Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Rumsfeld dies

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,894 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    odyssey06 wrote: »
    And lots of them suffered that fate under Saddam... but nobody cares about a Middle Eastern dictator killing torturing and kidnapping their own citizens

    And what were Rumsfeld’s views on Saddam when he was doing this during the 1980s?


  • Options
    #33
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,220 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Never liked the man. A vital part of the Iraq invasion on Twin Towers Attack pretences.
    US should have left Iraq and Afghanistan alone.


  • Options
    #34
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 76,552 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Thread title amended


  • Options
    #35
    Normal One
    Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭Normal One


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    And what were Rumsfeld’s views on Saddam when he was doing this during the 1980s?

    He had a clear view here, looks jolly

    94-FDA4-C4-4-B4-D-417-F-B1-DB-4388-D0-FFDA37.jpg


  • Options
    #36
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    FTA69 wrote: »
    I know loads of people from Iraq from all denominations, I’ve never met anyone who said invading the country for American geo-strategic concerns was a good idea.



    Thats good because I didnt ask about how the Iraqis felt about "invading the country for American geo-strategic concerns".

    The Kurds seem quite chipper about it all.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Tazium
    Registered Users Posts: 902 ✭✭✭Tazium


    "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones"


  • Options
    #38
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    He's what's known in the business as a horrible kunt.


  • Options
    #39
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 6,041 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    biko wrote: »
    US should have left Iraq and Afghanistan alone.

    Ah yeah, sure they were getting on fine until the Americans arrived. Sure a bit of genocide never hurt anyone hah?

    Whatever about Iraq, Afghanistan was a whole other story and no-one else was rushing in to do anything about the Taliban.


  • Options
    #40
    rogber
    Registered Users Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭rogber


    A vile war criminal, just like Bush, Cheney and the rest of that regime. Good riddance


  • Options
    #41
    Retr0gamer
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 51,467 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Former Former Former wrote: »
    Ah yeah, sure they were getting on fine until the Americans arrived. Sure a bit of genocide never hurt anyone hah?

    Whatever about Iraq, Afghanistan was a whole other story and no-one else was rushing in to do anything about the Taliban.

    Which is all well and good if they American's went in there for alruistic reasons but they didn't. They went in to Afghanistan and Iraq to look like they were doing something about terrorism and get a polls boost while avoiding the actual threat that was in Suadi Arabia and even more so in Syria.

    All they managed to do was pokethe hornets nest and fire up the jihadists working out of Syria.
    Untitled Image




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,902 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    markodaly wrote: »
    Does anyone else find it ironic that so-called pacifists are toasting the death of someone?

    I don't know what any of this means. Not wanting to slaughter people doesn't make someone a pacifist.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #43
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 6,041 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    Which is all well and good if they American's went in there for alruistic reasons but they didn't. They went in to Afghanistan and Iraq to look like they were doing something about terrorism and get a polls boost while avoiding the actual threat that was in Suadi Arabia and even more so in Syria.

    All they managed to do was pokethe hornets nest and fire up the jihadists working out of Syria.

    Like, that's great when you're sitting in Ireland. If you were living under brural Sharia Law in Afghanistan, you wouldn't be thinking, "man, I wish someone would come help us, but only if it's for the right reasons and they simultaneously fix everything else too".

    Whatever you think about Rumsfeld (wasn't a fan myself), the idea that Afghanistan would be better off without intervention is a bit mental.


  • Options
    #44
    Retr0gamer
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 51,467 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Is the world and Afghanistan really better off though? Countless thousands were killed and the country is still in conflict when america pulls out troops. There's a very real possibility of more violence breaking out and a return to extremist rule once america pulls out. And the invasion just fanned extremism in the middle east.

    The world is a much worse place now thanks to those wars.

    What was actually achieved other than a second gwb Jr term and money for rumsfeld and his contractor mates.
    Untitled Image




  • Options
    #45
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Former Former Former wrote: »
    Like, that's great when you're sitting in Ireland. If you were living under brural Sharia Law in Afghanistan, you wouldn't be thinking, "man, I wish someone would come help us, but only if it's for the right reasons and they simultaneously fix everything else too".

    Whatever you think about Rumsfeld (wasn't a fan myself), the idea that Afghanistan would be better off without intervention is a bit mental.

    Has anything changed for the good in Iraq/Afghanistan since the Americans invaded?


  • Options
    #46
    McGinniesta
    Registered Users Posts: 4,402 ✭✭✭McGinniesta


    What makes this worse is that George Bush, Barack Obama and William Jefferson Clinton will probably receive state funerals, despite their respective track records. I doubt the Donald is getting one somehow.

    Rumsfeld gets slagged off on boards for being a war criminal. Irony indeed.


  • Options
    #47
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    McGinniesta wrote: »
    What makes this worse is that George Bush, Barack Obama and William Jefferson Clinton will probably receive state funerals, despite their respective track records. I doubt the Donald is getting one somehow.

    Rumsfeld gets slagged off on boards for being a war criminal. Irony indeed.

    None of the four mentioned above did anything good for the people.of Afghanistan or Iraq.


  • Options
    #48
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,902 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    McGinniesta wrote: »
    What makes this worse is that George Bush, Barack Obama and William Jefferson Clinton will probably receive state funerals, despite their respective track records. I doubt the Donald is getting one somehow.

    Rumsfeld gets slagged off on boards for being a war criminal. Irony indeed.

    Rumsfeld is the one being discussed. His name is literally two thirds of the thread title. I've no idea why we've people making up claims nobody made to defend him along with the usual whataboutery.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #49
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,124 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    A long read, but worth the effort


    “The whole idea that Rumsfeld projects—‘We’re here to protect the nation from terrorism’—is an oxymoron,” Taguba said. “He and his aides have abused their offices and have no idea of the values and high standards that are expected of them. And they’ve dragged a lot of officers with them.”
    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/06/25/the-generals-report


  • Options
    #50
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,719 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    FTA69 wrote: »
    Who’s advocating pacifism?

    Everyone toasting the death of Rumsfeld.


  • Options
    #51
    RulesOfNature
    Registered Users Posts: 237 ✭✭RulesOfNature


    Rumsfeld, Cheney, and to a lesser extent George Bush, were all part of the neo-con grift. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan has benefited no one else except the executives and shareholders of Exxon and Haliburton, and the private military contracts given to their friends.

    As of now, the Taliban has won, there are millions of refugees flooding Europe from destabilized nations and more will come from the oncoming regime war caused by people like Rumsfeld.

    I am ambivalent towards his death. But I am utterly disgusted at how he lived.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    tdf7187
    Registered Users Posts: 1,597 ✭✭✭tdf7187


    Weapon Of Mass Destruction Found Dead At 88


  • Options
    #53
    KungPao
    Registered Users Posts: 4,783 ✭✭✭KungPao


    It still feels kind of like a dream. I remember sitting in a pub, someone was leaving the job so having a few drinks, and watching the start of “shock and awe” on the telly. Sovereign nations destroying another for no good reason. Mad times. He’ll be burning away in hell anyway.


  • Options
    #54
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Biggest issue with the Iraq and Afghanistan ,one was absolutely necessary and needed Afghanistan but yet no plan was ever put in place ,no short to middle term goals and objectives , invade with relatively small units in a fairly large country doesn't work ,they never sealed the border from Pakistan and worked from Pakistan into the mountain regions where the Taliban had control and supply routes ,
    They took several years before arming the predator drones which would have being a great tool to have in place before going in ,
    Then came various intelligence failing which caused more set backs as well as tieing the Hands of the commanders and soldiers on the ground behind their backs .

    Iraq was completely unnecessary and not required ,but sadam is gone and hopefully if Iran minds its own business we won't see another psycho in power
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Options
    #55
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,894 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    markodaly wrote: »
    Everyone toasting the death of Rumsfeld.

    Links?


  • Options
    #56
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Rest In Peace to the last good Secretary of Defense we've had.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #57
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,503 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    The yanks had no business going into either Afghanistan or Iraq, rumsfeld allegedly made the following comment when a defense advisor said that Afghanistan was the target post 9-11

    " there are no targets worth going after in Afghanistan "

    Rummy has Iraq in his sights the day after 9-11


  • Options
    #58
    Labaik
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Labaik


    Gatling wrote: »
    Very Wiley and shrewd operator,,
    Not a war criminal despite the clickbate sensational op ,
    I'd imagine that they will honour him with an ARLEIGH BURKE being named after him,

    Not a war criminal but you certainly would class Vladimir Putin and his secretary (minister) of defence as one for Russia's illegal invasion of Crimea. Its the worst type of hypocrite, "its ok when we do it but terrorism when others do it."


  • Options
    #59
    buried
    Registered Users Posts: 9,807 ✭✭✭buried


    Saddam_rumsfeld.jpg

    Good US Navy-man was Donald.

    Rest in Jet Fuel.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Options
    #60
    Labaik
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Labaik


    buried wrote: »
    Saddam_rumsfeld.jpg

    Listen when Saddam was gassing the Iranians the US did "NOTHING". Rumsfeld was providing Saddam with info on Iranian troop movement so he could use chemical weapons on them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Labaik
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Labaik


    Don't forget that congress report in the 90s that unveiled the US was supplying Saddam with Anthrax.


Advertisement