Comments on: Rumsfeld Finds Obama on Egypt ‘Confusing’

By: jim

jim — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:58:53 +0000

Rummy is confused? How about ‘Rummy is still confused.’ And he’s still trying to confuse the electorate.
He finds fault with the Obama administration for recognizing and responding to the rapidly developing and evolving situation in Cairo. Rummy and his boss charted numerous ill advised strategies. And although situations changed dramatically, all the angels in heaven could not persuade Rummy to change his plan.
Rummy, you sent our finest young men and women into battle without the protection and equipment they needed to survive – inadequate body protection and Hum Vs without lifesaving undercarriage plating. All on your watch.
Rummy, sit down, close your mouth, and keep it shut. If you have anything remotely resembling a soul, search it for answers for your blatant disregard for the safety of out military. Get away from the self aggrandizement you perpetuate with the cameras. However, get down on your knees and beg those wounded and the loved ones of those killed by you through your malfeasance.
We should have sent you and George to the front lines.

By: ELOC

ELOC — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 06:37:47 +0000

Rumsfeild does not need Obama to be confused. He was and remains a dud.

By: kwh65201

kwh65201 — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 17:22:45 +0000

This week, Republicans have been very critical of President Obamas actions in regard to the overthough of Egypt’s Mubarak. The fact that all this has happen in Egypt without the United States having to spend 12 billion dollars a month to kill and torcher people is fantastic and shows that President Obama has done a great job.

By: Paulet

Paulet — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 03:00:27 +0000

That is the problem Rumsfeld was confused when we went into Iraq — I am so glad that with the world situation; that Obama and Democratic party is in charge and people should take note of this for 2012 — instead of bombing or reacting the administration paced themselves during the situation which was no easy thing — this alone gives Obama the right credentials for guiding our country for another term.

By: Mike W

Mike W — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 01:58:50 +0000

Obama’s team seemed to waffle in reaction to daily events during the uprising, settling on Slow Ouster & a spy boss that could only alienate the movement, and likely leave Obama on the wrong side of history. The acceptance of Suleiman was never a possibility for protesters, making Obama for them, yet another line-toeing U.S. president who doesn’t get it.
As eloquent as he was yesterday, it very much appears the Obama team got lucky by Friday’s events – obviating the fact they’d put their chips on Suleiman. The high talk about civil & human rights, will at some point need to be matched by a White House willing to break ranks with dictators whom may serve some strategic end, but whom simultaneously run roughshod over those values at home. That in my view must be the change which Washington undergoes, if it is ever to garner real credibility in the region.
You’d think Obama, would be the one president to know that. Mr. Rumsfeld never did…

By: boomthereitis

boomthereitis — Sat, 12 Feb 2011 08:21:49 +0000

Obama took the right actions? By what? Doing his usual—-helping any violent islamic group gain power? Hmmmmm, I wonder if the Egyptians have any clue how bad the Muslim brotherhood is?

By: Reanno

Reanno — Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:28:15 +0000

You liberals are unbelievable – If Rumsfeld was ‘confused’ about the WMDs so that means that the democrats were too as they were the ones who started the campaign that Saddam had and creating WMDs… Don’t you morons remember what happened in 1998? Clinton bombed Bagdad without declaring war. You liberals are the most hypocritical, brainwashed bunch of people. And supporting Obama who did nothing on this matter and the mideast is in a huge mess.

By: J. Welsh

J. Welsh — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 22:50:29 +0000

Josh…4:00 PM…. uhmm, you can’t keep millions (plural) of people in another country from over throwing the leader they don’t like, just because we like that leader. We did nothing about the Shah…BECAUSE WE COULDN’T… and we did nothing about Mubarek…BECAUSE WE COULDN’T.
The USA still needs to learn to stop backing the worst-of-worst “thugs” (the Shah of Iran, Mubarek, Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, etc.)…just because they say, “I’m pro-US”. We’re fincancing these thugs that rule their countries as dictators, and in turn, turning entire countries and populations against us.
Obama took the right step here, standing behind “the people” desiring a DEMOCRATIC government versus continuing to support a dictatorial thug.

By: JM

JM — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 22:00:56 +0000

Wow, every rightwing talking head unloaded on Obama today, only to get pwned by reality.
Goodbye, Mubarak! Goodbye Republican credibility on foreign policy!
Both were overrated.

By: green.goddess

green.goddess — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 21:36:46 +0000

Posted by: Josh | Feb 11, 2011 4:00:42 PM posted “People don’t realize how bad Mubarak’s resignation is to the US and to Israel.”
Relax Josh. Conservative entertainers purposefully twist subliminal fears about how one quarter of the world’s population is ALL engaged in some sort of terrorist “Caliphate” conspiracy.
In reality these entertainers are slightly educated actors expressing their opinions, not relaying facts.
We do know that epic changes are underway in the broader Arab world. And yes, they may have important implications for Israel, beyond its bilateral relationship with Egypt, as well as for the United States. Think positive changes.
Like former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert advised to Benjamin Netanyahu in light of events in Egypt: “Don’t wait. Move, lead and make history. This is the time. There will not be a better one.” It is time for the United States and Israel to work proactively to achieve a two-state solution to the conflict.