ubertuber

You know, there was an interesting editorial in the NY Times yesterday saying that he definitely SHOULDN'T resign. One point the author made was that Rumsfeld's resignation at this point would encourage people to feel that action has been taken and blame assigned, which is not enough. Our anger should be flowing down the chain of command as well as up - individual officers have a responsibility to disobey and report illegal orders, which did not happen to a great enough extent here. The author also talked about how Rumsfeld has at times been the only person in a senior position in the administration sticking up for civil liberties and rights. Not the average person's impression of him to be sure. I'll try to find the editorial and put it in here.

I voted not sure yet, because I don't think I know enough facts yet to really say. This debacle has really shaken me up though - I think that the consequences from this will be larger and more severe than anyone is currently saying (both domestically and internationally), not to mention the fact that we must now admit that we have more than an image problem. Until there is some humility instead of righteous anger, we'll be walking down the same path. No matter whether there are hundreds of thousands of honorable soldiers, and no matter if foreign propagandists spin this event, we can't escape from the fact that some of our own are no better than those we accuse - and others of our own didn't have the courage to stick their necks out and put a stop to this behavior. That is a real problem, not just an image problem, and we owe it to ourselves to solve this one even though it will involve some pain.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam