<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Army Times vs Rumsfeld; Update: DoD responds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/</link>
	<description>The world’s first, full-service conservative Internet broadcast network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:28:20 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Blue Crab Boulevard &#187; On The Bright Side</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-129918</link>
		<dc:creator>Blue Crab Boulevard &#187; On The Bright Side</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2006 23:53:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-129918</guid>
		<description>[...] The job of blogging for the right side of the blogosphere just got easier. The first segment comes from &#8220;The Situation Room.&#8221; If you missed the story about the Military Times editorials, read Bryan&#8217;s post. You&#8217;ll need that as background to appreciate her ignorance. The second segment&#8217;s from &#8220;Special Report&#8221; and runs a bit longer than necessary to include her restatement of the Powell doctrine, which remains an attractive policy for doves trying to look hawkish. She&#8217;s all for using overwhelming force once we go in, so long as we never go in. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The job of blogging for the right side of the blogosphere just got easier. The first segment comes from &ldquo;The Situation Room.&rdquo; If you missed the story about the Military Times editorials, read Bryan&rsquo;s post. You&rsquo;ll need that as background to appreciate her ignorance. The second segment&rsquo;s from &ldquo;Special Report&rdquo; and runs a bit longer than necessary to include her restatement of the Powell doctrine, which remains an attractive policy for doves trying to look hawkish. She&rsquo;s all for using overwhelming force once we go in, so long as we never go in. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Pelosi: Iraq isn&#8217;t a war, Gannett = &#8220;the voice of the military&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-98490</link>
		<dc:creator>Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Pelosi: Iraq isn&#8217;t a war, Gannett = &#8220;the voice of the military&#8221;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 02:55:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-98490</guid>
		<description>[...] The first segment comes from &#8220;The Situation Room.&#8221; If you missed the story about the Military Times editorials, read Bryan&#8217;s post. You&#8217;ll need that background to appreciate her ignorance. The second segment&#8217;s from &#8220;Special Report&#8221; and runs a bit longer than necessary to include her restatement of the Powell doctrine, which remains an attractive policy for doves trying to look hawkish. She&#8217;s all for using overwhelming force once we go in, so long as we never go in. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The first segment comes from &#8220;The Situation Room.&#8221; If you missed the story about the Military Times editorials, read Bryan&#8217;s post. You&#8217;ll need that background to appreciate her ignorance. The second segment&#8217;s from &#8220;Special Report&#8221; and runs a bit longer than necessary to include her restatement of the Powell doctrine, which remains an attractive policy for doves trying to look hawkish. She&#8217;s all for using overwhelming force once we go in, so long as we never go in. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LegendHasIt</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-95276</link>
		<dc:creator>LegendHasIt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 02:35:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-95276</guid>
		<description>Aw, Heck.  Please disregard the above. 

I promised myself a couple of years ago I&#039;d quit getting in these stupid &#039;Mine is Bigger&#039; games.  All too often, I backslide into what only leads to irritation or frustration.

As Emily Litella famously said:
&quot;OH! Nevermind.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aw, Heck.  Please disregard the above. </p>
<p>I promised myself a couple of years ago I&#8217;d quit getting in these stupid &#8216;Mine is Bigger&#8217; games.  All too often, I backslide into what only leads to irritation or frustration.</p>
<p>As Emily Litella famously said:<br />
&#8220;OH! Nevermind.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LegendHasIt</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-95236</link>
		<dc:creator>LegendHasIt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 02:06:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-95236</guid>
		<description>Here is a little game, should any of you folks like to play:

Stand in the middle of the room, away from all chairs, furnishings, supports etc.

Raise your right hand if you ever served in any direct combat military unit at all.

Raise your left hand if you were ever a member of an elite combat unit (Ranger, Special Forces, Seal, Marine Recondo, Air Commando, {SAS, SBS etc. for Brit&#039;s or Aussies should they choose to play this game.}).

Raise your right foot if you are a graduate of any of the U.S. Military Acadamies or the Army War College. (Or Sandhurst, Duntroon etc.) 

Raise your left foot if you have a Masters or higher in International Management and Strategic Planning or a similar field.

Still standing?  
OK, just what are your qualifications for wanting to start and direct a world war?

Look, I&#039;m not disagreeing that it will PROBABLY come to that, eventually.  

I&#039;d just like to give the middle path a try before forcing the American people to have to make sacrifices like they did during WWII, without having the strong allies that we had back then.

If by some miracle Bush&#039;s plan for Iraq and the middle east in general works, we can maybe avoid all that.  If we do as some of you want right now, the whole world is going to be sorry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is a little game, should any of you folks like to play:</p>
<p>Stand in the middle of the room, away from all chairs, furnishings, supports etc.</p>
<p>Raise your right hand if you ever served in any direct combat military unit at all.</p>
<p>Raise your left hand if you were ever a member of an elite combat unit (Ranger, Special Forces, Seal, Marine Recondo, Air Commando, {SAS, SBS etc. for Brit&#8217;s or Aussies should they choose to play this game.}).</p>
<p>Raise your right foot if you are a graduate of any of the U.S. Military Acadamies or the Army War College. (Or Sandhurst, Duntroon etc.) </p>
<p>Raise your left foot if you have a Masters or higher in International Management and Strategic Planning or a similar field.</p>
<p>Still standing?<br />
OK, just what are your qualifications for wanting to start and direct a world war?</p>
<p>Look, I&#8217;m not disagreeing that it will PROBABLY come to that, eventually.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;d just like to give the middle path a try before forcing the American people to have to make sacrifices like they did during WWII, without having the strong allies that we had back then.</p>
<p>If by some miracle Bush&#8217;s plan for Iraq and the middle east in general works, we can maybe avoid all that.  If we do as some of you want right now, the whole world is going to be sorry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ScottyDog</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-94551</link>
		<dc:creator>ScottyDog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 16:02:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-94551</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Some of you really do seem to want to bring on Armageddeon; Odd that you seem to share the same goals that Ahmadinejad and the mullahs do.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Actually appeasement and hand wringing will bring the wrath of war and defeat. Sanity has nothing to do with it.

Many people fail to realize that they have declared War on America and unlike our diplomats they mean it.

Do you think they were just kidding?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Some of you really do seem to want to bring on Armageddeon; Odd that you seem to share the same goals that Ahmadinejad and the mullahs do.</p></blockquote>
<p>Actually appeasement and hand wringing will bring the wrath of war and defeat. Sanity has nothing to do with it.</p>
<p>Many people fail to realize that they have declared War on America and unlike our diplomats they mean it.</p>
<p>Do you think they were just kidding?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thomashton</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-94550</link>
		<dc:creator>thomashton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 16:01:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-94550</guid>
		<description>I subscribe to Army Times and have for quite some time seen their bias. They are not the Stars and Stripes (which can be just as bad sometimes), but are exactly as AP said, for profit.

There is some good reporting and up to date info on gear and Army news, but I don&#039;t believe I will be resubscribing. A lot of the anti-leadership and anti-Army views in it seem a bit out there for an ARMY newspaper.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I subscribe to Army Times and have for quite some time seen their bias. They are not the Stars and Stripes (which can be just as bad sometimes), but are exactly as AP said, for profit.</p>
<p>There is some good reporting and up to date info on gear and Army news, but I don&#8217;t believe I will be resubscribing. A lot of the anti-leadership and anti-Army views in it seem a bit out there for an ARMY newspaper.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emmett J.</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-94253</link>
		<dc:creator>Emmett J.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 04:13:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-94253</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;You must grant that the Americans will no longer be at war with whomever they kill. The Arab and Persian portions of the Dar al-Islam are very fragile; if American armies kill the rulers, destroy vital infrastructure, and seize oilfields, the rest will take care of itself. This sort of warfare is “post-colonial,” or “pre-colonial”: Without the burdens of colonial administration and “nation-building,” war becomes fast-moving, frugal, and productive.

The problem is that most Americans, including the President, don’t have the stomach for this sort of warfare. They’re not satisfied merely to avoid targeting populaces; either they’re too fastidious to make war at all, or they feel obligated to try to provide aid, security, order, freedom, and even prosperity in the aftermath. This present American moral education, reinforced over a lifetime, delivers the greatest military power that’s ever existed into weakness. 

Kralizec on November 5, 2006 at 9:40 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Well said indeed. 

The American soldier has the skills to win - they must be allowed to do so by those who lead them, whether on the battlefield or at home in government. No matter what party.

Without the will to win total victory on our terms, there will be no victory at all, except in the pages of propaganda.

The point must be made to those who lead whether on the battlefield or in the halls of power in Washington to allow our warfighters to win their war without restraint upon the &quot;niceties&quot;. 

Be assured that our enemies will not play by the &quot;rulebook&quot; or be nice to others - or even worry about playing well with others.

In war, nice loses. Strength, will, and determination wins - we have the best Armed Forces on the planet - let them do their job!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>You must grant that the Americans will no longer be at war with whomever they kill. The Arab and Persian portions of the Dar al-Islam are very fragile; if American armies kill the rulers, destroy vital infrastructure, and seize oilfields, the rest will take care of itself. This sort of warfare is “post-colonial,” or “pre-colonial”: Without the burdens of colonial administration and “nation-building,” war becomes fast-moving, frugal, and productive.</p>
<p>The problem is that most Americans, including the President, don’t have the stomach for this sort of warfare. They’re not satisfied merely to avoid targeting populaces; either they’re too fastidious to make war at all, or they feel obligated to try to provide aid, security, order, freedom, and even prosperity in the aftermath. This present American moral education, reinforced over a lifetime, delivers the greatest military power that’s ever existed into weakness. </p>
<p>Kralizec on November 5, 2006 at 9:40 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Well said indeed. </p>
<p>The American soldier has the skills to win &#8211; they must be allowed to do so by those who lead them, whether on the battlefield or at home in government. No matter what party.</p>
<p>Without the will to win total victory on our terms, there will be no victory at all, except in the pages of propaganda.</p>
<p>The point must be made to those who lead whether on the battlefield or in the halls of power in Washington to allow our warfighters to win their war without restraint upon the &#8220;niceties&#8221;. </p>
<p>Be assured that our enemies will not play by the &#8220;rulebook&#8221; or be nice to others &#8211; or even worry about playing well with others.</p>
<p>In war, nice loses. Strength, will, and determination wins &#8211; we have the best Armed Forces on the planet &#8211; let them do their job!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kralizec</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-94145</link>
		<dc:creator>Kralizec</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 02:40:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-94145</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s try this again.  LegendHasIt said, on November 5, 2006 at 12:02 AM,

&lt;blockquote&gt;We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once….&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You must grant that the Americans will no longer be at war with whomever they kill. The Arab and Persian portions of the Dar al-Islam are very fragile; if American armies kill the rulers, destroy vital infrastructure, and seize oilfields, the rest will take care of itself. This sort of warfare is “post-colonial,” or “pre-colonial”: Without the burdens of colonial administration and “nation-building,” war becomes fast-moving, frugal, and productive.

The problem is that most Americans, including the President, don’t have the stomach for this sort of warfare. They’re not satisfied merely to avoid targeting populaces; either they’re too fastidious to make war at all, or they feel obligated to try to provide aid, security, order, freedom, and even prosperity in the aftermath. This present American moral education, reinforced over a lifetime, delivers the greatest military power that’s ever existed into weakness.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s try this again.  LegendHasIt said, on November 5, 2006 at 12:02 AM,</p>
<blockquote><p>We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once….</p></blockquote>
<p>You must grant that the Americans will no longer be at war with whomever they kill. The Arab and Persian portions of the Dar al-Islam are very fragile; if American armies kill the rulers, destroy vital infrastructure, and seize oilfields, the rest will take care of itself. This sort of warfare is “post-colonial,” or “pre-colonial”: Without the burdens of colonial administration and “nation-building,” war becomes fast-moving, frugal, and productive.</p>
<p>The problem is that most Americans, including the President, don’t have the stomach for this sort of warfare. They’re not satisfied merely to avoid targeting populaces; either they’re too fastidious to make war at all, or they feel obligated to try to provide aid, security, order, freedom, and even prosperity in the aftermath. This present American moral education, reinforced over a lifetime, delivers the greatest military power that’s ever existed into weakness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kralizec</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-94140</link>
		<dc:creator>Kralizec</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 02:37:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-94140</guid>
		<description>LegendHasIt said, on November 5, 2006 at 12:02 AM,We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once....&lt;blockquote&gt;You must grant that the Americans will no longer be at war with whomever they kill.  The Arab and Persian portions of the Dar al-Islam are very fragile; if American armies kill the rulers, destroy vital infrastructure, and seize oilfields, the rest will take care of itself.  This sort of warfare is &quot;post-colonial,&quot; or &quot;pre-colonial&quot;:  Without the burdens of colonial administration and &quot;nation-building,&quot; war becomes fast-moving, frugal, and productive.

The problem is that most Americans, including the President, don&#039;t have the stomach for this sort of warfare.  They&#039;re not satisfied merely to avoid targeting populaces; either they&#039;re too fastidious to make war at all, or they feel obligated to try to provide aid, security, order, freedom, and even prosperity in the aftermath.  This present American moral education, reinforced over a lifetime, delivers the greatest military power that&#039;s ever existed into weakness.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LegendHasIt said, on November 5, 2006 at 12:02 AM,We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once&#8230;.<br />
<blockquote>You must grant that the Americans will no longer be at war with whomever they kill.  The Arab and Persian portions of the Dar al-Islam are very fragile; if American armies kill the rulers, destroy vital infrastructure, and seize oilfields, the rest will take care of itself.  This sort of warfare is &#8220;post-colonial,&#8221; or &#8220;pre-colonial&#8221;:  Without the burdens of colonial administration and &#8220;nation-building,&#8221; war becomes fast-moving, frugal, and productive.</p>
<p>The problem is that most Americans, including the President, don&#8217;t have the stomach for this sort of warfare.  They&#8217;re not satisfied merely to avoid targeting populaces; either they&#8217;re too fastidious to make war at all, or they feel obligated to try to provide aid, security, order, freedom, and even prosperity in the aftermath.  This present American moral education, reinforced over a lifetime, delivers the greatest military power that&#8217;s ever existed into weakness.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LegendHasIt</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-94121</link>
		<dc:creator>LegendHasIt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 01:56:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-94121</guid>
		<description>Some of you really do seem to want to bring on Armageddeon;  Odd that you seem to share the same goals that Ahmadinejad and the mullahs do. 

Oh, I share the same feelings of frustration and even hatred for Mohammed&#039;s cult members all too often, but then sanity (and hope for the future for &lt;strong&gt;all&lt;/strong&gt; mankind) take over.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some of you really do seem to want to bring on Armageddeon;  Odd that you seem to share the same goals that Ahmadinejad and the mullahs do. </p>
<p>Oh, I share the same feelings of frustration and even hatred for Mohammed&#8217;s cult members all too often, but then sanity (and hope for the future for <strong>all</strong> mankind) take over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ScottyDog</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-94033</link>
		<dc:creator>ScottyDog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 23:19:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-94033</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Unfortunately, The President won’t let him do that because if you think the media and the Democrats in the legislature, and our so-called allies and ‘world opinion’ are bad now, the furor from them over fighting the ruthless way would be overwhelming.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You hit the nail on the head. It is GWB that is the problem.

&lt;blockquote&gt;We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

We already are at war with all of Islam, it is just that the Bush administration still thinks &quot;Islam is the Religion of Peace&quot;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
If it doesn’t work, then at least we tried, and we will have managed to eke out another few years of comfort, prosperity and the opportunity to sit at our keyboards and express our opinions on how stupid everyone else is..&lt;/blockquote&gt;

We will get nuked if we do not start taking the Islamic Fanatics seriously. They have declared War on America but GWB still thinks he is going to spread Democracy to a bunch of people that still live in the 7th century and are subservients to a Religion called Islam.

pullingmyhairout nephew&#039;s is right and if we would fight this war like we fought WWII, we would be winning. We should have carpet bombed Fallujah and killed Al Sadre a long time ago.

Appeasement does not work, never has.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Unfortunately, The President won’t let him do that because if you think the media and the Democrats in the legislature, and our so-called allies and ‘world opinion’ are bad now, the furor from them over fighting the ruthless way would be overwhelming.</p></blockquote>
<p>You hit the nail on the head. It is GWB that is the problem.</p>
<blockquote><p>We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once.</p></blockquote>
<p>We already are at war with all of Islam, it is just that the Bush administration still thinks &#8220;Islam is the Religion of Peace&#8221;</p>
<blockquote><p>
If it doesn’t work, then at least we tried, and we will have managed to eke out another few years of comfort, prosperity and the opportunity to sit at our keyboards and express our opinions on how stupid everyone else is..</p></blockquote>
<p>We will get nuked if we do not start taking the Islamic Fanatics seriously. They have declared War on America but GWB still thinks he is going to spread Democracy to a bunch of people that still live in the 7th century and are subservients to a Religion called Islam.</p>
<p>pullingmyhairout nephew&#8217;s is right and if we would fight this war like we fought WWII, we would be winning. We should have carpet bombed Fallujah and killed Al Sadre a long time ago.</p>
<p>Appeasement does not work, never has.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JustTruth101</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93817</link>
		<dc:creator>JustTruth101</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 18:48:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93817</guid>
		<description>Interesting opinion about USA Today&#039;s purchase of these 4 newspapers:   

http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/11/05/why-did-gannett-buy-the-military-times/

The editor of these newspapers, Robert Hodierne, has this quote about his Vietnam coverage on his very own web site, he appears to wear it as a badge of honor:

&quot;... such stories do not border on treason -- they are treason.&quot; -- U.S. Army spokesman in Vietnam, 1969 

http://www.hodierne.com/sandssplash.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting opinion about USA Today&#8217;s purchase of these 4 newspapers:   </p>
<p><a href="http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/11/05/why-did-gannett-buy-the-military-times/" rel="nofollow">http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/11/05/why-did-gannett-buy-the-military-times/</a></p>
<p>The editor of these newspapers, Robert Hodierne, has this quote about his Vietnam coverage on his very own web site, he appears to wear it as a badge of honor:</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230; such stories do not border on treason &#8212; they are treason.&#8221; &#8212; U.S. Army spokesman in Vietnam, 1969 </p>
<p><a href="http://www.hodierne.com/sandssplash.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.hodierne.com/sandssplash.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pullingmyhairout</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93753</link>
		<dc:creator>pullingmyhairout</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 17:11:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93753</guid>
		<description>but he didn&#039;t say that it was Bush&#039;s fault - he said the violence is really a cultural thing.  they have no problem blowing each other up over different prayer rituals.  seriously.  they are fighting each other, not us, in many cases.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>but he didn&#8217;t say that it was Bush&#8217;s fault &#8211; he said the violence is really a cultural thing.  they have no problem blowing each other up over different prayer rituals.  seriously.  they are fighting each other, not us, in many cases.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pullingmyhairout</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93752</link>
		<dc:creator>pullingmyhairout</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 17:09:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93752</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Additionally, it’s hard to see what’s going on in Iraq right now as being as much a failure of our policy as it is a failure of their culture. When a bombing at a golden mosque can trigger months of sectarian bloodletting, and it’s impossible to stop all bombers everywhere in a country the size of Iraq, then the culture may just be too brittle in the short run to achieve peace. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

My nephew just got back from his first tour in Iraq on Thursday.  He essentially said the same thing.  When asked what we should &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; do, he said, &quot;Carpet bomb them back to the stone age.&quot;  (please don&#039;t ban me for that - I am just relaying something he said.) He also said that many Iraqis are soooo ignorant that they think the Americans (in Bradley&#039;s, with kevlar, m16&#039;s etc) are &lt;em&gt;Sunnis&lt;/em&gt; and that&#039;s why they engage American soldiers.  He also said that most of the iraqi army is corrupt.  He said it&#039;s absoluntely nuts over there and that it really doesn&#039;t matter if we pull out now or in 5 years, the outcome will still be the same.  most likely, failure.  It was a very sobering conversation, to say the least.  And my nephew is NOT a flaming liberal.  Oh, he also said the only reason he&#039;s alive is because the insurgents are really bad shots - snipers shoot often, but they usually miss.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Additionally, it’s hard to see what’s going on in Iraq right now as being as much a failure of our policy as it is a failure of their culture. When a bombing at a golden mosque can trigger months of sectarian bloodletting, and it’s impossible to stop all bombers everywhere in a country the size of Iraq, then the culture may just be too brittle in the short run to achieve peace. </p></blockquote>
<p>My nephew just got back from his first tour in Iraq on Thursday.  He essentially said the same thing.  When asked what we should <em>really</em> do, he said, &#8220;Carpet bomb them back to the stone age.&#8221;  (please don&#8217;t ban me for that &#8211; I am just relaying something he said.) He also said that many Iraqis are soooo ignorant that they think the Americans (in Bradley&#8217;s, with kevlar, m16&#8217;s etc) are <em>Sunnis</em> and that&#8217;s why they engage American soldiers.  He also said that most of the iraqi army is corrupt.  He said it&#8217;s absoluntely nuts over there and that it really doesn&#8217;t matter if we pull out now or in 5 years, the outcome will still be the same.  most likely, failure.  It was a very sobering conversation, to say the least.  And my nephew is NOT a flaming liberal.  Oh, he also said the only reason he&#8217;s alive is because the insurgents are really bad shots &#8211; snipers shoot often, but they usually miss.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LegendHasIt</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93372</link>
		<dc:creator>LegendHasIt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 05:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93372</guid>
		<description>Sorry, I left out a very important part:

&lt;em&gt;Unfortunately, The President won’t let him do that because if you think the media and the Democrats in the legislature, and our so-called allies and ‘world opinion’&lt;/em&gt; &lt;strong&gt;And the sabotaging clintonian and socialistic bureaucrats in the State Department, DOD, and CIA&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;em&gt;are bad now, the furor from them over fighting the ruthless way would be overwhelming.&lt;/em&gt;

Yes, it would be wonderful to see the Administration &quot;clean House&quot; in all those places.  But that &#039;ain&#039;t a gonna happen&#039; short of an attack on our soil that makes 9/11 look like a minor irritation.  We, as a nation, are too soft and too ignorant to do anything that would cause any deprivation or discomfort.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, I left out a very important part:</p>
<p><em>Unfortunately, The President won’t let him do that because if you think the media and the Democrats in the legislature, and our so-called allies and ‘world opinion’</em> <strong>And the sabotaging clintonian and socialistic bureaucrats in the State Department, DOD, and CIA</strong> <em>are bad now, the furor from them over fighting the ruthless way would be overwhelming.</em></p>
<p>Yes, it would be wonderful to see the Administration &#8220;clean House&#8221; in all those places.  But that &#8216;ain&#8217;t a gonna happen&#8217; short of an attack on our soil that makes 9/11 look like a minor irritation.  We, as a nation, are too soft and too ignorant to do anything that would cause any deprivation or discomfort.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LegendHasIt</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93368</link>
		<dc:creator>LegendHasIt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 05:02:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93368</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Why Bush did not clean house (and why he never has, on any issue) and get someone in control with a little more psy-ops savvy, remains baffling.......
I am in favor of battling harder, smarter and dirtier.......
Time to get a Patton in charge and let Rummy fade away.

profitsbeard on November 4, 2006 at 10:31 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You don&#039;t think Rumsfeld would do that if given the opportunity? The man is an absolute master of that kind of stuff.

I agree that it would be great to see that kind of stuff happen.

Unfortunately, The President won&#039;t let him do that because if you think the media and the Democrats in the legislature,   and our so-called allies and &#039;world opinion&#039; are bad now, the furor from them over fighting the ruthless way would be overwhelming.

You know what we face, I know what we face and most of the people that frequent Hot Air and Free Republic etc. know it...  But the rest of the world doesn&#039;t.

We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once.... And we will have to do it all by ourselves (&lt;em&gt;Well, maybe Australia and Poland would stick,)&lt;/em&gt; but Great Britain, Italy and the others will not only quit helping, they will do everything short of declaring war on us to impede our efforts. 

Yeah, it will probably come to that eventually anyway, but I reckon that while there is any hope of pulling it off short of another world war we ought to try it the kinder, gentler way.  

If it works the way President Bush is trying to do it, if we are REALLY, REALLY LUCKY, President Bush will be honored as the greatest visionary of the 21st century and millions of lives and millions of trillions of dollars will be saved.

If it doesn&#039;t work, then at least we tried, and we will have managed to eke out another few years of comfort, prosperity and the opportunity to sit at our keyboards and express our opinions on how stupid everyone else is..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Why Bush did not clean house (and why he never has, on any issue) and get someone in control with a little more psy-ops savvy, remains baffling&#8230;&#8230;.<br />
I am in favor of battling harder, smarter and dirtier&#8230;&#8230;.<br />
Time to get a Patton in charge and let Rummy fade away.</p>
<p>profitsbeard on November 4, 2006 at 10:31 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>You don&#8217;t think Rumsfeld would do that if given the opportunity? The man is an absolute master of that kind of stuff.</p>
<p>I agree that it would be great to see that kind of stuff happen.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, The President won&#8217;t let him do that because if you think the media and the Democrats in the legislature,   and our so-called allies and &#8216;world opinion&#8217; are bad now, the furor from them over fighting the ruthless way would be overwhelming.</p>
<p>You know what we face, I know what we face and most of the people that frequent Hot Air and Free Republic etc. know it&#8230;  But the rest of the world doesn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>We do it the way that you would like to do it and we will be at all out war with ALL of Islam at once&#8230;. And we will have to do it all by ourselves (<em>Well, maybe Australia and Poland would stick,)</em> but Great Britain, Italy and the others will not only quit helping, they will do everything short of declaring war on us to impede our efforts. </p>
<p>Yeah, it will probably come to that eventually anyway, but I reckon that while there is any hope of pulling it off short of another world war we ought to try it the kinder, gentler way.  </p>
<p>If it works the way President Bush is trying to do it, if we are REALLY, REALLY LUCKY, President Bush will be honored as the greatest visionary of the 21st century and millions of lives and millions of trillions of dollars will be saved.</p>
<p>If it doesn&#8217;t work, then at least we tried, and we will have managed to eke out another few years of comfort, prosperity and the opportunity to sit at our keyboards and express our opinions on how stupid everyone else is..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thedecider</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93342</link>
		<dc:creator>thedecider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 03:53:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93342</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;LegendHasIt on November 4, 2006 at 9:17 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Very insightful comment regarding Rumsfeld.  He&#039;s made a lot of changes to modernize the military which was still operating under a &#039;cold war&#039; mentality.  The world has changed and so have our enemies.  The Pentagon can either change with it, or look like an ancient dinosaur.  Bureaucracy’s create complacency and some people don&#039;t like change.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>LegendHasIt on November 4, 2006 at 9:17 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Very insightful comment regarding Rumsfeld.  He&#8217;s made a lot of changes to modernize the military which was still operating under a &#8216;cold war&#8217; mentality.  The world has changed and so have our enemies.  The Pentagon can either change with it, or look like an ancient dinosaur.  Bureaucracy’s create complacency and some people don&#8217;t like change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93323</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 03:35:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93323</guid>
		<description>So who&#039;s your Patton, prof?  I&#039;m not being snarky--just asking.  If we had somebody better than Rumsfeld waiting in the wings, I&#039;d be all for putting them in.  Because you&#039;re right about what you say--the Pentagon has bungled the infowar from start to finish (though they&#039;re getting better at it lately).  But in the current environment, firing Rumsfeld is more likely to give us a George McClellan than a George Patton.  And that would not be an improvement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So who&#8217;s your Patton, prof?  I&#8217;m not being snarky&#8211;just asking.  If we had somebody better than Rumsfeld waiting in the wings, I&#8217;d be all for putting them in.  Because you&#8217;re right about what you say&#8211;the Pentagon has bungled the infowar from start to finish (though they&#8217;re getting better at it lately).  But in the current environment, firing Rumsfeld is more likely to give us a George McClellan than a George Patton.  And that would not be an improvement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: profitsbeard</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93320</link>
		<dc:creator>profitsbeard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 03:31:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93320</guid>
		<description>President Bush should have accepted Rumsfeld&#039;s resignation offer after Abu Ghraib, which was as amateurish a piece of military intelligence work  (&lt;em&gt;and control of the issue, once it was leaked by a non-com&lt;/em&gt;) as I have ever witnessed.  That they did not have as many video cameras in that prison as are in the average 7-11, or in any regular U.S. prison, and that they did not forbid anyone -in or out of uniform- from bringing in a &quot;personal camera&quot; was a stuptifyingly self-defeating bit of &quot;bad planning&quot;. 

The propaganda value of the photos (&lt;em&gt;obviously relatively-harmless incidents, when compared to having an electric drill used on your skull, as the Iraqi sectarians do to their own doomed prisoners&lt;/em&gt;) and the tactically-exaggerated events (&lt;em&gt;that were recorded and released by the moronic soldiers involved&lt;/em&gt;) has probably cost us a extra 1,000 military casualties that need not have ever happened.  And it created a refreshed insurgency that might never have had as perfect an excuse to attack us as these images of rank American decadence, arrogance and sheer juvenile imbecility.  If jihadists had staged them, they could not have done a more effective job of defamation, desecration and demoralization.

Someone in charge needed to accept responsibility for this &quot;gaffe&quot;.  Why Bush did not clean house (&lt;em&gt;and why he never has, on any issue&lt;/em&gt;) and get someone in control with a little more psy-ops savvy, remains baffling.

The cureent DoD strategy is possefootingly infuriating and it would be good to get a new face in front of it to steer our efforts in a stronger direction.  The Islamic Imperialistic threat requires a fresh fighter.  Rumsfeld had his shot.  He&#039;s good at talking &lt;em&gt;into&lt;/em&gt; a battle, but not very capable of  handling these Maoist guerrilla methods that the jihadists/Baathists/insurgents/sectarians are utuilizing to erode and rattle the troopers who have to drive around in &lt;em&gt;sitting-duck-mobiles&lt;/em&gt;, waiting to see if the shaped-IED or CNN-ready snipers will get them &lt;em&gt;before their tour of duty is extended once again&lt;/em&gt;.

I am in favor of battling harder, smarter and dirtier.

Not mouthing platitudes that are as stale as popcorn from the premiere of &quot;The Sands of Iowa Jima&quot;.

&lt;strong&gt;Time to get a Patton in charge &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt; and let Rummy fade away&lt;/em&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>President Bush should have accepted Rumsfeld&#8217;s resignation offer after Abu Ghraib, which was as amateurish a piece of military intelligence work  (<em>and control of the issue, once it was leaked by a non-com</em>) as I have ever witnessed.  That they did not have as many video cameras in that prison as are in the average 7-11, or in any regular U.S. prison, and that they did not forbid anyone -in or out of uniform- from bringing in a &#8220;personal camera&#8221; was a stuptifyingly self-defeating bit of &#8220;bad planning&#8221;. </p>
<p>The propaganda value of the photos (<em>obviously relatively-harmless incidents, when compared to having an electric drill used on your skull, as the Iraqi sectarians do to their own doomed prisoners</em>) and the tactically-exaggerated events (<em>that were recorded and released by the moronic soldiers involved</em>) has probably cost us a extra 1,000 military casualties that need not have ever happened.  And it created a refreshed insurgency that might never have had as perfect an excuse to attack us as these images of rank American decadence, arrogance and sheer juvenile imbecility.  If jihadists had staged them, they could not have done a more effective job of defamation, desecration and demoralization.</p>
<p>Someone in charge needed to accept responsibility for this &#8220;gaffe&#8221;.  Why Bush did not clean house (<em>and why he never has, on any issue</em>) and get someone in control with a little more psy-ops savvy, remains baffling.</p>
<p>The cureent DoD strategy is possefootingly infuriating and it would be good to get a new face in front of it to steer our efforts in a stronger direction.  The Islamic Imperialistic threat requires a fresh fighter.  Rumsfeld had his shot.  He&#8217;s good at talking <em>into</em> a battle, but not very capable of  handling these Maoist guerrilla methods that the jihadists/Baathists/insurgents/sectarians are utuilizing to erode and rattle the troopers who have to drive around in <em>sitting-duck-mobiles</em>, waiting to see if the shaped-IED or CNN-ready snipers will get them <em>before their tour of duty is extended once again</em>.</p>
<p>I am in favor of battling harder, smarter and dirtier.</p>
<p>Not mouthing platitudes that are as stale as popcorn from the premiere of &#8220;The Sands of Iowa Jima&#8221;.</p>
<p><strong>Time to get a Patton in charge </strong><em> and let Rummy fade away</em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Puritan1648</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93281</link>
		<dc:creator>Puritan1648</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 02:25:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93281</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Additionally, it’s hard to see what’s going on in Iraq right now as being as much a failure of our policy as it is a failure of their culture. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

...and, it&#039;s a failure of *our* culture, as well.  The Left began the war promising that it would be a morass, a mire, and &quot;Bush&#039;s Vietnam&quot;...and it&#039;s taken &#039;em three years to deliver, but they gave us what they promised.  

Once again, we win on the ground, with casualties, under extraodinarily difficult conditions -- for one thing, they&#039;re surrounded by tribal and combattive people many of whom aren&#039;t the least bit interested in peace, justice and civil order -- and are being constantly told -- even by Cronkite, once again -- how messed up things are, and how immoral we are as a nation for interfering in other peoples affairs, etc.

I wish that the Left, just once, would promise us pie and ice cream.  They&#039;d deliver, and I could use some right now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Additionally, it’s hard to see what’s going on in Iraq right now as being as much a failure of our policy as it is a failure of their culture. </p></blockquote>
<p>&#8230;and, it&#8217;s a failure of *our* culture, as well.  The Left began the war promising that it would be a morass, a mire, and &#8220;Bush&#8217;s Vietnam&#8221;&#8230;and it&#8217;s taken &#8216;em three years to deliver, but they gave us what they promised.  </p>
<p>Once again, we win on the ground, with casualties, under extraodinarily difficult conditions &#8212; for one thing, they&#8217;re surrounded by tribal and combattive people many of whom aren&#8217;t the least bit interested in peace, justice and civil order &#8212; and are being constantly told &#8212; even by Cronkite, once again &#8212; how messed up things are, and how immoral we are as a nation for interfering in other peoples affairs, etc.</p>
<p>I wish that the Left, just once, would promise us pie and ice cream.  They&#8217;d deliver, and I could use some right now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Puritan1648</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93278</link>
		<dc:creator>Puritan1648</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 02:21:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93278</guid>
		<description>...in a related story, the Army Times, in its latest issue, gave over the entire last page to the article (published elsewhere in civilian publications) to the essay written by Pat Tillman&#039;s brother...the one not the least approving of the entire war effort.  It was very much talked about when it came out.  I read the excerpts printed in big type on the table of contents page and a few lines off the page itself, but couldn&#039;t get all the way through it without wretching....

...were I in a position to write something for him to read, I&#039;m sure that he&#039;d say the same about me, if he were to say anything.

The Army Times is a more or less official organ of the Army, but has long had a slant...it seemed more contended under the Clinton adminstration, for instance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;in a related story, the Army Times, in its latest issue, gave over the entire last page to the article (published elsewhere in civilian publications) to the essay written by Pat Tillman&#8217;s brother&#8230;the one not the least approving of the entire war effort.  It was very much talked about when it came out.  I read the excerpts printed in big type on the table of contents page and a few lines off the page itself, but couldn&#8217;t get all the way through it without wretching&#8230;.</p>
<p>&#8230;were I in a position to write something for him to read, I&#8217;m sure that he&#8217;d say the same about me, if he were to say anything.</p>
<p>The Army Times is a more or less official organ of the Army, but has long had a slant&#8230;it seemed more contended under the Clinton adminstration, for instance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LegendHasIt</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93275</link>
		<dc:creator>LegendHasIt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 02:17:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93275</guid>
		<description>Gee, I think I need a new mouse....  I didn&#039;t click anything, yet my post got &#039;sent&#039; before I was through....

ANYWAY, Rumsfeld is by far the best SecDef in my lifetime, if not in the history of the nation.  He is not only preparing us for the actions that we are fighting now, but for the ones we are most likely to fight in the forseeable future.  Most of the Generals that don&#039;t like him (and most of THEM being retired conventional force leaders  with some sort of political aspirations) are ones who see their old cherished units and/or weapons systems falling by the wayside on the road to the future of the military we will most likely need to survive.

Facts are, that unless we go to war with China, we are going to need more Special Forces type troops than conventional units.  And &#039;Leg&#039; leaders hate the &#039;snake eaters&#039; about as much as they hate the enemy.  Been that way since the first Green Beanie was worn, if not earlier.

Elite unit service is, in general, a &#039;career killer&#039; for people who plan to have more than one star.  Most of the big brass that even have a Ranger Tab on their shoulder just went through the School to &#039;get their ticket punched&#039;...  Not because they believe in the Ranger (or any other Spec Ops) mission.

But that is the direction that world events have led, that is the world that Rummy is preparing for; and most of the &#039;brass&#039; resents it.

I for one would be glad to put in the uniform once again if Rummy had any use for a decrepit old guy like me;  I&#039;d be proud and honored to work for him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gee, I think I need a new mouse&#8230;.  I didn&#8217;t click anything, yet my post got &#8217;sent&#8217; before I was through&#8230;.</p>
<p>ANYWAY, Rumsfeld is by far the best SecDef in my lifetime, if not in the history of the nation.  He is not only preparing us for the actions that we are fighting now, but for the ones we are most likely to fight in the forseeable future.  Most of the Generals that don&#8217;t like him (and most of THEM being retired conventional force leaders  with some sort of political aspirations) are ones who see their old cherished units and/or weapons systems falling by the wayside on the road to the future of the military we will most likely need to survive.</p>
<p>Facts are, that unless we go to war with China, we are going to need more Special Forces type troops than conventional units.  And &#8216;Leg&#8217; leaders hate the &#8217;snake eaters&#8217; about as much as they hate the enemy.  Been that way since the first Green Beanie was worn, if not earlier.</p>
<p>Elite unit service is, in general, a &#8216;career killer&#8217; for people who plan to have more than one star.  Most of the big brass that even have a Ranger Tab on their shoulder just went through the School to &#8216;get their ticket punched&#8217;&#8230;  Not because they believe in the Ranger (or any other Spec Ops) mission.</p>
<p>But that is the direction that world events have led, that is the world that Rummy is preparing for; and most of the &#8216;brass&#8217; resents it.</p>
<p>I for one would be glad to put in the uniform once again if Rummy had any use for a decrepit old guy like me;  I&#8217;d be proud and honored to work for him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LegendHasIt</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93265</link>
		<dc:creator>LegendHasIt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 01:59:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93265</guid>
		<description>The thing about Sullivan is:  If President Bush had just allowed him to marry his boyfriend, Sullivan would probably still be on &#039;the right side&#039; of this argument.

But yeah, I notice that even FOX news is reporting this as if it is the universal opinion of the military rather than a political effort by an essentially liberal owned publications group who merely happens to be selling papers to people in the military.

Back in my day, I only remember reading the Army Times three times;  The first was the one free night in Ft. Greely after after finishing the Arctic Warfare course, and absolutely nothing to do but read the paper someone left behind in the barraks.  (Headed for Jungle School in Panama the very next day.....  Talk about &#039;Climate Change...  Whew!)

The other two times I read it I was looking in the &#039;want ads&#039; for something to do in my field after my enlistment was up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The thing about Sullivan is:  If President Bush had just allowed him to marry his boyfriend, Sullivan would probably still be on &#8216;the right side&#8217; of this argument.</p>
<p>But yeah, I notice that even FOX news is reporting this as if it is the universal opinion of the military rather than a political effort by an essentially liberal owned publications group who merely happens to be selling papers to people in the military.</p>
<p>Back in my day, I only remember reading the Army Times three times;  The first was the one free night in Ft. Greely after after finishing the Arctic Warfare course, and absolutely nothing to do but read the paper someone left behind in the barraks.  (Headed for Jungle School in Panama the very next day&#8230;..  Talk about &#8216;Climate Change&#8230;  Whew!)</p>
<p>The other two times I read it I was looking in the &#8216;want ads&#8217; for something to do in my field after my enlistment was up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Perchant</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93264</link>
		<dc:creator>Perchant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 01:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93264</guid>
		<description>I think I&#039;m gonna start a paper called &quot;Democrat Times&quot; and then call for the Democrat leaders to resign.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I&#8217;m gonna start a paper called &#8220;Democrat Times&#8221; and then call for the Democrat leaders to resign.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SPIFF1669</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/comment-page-1/#comment-93257</link>
		<dc:creator>SPIFF1669</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 01:45:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/04/army-times-vs-rumsfeld/#comment-93257</guid>
		<description>When I was on active duty the only time I would purchase a copy of the Army Times was A) When cut off scores were posted B) A new pay chart was posted or C) when the E-7 or E-8 list were posted.  Otherwise it didn&#039;t offer a lot that I had any desire to read.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I was on active duty the only time I would purchase a copy of the Army Times was A) When cut off scores were posted B) A new pay chart was posted or C) when the E-7 or E-8 list were posted.  Otherwise it didn&#8217;t offer a lot that I had any desire to read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
