirt the Administration’s way? Even if it’s true, is it or is it not convenient for Iran to be aware that its nuclear installations could be destroyed during an air attack, and that it would be better off by negotiating in good faith with the United Nations than risking open war?
Maybe you should look for your warmongers elsewhere this time. In the meantime all I see is one of the world’s premier state sponsors of terrorism striding towards the acquisition of nuclear weapons and using a rhetoric that simply indicates how dangerous it would be to have them as a nuclear power; a view that seems to be shared by all of the members of the UN Security Council who asked Iran to stop all its enrichment activities by April 28th, if that actually means anything these days.
Ich finde es interessant, dass die Generäle die verantwortlich für die Irak-Krieg waren sind die Generäle die bitten dass Herr Rumsfeld hinaus geht. Die Schuld für die Fehler, die die USA gemacht hat während der Krieg fällt wahrscheinlich auch auf diese Generäle, oder?