Quote:
Originally Posted by peragro
...It seems like the SECDEF made comments that were too close to home for some. The protestation seems to indicate complicity. To paraphrase Shakespeare "The Senator doth protest too much, methinks".
|
Give me a break. That speech didn't hit close to anything, let alone home.
That bitter, incompetent old man said:
Quote:
...We need to consider the following questions, I would submit:
* With the growing lethality and the increasing availability of weapons, can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?
* Can folks really continue to think that free countries can negotiate a separate peace with terrorists?
* Can we afford the luxury of pretending that the threats today are simply law enforcement problems, like robbing a bank or stealing a car; rather than threats of a fundamentally different nature requiring fundamentally different approaches?
* And can we really afford to return to the destructive view that America, not the enemy, but America, is the source of the world's troubles?
These are central questions of our time, and we must face them honestly....
|
Those aren't the central questions of our time. They aren't even questions anyone is asking. Who said anything about appeasing terrorists? Seriously. Who said that? Nobody. That's who. And nobody is proposing anything that even resembles appeasement. The rest of those questions are equally phony.
Everyone is entitled to his opinion, but what Rumsfeld said is wrong and counter-productive.