Nelson Atwell
Well-Known Member
The Joint Chiefs found this cartoon so offensive that they wrote a letter to the Washington Post about it. The entire article, to include a link to a PDF file copy of the letter are at the link below.
Cartoon Brings Joint Chiefs Together
- Thread starter Nelson Atwell
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Michael Cacioppo
Well-Known Member
An absolutely tasteless satyrical cartoon. There are less crude ways of expressing their protest of the war. It goes to show the mentality of some of these so called journalists.
Mark Grumpy
Well-Known Member
Nelson,
you at work? The link's not working for me and I'd like to read it. If you are at work, I'll email you there and you can send to my work address.
grump
you at work? The link's not working for me and I'd like to read it. If you are at work, I'll email you there and you can send to my work address.
grump
Dre L
Well-Known Member
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
It is tasteless, but I think most people would interpret it as another ******* remark by Rumsfeld.
My favorite war movie (about government propaganda, otherwise the movie sucks) is Starship Troopers.
Dre L
Well-Known Member
Link to Rumsfelds comment.
'Battle-hardened' military not overextended, Rumsfeld says
January 26, 2006
BY LOLITA C. BALDOR Advertisement
WASHINGTON -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday disputed reports suggesting that the U.S. military is stretched thin and close to a snapping point from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, saying ''the force is not broken.''
''This armed force is enormously capable,'' Rumsfeld said at a Pentagon briefing. ''In addition, it's battle hardened. It's not a peacetime force that has been in barracks or garrisons.''
Rumsfeld spoke a day after it was reported that an unreleased study conducted for the Pentagon said the Army is being overextended by the two wars and may not be able to retain and recruit enough troops to defeat the insurgency in Iraq. Congressional Democrats released a report Wednesday that also concluded the U.S. military is under severe stress.
Reports suggesting that the U.S. military is close to the breaking point ''is just not consistent with the facts,'' he said.
'More rebalancing? You bet'
In an apparent shot at the Democratic Clinton administration, Rumsfeld said a number of components of the armed forces were underfunded during the 1990s, ''and there were hollow pieces to it. Today, that's just not the case.''
He said there were more than 1.4 million active U.S. troops, and about 2 million counting National Guard and Reserve units, of which only 138,000 people were in Iraq.
''Do we still need more rebalancing? You bet,'' Rumsfeld said.
The secretary suggested he was not familiar with reports suggesting an overburdened military. But, he said, ''It's clear that those comments do not reflect the current situation. They are either out of date or just misdirected.''
Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former Secretary of Defense William Perry, both members of the Clinton administration, were credited among the authors of the study that congressional Democrats released.
It said that U.S. ground forces are under ''enormous strain,'' adding, ''This strain, if not soon relieved, will have highly corrosive and potentially long-term effects on the force.''
AP
'Battle-hardened' military not overextended, Rumsfeld says
January 26, 2006
BY LOLITA C. BALDOR Advertisement
WASHINGTON -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday disputed reports suggesting that the U.S. military is stretched thin and close to a snapping point from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, saying ''the force is not broken.''
''This armed force is enormously capable,'' Rumsfeld said at a Pentagon briefing. ''In addition, it's battle hardened. It's not a peacetime force that has been in barracks or garrisons.''
Rumsfeld spoke a day after it was reported that an unreleased study conducted for the Pentagon said the Army is being overextended by the two wars and may not be able to retain and recruit enough troops to defeat the insurgency in Iraq. Congressional Democrats released a report Wednesday that also concluded the U.S. military is under severe stress.
Reports suggesting that the U.S. military is close to the breaking point ''is just not consistent with the facts,'' he said.
'More rebalancing? You bet'
In an apparent shot at the Democratic Clinton administration, Rumsfeld said a number of components of the armed forces were underfunded during the 1990s, ''and there were hollow pieces to it. Today, that's just not the case.''
He said there were more than 1.4 million active U.S. troops, and about 2 million counting National Guard and Reserve units, of which only 138,000 people were in Iraq.
''Do we still need more rebalancing? You bet,'' Rumsfeld said.
The secretary suggested he was not familiar with reports suggesting an overburdened military. But, he said, ''It's clear that those comments do not reflect the current situation. They are either out of date or just misdirected.''
Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former Secretary of Defense William Perry, both members of the Clinton administration, were credited among the authors of the study that congressional Democrats released.
It said that U.S. ground forces are under ''enormous strain,'' adding, ''This strain, if not soon relieved, will have highly corrosive and potentially long-term effects on the force.''
AP
Last edited by a moderator:
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
very,very tastless..it is a slap in the face to our soldiers..IMO..:angry:
Dale Carter
Active Member
The Pentagon is such a huge organization that you can find a report or study supporting or advocating ANY position. There are people there who draw up battle plans against Canada and Lower Elbonia. 
Also, the Pentagon is a haven for pure intellectual pursuits. The military command is big on thought experiments that might take us out of conventional thinking. That apporach is perfectly consistent with Rumsfields past. Good leaders are always looking for new approaches. They may not do it, but they do listen.
I laugh at people who talk about how badly this war has been run. I wonder what they would have said if the Bush Administration had appeared before Congress in 2002 and guaranteed a three week capitulation of Iraq, an Iraqi Constitution, three legitimate national elections with 70+% turnout and a Kurdish Prime Minister?
Keep in mind these same "experts" (think John Murtha) were bloviating about "10,000 body bags with American boys coming home" if we invaded Baghdad. Mainly due to WMD, according to them. Idiots.
That said, I think it is terrible and said the injuries and deaths sustained by our soldiers and their families. I also think it will be worse in the future if we don't handle this today. Think Hitler in 1935.
Also, the Pentagon is a haven for pure intellectual pursuits. The military command is big on thought experiments that might take us out of conventional thinking. That apporach is perfectly consistent with Rumsfields past. Good leaders are always looking for new approaches. They may not do it, but they do listen.
I laugh at people who talk about how badly this war has been run. I wonder what they would have said if the Bush Administration had appeared before Congress in 2002 and guaranteed a three week capitulation of Iraq, an Iraqi Constitution, three legitimate national elections with 70+% turnout and a Kurdish Prime Minister?
Keep in mind these same "experts" (think John Murtha) were bloviating about "10,000 body bags with American boys coming home" if we invaded Baghdad. Mainly due to WMD, according to them. Idiots.
That said, I think it is terrible and said the injuries and deaths sustained by our soldiers and their families. I also think it will be worse in the future if we don't handle this today. Think Hitler in 1935.
