Rumsfeld calls Obama’s Syria strategy ‘mindless’
Former Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld says he’s confounded by how the Obama administration has gone about explaining why a strike is in the USA’s national interest.
“There really hasn’t been any indication from the administration as to what our national interest is with respect to this particular situation,” Rumsfeld, secretary of Defense when the U.S. attacked Iraq in 2003, said Wednesday evening on the Fox Business Network.
The most important issues in the region, Rumsfeld said, are “Iran’s nuclear program and the relationship between Iran and Syria — the (Bashar) Assad regime — with respect to funding terrorists that go around killing innocent men, women and children, including Americans.”
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Climate Grifting Shutting Down
- Fundamental Pillars Of Democracy
- An Inconvenient Truth
- Antarctic Meltdown Update
- “Trump eyes major cuts to NOAA research”
- Data Made Simple II – Sneak Preview
- Attacks On Democracy
- Scientists Warn
- Upping The Ante
- Our New Leadership
- Grok Defines Fake News
- Arctic Meltdown Update
- The Savior Of Humanity
- President Trump Explains The Stock Market
- Net Zero In Europe
- The Canadian Hockey Stick
- Dogs Cause Hurricanes, Tornadoes And Droughts
- 50 Years Of Climate Devastation
- Climate Cycles
- Hiding The Decline
- Careful Research At BBC News
- New Video : Man Made Climate Emergency
- Geoengineering To Save The Planet
- Geoengineering Genocide
Recent Comments
- arn on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- D. Boss on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- gordon vigurs on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Independent on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Ivan G Wainwright on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Crispin Pemberton-Pigott on An Inconvenient Truth
- DD More on Attacks On Democracy
- arn on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- conrad ziefle on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Billyjack on An Inconvenient Truth
My guess is that he’ll shoot a few tomahawks and hit some camels in the butt. (at $1.5 mill each!)
This is the military equivalent of his voting present on many important issues when he was a Senator.
Donald Rumsfeld is not aware of how many unknown unknowns are known to being ignored currently.
Send in Joe Biden with a shotgun
Mindless? Rumsfeld is once again far too generous and supportive.
Kinda like calling AGW a clear-and-present danger, without actually defining what that means. Saying bombing Syria is in our national security interest doesn’t make it so. Why won’t the media ask Obama the tough questions? Journalistic malpractice may result in lots of deaths, possibly WWIII.
While O’Bummer is getting his rocks off attacking Syria, Iran will be attacking Israel. That will give either Barry and/or his Israeli counterpart an excuse for taking out Iran’s nuclear facilities. If Barry is capable of thinking that far ahead, that’s probably his ‘brilliant’ strategy. World War Three, World War Shmee.
Sounds like Obama can get Iran to execute his plan to take Israel out.
Rumsfeld calling someone else mindless.
Now that’s irony.
So how is Obama’s unilateral action against Syria in our national security interest?
What is the end game?
What is the best possible scenario?
What will Obama do if Iran responds by attacking Israel either directly or using Hezbollah in Lebanon?
Coalition partners for 1st Iraq war (Bush41): 38 + Congressional approval
2nd Iraq war (Bush41): 30 + Congressional approval
Syria: 3, if you count the U.S., U.K. (wavering), and France (no guarantee); no COngressional vote or calling of special session by Obama
Obama isn’t behaving by his own standards – to only take military action with a broad international consensus and approval from the Congress. Remember Biden calling for Bush43’s impeachment, and Obama calling Bush’s bombing of Iran (which never happened – strawman attack) unconstitutional?