Report: Rumseld Ignored Pentagon Advice on Iraq
Yang
Report: Rumseld Ignored Pentagon Advice on Iraq
Sat Mar 29, 6:39 PM ET Add Politics to My Yahoo!
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
Iraq (news - web sites), New Yorker Magazine reported.
In an article for its April 7 edition, which goes on sale on Monday,
the weekly said Rumsfeld insisted at least six times in the run-up to
the conflict that the proposed number of ground troops be sharply
reduced and got his way.
"He thought he knew better. He was the decision-maker at every turn,"
the article quoted an unidentified senior Pentagon planner as saying.
"This is the mess Rummy put himself in because he didn't want a heavy
footprint on the ground."
It also said Rumsfeld had overruled advice from war commander Gen.
Tommy Franks to delay the invasion until troops denied access through
Turkey could be brought in by another route and miscalculated the
level of Iraqi resistance.
"They've got no resources. He was so focused on proving his point --
that the Iraqis were going to fall apart," the article, by veteran
journalist Seymour Hersh, cited an unnamed former high-level
intelligence official as saying.
A spokesman at the Pentagon declined to comment on the article.
Rumsfeld is known to have a difficult relationship with the Army's
upper echelons while he commands strong loyalty from U.S. special
operations forces, a key component in the war.
He has insisted the invasion has made good progress since it was
launched 10 days ago, with some ground troops 50 miles from the
capital, despite unexpected guerrilla-style attacks on long supply
lines from Kuwait.
Hersh, however, quoted the former intelligence official as saying the
war was now a stalemate.
Much of the supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles has been expended,
aircraft carriers were going to run out of precision guided bombs and
there were serious maintenance problems with tanks, armored vehicles
and other equipment, the article said.
"The only hope is that they can hold out until reinforcements arrive,"
the former official said.
The article quoted the senior planner as saying Rumsfeld had wanted to
"do the war on the cheap" and believed that precision bombing would
bring victory.
Some 125,000 U.S. and British troops are now in Iraq. U.S. officials
on Thursday said they planned to bring in another 100,000 U.S.
soldiers by the end of April.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Kelvin
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl
''The tax cut proposed by President Bush is not the answer''
-George Akerlof, Nobel 2001
-Kenneth J. Arrow, Nobel 1972
-Lawrence R. Klein, Nobel 1980
-Daniel L. McFadden, Nobel 2000
-Franco Modigliani, Nobel 1985
-Douglass C. North, Nobel 1993
-Paul A. Samuelson, Nobel 1970
-William F. Sharpe, Nobel 1990
-Robert M. Solow, Nobel 1987
-Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel 2001
-And 450 other senior economists
www.epinet.org
JTEM
"Yang" <eac...@SPAMmail.com> wrote
> Report: Rumseld Ignored Pentagon Advice on Iraq
Bringing you yesterday's news, tomorrow!
Rumsfeld did micro-manage his weasel ass into a corner,
no question about that, but the mismanagement began long
long ago and started *Way* at the top.
Wbarwell
President Botch-up delegated the military planning to Rumsfeld, afterall,
how much did a n airforce reserve deserter know about the military?
I am now reading Hersh's horrifying article in the March 31
new Yorker on the Niger uranium forgeries. Somebody forged some
clumsy forgeries that seemed to implicate Iraq as buying uranium
from Niger. It was so bad a forgery that any decent intelligence
office could pick it aprt in minutes.
This is the document, that was abstracted into a summary that Bush
waved around in the faces of Democratic House and Senate leaders
to justify his war. By doing that, he silenced them in face of imminent
war with iraq.
Now we know, the Democrats were conned.
I am extremely upset.
The fuckers lied their way into a war.
Either our intellience service is totally incompetent, or somebody
at the top muffled the truth from teh analysts, or Bush was informed
it wasn't good evidence and lied.
We need to find out.
And having lied to get us in this war, Bush and his crew are now proving
to be incompetent at prosecuting this war.
Stupid brain damaged 'conservatives'!
Impeach Bush now!
--
When I shake my killfile, I can hear them buzzing!
Not at all Cheerful Charlie
*Nemo*
eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang) wrote:
> http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=615&u=/nm/20030329/pl_nm/iraq_usa_r
I know that this is happening at the expense of many American lives, and
there's nothing funny about that. The only bright thing I can see about
this is that if this war keeps going this way, Dumbya will almost
certainly be a one-term president. Perhaps with a sharp enough lesson,
the country will learn never to elect a Bush again -- Florida
notwithstanding...
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
John Popelish
(snip)
> Either our intellience service is totally incompetent, or somebody
> at the top muffled the truth from teh analysts, or Bush was informed
> it wasn't good evidence and lied.
>
> We need to find out.
> And having lied to get us in this war, Bush and his crew are now proving
> to be incompetent at prosecuting this war.
I am sort of holding my breath, waiting for the fake excuse that we
now need to use 'nucular' weapons on Iraq to get us out of this mess.
What would that do to the value of Texas oil?
--
John Popelish
Jeremy Martin
>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>Iraq (news - web sites), New Yorker Magazine reported.
Yeah, and more troops are on their way, so I doubt it's really
being ignored now.
--
Jeremy Martin
"MENTAL GIANT kollegge graduate with a PHD in STUPID!"
"I could wrap a slightly warm cheese quesadilla around my cock,
and that would be fuckable. Does it make that gooey, delicious
product attractive? No sir, it does not."
- Sulzanti, SA Forums
Wbarwell
> Wbarwell wrote:
> (snip)
>> Either our intellience service is totally incompetent, or somebody
>> at the top muffled the truth from the analysts, or Bush was informed
>> it wasn't good evidence and lied.
>>
>> We need to find out.
>> And having lied to get us in this war, Bush and his crew are now
>> proving
>> to be incompetent at prosecuting this war.
> (snip)
>
> I am sort of holding my breath, waiting for the fake excuse that we
> now need to use 'nucular' weapons on Iraq to get us out of this mess.
>
> What would that do to the value of Texas oil?
>
The problem is the seige of Baghdad.
Its a problem. Rumdum and Bushy-wushy obviously though
that we could waltz in, shoot up a few palaces and ministry
buildings, and happy Iraqis would dance through the streets and present
the marines with keys to the city and total surrender.
As it is, we are now running low on precision guided bombs and missles.
Not that it matters, teh awe and shock crao didn't work.
You cannot win a seige with cruise missles and JDAMs.
Or B-52's and dumb iron bombs. Or even tanks. Or Nukes.
The utter, horrifying, total incompetence of Bush and Rumdum
will be displayed to a horriyfied world for some weeks or even months to
come. It is a matter of if Bush et al try to starve 'em out, or shoot their
way in, or both. Shoot their way in, have to retreat. Repeat until its too
bloody for American public consumption, go to full blown siege
warfare.
I suspect this will be what happens.
Do not be surprised if angry mobs burn down a few embassies when
the bloody siege begins.
I am very angry. At the pusillaminous, cowardly, knee knocking, yellow
bellied Democratic leadership.
Bush suckered them with lies about the Niger-Iraq uranium connection,
these lies shut them up in face of Bush's demand for war.
It was a lie, a fake set of documents that wasn't even a good fake.
And now they are silent, they hang their heads and dare not speak out.
I am surrounded by 'leaders' on both parties that are either weakling scum,
or incompetent war mongering lying scum.
And nose picking morons with their ears glued to Rush Limbaugh, and
other far right brain-freaks listen to the lying scum and bob their scum
heads up and down, agreeing with every lie uttered.
Scum, scum, scum, all around me debased, degenerate, ignorant scum.
--
When I shake my killfile, I can hear them buzzing!
Cheerful Charlie
Fester
"Yang" <eac...@SPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:3e867ad3...@news.cox.net...
>
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=615&u=/nm/20030329/pl_nm/iraq_usa
<credibility flies out the window like a Tomohawk>
<Yang (no offense) is heard to cry>
Come back cred, please come back. I won't I abuse you anymore.
<Credibility turns its head and sez, yeah right.>
Automort
>Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>Iraq (news - web sites),
When war starts, listen to generals and not politicians.
In fact, when should one listen to politicians rather than to experts in a
field in question?
Kevin Anthoney
It's not much different here in Britain.
With Tony Blair on the warpath, and massive public protests against the war,
Iain Duncan Smith, Leader of the Opposition, had an unmissable opportunity
to stick in the knife and bring down the Government. Instead, he says:
"eep."
Well done, Iain.
Expect the Lib Dems to do well at the next election, assuming Blair's plans
for World Domination fall through and we actually have one, of course.
--
Kevin Anthoney
kanthoney[a]dsl.pipex.com
Pro-Humanist FREELOVER
> [...]
> proving to be incompetent at prosecuting this war.
How much video has been released regarding the air
attacks on Iraqi military? For example, it has been said,
recently, that from 35 to over 50 percent of the Repub-
lican Guard entrenched around Baghdad has been de-
stroyed. How was that accomplished? Air power. How
much have we seen of that action? Very little, other than
video of the horizon of Baghdad conveying that what-
ever is being hit by those bombs is not likely to be faring
well.
As for the reaction of Iraqis, that will become evidenced
as Saddam's regime / Fedayeen is tossed out of power.
Right now, folks are threatened with death if they so much
as smile at a camera and offer a thumbs up to U.S. forces.
To minimize civilian casualties, the military plan, for the
most part, is to forestall maximum contact in many Iraqi
cities in the hope that if / when the Saddam regime falls,
the Fedayeen and remaining military forces will capitulate,
thereby minimizing the consequences to civilians.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---
Sunday, 30 March, 2003
Iraq war 'on track'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2900907.stm
---
Excerpts:
The commander of the US-led war in Iraq, General
Tommy Franks, has said coalition forces have made
"truly remarkable" progress in the campaign to oust
Saddam Hussein.
... Correspondents say the Iraqi capital is now being
bombed around the clock, with some of the most
intensive bombardments since the start of the war
11 days ago. B-52 bombers have been dropping
massive payloads on Republican Guard positions
in the southern outskirts of the city, while laser-guided
bombs have struck communication facilities and
government buildings inside Baghdad.
... The UK Government says the head of Baghdad's
air defences has been sacked because Iraq's own
missiles have been falling on the capital; Iraq has
not responded to the reports.
... General Franks told reporters coalition forces had
achieved a series of objectives since the start of the
war, beginning with securing Iraq's southern oil fields.
"The Air Force has worked 24 hours a day across
every square foot of Iraq, and every day the regime
loses more of its military capability," he said. He dis-
missed reports the coalition had been set back by
unexpectedly stiff Iraqi resistance, saying: "We're in
fact on plan. And where we stand today is not, in my
view, only acceptable but truly remarkable."
General Franks said the Iraqi people would "welcome
their liberation", and said coalition successes meant
the way was now clear for humanitarian aid shipments
to begin. The commander also rebutted claims that
he had requested additional troops before the ground
war began and said that those on the way had always
been in the pipeline. ...
- - - end excerpts - - -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
} } } } Maps / Graphics { { { {
---
Iraq (simple map)
http://tinyurl.com/8gok
---
---
Maps of
Iraq (political, terrain, population, oil fields, regional, palaces)
Iraq WMD sites (chem, bio, nuke, missile sites / ranges)
Iraqi Military (air defense, ground force, air bases)
U.S. & Coalition Bases in the Persian Gulf
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/maps/index.html
---
---
Iraq -- War Tracker
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/war.tracker/index.html
---
---
U.S. & Coalition Forces applicable to Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/coalition/index.html
---
---
Iraq Forces
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/iraq/index.html
---
---
Weapons (U.S., Coalition, Iraqi) -- 3D models, munitions,
ground, aircraft, warships, WMD
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/weapons/index.html
---
---
Latest news in Iraq from CNN correspondents on the scene
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/otsc/index.html
---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
} } } } Photos { { { {
---
An Iraqi child receives humanitarian aid from British
Royal Marines on the streets of Umm Qasr
http://tinyurl.com/8gi8
---
---
U.S. Marines read magazines whilst wearing respir-
ators during a gas attack alert in an undisclosed
location in the Iraqi desert
http://tinyurl.com/8gig
---
---
British Royal Marine Eric Walderman dons the kevlar
helmet which saved his life after it was hit by four
bullets during a firefight in the assault on the southern
Iraq port of Umm Qsar
http://tinyurl.com/8gip
---
---
Smoke billows from an explosion in the presidential
compound in Baghdad following a US-British air raid
http://tinyurl.com/8git
---
---
British Challenger 2 tanks fire on enemy vehicles on
the front line just outside Basra
http://tinyurl.com/8gjj
---
---
British Royal Marine Roger Green gives out sweets
to Iraqi children as British Troops bring the first human-
itarian aid to Umm Qasr, Southern Iraq
http://tinyurl.com/8gk2
---
---
K-Dog R , a bottle-nose dolphin belonging to Com-
mander Task Unit CTU-55.4.3 and trained to seek out
mines, leaps out of the water
http://tinyurl.com/8gkk
---
---
Members of the Desert Rats - Zulu Company, British
Royal Fusiliers, drive their Warrior tank into a portrait
of Saddam Hussein
http://tinyurl.com/8gkv
---
---
Smoke billows during a US strike on a presidential
palace in Baghdad
http://tinyurl.com/8gli
---
---
Smoke covers the presidential palace compound in
Baghdad during a massive US-led air raid on the Iraqi
capital
http://tinyurl.com/8gm8
---
---
British Royal Artillary troops from 29 Commando Regi-
ment fire their 105mm light guns from a position in the
Kuwait desert at targets in Southern Iraq during the first
night of the allied campaign
http://tinyurl.com/8gmm
---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤
~~~
Pro-Humanist FREELOVER
(Freethinking Realist Exploring Expressive Liberty,
Openness, Verity, Enlightenment, & Rationality)
http://www.ghg.net/phf
~~~
Yang
<mrbu...@pattonisgod.com> wrote:
>(eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)):
>
>>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>>Iraq (news - web sites), New Yorker Magazine reported.
>
>Yeah, and more troops are on their way, so I doubt it's really
>being ignored now.
Which is a violation of the Powell doctrine. It shows that someone up
there miscalculated the amount of original troop strength needed.
Yang
>
>"Yang" <eac...@SPAMmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3e867ad3...@news.cox.net...
>>
>http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=615&u=/nm/20030329/pl_nm/iraq_usa
>_report_dc_3&printer=1
><credibility flies out the window like a Tomohawk>
><Yang (no offense) is heard to cry>
>Come back cred, please come back. I won't I abuse you anymore.
><Credibility turns its head and sez, yeah right.>
Let's see:
New Yorker- Lots of credbility
Fester-Zero credibility, but his head makes a nice hollow sound.
Yang
And the general, according to the New Yorker, says Rumsfeld is wrong.
Wbarwell
> Wbarwell wrote:
>
>> John Popelish wrote:
>>
>>> Wbarwell wrote:
>>> (snip)
>>
>> Do not be surprised if angry mobs burn down a few embassies when
>> the bloody siege begins.
>>
>> I am very angry. At the pusillaminous, cowardly, knee knocking, yellow
>> bellied Democratic leadership.
>>
>> Bush suckered them with lies about the Niger-Iraq uranium connection,
>> these lies shut them up in face of Bush's demand for war.
>> It was a lie, a fake set of documents that wasn't even a good fake.
>>
>> And now they are silent, they hang their heads and dare not speak out.
>>
>> I am surrounded by 'leaders' on both parties that are either weakling
>> scum, or incompetent war mongering lying scum.
>> And nose picking morons with their ears glued to Rush Limbaugh, and
>> other far right brain-freaks listen to the lying scum and bob their scum
>> heads up and down, agreeing with every lie uttered.
>>
>> Scum, scum, scum, all around me debased, degenerate, ignorant scum.
>>
>>
>
> It's not much different here in Britain.
>
> With Tony Blair on the warpath, and massive public protests against the
> war, Iain Duncan Smith, Leader of the Opposition, had an unmissable
> opportunity to stick in the knife and bring down the Government. Instead,
> he says:
>
> "eep."
>
> Well done, Iain.
>
> Expect the Lib Dems to do well at the next election, assuming Blair's
> plans for World Domination fall through and we actually have one, of
> course.
>
Whats the deal with the Liberal Democrats? It looked like post-Thatcher
they were poised to do well, but faded. Lack of real programs?
Lack of organization? Lack of charismatic personel with good ideas
that can generate enthusiams? All the above?
We get no hint of what is going on in English politics here
in our next to useless and utterly provincal media.
Wbarwell
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 10:07:23 -0600, Jeremy Martin
> <mrbu...@pattonisgod.com> wrote:
>
>>(eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)):
>>
>>>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>>>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>>>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>>>Iraq (news - web sites), New Yorker Magazine reported.
>>
>>Yeah, and more troops are on their way, so I doubt it's really
>>being ignored now.
>
>
> Which is a violation of the Powell doctrine. It shows that someone up
> there miscalculated the amount of original troop strength needed.
>
>
Rumsfeld is getting all the credit appearently from a stream
of insiders in the Pentagon. A lot of people are angry with him.
If this goes down badly, he's sacrificial lamb No. 1.
Apprently, early on, he thought we could take Iraq with 80,000
troops and air power alone.
This is the sort of thinking you get when war wimps
are allowed to play general.
Kevin Anthoney
It's partly that, although you could lay the same criticisms at the other
two parties. It's mainly the getting-started problem - people don't vote
for you if they think you won't get in, and you won't get in unless folks
vote for you.
If voters get brassed off with Tony, and the Tories stay in hibernation,
they'll do well.
> We get no hint of what is going on in English politics here
> in our next to useless and utterly provincal media.
>
--
Jeremy Martin
>On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 10:07:23 -0600, Jeremy Martin
><mrbu...@pattonisgod.com> wrote:
>
>>(eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)):
>>
>>>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>>>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>>>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>>>Iraq (news - web sites), New Yorker Magazine reported.
>>
>>Yeah, and more troops are on their way, so I doubt it's really
>>being ignored now.
>
>
>Which is a violation of the Powell doctrine. It shows that someone up
>there miscalculated the amount of original troop strength needed.
Yeah, uh.. I don't believe the Powell doctrine is exactly what's
being used. And besides that, the Powell doctrine called for a
large amount of troops in the first place.
--
Jeremy Martin
"MENTAL GIANT kollegge graduate with a PHD in STUPID!"
"I'm fairly sure that the entire country of Japan, its
inhabitants, culture, and principal exports were univerisally
created wholesale by the imaginations of lonely fanboys."
- evensevenone, SA Forums
Jeremy Martin
>On 30 Mar 2003 18:02:54 GMT, auto...@aol.com (Automort) wrote:
>
>>>From: eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)
>>
>>>Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>>>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>>>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>>>Iraq (news - web sites),
>>
>>When war starts, listen to generals and not politicians.
>>In fact, when should one listen to politicians rather than to experts in a
>>field in question?
>
>
>And the general, according to the New Yorker, says Rumsfeld is wrong.
"an unidentified senior Pentagon planner"
--
Jeremy Martin
"MENTAL GIANT kollegge graduate with a PHD in STUPID!"
"The combined IQ of everyone in PETA still wouldn't compete with
the shaving cream coated lab rats they dedicate their lives to
freeing."
- Livestock, SA Forums
Yang
<mrbu...@pattonisgod.com> wrote:
>(eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)):
>
>>On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 10:07:23 -0600, Jeremy Martin
>><mrbu...@pattonisgod.com> wrote:
>>
>>>(eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)):
>>>
>>>>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>>>>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>>>>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>>>>Iraq (news - web sites), New Yorker Magazine reported.
>>>
>>>Yeah, and more troops are on their way, so I doubt it's really
>>>being ignored now.
>>
>>
>>Which is a violation of the Powell doctrine. It shows that someone up
>>there miscalculated the amount of original troop strength needed.
>
>Yeah, uh.. I don't believe the Powell doctrine is exactly what's
>being used. And besides that, the Powell doctrine called for a
>large amount of troops in the first place.
Which is exactly what is happening as we speak. Extra deployment order
came on the same week of the repoted reverses, or as Rumsfeld
euphemistically put, a "rolling deployment". If you think about it,
the failure of "rolling deployment" in Vietnam is what gave rise to
thr Powell doctrine in the first place.
Yang
<mrbu...@pattonisgod.com> wrote:
>(eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)):
>
>>On 30 Mar 2003 18:02:54 GMT, auto...@aol.com (Automort) wrote:
>>
>>>>From: eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang)
>>>
>>>>Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly
>>>>rejected advice from Pentagon (news - web sites) planners that
>>>>substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in
>>>>Iraq (news - web sites),
>>>
>>>When war starts, listen to generals and not politicians.
>>>In fact, when should one listen to politicians rather than to experts in a
>>>field in question?
>>
>>
>>And the general, according to the New Yorker, says Rumsfeld is wrong.
>
>"an unidentified senior Pentagon planner"
So who does the senior planning in Pentagon, the janitor?
Wbarwell
Rumsfeld's, Bush's and the right.
Today in our local newspaper:
"Brass Prepared for High Casualties"
...
"We're prepared to pay a very high price", the official
("a senior official with the U.S. Central Command")
said, on condition of anonimity.
So they are letting somebody else slip us the bad news
while Rummydumb and Bushy-wushy prevaricate, lie and
cheerlead.
If this is a bloody, nasty, long fight that leaves 5,000
US soldiers dead, this whole cockup by Rummy and Bush
will haveto, just have to be investigated.
If these deaths occur because these morons lead us to war
based on bad plans and assumptions, they have to be investigated so the
blame hangs around their stupid, incompetent necks.
What credibility?
And we went to war based on lies about a fraudulent set of documents
claiming Iraq was trying to buy uranium frim Niger, and false claims about
WMD.
Liars and frauds and fools.
An nobody on the far right cares.
No credibility in the White House, the GOP lead Senate and House, nor
the swarm of far right radio haters that fannned these flames.
--
Cheerful Charlie
John Schneider II
> Fester wrote:
--snip of liberal media spin--
--snip of barwell hysteria--
>
The plan for the invasion of Iraq was written in the Pentagon.
Rumsfeld tasked them to come up with a plan should it become necessary,
and they complied. No one involved in the planning of the operation was
ignored.
When barwell and the liberals want to post something with some
credibility, then they'll be treated as being credible. However, as long
as barwell demonstrates a fanatical, visceral hatred for anyone who
disagrees with his left wing extremism, then nothing he says can be
given any credibility.
John II
stoney
Message ID: <nemo0037-846431...@nnrp03.earthlink.net> wrote
in alt.atheism;
>In article <3e867ad3...@news.cox.net>,
> eac...@SPAMmail.com (Yang) wrote:
>
>> http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=615&u=/nm/20030329/pl_nm/iraq_usa_r
>> eport_dc_3&printer=1
(snip)
>> Hersh, however, quoted the former intelligence official as saying the
>> war was now a stalemate.
>>
>> Much of the supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles has been expended,
>> aircraft carriers were going to run out of precision guided bombs and
>> there were serious maintenance problems with tanks, armored vehicles
>> and other equipment, the article said.
>>
>> "The only hope is that they can hold out until reinforcements arrive,"
>> the former official said.
>>
>> The article quoted the senior planner as saying Rumsfeld had wanted to
>> "do the war on the cheap" and believed that precision bombing would
>> bring victory.
>>
>> Some 125,000 U.S. and British troops are now in Iraq. U.S. officials
>> on Thursday said they planned to bring in another 100,000 U.S.
>> soldiers by the end of April.
>
>I know that this is happening at the expense of many American lives, and
>there's nothing funny about that. The only bright thing I can see about
>this is that if this war keeps going this way, Dumbya will almost
>certainly be a one-term president. Perhaps with a sharp enough lesson,
>the country will learn never to elect a Bush again -- Florida
>notwithstanding...
The moral of the story boys and girls is to never stop beating the
bushes..........................
::::::::FFFFFFFFLLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEE:::::::::::::::::::
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!