Rumsfeld the Brave

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Dec 15, 2003.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    link

    anyone else noting the irony?
     
  2. Inu macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    #2
    Seeing he was raided by over a hundred heavily armed Marines, anything but "being not terribly brave" is anything but "being not terribly stupid".

    Of course, Rummy might not know, since he was terribly brave all the time :rolleyes:
     
  3. manitoubalck macrumors 6502a

    manitoubalck

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #3
    Rummy the stupid,
    Rummy the witty,
    Rummy the Fool,
    Rummy the weak.
     
  4. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    Actually, I am kind of surprised that Saddam didn't want to be seen going down in a blaze of glory. But that Don Rumsfeld -- he will never learn when to keep his big trap shut. Maybe he should have strapped on a .45 and climbed into that hole himself. Now, that would've been brave.
     
  5. G5ROCKS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    #5
    A few points:
    1. Rumsfeld's right. Saddam was not very brave. He was a brutal coward who ruled by murder and torture.
    2. They weren't Marines.
    3. Anyone who will strap on a fighter jet, and take off and land from a carrier deck, has demonstrated sufficient courage not to be mocked for lacking bravery, IMO.

    manitoubalck,
    You're batting .250.
     
  6. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #6
    iow, you missed the irony
     
  7. Inu macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    #7
    Of course. Normally someone who murders and tortures has not the wits to give up when he is outnumbered more than 100:1

    I bet if bush is cornered like that, he'd put on his flight suit and kill them all in a fair fight, right?
    There Where Marines in the raiding team. Seeing there cant fit more than 5 of 'em into an average room, its not very likely their numbers matter here. There where more than 100 people involved... Doesnt this ring a bell at all?
    First, it wasnt Rummy doing that. Second - Seeing Mr. Bush hasn't flown himself (and even if he did - he was supposed to do this in his military service before he went AWOL), and in the hands of a well trained pilot (we all know they took the best one) the flight is less dangerous than a rollercoaster ride.

    I dont feel terribly brave for riding a rollercoaster - do you?
     
  8. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #8
    yeah, bush calling hussein a coward is pretty weak. unless, after joining the Texas Air National Guard to get out of going to Vietnam, Hussein had gone AWOL after just _one_month....
     
  9. Juventuz macrumors 6502a

    Juventuz

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Binghamton
    #9
    Actually, there were no Marines. There were 600 soldiers of the 1st Brigade, 4th Infantry Division that were involved in the capture. Them and a number of Special Operations Forces.

    Rumsfeld served in the U.S. Navy as an aviator and flight instructor. He was then in the Naval Reserves where he continued flying.
     
  10. Inu macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    #10
    Reread the whole document, reread the link - looks like i have been wrong on the marines ;) Those guys that got him replaced the marines - i must have mixed it up.

    I do know the difference between normal soldiers and marines, since i made marine basic training (well, we are not calling our elites marines, but thats logical for a german speaking nation, isnt it?). I do not see the point of it making a difference: Marines run/climb/jump and fire faster - their rifles do the same lethal damage though. The single man (with two guns at his disposal) remains outgunned by both, be he a murderous dictator or a normal (fanatical or not) enemy. The only plus side the dictator has, he is more worth alive then dead.

    Ah, so that was actually aimed at rummy and not on photo-op bush? Got that wrong too (must not be my day, it seems). But anyway, getting to be a pilot and do your duty isnt so much a show of bravery but of luck. I'd much rather be a pilot risking a crash than be a Mortar Handler and risking a Sniper btw. I did (and still do) my Service as I should, i even stood up to my superiors when it mattered - that doesnt give me the right to call others not terribly brave for doing something that wasnt stupid
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    What I wonder is, would Rummy have said the same thing about an American soldier who, alone and armed only with a pistol, surrendered to a 600-strong, heavily armed military unit?

    Would you think of that soldier as a coward?

    And what would you do in that situation?
     
  12. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #12
    there's just something inherently unpleasant in rumsfeld's implication that only violence can be described as brave.

    it would have been suicide for saddam to take on 600 soldiers w/ one gun. wait a sec - that would have been brave, but then he and bush call suicide bombers cowards?

    inconsistent.
     
  13. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #13
    There's the rape rooms again.

    My God! What sort of offel has rape rooms?!

    He must have been horrible! By God, how could we do anything less than go in and take him out?

    It's not hard to pick on a man as awful as Saddam. Calling him a coward is easy.

    But Bush likes his targets easy.

    Anyone know why we haven't gone after Nuclear Kim or the Saudi royals yet?
     
  14. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #14
    RIGHT NOW is Diane Sawyer's interview w/ Bush. there was a preview of it on World News Tonight.

    bush not only referred to the rape rooms, but ONCE AGAIN linked saddam to 9/11. and you should see him raise his voice when it's suggested the intelligence was bad.

    heck, i should go watch the whole thing.
     
  15. G5ROCKS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    #15
    Inu,
    I guess it wasn't your day. BTW, carrier landings are a hell of a lot more dangerous than a roller coaster ride.




    Calling Saddam a coward is easy and is also accurate. He was a coward long before he crawled into a hole to hide from coalition forces.

    About those rape rooms, the bold type at the bottom is just for you.

    From Amnesty International USA.
    There are a few people who can get beyond their hatred of Bush and see the presence of rape rooms without claiming that it is some how sensationalism and reflects poorly on those who talk about such rooms. However, the prisoners in that particular prison did report the presence of "rape rooms."
     
  16. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #16
    marines? army?

    i just talked to a military author who speculated that some in the press believe that the navy seals (with marines) helped along with the ultra secret delta force in the capture of hussein

    but then again, the seal's work rarely makes the press and the delta force, due to their covert nature, should never be in the press under any circumstance

    but the regular army can take the credit even if it wasn't them who made the actual find but some special forces or CIA operatives who need to keep their undercover status in iraq to continue their important, unseen work

    there are still dangerous elements working within iraq and the press should still be carefull not to divulge too much information
     
  17. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #17
    there's some evidence it may actually have been the kurds
     
  18. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #18
    i hope if it was the kurds they get proper credit for it

    they suffered so much at the hands of the brutal saddam...it bugs me that the kurds have such a strong relationship with al qaeda, but it doesn't change the fact that saddam was so brutal to them and killed many of their people

    i just heard on kgo, abc news radio, that saddam did put up a small fight and spit at a us soldier and the soldier slugged him back, but it's just another rumor, just like the rumor that special forces found him and not the regular us army...the truth will eventually be flushed out and someone with a more objective view than us army command will write a book on the topic and lay out the long process and eventual success in the capture of saddam

    as much as it is a good thing that saddam was captured, i would much rather have had the us focus more on al qaeda in afganistan and pakistan and caught or killed bin laden and captured more of his al qaeda operatives...too many americans do not realize that al qaeda and bin laden and friends took down the world trade center, not saddam even though the president likes to bunch them all together...terrorists, al qaeda, iraq, and saddam
     

Share This Page