Sec. Of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was so adept at bobbing and weaving to avoid responsibility on ABC’s This Week that Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria later said he made it sound as if his role in Iraq up to now is like that of a “potted plant.”
Indeed, listening to Rumsfeld, he had nothing to do with anything, ever. Unless it was good, and then it’s probably attributable to him and/or the Bush administration. If it was bad it’s because of Congress, impatient or disloyal Americans, and/or terrorists-insurgents. He’s only the secretary of defense, for crying out loud, what can he do?
Would he have still advocated invading had he known there were no weapons of mass distruction, Stephanopoulos asked. I didn’t advocate it, Rumsfeld answered, because the president never asked me. So was he not in favor of it? The president knew his feelings on the matter.
Did we have too few troops going in and do we still? That decision was always up to military leaders. So if they wanted more, as they have publicly stated, they could have them? A formal request from one of the three commanders of the Iraq war has never been formally turned down.
And on, and on. Rumsfeld played both sides of the net so exhaustively he was able to change the direction of the ball in midair, without it even touching the racket.
Rumsfeld just wants the questions to go away, even if it means making veiled threats, or as lapdog Jean Schmidt demonstrated, performing character assassination.
“We have to all have the willingness to have a free debate, but we also all have to have the willingness to understand what the effects of our words are,” he said.
He should know. The lies and distortions of the Bush administration have reaped horrific effects. Mere words can do that. And the unwillingness to debate first, then act with restraint and certainty later, is deadly.