Rumsfeld Gives White House Failing Grade on Terror

[jimnyc]

When it comes to handling the ideology of terrorism, Donald Rumsfeld gives the Obama administration a failing grade.

"I would give this administration an F, because they won't even use the words," said Rumsfeld, speaking with CNN host Jake Tapper this week.

“Until today, I haven't heard people use the word jihad,” said Rumsfeld.

“I haven't heard the people in the Obama administration talk about the fact that there are people that are determined to kill innocent men, women, and children that are attacking the whole concept of the nation state.”

The Former Secretary of Defense for President George W. Bush reacted strongly to points made by Obama during his speech on his administration’s counterterrorism policy Thursday at National Defense University.

Rumsfeld was particularly riled by Obama’s statement that he believes “we compromised our basic values by using torture to interrogate our enemies and detaining individuals in a way that ran counter to the rule of law,” a clear shot at the Bush administration’s national security policy.

Giving the Bush administration a D-minus, "and I'm an easy grader," Rumsfeld said Obama has “blamed the Bush administration for practically everything since he took office.”

Rumsfeld also took a very different view of Obama’s assessment that al Qaeda had “been gutted.”

“That just simply isn't true,” Rumsfeld said.

“Al Qaeda is still effective. We have killed or captured any number of al- Qaida leadership, and they get replaced. Someone comes on behind them.”

Rumsfeld did have some advice for Obama, whose administration, he said, changes its message “week after week after week, whether it's Benghazi or whether it's the Internal Revenue Service.”

“What you need to do is get the people in the office, sit them down, and find ground truth, because the currency a leader has is credibility,” Rumsfeld said.

“To the extent that credibility gets eroded over time, you lose your ability to lead.”

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/rumsfeld-obama-terror/2013/05/25/id/506361

[BillyBob]

Obama denies the threat of terrorism for political reasons which makes him an ineffective leader and a danger to national security.

[Robert A Whit]

I went to Jake Tappers CNN feed and heard what Rumsfeld said during the full interview.

Obama is still that empty suit. But each and every day, I must see that narcissist on the TV.

Has he ever not delivered some speech on any day of the year?

I wish Rumsfeld explained the D he gave to Bush but Tapper did not press him there.

Did you guys see the expression on Tappers face when Rumsfeld did run down Obama?

The man was in pain it seemed to me.

[gabosaurus]

Say what you want about Obama, but our country has lost no planes and no tall buildings under his watch.

http://www.politicvic.com/images/george-bush-miss-me-yet.jpg

[Robert A Whit]

Say what you want about Obama, but our country has lost no planes and no tall buildings under his watch.



Make a list of what Obama lost and don't forget an Ambassador and some people with him along with a few thousand men in uniform.

Don't forget how Bush set things up so we would not lose more tall buildings nor airplanes.

As Obama says, he inherited.

But the empty suit is no leader and a person supporting him has my sympathy.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Last post was on this date..

05-26-2013, 12:53 AM#5 (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?41031-Rumsfeld-Gives-White-House-Failing-Grade-on-Terror&p=641559#post641559)Robert A Whit (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?2337-Robert-A-Whit)

View Profile (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?2337-Robert-A-Whit)
View Forum Posts (http://www.debatepolicy.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=2337&contenttype=vBForum_Post&showposts=1)
Send Email (http://www.debatepolicy.com/sendmessage.php?do=mailmember&u=2337)


http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/statusicon/user-offline.png Banned http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/misc/army_white.gif

Asking because I see banned there but not sure if it was put there by admin here or him.


Just curious , so everybody don't jump my case for asking, ok?-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

last post was on this date..

05-26-2013, 12:53 am#5 (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?41031-rumsfeld-gives-white-house-failing-grade-on-terror&p=641559#post641559)robert a whit (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?2337-robert-a-whit)

view profile (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?2337-robert-a-whit)
view forum posts (http://www.debatepolicy.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=2337&contenttype=vbforum_post&showposts=1)
send email (http://www.debatepolicy.com/sendmessage.php?do=mailmember&u=2337)


http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/statusicon/user-offline.png banned http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/misc/army_white.gif

asking because i see banned there but not sure if it was put there by admin here or him.


Just curious , so everybody don't jump my case for asking, ok?-tyr

tried to edit. Ignore the question please...-tyr

[jafar00]

So what does Rummey want? Millions more innocent dead and more footholds for Al Qaeda to run amok?

[BillyBob]

So what does Rummey want? Millions more innocent dead and more footholds for Al Qaeda to run amok?

There is no such thing as an innocent muslim.

[aboutime]

jafar. You, of all people should pay attention to what Rumsfeld said. Because, in nearly every post you have made here. His words ring so true about, and for you....

"You don't know, what you don't know...you don't know!"

Those who still support terror, and terrorist. And that seems to include Obama, and you...will always be the very same people who demand that Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld are WAR CRIMINALS....because they had no fear of Destroying, or Killing the very same people YOU COME HERE TO PROTECT, and make EXCUSES for each day. Ya know? Like those who took part in the September 11th attacks??

[Drummond]

So what does Rummey want? Millions more innocent dead and more footholds for Al Qaeda to run amok?

Jafar, you really need to decide, once and for all, just how 'terrorist-friendly' you are.

On the one hand, we've seen post after post from you, where you've done your best to distance Islam from terrorism .. and say that terrorists, in being terrorists, cannot say they're representing Islam when they terrorise. But, on the other hand ... when someone comes along with what can be called a 'hawkish' approach to terrorism, then you OBJECT ?

The War on Terror, and all that's been done in the furtherance of it, is absolutely justified. Because to do less is to support terrorism.

Here's a question for you (.. can I guess what your answer will be ?) .. what if the War on Terror was ever pursued with greater vigour once more ... and HAMAS was its target ?

Any thoughts, Jafar ?

[Drummond]

Say what you want about Obama, but our country has lost no planes and no tall buildings under his watch.

http://www.politicvic.com/images/george-bush-miss-me-yet.jpg

... ah, now .... could that be because all the steps at creating an effective infrastructure against terrorism on mainland US were taken ... by the BUSH Administration ???

[aboutime]

Jafar, you really need to decide, once and for all, just how 'terrorist-friendly' you are.

On the one hand, we've seen post after post from you, where you've done your best to distance Islam from terrorism .. and say that terrorists, in being terrorists, cannot say they're representing Islam when they terrorise. But, on the other hand ... when someone comes along with what can be called a 'hawkish' approach to terrorism, then you OBJECT ?

The War on Terror, and all that's been done in the furtherance of it, is absolutely justified. Because to do less is to support terrorism.

Here's a question for you (.. can I guess what your answer will be ?) .. what if the War on Terror was ever pursued with greater vigour once more ... and HAMAS was its target ?

Any thoughts, Jafar ?


Sir Drummond. Thought I'd make use of the time we will spend waiting for jafar to answer your question by reading
"The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire" or "War and Peace".:rolleyes:;):eek::poke:

[jafar00]

Jafar, you really need to decide, once and for all, just how 'terrorist-friendly' you are.

On the one hand, we've seen post after post from you, where you've done your best to distance Islam from terrorism .. and say that terrorists, in being terrorists, cannot say they're representing Islam when they terrorise. But, on the other hand ... when someone comes along with what can be called a 'hawkish' approach to terrorism, then you OBJECT ?

The War on Terror, and all that's been done in the furtherance of it, is absolutely justified. Because to do less is to support terrorism.

The war on terrorism is just a bogus excuse. At the time, Al Qaeda was a pretty much unknown rag tag bunch of idiots with no home. Now they are internationally known and have media coverage that would make Justin Bieber jealous at it's extent which furthered their political aims and power. Now they have a home in Afghanistan and Iraq where the population of these countries destroyed by the US are now subjected to almost daily bombings worse than the Boston bombs.

Tell me again that the "War on Terror" is justified. All it's done is breed more terror, suffering and death.


Here's a question for you (.. can I guess what your answer will be ?) .. what if the War on Terror was ever pursued with greater vigour once more ... and HAMAS was its target ?

Any thoughts, Jafar ?

It would just be another day sheltering from the bombs of a foreign power for the people of Gaza.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So what does Rummey want? Millions more innocent dead and more footholds for Al Qaeda to run amok?

Al Qaeda already runs amok. Already murders people as they please. Even does so and obama covers it up.
What do you want jafar? That we infidels stretch our necks and say yes please slay me next!??

Every damn muslim terrorist must be put down hard like the mad raving murdering dog that they are NFM , NFM.... No Freaking Mercy!! - -:flyflag:

Yes, obama hates we that bought our guns and stocked up with extra ammo to deliver justice to ffing murdering thugs. He hates it because he ffing is one himself... f-him too. -Tyr

[hjmick]

Only on terror?

[gabosaurus]

A terrorist giving grades on terror. How wonderful is that?

[jimnyc]

So what does Rummey want? Millions more innocent dead and more footholds for Al Qaeda to run amok?

Maybe to fight terrorism with full force until they are eradicated? Or do you propose letting Al Qaeda and their ilk running amok, because people shouldn't stop them for fear of an innocent being killed - while these terrorists, all they do is kill innocents? Sure, it's EASY to blame Rumsfeld - when you should be blaming the filth that brought the so called war on terror to the forefront, which is terrorism, and the majority being rooted in radical Islam. THEY deserve the blame for innocent deaths. Don't blame those coming to kill the filth that in turn hides amongst civilians.

[BillyBob]

A terrorist giving grades on terror. How wonderful is that?


Not as wonderful as a flaming lib calling Rumsfeld a terrorist.

[jimnyc]

The war on terrorism is just a bogus excuse. At the time, Al Qaeda was a pretty much unknown rag tag bunch of idiots with no home.

Who were responsible for multiple attacks on Americans prior, and then the blood of 3,000 innocents on 9/11. Sorry if you and I look at terrorists in a different light. Anyone capable of doing what they did, and what they claim they want to do, should be feared - and then hopefully destroyed.

[aboutime]

A terrorist giving grades on terror. How wonderful is that?


Good question gabby. How'd Rummy manage to miss you?

[jimnyc]

A terrorist giving grades on terror. How wonderful is that?

Do you want to be taken seriously? Why would you place Rumsfeld on the same page as people who have killed so many Americans? He was a legit part of our country, whether you like it or not, and we used a legitimate military. If you truly believe this retarded comment, then you also believe the current President is a terrorist - as he is responsible for setting troops on the ground AND completely bypassed congress to do so.

[hjmick]

Do you want to be taken seriously? Why would you place Rumsfeld on the same page as people who have killed so many Americans? He was a legit part of our country, whether you like it or not, and we used a legitimate military. If you truly believe this retarded comment, then you also believe the current President is a terrorist - as he is responsible for setting troops on the ground AND completely bypassed congress to do so.



Pffft... That's so fucking different... He's a Democrat... She shares his ideas of what is right and wrong for this country... And anyone who doesn't is just wrong...

[gabosaurus]

Do you want to be taken seriously? Why would you place Rumsfeld on the same page as people who have killed so many Americans? He was a legit part of our country, whether you like it or not, and we used a legitimate military. If you truly believe this retarded comment, then you also believe the current President is a terrorist - as he is responsible for setting troops on the ground AND completely bypassed congress to do so.

You seem to believe that only those who attack and kill Americans can be classified as "terrorists." This is not the case.
Go outside this country and ask people if they think Dubya and Rumsfeld are terrorists. You will find a great many who say yes.

[aboutime]

You seem to believe that only those who attack and kill Americans can be classified as "terrorists." This is not the case.
Go outside this country and ask people if they think Dubya and Rumsfeld are terrorists. You will find a great many who say yes.


I totally agree with you gabby. Therefore. Based on your idiotic remarks above. I think YOU are one too! How's that feel?

[jimnyc]

You seem to believe that only those who attack and kill Americans can be classified as "terrorists." This is not the case.
Go outside this country and ask people if they think Dubya and Rumsfeld are terrorists. You will find a great many who say yes.

Terrorists are responsible for deaths in almost every country, and certainly not only to Americans. I never stated otherwise. But a legit military force on approved wars are hardly terrorists. Bitch to Congress for what they passed and for the tons of resolutions the UN passed - all of which made the decisions by Rumsfeld and Bush part of war - not terrorism.

[gabosaurus]

Terrorists are responsible for deaths in almost every country, and certainly not only to Americans. I never stated otherwise. But a legit military force on approved wars are hardly terrorists. Bitch to Congress for what they passed and for the tons of resolutions the UN passed - all of which made the decisions by Rumsfeld and Bush part of war - not terrorism.

Terrorism is defined by those who believe they are the victims of such.

[BillyBob]

You seem to believe that only those who attack and kill Americans can be classified as "terrorists." This is not the case.

Not so, the palestinian terrorists attack jews.




Go outside this country and ask people if they think Dubya and Rumsfeld are terrorists. You will find a great many who say yes.

Does anybody here give a flying crap what people 'outside this country' have to say about us?

[BillyBob]

Terrorism is defined by those who believe they are the victims of such.


By that definition libs/progressives/dems are terrorists.

[jimnyc]

Terrorism is defined by those who believe they are the victims of such.

So ANYONE can be labeled a terrorist, so long as another person feels they are victims? If a woman thinks the husband who beat her is a terrorist, he is now a terrorist? WTF?

[BillyBob]

So ANYONE can be labeled a terrorist, so long as another person feels they are victims? If a woman thinks the husband who beat her is a terrorist, he is now a terrorist? WTF?


Don't you just love liberalism and the way they just make shit up as they go?

[aboutime]

So ANYONE can be labeled a terrorist, so long as another person feels they are victims? If a woman thinks the husband who beat her is a terrorist, he is now a terrorist? WTF?


Jim. Keep in mind. Our president, and his cabinet with the administration Denies Terrorism, and Terrorists exist. UNLESS, we are Veterans, and Home Grown terrorists because we disagree with Obama.

So. Millions of us out here...according to Obama. ARE Terrorists, and Racists too!

[hjmick]

Terrorism is defined by those who believe they are the victims of such.

Guess that would make the IRS terrorists...

[BillyBob]

Guess that would make the IRS terrorists...

Especially lately. TSA, too. And Obama.

[red states rule]

You seem to believe that only those who attack and kill Americans can be classified as "terrorists." This is not the case.


Or visit any abortion clinic in America and see first hand the slaughter of the innocent and the helpless - all for money and protecting the "right" of a mother to murder her unborn child

[red states rule]

Go outside this country and ask people if they think Dubya and Rumsfeld are terrorists. You will find a great many who say yes.

I am sure Iran loves Obama and his spine of Jello. They would much rather deal with Obama then Bush

Of course there is Israel watching in the background

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz060313dAPR20130601124513.jpg

[aboutime]

Or visit any abortion clinic in America and see first hand the slaughter of the innocent and the helpless - all for money and protecting the "right" of a mother to murder her unborn child


We should declare Gabby as a terrorist too! Almost every post she leaves here, for any reason. Terrorizes Jim's intentions to keep his Forum Civil, and for Human's only.

[red states rule]

We should declare Gabby as a terrorist too! Almost every post she leaves here, for any reason. Terrorizes Jim's intentions to keep his Forum Civil, and for Human's only.

Being a liberal pain in the ass is a major part of Gabby's "charm"

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gmc10994620130610080000.jpg