By RJ Schinner, 9/6/06
ABSOLUTELY! In case the torture at
Abu Ghraib he presided over, the numerous war crimes committed in Iraq by the
US military, and the threats of war on Iran have not made that abundantly
clear, then Rumsfeld’s outrageous remarks at the American Legion rally last
week in which he compared those who oppose the Bush regime’s unjust wars to
appeasers of the Nazis certainly does.
Rumsfeld and the whole clique in power he is part of should be driven
out and tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
In the midst of the controversy around Rumsfeld’s perverse historical
analogy, Democrats and even some Republicans in Congress have called for a vote
on a resolution demanding Rumsfeld’s resignation. As the Bush regime faces real problems
persecuting its unjust war on Iraq,
real differences are opening up in the halls of power over how to win the
“war on terror”, and Rumsfeld had become the target of criticism for
blunders. Moreover, when there is so
much widespread outrage and anger at the Secretary of Defense, especially after
his remarks last week (who exactly is Rumsfeld
to be talking about fascism?), those
in positions of power cannot simply ignore it.
But let’s take a closer look at the resolution for Rumsfeld to resign. First off, IT’S NON-BINDING. It will simply be a way for the Democrats to
make some noise and get you thinking they’re taking care of the problem, but it
will not actually affect anything. The
White House has already made clear they’ll simply ignore the resolution, with spokesman
Tony Snow saying that Rumsfeld’s resignation is “not going to
happen,” and that “the president strongly supports the defense
secretary”.
Second, the terms on which the Democrats are criticizing Rumsfeld are not
about bringing to a halt the unjust wars, torture, and the drive for empire,
but instead center on the notion that Rumsfeld isn’t doing well at
administering all this. As Senator Chuck
Schumer put it, “the reason [to call for Rumsfeld’s resignation] is not
that we shouldn’t fight a strong war on terror, but Rumsfeld’s not doing a very
good job of it.” This is quite
literally like coming upon the scene of a murder and saying “I could have
done that better.”
Third, what’s being calculated by
Democrats and Republicans in their calls for Rumsfeld to resign is not the
Iraqi lives being obliterated and tortured, but how to garner votes in the 2006
elections. Just look at what Howard
Wolfson, a Democratic consultant who is advising Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
as well as Democrats in two upstate New
York districts has to say: “It’s a great
issue. It forces the stay-the-course
Republicans to choose between the president and their districts.” Meanwhile, Rich Galen, a Republican
consultant who worked as a civilian employee for the Defense Department in Iraq, said:
“It’s really a free shot for Republicans. You can be in favor of what we
are trying to accomplish in Iraq
and not be in favor of Rumsfeld.”
There is a crying need to force
Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush regime out of office and to put a stop to
their whole program. But let’s be
real. Much as the Democrats might say
some things to get you thinking they’re going to do this (“if only we had
a majority in Congress”), they’re not.
They voted to make the Patriot Act permanent. Any “opposition” to the occupation
of Iraq
always ends in “but we can’t pull out now”. They’re acting as cheerleaders for a new war
on Iran. And speaking of Rumsfeld’s crimes, what are
the Democrats saying about torture? (Click here to listen.)
The stakes are way too high to
allow yourself to get duped again into thinking “oh the Democrats are
really standing up for us now” (as you have been with the Alito and
Roberts nominations, the NSA spying, the Libby indictments, impeachment,”I
could go on, but you get the idea). The
recent speeches by Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney have all made clear that this
regime intends to not only “stay the course”, but force the whole
Middle East into submission and consolidate fascistic measures inside the US in
the name of “keeping us safe”.
At this point, to put your efforts and resources into anything other
than a movement to drive out the Bush regime that doesn’t take its marching
orders from the Democratic Party is only asking for disaster.
(Sources: “Democrats plan a vote on Rumsfeld”, The
Washington
Times, 9/4/06; “Democrats see support for anti-Rumsfeld vote”,
Reuters, 9/3/06; “Candidates of Both Parties Turn Criticism of Rumsfeld
Into Political Chorus”, NY Times, 9/5/06)