4 ms·

Rumsfeld wasn't exactly known for being straightforward with reporters, and it's easy to get the impression that it's an evasive, nonsensical answer. It even w

by j_baker 16y ago

Rumsfeld wasn't exactly known for being straightforward with reporters, and it's easy to get the impression that it's an evasive, nonsensical answer. It even won an award for that! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3254852.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3254852.stm

stretchwithme 16y ago
I'll buy that. It makes sense that one who evades the facts of reality would evade questions as well. EDIT: Rumsfeld was in denial over what it took to do the job of invading Iraq. And he never caught on. The "surge" was simply sending enough manpower to do the job. Finally. Not to say it made any sense to invade Iraq to begin with.
- jordanb 16y ago
  It's worth observing that the surge was part of Condoleezza Rice's "clear, hold build" strategy. Rumsfeld was fired and she was brought in to implement it. I think that should help put Rumsfeld and criticism of him in a little bit of context. Yes, he was a Bush administration official heavily involved in the Iraq war and got a lot of criticism from that. But he was in rare company by being someone who was fired in disgrace from the Bush administration as things came apart under his watch. The only other guy I can think of offhand who is in that group is Micheal Brown.
  - stretchwithme 16y ago
    Rumsfeld was replaced by Robert Gates after the mid term election in 2006. Rice was secretary of state for the entire second term.
    - jordanb 16y ago
      Sorry, yes, you're correct, Rice remained Secretary of State. But Rumsefeld's firing was a repudiation of his "Light Footprint" strategy in favor of the "Clear, Hold, Build" strategy being championed by Rice. http://books.google.com/books?id=dhff3C6xhvkC&pg=PA271&lpg=PA271&dq=%22clear,+hold,+and+build%22+rice&source=bl&ots=Kawmdahcji&sig=ysKQQDz9IBvQ52y6NZt-wGDPgUY&hl=en&ei=_FExTPTFEYPcnAfFx_TXAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22clear%2C%20hold%2C%20and%20build%22%20rice&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=dhff3C6xhvkC&pg=PA271&#...
_delirium 16y ago
He might've gotten some negative rub-off from being in the Bush administration as well--- since Bush already had a reputation by that point for "Bushisms", people were sort of in the mindset to be looking for them.
- philwelch 16y ago
  Bushisms were malapropisms, often formed by mashing up half-misremembered cliches, like "Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me...can't get fooled again!". Rumsfeld's quote has a much different flavor, rather like a confusing professor--everything he says is very carefully and meticulously correct, meaningful, applicable, and insightful, but he's talking so far above the audience's collective head, and assuming a familiarity with the subject that the audience doesn't have, that no real communication is accomplished. If Rumsfeld were more talented at this, and viewed more favorably, it would have been brilliant to use a half-applicable generality like that to evade the question. But for that to work, people have to get what you're saying. An impromptu lecture on black swan events might have been the way out, but Rummy talked too abstractly for the audience to get it.

by j_baker 16y ago

stretchwithme 16y ago

I'll buy that. It makes sense that one who evades the facts of reality would evade questions as well. EDIT: Rumsfeld was in denial over what it took to do the job of invading Iraq. And he never caught on. The "surge" was simply sending enough manpower to do the job. Finally. Not to say it made any sense to invade Iraq to begin with.

jordanb 16y ago
It's worth observing that the surge was part of Condoleezza Rice's "clear, hold build" strategy. Rumsfeld was fired and she was brought in to implement it. I think that should help put Rumsfeld and criticism of him in a little bit of context. Yes, he was a Bush administration official heavily involved in the Iraq war and got a lot of criticism from that. But he was in rare company by being someone who was fired in disgrace from the Bush administration as things came apart under his watch. The only other guy I can think of offhand who is in that group is Micheal Brown.
- stretchwithme 16y ago
  Rumsfeld was replaced by Robert Gates after the mid term election in 2006. Rice was secretary of state for the entire second term.
  - jordanb 16y ago
    Sorry, yes, you're correct, Rice remained Secretary of State. But Rumsefeld's firing was a repudiation of his "Light Footprint" strategy in favor of the "Clear, Hold, Build" strategy being championed by Rice. http://books.google.com/books?id=dhff3C6xhvkC&pg=PA271&lpg=PA271&dq=%22clear,+hold,+and+build%22+rice&source=bl&ots=Kawmdahcji&sig=ysKQQDz9IBvQ52y6NZt-wGDPgUY&hl=en&ei=_FExTPTFEYPcnAfFx_TXAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22clear%2C%20hold%2C%20and%20build%22%20rice&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=dhff3C6xhvkC&pg=PA271&#...

_delirium 16y ago

He might've gotten some negative rub-off from being in the Bush administration as well--- since Bush already had a reputation by that point for "Bushisms", people were sort of in the mindset to be looking for them.

philwelch 16y ago
Bushisms were malapropisms, often formed by mashing up half-misremembered cliches, like "Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me...can't get fooled again!". Rumsfeld's quote has a much different flavor, rather like a confusing professor--everything he says is very carefully and meticulously correct, meaningful, applicable, and insightful, but he's talking so far above the audience's collective head, and assuming a familiarity with the subject that the audience doesn't have, that no real communication is accomplished. If Rumsfeld were more talented at this, and viewed more favorably, it would have been brilliant to use a half-applicable generality like that to evade the question. But for that to work, people have to get what you're saying. An impromptu lecture on black swan events might have been the way out, but Rummy talked too abstractly for the audience to get it.