Don't you love hearing from neocons that are always wrong about the issues of war, but are given a huge platform to opine about them anyway? When it comes to Iraq, one of the biggest laughing stock's to come out of it was Donald Rumsfeld. He's got a new book out that's kinda like Bill Maher's New Rule segment called: Rumsfeld's Rules:
Rumsfeld new book is titled Rumsfeld’s Rules, and it promises you “leadership lessons in business, politics, war, and life.” It’s sort of like Game of Thronesmeets The Secret.In Rules, Rumsfeld offers numerous lessons to succeed in these various fields. But the No. 1 lesson I have gleaned from his book is: ignore your past and instead re-create yourself so you sound amazing. Rumsfeld has done just that by offering us rules to live by that paint him as a thoughtful, considerate person who is cross between Steve Jobs and Gandhi.
Rumsfeld as Gandhi? (cough, cough) Savannah discusses with him the Syrian problem and asks if he feels any sense of responsibility that was caused by his part in the Iraq debacle which is now being used as a major point against any action against Syria.
Savannah: Looming over this debate time and time again has been the specter of Iraq, most recently the UK parliament many members cited the failure of intelligence leading up to Iraq as the reason they won't take action now in Syria because they don't trust US intelligence. Do you personally take any responsibility for that or feel any responsibility for that?
Rumsfeld: Well I think the intelligence community turned out to be wrong, and the presentation made by Secretary of State Colin Powell proved out to be wrong. On the other hand you had a brutal dictator in Iraq who had used chemical weapons on his own people, used them against his neighbors rebuffed seventeen UN resolutions and President Bush went to the Congress, got the support of the congress, went to the UN, got the support of the UN and fashioned a very large coalition so it seems to me that all the appropriate steps were taken and the Congress, Democratic congress voted for regime change in Iraq.
This is a shockingly twisted reply. Rumsfeld completely dismisses the only pertinent fact that he mentioned. The intelligence was complete bullshit that was feed to the media, the American people, Congress and the UN so everything he said after that is horse dung. He sounds sociopathic as he answers Savannah's very good questions. Of course he feels no sense of guilt or shame over Iraq, sociopaths don't feel feelings the way normal people do!
Savannah then quotes one of Rumsfeld's insipid rules to him. "It is easier to get into something than get out of it." No shit, Sherlock, so why is he asking for the US to get into Syria? Oh, right, I forgot about those sociopathic tendencies.
Savannah: I know you're somebody who who thinks perhaps regime change is the thing to seek in Syria , does that rule apply here?
Rumsfeld: Well, it is true that it is easier to get into something than get out of it. There are also times that leadership requires you to act and it seems to me that in this instance, the instinct I have is to be supportive of the president and to wish him well if he decides to use force.
Nothing could go possibly go wrong relying on Rumsfeld's instincts? Answer the question, Rummy, for f*cks sake. He doesn't answer her question because if we were to start a war with Syria, it would take decades to sort that mess out and he knows it.
But like John McCain, he loves him some war.