Digby theorizes that Bush can't fire Rumsfeld because they're deep in planning the next war (Iran), which they decided to launch right after a bunch of idiots re-elected Bush, making him think he had a mandate.
Bush just issued a statement of support for Rumsfeld. He is stubborn and refuses to change course, as we know. But if what Hersh reported back in 2005 is correct, Rumsfeld owns him. Back in the heady days of his 2% landslide, Bush authorized a covert war with Iran, with no congressional oversight and without even the cooperation of the CINQ's. This makes Iran-Contra look like the Canuck letter.

These retired generals are speaking for a military establishment that has been used like monopoly money by Rummy his fellow magical thinkers (like his "advisor" Newt Gingrich) who have spent the last five years attempting to destroy the military with their useless, incompetent war planning and their surreal Toffler-esque vision of a military that doesn't require an actual army.

I realize that the armed forces always resist change. But I think it's fair to assume, considering the Iraq cock-up, that Rummy doesn't know what in the hell he's doing. The military is finally saying "enough." We are witnessing a coup by media.

The congress has completely abdicated its oversight responsibility, the media is shallow and incompetent, our allies are considered irrelevant, the UN is being run by a nutcase even more far-out that Rummy and the wishes of the people are, as usual, not considered. It looks like the only institution in America that can bring us back from the brink of a tragic, tragic mistake is the military itself.
Impeach.

- tom moody 4-15-2006 10:50 pm

beyond planning?


C&L
- steve 4-16-2006 8:41 pm


You can't link directly to the video at C&L, you have to link to the post.
- jim 4-16-2006 8:44 pm


Do you know about Dan Savage's ITMFA campaign? (impeach the motherfucker already). I think you can find it by going to his column on villagevoice.com
- oriane (guest) 4-16-2006 8:53 pm


correction: there's a whole website, ITMFA.com, devoted to it. You can buy buttons, bumperstickers, etc., there.
- oriane (guest) 4-16-2006 9:01 pm


Thanks, yes, someone left those initials here recently. We have to do what we can.

Re; the clip. I can't watch most of the overheated TV chat, partly because it gets me overheated and I don't have enough shoes to hurl at the screen, but I did watch this clip, and I'm always amazed how casually these cretins sit around discussing the unthinkable.

I'm sure he's right, and that Bush is already doing the kind of "war before the war" they did in Iraq.

The media is already playing its part, too--that CNN anchor rattled off a bunch of stuff from the "demonizing Iran" script they've all been reading the past few months. "What if Iran gets nukes? They're so belligerent! Oh my god, what if? WHAT IF? WOULDN"T THAT BE HORRIBLE?" "Ellie May, the feller there on that there TV says them Iranians have some kinda A-bomb." "Thank God we have George Bush to attack them and keep us safe from them there towel heads, Jethro."
- tom moody 4-16-2006 9:13 pm


Billmon voices another frustrating thing about that clip:

What's amazing is how the corporate media absolutely insists on sticking to the prepared script, even when their sources won't. Having just been told the war has already begun, here's the CNN twink's reaction:

CLANCY: If they do decide on a military option . . .
GARDINER: Right?
CLANCY: What's the realistic chance of success?


IF they decide on a military option. In one ear and out the other.


- tom moody 4-17-2006 12:33 am





add a comment to this page:

Your post will be captioned "posted by anonymous,"
or you may enter a guest username below:


Line breaks work. HTML tags will be stripped.