It's Time For Rumsfeld To Go - Page 3
Create Post
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 60
  1. #31
    Nam grunt, I was told if you cut someone some slack they'll take advantage of the situation at hand..And everyone should get their azz chewed out..top to bottom..and as you stated what happened to you was your mistake not the Garrison SOBs..as for Mr. Rumsfeld if he's man enough to say that it happened on his watch fine..But i doubt that he'll be back..win or lose..wasn't there a article some where that Rumsfeld said that the Geneva convention doesn't apply to the terrorist..if there a war going on then ALL captured should be held as POWs and treated as so...and even though it HURTS we can't act like they the iraqi people did when the 4 US people were hung up and the people danced around ...NO never..


  2. #32
    dc
    You should also recall I wrote that I "took my demotion and moved on". I didn't let that stop me from doing my job.
    I used my example as one occurrence of an action happening, and the upper echelons not being held responsible to the highest level. Why wasn't President LBJ taken to task for having someone arrive late to formation.
    It highlights the absurdity of calling for Donald Rumsfeld's (Rummy!!! yay-rah!) resignation for actions he did not order nor foresee.


  3. #33

    seems to me

    Originally posted by jryanjack
    Ok, let me first say that I've been out of the loop on the news lately. However, if we extend MajMike's arguement, doesn't the SecDef report to the CIC? And therefore isn't Bush also responsible for what happens on his watch? Sorry, while I may not agree that Bush is the perfect President, I cannot follow adding Bush to being responsible for this. And unless the SecDef was aware of the abuse prior to it hitting the newswire and did not handle that appropriately, then hang him! If he was not aware or if he was taking appropriate action, then leave him alone.
    Seems to me that when i was in the military,,,, the Commander was ultimately responsible for what happened under his Command,, and with something that is so hideous and outrageous, I would say that the leve has to go to the top... Rumsfield didn't read the report on the investigation that was started in January,, and when he did read it he didn't follow through by reporting it to his COMMANDER,,,, the CIC is ultimately responsible,,,so..... Bush has to bear some of the responsibility, but of course he won't....


  4. #34

    to me

    Originally posted by mrbsox
    Sparrowhawk said;

    [bI'm sorry Major, but your arugrument, in MY OPINION, undermines part of what makes the American Military what it is. The TRUST AND CONFIDENCE of Officers to make approporiate decisions, without having to 'ask permission' or say 'Hey Col, I've got a Lance coolie here that Fkd up. What do you want me to do with him ??

    The buck stops at the level that seems appropriate. If it stopped too soon, THEN we can pass judgement on the decision.

    And I wont dive into the potential (and wise) attempt to keep the investigations INTERNAL, for National security sake.
    but it wasn't kept internal, and as John Dean's book states, the Bush administration has a lot of secrets,, I'm sure that Bush wished it would've stayed internal.... this has much more impact than a single Marine smoking a joint,, it has dropped the US to the level of the terrorists if not lower,,, I'm angry as hell that it happened,,,


  5. #35
    SheWolf
    I will dispute your last statement.
    Bush has to bear some of the responsibility, but of course he won't....
    He has publicly apologized to the Iraqi people, whether we agree with his action or not. You do not apologize if you do not consider yourself responsible. I didn't like to hear it, but it was said on national media outlets.

    What happened is debilitating to our cause, but I won't accept the need for Rumsfeld to step down, nor for President Bush to fall on his sword for political correctness' sake. It will solve nothing for either of these events to happen. Lets resolve the problem and eradicate it's recurrence in the future.

    Regards to your son, and prayers for his safety, along with all our people over there (incuding the persons charged in this incident).


  6. #36

    ok but

    Originally posted by namgrunt
    SheWolf
    I will dispute your last statement.

    He has publicly apologized to the Iraqi people, whether we agree with his action or not. You do not apologize if you do not consider yourself responsible. I didn't like to hear it, but it was said on national media outlets.

    What happened is debilitating to our cause, but I won't accept the need for Rumsfeld to step down, nor for President Bush to fall on his sword for political correctness' sake. It will solve nothing for either of these events to happen. Lets resolve the problem and eradicate it's recurrence in the future.

    Regards to your son, and prayers for his safety, along with all our people over there (incuding the persons charged in this incident).
    he apologized the second time, and I think there is more to accepting responsibility than saying you are sorry,,, thanks for the regards and prayers,, we still haven't heard from my son... the kv is quiet and no newsletter from the Command (recently)


  7. #37
    yellowwing
    Guest Free Member
    August 31-September 9, 2003: Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, who runs the military prison for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, conducts an inquiry on interrogation and detention procedures in Iraq. He suggests that prison guards can help set conditions for the interrogation of prisoners.

    October-December 2003: Many of the alleged abuses at Abu Ghraib take place during this time period.

    October 13-November 6, 2003. Maj. Gen. Donald Ryder, provost marshal of the Army, investigates conditions of U.S.-run prisons in Iraq, including Abu Ghraib. He finds problems throughout the prisons. Some units, including the 800th Military Police Brigade, did not receive adequate training to guard prisons, he notes. He also says military police (MPs) should not assist in making prisoners more pliable to interrogation, as their job is to keep prisoners safe.

    January 13, 2004: Army Spc. Joseph M. Darby, an MP with the 800th at Abu Ghraib, first reports cases of abuse at the prison.
    January 16: Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez orders a criminal investigation into reports of abuse at the prison by members of the brigade. The military also announces the investigation publicly.

    January 18: A guard leader and a company commander at the prison are suspended from their duties, and Sanchez admonishes Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who commanded the brigade.

    January 19: Sanchez orders a separate administrative investigation into the 800th. Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba was appointed to conduct that inquiry on Jan. 31.

    Late January-early February: President Bush becomes aware of the charges sometime in this time period, according to White House spokesman Scott McClellan, although the spokesman has not pinpointed a date. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld tells Bush of the charges, McClellan has said.

    __________
    Who supervises all these Generals? Why didn't they inform the NCA sooner. That is one of the bipartisan questions asked by Congress.


  8. #38
    Registered User Free Member Kurt Stover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Dallas Texas area
    Posts
    125
    Credits
    0
    Savings
    0
    mrbsox,

    In reply to the admonishment from yourself....

    "GySgt. Stover,

    In light of recent posts, I think you were out of line to admonish Maj Mike in the tone you did.

    We are all Marines, with opinions, and it is his God given right to be dead Fkn wrong!"

    As a Senior Staff NCO, it is within my realm and my responsibility to not only facilitate, teach, unencumbered and otherwise look out for any Officer, it is my right and my duty to make on spot corrections to ensure the OIC and any Officer within the command structure that I so happen to be in, to be the voice of consternation when either bum scoop, or slanted information is being presented. On the flip side, I know my place as a SNCO and I have the utmost respect and courtesies for Officers within and without my command.

    There is a fine line between an officer that is active or reserve that I am in discussion with, it is another affair when it is a public forum, as has been pointed out several times to myself and then to present my argument on the basis of a retired Officer's opine. I will in effect render the courtesy and decorum that is allowed.

    If "Maj Mike" was of the active or reserve ilk, he would not be addressed as "Maj Mike" and further more, as an active or reserve officer or even an officer of the IRR, he would be subject to the laws and articles that govern the speech and rhetoric that is allowed to be spoken by said such.

    From looking at his profile, and the sense to know that he is not of the active ilk, my admonishment stands as stated. I ask no quarter and give no quarter in a public forum.

    Allow me to ask you this, if the 1Sgt, WO, and 2 SFC's that went out with the 507th Maintenance Company had not only told the CO about missing his SP time, lack of co-ordination with the MP's and the fact that the convoy time was set back 15 minutes due to a lack of planning and skills (Which they should have been making sure was happening for him in the first place), don't you think the Soldiers of that command would still be alive or at least the outcome would have been different?

    No my friend, it is a sorry POS SNCO or NCO for that matter that will not call a spade a spade and a jack a jack because it might offend someone. So many people in the military are afraid to make the right choice as opposed to going along with a bad or a really bad choice. If there is fallout from that, then we might as well box up the ledged of Chesty Puller and a few other Marines and forget about leadership.

    Me, nope, ain't gonna happen, I'm bringing my people home, and one of them is gonna be me.


  9. #39

    For what it's worth..

    Originally posted by SheWolf
    Seems to me that when i was in the military,,,, the Commander was ultimately responsible for what happened under his Command,, and with something that is so hideous and outrageous, I would say that the leve has to go to the top... Rumsfield didn't read the report on the investigation that was started in January,, and when he did read it he didn't follow through by reporting it to his COMMANDER,,,, the CIC is ultimately responsible,,,so..... Bush has to bear some of the responsibility, but of course he won't....
    Say what you will, do what you want...we ain't there but if we were....what would you do?

    This not for you SheWolf...it's for all of us.

    "I am now officially sick-and-tired of the self-serving and largely uninformed hand-wringing about the goings on at Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad. As someone who has actually been on the grounds of Abu Ghraib prison, let me explain a few things. First of all, there is no excuse for what a few soldiers did; but there is also no reason to make this into the moral equivalent of the Black Plague. It should be pointed out that the prisoners at Abu Ghraib are not Boy Scouts rounded up for jaywalking. These are bad guys who either blew up or shot a coalition member; or were caught assembling an explosive device; or were caught in a place where the makings of explosive devices were found; or were caught with a cache of weapons. See the pattern here? In short they were trying to kill me and others like me. And if they succeeded in doing that, they were going to come over there and try to kill you. ... The Roar du Jour from those who want to get into this story by beating their chests over how terrible it all is, keep telling us that this has damaged American credibility in the Middle East. Let's look at that. First, lots of Arabs don't like us in the first place. Those Arabs will not like us any less for this incident. That dislike has nothing to do with our cultural insensitivities. It has to do with America's refusal to allow those same Arabs, many of whom have been bankrolling the Palestinian terrorists for decades, to wipe the State of Israel off the face of the Earth they way they have wiped it off the face of their maps. Second, those who claim that the Abu Ghraib situation will poison the well of American goodwill for decades, are really the ones who are under rating Arabs. They have to believe that all Arabs will assign the actions of perhaps a couple of dozen soldiers to the 280 million Americans who have pledged to help the Iraqis attain security, independence, and prosperity. Those making that claim must, therefore, believe that all Arabs have the intellectual capacity of a frog (a real frog, not a French person) and the emotional development of a three-year-old (a real three-year-old, not a French person). Finally, our friends on the Left are so very, very concerned about how foreigners (read, Europeans) will see us. I don't care what the French, the Germans, or the Spaniards think about us. The French and the Germans are up to their elbows in the fraud and theft of billions of dollars in what is called the Oil-for-Food Program but which was really the Oil-for-Palaces Program. ... The actions of a few soldiers in Abu Ghraib were wrong. But we cannot allow the spotlight currently shining on them to cast a shadow over the other 135,000 soldiers who are in Iraq doing their jobs professionally, properly, and with honor." --Friend of The Federalist Rich Galen from the front



  10. #40

    Re: For what it's worth..

    [QUOTE]Originally posted by arzach
    [B]

    Say what you will, do what you want...we ain't there but if we were....what would you do?

    This not for you SheWolf...it's for all of us.

    but there is also no reason to make this into the moral equivalent of the Black Plague.


    ]the Black Plague has no moral issues in my mind,, it was spread by the fleas on rats,, unless you tie into the deplorable social issues of the living conditions of some people at the time



    It should be pointed out that the prisoners at Abu Ghraib are not Boy Scouts rounded up for jaywalking. These are bad guys who either blew up or shot a coalition member; or were caught assembling an explosive device; or were caught in a place where the makings of explosive devices were found; or were caught with a cache of weapons. See the pattern here? In short they were trying to kill me and others like me. And if they succeeded in doing that, they were going to come over there and try to kill you. ...

    ][/QUOTEand that's what they were in prison for,,, doesn't give any right to abuse them,, it just lowers us to their level


  11. #41
    Originally posted by USMC-FO
    I am inclined to agree with Maj Mike. I am not satisfied that just taking out the lower rungs of this ladder is sufficient and the poor dumb slobs who were foolish enough to take the pics. We have all seen poor responses to crisis in the past, and I am sure we'll see more going forward. But responsibility begins at the top and not just half way up the ladder.

    The problem erutpted on Rummey's watch and he has, in my opinion, failed badly with handling it correctly both to this nation and to the CIC in particular. I am listening to him grovel right now.
    First thought on this post was ..."Figures"..


  12. #42

    Re: Re: For what it's worth..

    [QUOTE]Originally posted by SheWolf
    [B]
    Originally posted by arzach


    Say what you will, do what you want...we ain't there but if we were....what would you do?

    This not for you SheWolf...it's for all of us.

    but there is also no reason to make this into the moral equivalent of the Black Plague.


    ]the Black Plague has no moral issues in my mind,, it was spread by the fleas on rats,, unless you tie into the deplorable social issues of the living conditions of some people at the time



    It should be pointed out that the prisoners at Abu Ghraib are not Boy Scouts rounded up for jaywalking. These are bad guys who either blew up or shot a coalition member; or were caught assembling an explosive device; or were caught in a place where the makings of explosive devices were found; or were caught with a cache of weapons. See the pattern here? In short they were trying to kill me and others like me. And if they succeeded in doing that, they were going to come over there and try to kill you. ...

    ][/QUOTEand that's what they were in prison for,,, doesn't give any right to abuse them,, it just lowers us to their level
    Thing is SheWolf...the ones doin' the deed and their superior officers are the ones in the wrong, ain't disputin' that. But takin' it all the way to the SecDef is wrong! If you would read and THINK for a couple minutes and not go on a knee-jerk reaction...you'd have understood my post more better.


  13. #43
    Sam Adams is a good man!


  14. #44
    Registered User Free Member enviro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    517
    Credits
    980
    Savings
    0
    Would you still be crying for the Iraqi prisoners if they actually were responsible for blowing up someone you loved very dearly?


  15. #45
    Registered User Free Member Kurt Stover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Dallas Texas area
    Posts
    125
    Credits
    0
    Savings
    0
    Originally posted by Sgtj
    Sam Adams is a good man!
    It's an okay beer also, if it's free, it's a great beer, if I have to buy it, well, Fat Tire tastes a lot better.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not Create Posts
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts