Rumsfeld questioned...

[The Vault Dweller]

So apparently Rumsfeld had a press conference with troops who turned out to be disgruntled. At one point a soldier asked "Why do we have to go through garbage dumps to get scrap metal to protect our vehicles?" The question caused many others to cheer and applaud.

Good to see the people in the service value their freedom of speech as much as many other citizens do.

This isnt the best link...it says the question was planted by a reporter.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/12/09/rumsfeld.reporter/index.html

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

 

[gonzo13]

Even if this question originated from a reporter, I do not think it matters. It obviously was a sentiment shared by the rest of the troops, judging by the tremendous cheer. I fee it is a question that needed to be asked regardless of who asks it. We must also remember that the soldier who asked it has his own mind as well and that ha chose to go along with the reporter of his own free will. He did not ask anything that he didn't want to.

Also, this presidency has been notorious for controlling the press. They ignore reporters that ask tough questions, or do any kind of investigative journalism. If the reporter is cut off from the White House then he/she basically looses his/her voice in the press since he/she cant very well report on the White House if all that is available are secondhand sources. Credibility drops to where the report is marginalized. I say more power to the reporter, because likely that question would have never been asked otherwise.

 

[quietfanatic]

The reporters have been just as much at fault in getting too friendly with the administration. They need some serious reform but there is little they can do now. The damage has already been done. Restriction of the press has still been a large problem, started by the spin doctors of the administration. I only hope that it stops and that popular support for freedom of the press will ensure good coverage.

This topic reminds me of things discussed here before. It seems very depressing if the soldiers did not tell the press about this problem before, as I fear that they may fear for their career or reputations. Why else would they not speak up without prompting and support?

 

[4too]

Intelligence Failure

Intelligence Failure

Not only was the pre invasion "homework" shallow on WMD.

The use of Turkish territory by the 2nd Div. was assumed by the U.S. planners and then denied by a vote in the Turkish legislature when it became public.

The forces committed depended as much on the Iraqis, NOT fighting after a certain point and the population on a whole supporting the regime change. In this scenario only 1 division would be needed to occupy Bagdad.

The on going insurgency and the infiltration of Iraqi by outside Islamic radicals was NOT in the plan.

What we see is another war where Americans are engaged in a mission with insufficient forces. Perhaps the conventional force and fire power is adequate, but the troops needed to secure the rebuilding appear insufficient, and most certainly the "bodies" needed to rotate and relieve troops are not readily available. The ""back door"" draft and the extensive use of the U.S. National Guard are proof of an over extended condition.

In the utopian vision of the neo-con's this wasn't "'in the plan'".
We are seeing an administration that deems image as everything, that spins a vertual reality that they acknowledge and a real world reality they deny.


4too

 

[Ratty Sr.]

The only thing I enjoyed more than the massive cheer was Rumsfeld's dumbass face and inarticulate attempts to get out of the unpleasant situation he found himself in. Had I been there, I would have thrown a few tomatoes and eggs for added effect.

 

[Murdoch]

The only thing I enjoyed more than the massive cheer was Rumsfeld's dumbass face and inarticulate attempts to get out of the unpleasant situation he found himself in. Had I been there, I would have thrown a few tomatoes and eggs for added effect.

And probably have been shot, but I don't disagree with your sentiment.

 

[welsh]

I would. If I were driving around Humvees without armor and seeing buddies get killed. Yeah.

As for this issue- old news. Remember, this was raised (without fanfare and with republican denials) during the election.

 

[Roshambo]

The only thing I enjoyed more than the massive cheer was Rumsfeld's dumbass face and inarticulate attempts to get out of the unpleasant situation he found himself in.

I think it's a good thing he's not in an important office when he openly patronizes the troops with bullshit answers and hyperbole. Oh, wait...Secretary of Offense or something like that...

I like this disection of what went on.

 

[Dixie_Rebel]

^Seconded

I especially liked this part of the third one:

Third, Rumsfeld's answer was not only glib--like his other infamous quips "nothing's perfect", "stuff happens" and "freedom's untidy"--but also callous and insensitive. "Go to war with the army you have" is acceptable if the war is caused by a surprise attack; Iraq is a preventive war which was planned in advance.

I doubt Rumsfeld would be so cavalier if he had a loved one fighting in this war, as opposed to effectively calling the soldiers wimpy for not sucking it up and toughing it out with what they've got.

Perhaps Donald Rumsfeld should go on a ride along with the soldiers? The way our government is treating our soldiers on this issue is horrible, in my opinion. It just seems like they have a "o well, get over it. Check please?" kind of attitude.

BTW.... thanks for the link Roshambo.