President Bush announced Wednesday afternoon that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld will resign his post, to be replaced by former CIA Director Robert Gates ("Rumsfeld quitting as defense secretary"). Rumsfeld has faced ever-increasing calls for his resignation since the start of the War in Iraq. In the past week alone he presided over the deadliest month this year for U.S. troops in Iraq; was called to resign by the Army Times, Navy Times, and other military newspapers; and witnessed a Democratic takeover of the House and possibly the Senate. Many view the Democrats' success as a signal of Americans' loss of confidence in the Bush administration's Iraq War strategy. Bush firmly stated that Vice President Cheney will continue to serve the rest of his term, and assured the people of Iraq that America will continue to stand with them as they take the "difficult steps toward democracy and peace."
What does Bush's acceptance of Rumsfeld's resignation reveal about the results of yesterday's election? Is Bush answering calls for dramatic changes in strategy in Iraq? Would your vote have changed if this decision had been made before the election?
Be sure to check the latest news and commentary from Gather members through the election aftermath in our Election 2006 group. Join the group today to stay up-to-date on the debate from all political perspectives.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 14
no tears for rumsfeld here.
It's late, but, as they say, better late than never.
(I had to chuckle at this article. It would appear the Gather Glitch got it as this is a duplicate publishing because of added groups. So many of us get frustrated by that, and now it's happened to the Editoral Team too!)
An elephant cannot change directions like a dragonfly -- given how massive it is, therefore how much energy would be required, etc.
So, was there a lot less substance to this particular elephant than we thought -- or was way more energy applied?