Rumsfeld is a diplomatic genius - Page 2

Velociryx · February 7, 2003, 11:24

Ganger...no, they're in the "Axis of Slightly Evil" Don't you read The Onion!?

-=Vel=-

Gangerolf · February 7, 2003, 11:39

hmm so they're still slightly evil... Hope they're not next in line after Iraq and N.K. I don't want to be a human shield when I go to Cuba in july.

Sten Sture · February 7, 2003, 11:41

Rummy is the Mike Tyson of the diplo core. You have to give us Ameroes credit for coming up with a drunk brawler for Sec Defense! C'mon on! The guy is a brilliant bad cop. "Youse guys are all chicken-sh!t and I'm gonna kick everyones ass"

No finesse at all - but it is brilliant! The pit-bull in the government.

Gangerolf · February 7, 2003, 11:48

isn't he a christian fundamentalist as well?

DanS · February 7, 2003, 11:50

Rummy? Don't think so.

Willem · February 7, 2003, 11:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Rumseld is certainly not a moron.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck. All Rumsfeld has been good for is opening his mouth in order to change feet. Although he's been trying to get everyone on his side of the issue, he's only managed to piss alot of people off. I'd say that's being a diplomatic moron.

Buck Birdseed · February 7, 2003, 11:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Gangerolf
isn't he a christian fundamentalist as well?

You're thinking of John Ashcroft.

It's easy to confuse the two.

Gangerolf · February 7, 2003, 11:54

Just asking. I heard/read it somewhere. It might have been Ashcroft though.

Buck Birdseed · February 7, 2003, 11:54

Nice X-post.

Drake Tungsten · February 7, 2003, 11:55

Quote:

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.

If this is true, then your prime minister is the biggest moron on the planet...

See Sten Sture's post for an intelligent analysis of Rumsfeld's diplomatic role.

Gangerolf · February 7, 2003, 11:56

buck, yep

Sten Sture · February 7, 2003, 11:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

that's being a diplomatic moron.

Unless that is the intention. Then you can just say, well, that army sargent we got is the pointy end of the stick, but we'll try not to let him nuke anybody friendly...

CerberusIV · February 7, 2003, 12:07

Rumsfeld seems to be the modern US version of the Davy Crockett nuclear mortar.

Willem · February 7, 2003, 12:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

If this is true, then your prime minister is the biggest moron on the planet...

I don't recall Chretien totally pissing off the very people he's trying to befriend. He's a diplomat, he knows how to butter people up, that's why he's been probably the most successful Prime Minister we've ever had. He understands full well that politics is a game of give and take, something that Rumsfeld could use a few lessons in.

Willem · February 7, 2003, 12:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Sten Sture

Unless that is the intention. Then you can just say, well, that army sargent we got is the pointy end of the stick, but we'll try not to let him nuke anybody friendly...

If the intention is counter-productive to the ultimate goal, then maybe it's time he tried a new approach. Obviously the first one isn't working very well.

Harovan · February 7, 2003, 12:13

Quote:

Originally posted by DanS
Rummy has a way of being out in front of issues. Like his "old world" quote, this one might ring true in a couple of weeks. We'll see what the mood is like in Germany after France offers troops.

Schröder already does what he can in the limits of his promise. He already sent 2 Patriot systems with 128 missiles to Israel, and he'll send the same amount to Turkey without any doubt (they just asked for it). That's "offering aid" without participating. I doubt that he sends troops, though. Not only because he doesn't want (I'm sure he regrets his blunder, he just doesn't see a way out), but basically because he doesn't have any. All mobile forces he had are already in peacekeeping missions, in ex Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. The US withdrew lots of forces, and they were replaced by German troops.

As you know, the logistic capabilities of our army is (still) very limited, the rebuild into a modern army is expensive and money is scarce. May be in the future Germany can contribute 2 or 3 rapid reaction corps into a common European army, at least the first chunk of transport planes is already ordered. France and UK provide some nuclear power and perhaps they and may be Spain and Italy will contribute some more carriers. But all this will last very long.

Master Zen · February 7, 2003, 12:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Perhaps we should rethink our denial to aid our American friends. We should send little Donald a couple of Leopard 2 toy tanks, so he can play out his hobby without harming anyone. And for Bush jr. I recommend a copy of Civ3. We could tell him, that Hammurabi is the predecessor of Saddam Hussein. He wouldn't notice the difference, I'm sure.

Make games, not war!

Sava · February 7, 2003, 13:31

Rumsfeld isn't a moron, he's just an evil, little, war-mongering, pudwhacker.

Proteus_MST · February 7, 2003, 19:30

Rumsfeld is not the only one who understands how to make Friends

Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagons Policy Advisory Board thinks France is a by far greater Evil than Germany.

Quote:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 (UPI) -- France is no longer an ally of the United States and the NATO alliance "must develop a strategy to contain our erstwhile ally or we will not be talking about a NATO alliance" the head of the Pentagon's top advisory board said in Washington Tuesday.

Quote:

But while dismissing Germany's refusal to support military action against Iraq as an aberration by "a discredited chancellor," Perle warned that France's attitude was both more dangerous and more serious.

"France is no longer the ally it once was," Perle said. And he went on to accuse French President Jacques Chirac of believing "deep in his soul that Saddam Hussein is preferable to any likely successor."

Quote:

Perle went on to question whether the United States should ever again seek the endorsement of the U.N. Security Council on a major issue of policy, stressing that "Iraq is going to be liberated, by the United States and whoever wants to join us, whether we get the approbation of the U.N. or any other institution."

"It is now reasonable to ask whether the United States should now or on any other occasion subordinate vital national interests to a show of hands by nations who do not share our interests," he added.

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=...4-031831-1626r

Seems like the US-Government is very good at smashing china

Sten Sture · February 7, 2003, 19:38

I lost my whole Rummy post...

Ned · February 7, 2003, 19:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

Well, Schäuble is a rightwinger and in opposition right now. So does it surprise anyone, that he tries to gain political benefits out of Schröders moronic behavior? Schröders whole problem is his "Unlimited support" promise after Sept 11th. He got a lot of trouble for the "unlimited" part and his popularity sank very fast. He won the 2002 elections with the promise "not to participate in a war against Iraq in any way". That was a blunder, he should have said "we won't participate militarily", while we offer our help in political pressure against Saddam and may be in cleaning up and peacekeeping, as we always do. The US don't need our military help anyway. The German army is, like most of the other European armies, build as a pure defensive force and thus unable to project its power. Plus, due to the results of WWII, Germany was restricted to build offensive forces like carriers and long range bombers. I don't know, if these restrictions were lifted in the 90s, when the German occupation officially ended. But any military effort of the government would be extremely unpopular. The WWII allies put an enormous effort to reeducate the German population after the war. So if we seem to be pacifist pussies now, we're terribly sorry, but...........

I agree, we did this to Germany. So guys, let's lay off. It is actually good, in my view, that Germany is anti-war. A powerful and aggressive Germany only destabalizes Europe and perhaps the world.

Urban Ranger · February 8, 2003, 00:51

I like his math too. Is it six days or six weeks?

Velociryx · February 8, 2003, 01:08

Quote from Willem: If the intention is counter-productive to the ultimate goal, then maybe it's time he tried a new approach. Obviously the first one isn't working very well.

Good GOD man, that is *exactly* how I woulda said it!

-=Vel=-

LaRusso · February 9, 2003, 14:48

Quote:

Originally posted by DanS
Yes, but Germany's (and France's) actions took off the pressure just when the pressure was needed. And that rightly pisses everyone off. I don't think Schroeder's actions served the cause of peace.

thankfully, there was a plagiarised british 'intelligence' report to help the cause of peace...

DanS · February 9, 2003, 15:23

So what?

LaRusso · February 9, 2003, 15:40

Quote:

Originally posted by DanS
So what?

so some people are going to die and the justification for that will be, inter alias, a copy-pasted master thesis of an arabian student based on 1991 data.

DanS · February 9, 2003, 15:45

Powell referenced it once in his speech.

LaRusso · February 9, 2003, 16:02

Quote:

Originally posted by DanS
Powell referenced it once in his speech.

and praised it as 'excellent'

DanS · February 9, 2003, 16:05

Well, it was excellent. The material from which it was plagiarized is solid primary research.

Sava · February 9, 2003, 16:07

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showt...threadid=76642

Powell's speech excellent? Discuss in this thread... Seriously Dan, no one will think less of you if you admit your wrong.