Dumb and Dumber

SecDef Donald Rumsfeld has achieved such levels of obfuscation ("unknown unknowns", etc.) that most people seem to be just worn out. If he says something that doesn't make any sense folks just shrug and move along.

Which may explain how he got away with a remark to the Senate Appropriations Committee yesterday.

"Pressed" by Senator Byrd on Administration plans for dealing with a civil war in Iraq, Rumsfeld said, and I'm not kidding:

"The plan is to prevent a civil war, and to the extent one were to occur, to have the _ from a security standpoint _ have the Iraqi security forces deal with it, to the extent they are able to," Rumsfeld told the committee.

The "Iraqi security forces", of course, will BE the civil war, if there is one. Which "side" of the civil war does Rumsfeld expect the security forces to be on ? The nonexistant government's ? Does he expect Shia, Sunni and Kurd forces to each turn on their own populations to subdue them ? Excuse me, I'm hyperventilating.

Didn't anybody notice ? Didn't any of the august senators take a moment to skewer Rumsfeld with this monumentally stupid observation. Oh, yeah. I almost forgot Dumber.

Sen. Ted Kennedy D(umber)-Mass wasn't going to let him get away with it. After the hearing (and presumably after having had time to think about it, more's the pity), Ted issued a statement.

"Obviously, it's not realistic to depend on the Iraqi security forces, which are not yet able to fight on their own."

Put another way, Ted said "I'll see Rumsfeld's stupid and raise him 'brain damaged' ". Oh, they'll fight on their own alright, Ted. Ted is , of course, concerned that our forces will be "deeply involved" if the Iraqi security forces don't handle it. He wants a plan to avoid having an occupying army involved in a three way civil war in the country its occupying.

He doesn't need Rumsfeld, he needs Disney and a long stay in Fantasyland.

Stay alert and

Stay Naked
jd