Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
The WSJ via CNN, says Bush has his own covey of generals to rebuke the dissenters and call them stogy old cranks as well as unpatriotic.
|
And so we go right to what those four generals say:
Quote:
|
"It unfortunately appears that two of the retired generals (Messrs. Zinni and Newbold) do not understand the true nature of this radical ideology, Islamic extremism, and why we fight in Iraq. We suggest they listen to the tapes of United 93."
|
When did Saddam bring down flight 93? When did Saddam attack the WTC and Pentagon?
The war in Iraq is not being won. 85% of problems are directly traceable to top management - clearly Rumsfeld and George Jr. AND the reasons given to fight a war in Iraq are justified by 11 September? Why are four generals lying to defend Rumsfeld? Are they simply following the president’s orders? Or are they that misguided?
How deep is this pool of outright liars? Anyone who can read knows Saddam was totally unrelated to Flight 93. Maybe these four generals think you - the person reading this - is that dumb? Or maybe these four generals also believe category three levees would not be breeched by a category five hurricane? Maybe Rumsfeld had to reach that deep into a barrel of retired generals to find support? Iraq is about Flight 93? They acutally wrote that in defense of Rumsfeld?
Meanwhile the reason for Flight 93 was in Afghanistan. Remember bin Laden who Rumsfeld and George Jr will not go after? Remember how 10th Mountain was denied access to Tora Bora and then later sent up without preparation - causing numerous unnecessary casulties? More micromanagement by Rumsfeld or Bush. So yes, let's listen to the tapes of Flight 93 - and remember that George Jr did not go after bin Laden. Four generals somehow call that competence? And when did those four generals say we will go after bin Laden?