PDA

View Full Version : Obama Rumsfeld Cries Foul on Obama Claim Troop Requests for Afghanistan Were Denied


Donger
12-02-2009, 01:47 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/02/rumsfeld-rejects-obama-claim-troop-requests-denied-afghanistan/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+foxnews%252Fpolitics+%2528FOXNews.com+-+Politics%2529



Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday lashed out at President Obama for claiming the Bush administration rebuffed commanders' repeated requests for more troops in Afghanistan.

In a rare break in his public silence since leaving the Pentagon, Rumsfeld rejected the claim as a "bald misstatement" and "disservice" that cannot go unanswered.

"Such a bald misstatement, at least as it pertains to the period I served as secretary of defense, deserves a response," Rumsfeld said in a written statement. "I am not aware of a single request of that nature between 2001 and 2006."

The president leveled the charge in his speech Tuesday night outlining his plan to send 30,000 more U.S. troops into Afghanistan.

In his speech, Obama gave a detailed history of the Afghanistan war starting with the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. He argued that the Iraq war drew needed resources away from Afghanistan, allowing the situation to deteriorate since 2003.

"Throughout this period, our troop levels in Afghanistan remained a fraction of what they were in Iraq," Obama said. "Commanders in Afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to deal with the reemergence of the Taliban, but these reinforcements did not arrive."

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs explained Wednesday that Obama was referring to requests that came in during 2008, and suggested Rumsfeld was on thin ice with his criticism.

"I will let Secretary Rumsfeld explain ... whether he thinks that the effort in Afghanistan was sufficiently resourced during his tenure as secretary of defense," he said.

But if Obama were referring to the 2008 period, he would seem to have been pointing the finger at his own secretary of defense, Robert Gates, who served in the same position in the previous administration.

Rumsfeld said in his statement the White House should make public any such requests if they exist to back up the allegation.

"The president's assertion does a disservice to the truth and, in particular, to the thousands of men and women in uniform who have fought, served and sacrificed in Afghanistan," Rumsfeld said.

He urged Congress to review the claim in the upcoming debate to "determine exactly what requests were made, who made them, and where and why in the chain of command they were denied."

Unlike former Vice President Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld has kept largely out of the public eye since leaving the administration after the 2006 mid-term elections in which Republicans suffered huge losses, largely the result of setbacks in the Iraq war.

wild1
12-02-2009, 01:50 PM
the teleprompter is going to have to answer for this one...


Rumsfeld said in his statement the White House should make public any such requests if they exist to back up the allegation.


Hopefully they will do so if there are any.

mlyonsd
12-02-2009, 01:52 PM
Gibbs is such a dirt bag scum pile.

Chief Henry
12-02-2009, 01:58 PM
the teleprompter is going to have to answer for this one...



Hopefully they will do so if there are any.





With todays media ? Fat Chance of the telepromter having to answer for anything, except maybe an occassional question about the state dinner party crashers :rolleyes:

Calcountry
12-02-2009, 02:00 PM
Gibbs is such a dirt bag scum pile.That's the change we need.

BucEyedPea
12-02-2009, 02:08 PM
Rum is scum! LMAO

Cannibal
12-02-2009, 03:28 PM
Rumsfeld is the most inept SoD ever. I take no value in anything that moron has to say about anything.

orange
12-02-2009, 03:32 PM
Gibbs is such a dirt bag scum pile.

"I will let Secretary Rumsfeld explain ... whether he thinks that the effort in Afghanistan was sufficiently resourced during his tenure as secretary of defense," he said.

Priceless.

dirk digler
12-02-2009, 06:21 PM
Oops

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff pushed back in a fact-checking dispute with former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, asserting that the Bush administration objected rejected a Pentagon request for more troops for Afghanistan last year.

Adm. Michael Mullen told a House committee Wednesday that Gen. David McKiernan, who led U.S. troops in Afghanistan between 2008 and this year, had asked for 20,000 troops for the effort but was rebuffed.

“We didn’t have them because they were pushed to Iraq,” the four-star admiral said during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in response to a question from Indiana Republican Rep. Mike Pence. “That was the priority of the president.”

BigChiefFan
12-02-2009, 06:25 PM
I really don't care who is giving the excuses. They're full of crap. We've been in Afghanistan for 8 years. This war is bogus and costing us trillions.

BucEyedPea
12-02-2009, 06:44 PM
I really don't care who is giving the excuses. They're full of crap. We've been in Afghanistan for 8 years. This war is bogus and costing us trillions.

:thumb:

They like having their heads in the sand.
That's why they want to stay in Afghanistan.

mlyonsd
12-02-2009, 06:49 PM
Oops

Who was DS in 2008?

dirk digler
12-02-2009, 06:51 PM
Who was DS in 2008?

Exactly. It goes back to the point wtf is Rumsfeld bitching and crying about? Obama didn't say it was him but for some reason he got sand in his vagina.

mlyonsd
12-02-2009, 06:55 PM
"I will let Secretary Rumsfeld explain ... whether he thinks that the effort in Afghanistan was sufficiently resourced during his tenure as secretary of defense," he said.

Priceless.
The priceless part is watching your crazy leg attempt at avoiding a bold faced Obama lie.

orange
12-02-2009, 07:03 PM
Who was DS in 2008?

Do you believe the DS overrules the President?

I'll need a little more explanation for that.

orange
12-02-2009, 07:04 PM
The priceless part is watching your crazy leg attempt at avoiding a bold faced Obama lie.

Adm. Michael Mullen told a House committee Wednesday that Gen. David McKiernan, who led U.S. troops in Afghanistan between 2008 and this year, had asked for 20,000 troops for the effort but was rebuffed.

“We didn’t have them because they were pushed to Iraq,” the four-star admiral said during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in response to a question from Indiana Republican Rep. Mike Pence. “That was the priority of the president.”

mlyonsd
12-02-2009, 07:07 PM
Adm. Michael Mullen told a House committee Wednesday that Gen. David McKiernan, who led U.S. troops in Afghanistan between 2008 and this year, had asked for 20,000 troops for the effort but was rebuffed.

“We didn’t have them because they were pushed to Iraq,” the four-star admiral said during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in response to a question from Indiana Republican Rep. Mike Pence. “That was the priority of the president.”

In case you didn't notice Rumsfield is defending himself, not Bush.

Who was DS in 2008 again?

A. Gates

orange
12-02-2009, 07:11 PM
In case you didn't notice Rumsfield is defending himself, not Bush.

Who was DS in 2008 again?

A. Gates

And Gates could overrule the President's priorities based on what?

dirk digler
12-02-2009, 07:14 PM
In case you didn't notice Rumsfield is defending himself, not Bush.

Who was DS in 2008 again?

A. Gates

So why is Rumfield crying? Anyway Gates probably pushed the request up the ladder only to get rejected because of Iraq.

mlyonsd
12-02-2009, 07:22 PM
And Gates could overrule the President's priorities based on what?
Of course not.

Again, I'm not defending Bush here. I do laugh at Gibb's implicating Rumsfield in not paying attention to "Commanders in Afghanistan" though.

It's a great backhanded attempt deflecting an Obama lie.

dirk digler
12-02-2009, 07:25 PM
Of course not.

Again, I'm not defending Bush here. I do laugh at Gibb's implicating Rumsfield in not paying attention to "Commanders in Afghanistan" though.

It's a great backhanded attempt deflecting an Obama lie.

What's the lie? He never once stated anything about Rumsfeld and what he said was true about troop requests being denied. Adm Mike Mullen verified this so what is the lie again?

patteeu
12-15-2009, 04:09 AM
So why is Rumfield crying? Anyway Gates probably pushed the request up the ladder only to get rejected because of Iraq.

I bet he didn't.

patteeu
12-15-2009, 04:17 AM
What's the lie? He never once stated anything about Rumsfeld and what he said was true about troop requests being denied. Adm Mike Mullen verified this so what is the lie again?

Admiral Mullen didn't verify it. He said that Bush's priorities led to a situation where a single request was rejected (not repeated requests) and he didn't say whether the rejection came from the administration or from someone down the chain of command (e.g. the CENTCOM commander who was in charge of both Iraq and Afghanistan at the time). Requests for more troops are made all the time and they're rejected much of the time, but that doesn't mean that the current administration (whoever they may be) are the ones doing the rejecting.

If Mullen wanted to verify what Obama said in his speech, he could have been much more explicit. Mullen's answer was a political answer that didn't contradict what his current CiC said but it didn't confirm it either.

patteeu
12-15-2009, 04:35 AM
Besides, is Obama saying that it was a mistake to avoid a humiliating defeat in Iraq?

In his speech, he shamelessly attaches himself to the successes that his predecessor accomplished with the surge in Iraq despite his repeated efforts to prevent that success from happening.

Thanks to their courage, grit and perseverance , we have given Iraqis a chance to shape their future, and we are successfully leaving Iraq to its people.

And then he has the audacity to criticize the hard choices that our military commanders had to make wrt Afghanistan in order to carry out that surge (while blaming them on Bush for political reasons despite the fact that his own SecDef was running the shop at the time). The guy is shameless and we can only hope that his efforts in AfPak will be as sincere and successful as Bush's were in Iraq. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but I still think he's doing only what he needs to do for his own political benefit. The results in AfPak will tell us whether Obama is fit to walk in GWBush's shadow.

wild1
12-15-2009, 08:20 AM
In his speech, he shamelessly attaches himself to the successes that his predecessor accomplished with the surge in Iraq despite his repeated efforts to prevent that success from happening.



And then he has the audacity to criticize the hard choices that our military commanders had to make wrt Afghanistan in order to carry out that surge (while blaming them on Bush for political reasons despite the fact that his own SecDef was running the shop at the time). The guy is shameless and we can only hope that his efforts in AfPak will be as sincere and successful as Bush's were in Iraq. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but I still think he's doing only what he needs to do for his own political benefit. The results in AfPak will tell us whether Obama is fit to walk in GWBush's shadow.

Agree 100%