This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Published: Friday April 27, 2007 Germany's federal prosecutor announced she will not be proceeding with an investigation against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA Director George Tenet, and other high-ranking U.S. officials for torture and other war crimes committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantánamo, according to a press release obtained by RAW STORY.
Article needs to be updated, but I don't have the skill. I'm putting above references in to alert those more skilled than me.-- Raymm 01:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The whole thing was absurd in the first place. German courts have no jurisdiction over American foreign policy.
128.138.173.224 01:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
they do though, as they have started an investigation and will bring their claims to the international criminal court where his trial will be taken under consideration, American policy or not
Markthemac
07:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Torture is forbidden by international law, which means that every country, where Rumsfeld is traveling to, is obligated to investigate this case and possibly arrest him. See Pinochets arrest in the UK -- Raphael1 18:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Clicking on "Wolfgang Kaleck" (the human rights lawyer who brought this case) on other pages, or typing his name into the search function on Wiki, brings you rather eerily to "Donald Rumsfeld"'s page. Unfortunately I can't work out how to change it, but perhaps someone cleverer than I could? Thanks. Ciggywink 20:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
The article currently reads:
Since he held the position as recently as 2006, shouldn't we say that he was 74 years as the oldest position-holder? If no one objects, I intend to change this. Dylan 07:11, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
That Rumsfeld lives at the plantation Mount Misery loses context since it was edited. Earlier versions should be restored. Robert B. Livingston 21:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Can we include the London Guardian's reference of Donald Rumsfeld's involvement in the sale of nulcear reactors to North Korea in 2000, just two years before the Bush Administration's declaration of North Korea as part of the Axis of Evil. http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,952289,00.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lakeshorebaby ( talk • contribs) 17:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
I would say this opening description of 'politician and businessman' is incomplete. He was also a White House Cabinet member (Cabinet members are not considered to be politicians, but rather Civil Service Presidential advisors in charge of Departments of the Government--so the word politician doesn't go far enough). He also had a long career as a Navy fighter pilot and served as well in different roles as a non-Cabinet Senior White House advisor. Also he is no longer any of those professions but is now retired so the article should say "was".
The sidebar seems to hit most of these points but they should also be in the opening sentence to the article.
I would suggest instead "...was the (numbers) Secretary of Defense, a senior White House advisor, a politician, the CEO of _________ and a Navy Fighter pilot for 20 years (get exact number of years). The details of course need to be filled in. Even those who have been critical of him on Iraq him have to concede that he had an incredible career, any one of these roles is quite an accomplishment. Give credit where credit is due.
Phil
Sean7phil 04:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
67.42.243.184 04:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
On September 10, 2001 declared war on the Pentagon bureaucracy. "The adversary is closer to home, it's the Pentagon bureaucracy." he said in the same speech that he cannot account for up to $2.3 Trillion that has been spent by the military. To see the video click here http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4437883523511945930&q=Rumsfeld+loses+trillion
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.220.70.217 ( talk) 01:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC).
The article's tag read Donald Rumsfled is a fucktag so I deleted the line. I hope this was the right thing to go.
Mikomax 14:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Here is an orphaned PD-USGov image of Rumsfeld: Image:Rummy.jpg. -- Strangerer ( Talk) 21:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I see a birth place of Evanston in the infobox, and Chicago in the article. Which is correct?-- Kranar drogin 02:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Michael Savage said yesterday on his radio program tht Donald Rumsfeld still has an office in the Pentagon. Can anyone confirm or deny this? 75.44.20.8 20:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Any good reason Rumsfeld's attempted rescue actions after the Pentagon was struck were left out of this article's section on "September 11"? I would like to include a sentence or two on his hurried response to the accident scene. 24.62.25.90 04:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Is Donald Rumsfeld Jewish? I ask because it doesn't say so in the article (a sure sign that he isn't) but I was under the impression, don't know why, that he is. Jewish ancestry? I am sure you can have the name Rumsfeld and not be Jewish but I was concerned it could have just been passed over.
In case anyone is wondering why it matters I am of the impression that ethnicity or religious persuasions are/or can be important factors. Maybe I am off, as an Australian I don't really understand the U.S. political ways.
Any how, i suppose it is just a simple YES/NO sort of thing. Is Rumsfeld Jewish?
In first section of the BBC Profile: Donald Rumsfeld calls him the the most controversial defence secretary in US history [2]. IMHO that's enough to call him controversial in the lead section. -- Raphael1 23:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
By WHOM is Rumsfeld considered most controversial? Not by me. Perhaps by left-leaning wikieditor? Statements like this are a sneaky way for the author to insert his opinion (by ascribing it to others or to a consensus.) Realize that there are a lot of us Red Staters out here. Bush got elected in 2004 by us. Not everyone reads DKOS and listens to NPR. Or watches the Daily Show. TCO 00:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Can someone add a section detailing Rumsfeld's efforts to get Aspartame approved under the Reagan administration, and his economic links to the G.D. Searle Company - I'm at work right now and can't - I'll probably do some research later and add to it.
Chris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.195.227.146 ( talk) 15:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I hadn't seen the article under his career. Maybe it should have an additional heading. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.195.227.146 ( talk) 16:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
81.85.255.75 ( talk) 07:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)--JB--
Please remove the following comment from the Donald Rumsfeld page.
"HES A DUMB ASS FUCKER FUCK HIS KIDS."
It degrades the effectiveness of Wikipedia.
171.64.131.101 19:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to see the source (and read the article myself). I recently heard on local news radio that he was *offered* a post, but that there was a petition circulating among students and faculty protesting that appointment. Can anyone with better information footnote this, please? Rousse 22:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
i didn't see any mention of his involvement with the Bilderberg Group, i believe it speaks volumes about his power and influence. anyway, just a thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.63.252.99 ( talk) 15:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Rumsfeld's "snowflakes" (memos) should be discussed in the article. Washington post article. Badagnani 06:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
A. It's a facade: what it really means is...I, the writer, think this. B. The "some" is not specified. C. It's not noteworthy. D. We could also find "some" with an opposite view. E. The "some" are always DKOSacks who don't like Bush or Rumsfeld or what have you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the addition of "Rummy" to the introduction and infobox as it is not a common name for Rumsfeld, even if it is used by some. Think of it this way, we don't add Dubya to George W. Bush's name or Bubba to Bill Clinton's, but we add Bill to Clinton's (in addition to William) and Al to Al Gore's (in addition to Albert). A common name is quite different than a nickname. - auburnpilot talk 15:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Asked at WT:MOSBIO#Lead names. MilesAgain ( talk) 19:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I deleted a whole bunch of stuff recently. The reason has nothing to do with politics, beliefs, agendas or any of that. The reason was simple. After dealing in "big facts" for quite a while, the entry suddenly gets bogged down in minutia and "small facts." The information presented (each and every lawsuit, for example) is not significant in the grand scheme of things. Being aware that Rumsfeld is controvercial, I deleted it because all of this material is negative, apparently the work of folks bent on presenting a case against the man with factually accurate, yet relatively insiginficant detail compared to the rest of the entry. I'm sure there are lots of facts that can be listed here, such as his grade in algebra, the first girl he kissed, how many Cubs games he attended as a kid, etc., but a line needs to be drawn when editing (I am a professional editor). In this case, there are so many "big facts", the dispropotionate attention to "smaller facts" cheapens the overall flow. If others disagree, that's fine and that's what this site is for, I guess. But I think it reads better without the overload of detail about relatively insignificant facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.96.247 ( talk) 15:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Any objections to removing this in its entirety? McGovern is a crank and a 9/11 truther to boot, he has squandered any credibility he once had when he went down thermite Ave. CENSEI ( talk) 00:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Self-published books, zines, websites, and blogs should never be used as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article (see below). "Self-published blogs" in this context refers to personal and group blogs. Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control. Where a news organization publishes the opinions of a professional but claims no responsibility for the opinions, the writer of the cited piece should be attributed (e.g., "Jane Smith has suggested..."). Posts left by readers may never be used as sources.[4]
Parry is self published, and as such the use of material from his site, Consortium News is in violation of BLP. CENSEI ( talk) 01:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad the pov tag was added to this page. I haven't been paying attention lately but I see a number of things have been systematically whitewashed from this page; it is no wonder that certain editors have put the microscope on minor issues like the Ray McGovern incident or the lawsuits. Most of the information about the "generals' revolt" -- an unprecedented fact in US history -- has been already deleted, as well as the material about the " pentagon pundits," not to mention the claims of those like McCain that Rumsfeld " will go down in history as one of the worst secretaries of defense in history." Obviously the page should be about the man's entire career, not its worst incidents, and I am sympathetic to those who believe that the section on McGovern is too long, but I sense a preference that such things be deleted entirely. The POV tag should stay up until these facts are (re)entered into the article. csloat ( talk) 06:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I just came across this page. I don't like Rumsfeld at all but I think the current section on his career is terrible and contains a bunch of random irrelevant negative tidbits. The writing is terrible and un-encyclopedic -- it should describe the major controversies, and not just consist of a bunch of random quotes! If you don't already know what happened, there's no way you'll figure out what the problems with Rumsfeld were, and why he eventually had to resign:
Why don't we just say these things? I'm sure some pro-Bush editors will disagree with my assessment but at least the above points should serve as the basis for the section on his career.
I've deleted all the following as either irrelevant or incomprehensible:
Benwing ( talk) 07:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I've come to the conclusion that a major reason I'm so dissatisfied with this article is that, frankly, the section on Rumsfeld's second term as SecDef is a mess. There is no clear chronological or conceptual organization; it ends up being a laundry list without coherence. I wish to propose a reorganization of existing information, but there is a lot of material to cover, so I'm soliciting help and suggestions in fleshing it out. I tentatively suggest a grouping by type of topic, with events detailed in approximate chronological order inside each topic. The topics would be
We would handle criticism of the various wars inside appropriate subsubsections pertaining to the individual wars. Miscellaneous topics would address things like the State-Defense turf wars, the Tamiflu section and other accusations of conflict of interest (insofar as we consider them to be relevant -- but that's another discussion) , his role in media relations, his cultural image, etc. Thoughts? RayAYang ( talk) 06:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Come on CENSEI, try to work with your fellow editors towards compromise rather than making this some kind of war. On McGovern the version I edited after Ray's editing kept things short and to the point, left most of the comments to Rumsfeld, and kept in the directly quoted material I felt was important. The version you reverted to was sterile and empty of content. As for the general's war, the "unprecedented" is a well sourced and important fact; why would you delete that? Ray is proposing some major improvements to the organization and content of this page but we're not going to get anywhere on those if we edit war on minor points. Even though we disagree this article will be better off if we work together on it. csloat ( talk) 15:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Am I being particularly dense? I went through the notes in that section looking for that quote ... there is a Congressional record for aspartame on that date, but I can't find the corresponding quotes. There actually is testimony by Dr. Goss on that point, but the precise phrases "beyond a shadow of a doubt," "the FDA has violated the Delaney Amendment," "who is left to protect the health of the public" appear nowhere in the testimony. He has certainly made remarks towards that point; however, the quotes used only appear, as far as I can see, on an advocacy website (I suspect the website of "spicing" up the relatively technical Congressional testimony). I can have Lexis email the record I pulled for that date to those who are interested.
Also, I fail to see how the quote adds meaningfully to Rumsfeld's bio; the appropriate place for its insertion is our article on the Aspartame controversy, which is linked from the paragraph. It seems a matter of deliberately inserting material to promote a particular point of view, attributed or not, and its placing here violates principles of neutrality, as it leaves us with unbalanced coverage of the aspartame controversy in the Rumsfeld article. RayAYang ( talk) 11:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I have added a sentence and reference indicating that a UN representative (the special representative on torture at the UN Commission on Human Rights) has called for this man's prosecution. This just a factual statement. -- Fremte ( talk) 20:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I want to know what happened to the original text with regards to Stephen Cambon's 9/11 notes. Before anything I would like to hear a valid explanation for the removal of the well formulated sentences which stood in "Run up to Iraq" heading for a very, very long time. We had vigorous discussion about it couple of years ago, the consensus for inclusion was reached and I hate to stumble upon same issue which already fueled a lot of debate because it shows our, somewhat ridiculous love for entropy. So before we go on another ride, I'd like to see who and why removed a whole section leaving dubious sentence while violating long time reached consensus. Thanks. DawnisuponUS ( talk) 12:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
To readers just dropping in: here is the text of the passage in question. Ray Talk 22:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Approximately five hours after the attack on the World Trade Center, Rumsfeld told aides he wanted the; "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time. Not only UBL [Usama bin Laden]." He instructed general Richard Myers to; "Go massive (…) Sweep it all up. Things related and not." DoD staffer Stephen Cambone who took the notes ended them with sentence "Hard to get a good case." [12] [13]
I'm moving the section on lawsuits here. They don't seem to be going anywhere, and they don't have any lasting historical significance to Rumsfeld's life. WP:NOTNEWS and all of that. As it is, the descriptions of personal lawsuits only exist to repeat charges against Rumsfeld which no court has found even remotely worthy of consideration. The lawsuits against him in his official capacity are sufficiently irrelevant to his life that they shouldn't be included at all. If one of these actually goes somewhere with impact on his career, the information archived below may become meaningful. Ray Talk 19:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
For example, "Politician" should come before "Businessman". The most significant role should come first, not last.
Otherwise you would have Wikipedia articles like "Barak Obama: Lawyer, Neighborhood Activist and U.S. President". That would be ridiculous.
I also don't know why "Secretary of Defense" isn't in the first career descriptions.
Hopefully this is not a case of people with political agendas manipulating the article.
69.171.160.86 ( talk) 01:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
I changed link "[non-]state terror"-->"State terror" because as it was, the link really went 180• off target. I changed the link to "non-state terror"-->"History of terrorism" because the History of Terrorism page describes many, many non-state terrorist organisations and gives an excellent counter-example in the French "Reign of Terror." I didn't point the link to the "Non-state terror" page because there isn't one and because creating one is currently a bit beyond my scope at the moment.
I didn't sig the original edit because I forgot to log in. oops. Fred ( talk) 17:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
{{hidden|Lawsuits|
I think some of the images can be used under fair use?
Here is one image:
-- Timeshifter ( talk) 03:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
The article states "and also defended him in his controversial decider remark." but I can't find anything about such remark in the article. Did I miss it? or maybe info should be added? Thanks. Airproofing ( talk) 18:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
This isn't really a full blown media mention, but a new book by a former Bush speechwriter apparently claims that "Donald Rumsfeld had to be talked out of editing his own entry on Wikipedia, which he referred to as "Wika-wakka."" Joshdboz ( talk) 15:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Do we really need a section for one sentence, do we? InnerParty ( talk) 16:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I disagree with InnerParty, and support Unomi's work, which is of value and properly sourced. Will revert it myself manually. Jusda fax 21:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Now that we've got some activity again, I went and took a look at Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, which surprised me with the fact that WMD were found in Iraq, albeit presumably not at the scale or quantities claimed in the leadup to the invasion. Thus, I've removed that sentence - anybody who wants to take a stab at summarizing a decently complicated subject, feel free -- I just didn't feel comfortable with a factually wrong statement on the page. In general, I think we should strive for a good, narrative treatment of Rumsfeld's role in the leadup to the Iraq war, instead of regurgitating 6-year old bits of news reporting. If anybody's willing to dive through one or two of the Rumsfeld biographies that have been written of late, that would be very welcome. Ray Talk 00:20, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't have time to go through the full article right now, but just at a glance, the summary that opens the page seems to be HEAVILY biased against Rumsfeld. "Rumsfeld is one of the key people responsible for the misguided direction the United States took when experimenting with torture"? "This is his most infamous legacy."? Both statements are anything but neutral in tone. NathanDahlin ( talk) 07:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Along those lines, there is no controversy section which makes the whole article read like a fluff piece. Good job WIKI!! you're such a bad joke. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.78.183.102 (
talk)
12:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Donald Rumsfled,George W.Bush and Dick Cheney had involvement in 911.Dick Cheney had the responsibility of the pentagon & flight 93.George W.Bush had operation of the world trade center and Donald Rumsfled planned 9/11.Rumslfed made sure the two planes went into the world trade center.There has been evidence that Bush,Cheney and Rumsfled where involved in the September 11,2001 terrorist attacks.A U.S. House Representative & U.S. Senate is trying to find a prosecutor to prosecute Bush,Cheney and Rumsfled for murder on 9/11.George H.W. Bush helped bush jr with the 9/11 terrorist attacks.Bush,Cheney and Rumsfled could face charges of treason,murder and could face a life sentence or the death penalty.Bush could face prosecution for the Iraq war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.25.186.198 ( talk) 19:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Q.: I had heard that on or soon after 9/11, Rumsfeld announced a de facto continental military perimeter. I don't see that mentioned on his page. Any info? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.178.183.222 ( talk) 00:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
in the "Nixon Administration section, Rumsfeld is described as "a member of the President's Cabinet (1969–1970)" and then again as a "member of the President's Cabinet (1971–1972)." But the info panel doesn't describe any cabinet level positions until he became Secretary of Defense in 1975. The positions he held were United States Office of Economic Opportunity (1969-1970) and Director of the Economic Stabilization Program (1971-1972). Are these generally considered cabinet-level positions? — MiguelMunoz ( talk) 03:58, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Something should certainly be said about the status of various arrest warrants Rumsfeld has internationally. He is considered an internationally fugitive by many nations. Germany: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,473987,00.html France: http://www.alternet.org/story/66425/ Spain: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_03/017494.php The ICC http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/12663-international-criminal-court-complaint-filed-against-bush-cheney-rumsfeld-tenet-rice-and-gonzales-international-arrest-warrants-requested.html ECT. This needs to go in, it is a very notable part of his life 97.91.187.161 ( talk) 17:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"Statesman" is an overly glowing term, this is just peacock lanugage. I would suggest "public servant" or simply give his former titles. Hairhorn ( talk) 04:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I cannot fathom that anyone would apply wikipedia's own definition of statesman to Sec. Rumsfeld: "Statesmanship also conveys a quality of leadership that organically brings people together..., a spirit of caring for others and for the whole." Rumsfeld was intentionally divisive in his policies and language. He ranked very low in public approval, and still does. This is not the hallmark of a statesman. -- Cjs56 ( talk) 21:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I replaced a word laden with value judgment (statesman) and replaced it with a neutral one (politician). In all but the most indisputable cases, wikipedia should probably avoid value laden terms like statesman, in favor of more neutral terms. In addition, I think that politician is a far more descriptive term than statesman, as Rumsfeld was certainly not a statesman while serving in Congress as a young man, and could not have possibly been a statesman until the last few years of his life, while he was most certainly and unarguably a politician. Cjs56 ( talk) 05:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Check out the Financial Times of February 11, 2011, for Gideon Rachman's Lunch with the FT: Donald Rumsfeld. Asteriks ( talk) 02:49, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Please see: Known and Unknown: A Memoir, it should be linked from this page. Sugar-Baby-Love ( talk) 02:59, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
The rumsfeld surname is actually scottish so rumsfeld is scottish on his father's side. The link that says he has german ancestors no longer gives that information and may have never had that information so it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.102.153.66 ( talk) 15:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
In the overview tab below the lead image, there is a US-O6 Colonel insignia (Eagle) to the left of the rank, Captain. I'm not exceptionally knowledgeable of military ranks and insignias, but the description for the US-O6 insignia succinctly states that it is for Army, Air Force, and Marines—excluding the US Navy. So considering that, along with Rumsfeld's retiring rank as captain, am I right in saying this needs fixed? If not, pardon my misunderstanding. I also do not have access to edit this article to do it myself.-- Lennybird ( talk) 18:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On sept 10th 2001, It should be noted that he announced the pentagon lost/missplaced 2.7 Trillion dollars. Not million, not even billion, but TRILLION?!? Hmmmm I wonder where the corresponding finacial information was stored... Quelle suprise, in the same spot the pentagon was hit. Makes ya wonder... And I'm not a conspiracy nut (Jesse Ventura hahahhahaha so crazy) Sources- Gov/millitary websites 24.69.85.54 ( talk) 11:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
It's actually 2.3 trillion not 2.7 trillion and it's not lost, it's "untracked". The biggest single robbery I know of. Just Google "2.3 trillion" - it's all fucking there, including videos of him saying it himself.
Did his literary agent have much to do with this blarney?
"His tenure has been noted to be one of the most pivotal in recent history; as one of the key individuals responsible for the restructuring of the military in the new 21st century, Rumsfeld was crucial in planning the United States' response to the September 11, 2001 attacks, which included two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Highly popular with the media for his outspokenness and candor,"
He is one of the most hated figures of the modern era, despised for his wholesale incompetence and his appalling mixture of arrogance, bullying, and cluelessness. By hanging on to him, Bush lost the Senate to Democrats in 2006. I'm sure he was wildly popular on the Republican-controlled Fox network, otherwise, this is disinformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mare Nostrum ( talk • contribs) 12:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Donald Rumsfeld great-grandfather Johann Heinrich Rumsfeld emmigrated from Weyhe in Lower Saxony (Germany) to the USA in 1876. Donald Rumsfeld's father George Donald Rumsfeld was the grand child of Johann Heinrich Rumsfeld. Henry Rumsfeld (Henry is the english form of Heinrich), the son of Johann Heinrich Rumsfeld, is the father of George Donald Rumsfeld.
Donald Rumsfeld visited Weyhe at November 16th 1976.
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The link to a current version of 'Rumsfeld's Rules' in the 'Works' section of 'External links'is broken. A current version is available at www.rumsfeldsrules.com. Please update accordingly. Matt9311 ( talk) 00:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
No mention is made of the editorial published by the Military Times Media Group which played a substantial role in Rumsfeld's resignation / removal. If this extraordinary event can't be fully covered by Wikipedia while he's alive, due to the rules on biographies of living persons, it should at least be noted as a unique event in United States history.
Ref: "Time for Rumsfeld to go." 11/3/2006. Army Times; Air Force Times; Navy Times; Marine Corps Times. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15552388/. Accessed: 2013-07-25. (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6INvORWn0) alternately, http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fid%2F15552388%2F&date=2013-07-25 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janeqpublique ( talk • contribs) 21:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
undid the removal of war crimes controversy by User:Fat&Happy as wikipedia is international, and NPOV. it might be better to discuss this here before removing controversial text as "unsourced" from an article bearing "promotes the subject in a subjective manner". -- ThurnerRupert ( talk) 11:31, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Friends, we do not write thinly sourced, bad things about living people, such as stating or implying that they are war criminals. See WP:BLP. Please discuss sources and hash out what, if anything, has been reported in reliable sources. Once there is a good consensus, editing on this topic might resume. Anybody who restores a thinly sourced war crime allegation may be blocked without further warning. Jehochman Talk 03:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
This is one of the funniest interviews ever aired with a man of Rumsfeld's stature. I think it's deserving of an External link, but I think I tried it earlier, and it got reverted as vandalism, which it was not meant to be. Please do check, it's very much worth listening: [14] LizardHunter ( talk) 21:19, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
References
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 09:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
This talk page is a mess with all this "correcting" and formatting. Clean it up somehow. Its ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.112.68 ( talk) 06:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Donald Rumsfeld has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could the hatnote please be moved above {{ recently died}} per MOS:ORDER? Thanks, 142.161.113.242 ( talk) 19:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm interested in improving wikipedia navigation around Rumsfeld-related topics. To this end, I have started a potential template for related articles at Draft:Template:Donald Rumsfeld. I am interested in hearing from others how this template might be improved, if it is even necessary at all, if it should take the form of a "series"-type navbox or a "see also"-type navbox, which other articles might be included, if there should also be a Category:Donald Rumsfeld, etc. Please feel free to make edits to the draft, share thoughts here, or go to the draft talkpage. - - mathmitch7 ( talk/ contribs) 20:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Donald Rumsfeld has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change "A day after Rumsfeld announced that the Department of Defense could not account for about $2.3 trillion worth of transactions,[61] al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked commercial airliners and crashed them in coordinated strikes into both towers of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan, New York City, and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C." to "On September 11th, al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked commercial airliners and crashed them in coordinated strikes into both towers of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan, New York City, and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C."
The source given for the statement about the transactions not being accounted for is unreliable and is misrepresenting a speech that Donald Rumsfeld gave chastising the accounting standards for certain aspects of the pentagon. Including that clause to the sentence about 9/11 serves to further false conspiracy theories. 192.91.171.34 ( talk) 16:18, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm wondering why the blue link in the caption below the first pic next to this section says "Andrews Air Forces base", instead of Andrews Air Force base. Editrite! ( talk) 03:08, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:23, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
interesting how there's not one mention of the fact that this man is a war criminal and presided over torture and the extrajudicial killing of non-combatants L33tSpeak ( talk) 02:11, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Published: Friday April 27, 2007 Germany's federal prosecutor announced she will not be proceeding with an investigation against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA Director George Tenet, and other high-ranking U.S. officials for torture and other war crimes committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantánamo, according to a press release obtained by RAW STORY.
Article needs to be updated, but I don't have the skill. I'm putting above references in to alert those more skilled than me.-- Raymm 01:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The whole thing was absurd in the first place. German courts have no jurisdiction over American foreign policy.
128.138.173.224 01:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
they do though, as they have started an investigation and will bring their claims to the international criminal court where his trial will be taken under consideration, American policy or not
Markthemac
07:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Torture is forbidden by international law, which means that every country, where Rumsfeld is traveling to, is obligated to investigate this case and possibly arrest him. See Pinochets arrest in the UK -- Raphael1 18:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Clicking on "Wolfgang Kaleck" (the human rights lawyer who brought this case) on other pages, or typing his name into the search function on Wiki, brings you rather eerily to "Donald Rumsfeld"'s page. Unfortunately I can't work out how to change it, but perhaps someone cleverer than I could? Thanks. Ciggywink 20:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
The article currently reads:
Since he held the position as recently as 2006, shouldn't we say that he was 74 years as the oldest position-holder? If no one objects, I intend to change this. Dylan 07:11, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
That Rumsfeld lives at the plantation Mount Misery loses context since it was edited. Earlier versions should be restored. Robert B. Livingston 21:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Can we include the London Guardian's reference of Donald Rumsfeld's involvement in the sale of nulcear reactors to North Korea in 2000, just two years before the Bush Administration's declaration of North Korea as part of the Axis of Evil. http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,952289,00.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lakeshorebaby ( talk • contribs) 17:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
I would say this opening description of 'politician and businessman' is incomplete. He was also a White House Cabinet member (Cabinet members are not considered to be politicians, but rather Civil Service Presidential advisors in charge of Departments of the Government--so the word politician doesn't go far enough). He also had a long career as a Navy fighter pilot and served as well in different roles as a non-Cabinet Senior White House advisor. Also he is no longer any of those professions but is now retired so the article should say "was".
The sidebar seems to hit most of these points but they should also be in the opening sentence to the article.
I would suggest instead "...was the (numbers) Secretary of Defense, a senior White House advisor, a politician, the CEO of _________ and a Navy Fighter pilot for 20 years (get exact number of years). The details of course need to be filled in. Even those who have been critical of him on Iraq him have to concede that he had an incredible career, any one of these roles is quite an accomplishment. Give credit where credit is due.
Phil
Sean7phil 04:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
67.42.243.184 04:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
On September 10, 2001 declared war on the Pentagon bureaucracy. "The adversary is closer to home, it's the Pentagon bureaucracy." he said in the same speech that he cannot account for up to $2.3 Trillion that has been spent by the military. To see the video click here http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4437883523511945930&q=Rumsfeld+loses+trillion
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.220.70.217 ( talk) 01:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC).
The article's tag read Donald Rumsfled is a fucktag so I deleted the line. I hope this was the right thing to go.
Mikomax 14:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Here is an orphaned PD-USGov image of Rumsfeld: Image:Rummy.jpg. -- Strangerer ( Talk) 21:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I see a birth place of Evanston in the infobox, and Chicago in the article. Which is correct?-- Kranar drogin 02:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Michael Savage said yesterday on his radio program tht Donald Rumsfeld still has an office in the Pentagon. Can anyone confirm or deny this? 75.44.20.8 20:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Any good reason Rumsfeld's attempted rescue actions after the Pentagon was struck were left out of this article's section on "September 11"? I would like to include a sentence or two on his hurried response to the accident scene. 24.62.25.90 04:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Is Donald Rumsfeld Jewish? I ask because it doesn't say so in the article (a sure sign that he isn't) but I was under the impression, don't know why, that he is. Jewish ancestry? I am sure you can have the name Rumsfeld and not be Jewish but I was concerned it could have just been passed over.
In case anyone is wondering why it matters I am of the impression that ethnicity or religious persuasions are/or can be important factors. Maybe I am off, as an Australian I don't really understand the U.S. political ways.
Any how, i suppose it is just a simple YES/NO sort of thing. Is Rumsfeld Jewish?
In first section of the BBC Profile: Donald Rumsfeld calls him the the most controversial defence secretary in US history [2]. IMHO that's enough to call him controversial in the lead section. -- Raphael1 23:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
By WHOM is Rumsfeld considered most controversial? Not by me. Perhaps by left-leaning wikieditor? Statements like this are a sneaky way for the author to insert his opinion (by ascribing it to others or to a consensus.) Realize that there are a lot of us Red Staters out here. Bush got elected in 2004 by us. Not everyone reads DKOS and listens to NPR. Or watches the Daily Show. TCO 00:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Can someone add a section detailing Rumsfeld's efforts to get Aspartame approved under the Reagan administration, and his economic links to the G.D. Searle Company - I'm at work right now and can't - I'll probably do some research later and add to it.
Chris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.195.227.146 ( talk) 15:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I hadn't seen the article under his career. Maybe it should have an additional heading. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.195.227.146 ( talk) 16:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
81.85.255.75 ( talk) 07:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)--JB--
Please remove the following comment from the Donald Rumsfeld page.
"HES A DUMB ASS FUCKER FUCK HIS KIDS."
It degrades the effectiveness of Wikipedia.
171.64.131.101 19:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to see the source (and read the article myself). I recently heard on local news radio that he was *offered* a post, but that there was a petition circulating among students and faculty protesting that appointment. Can anyone with better information footnote this, please? Rousse 22:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
i didn't see any mention of his involvement with the Bilderberg Group, i believe it speaks volumes about his power and influence. anyway, just a thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.63.252.99 ( talk) 15:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Rumsfeld's "snowflakes" (memos) should be discussed in the article. Washington post article. Badagnani 06:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
A. It's a facade: what it really means is...I, the writer, think this. B. The "some" is not specified. C. It's not noteworthy. D. We could also find "some" with an opposite view. E. The "some" are always DKOSacks who don't like Bush or Rumsfeld or what have you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the addition of "Rummy" to the introduction and infobox as it is not a common name for Rumsfeld, even if it is used by some. Think of it this way, we don't add Dubya to George W. Bush's name or Bubba to Bill Clinton's, but we add Bill to Clinton's (in addition to William) and Al to Al Gore's (in addition to Albert). A common name is quite different than a nickname. - auburnpilot talk 15:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Asked at WT:MOSBIO#Lead names. MilesAgain ( talk) 19:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I deleted a whole bunch of stuff recently. The reason has nothing to do with politics, beliefs, agendas or any of that. The reason was simple. After dealing in "big facts" for quite a while, the entry suddenly gets bogged down in minutia and "small facts." The information presented (each and every lawsuit, for example) is not significant in the grand scheme of things. Being aware that Rumsfeld is controvercial, I deleted it because all of this material is negative, apparently the work of folks bent on presenting a case against the man with factually accurate, yet relatively insiginficant detail compared to the rest of the entry. I'm sure there are lots of facts that can be listed here, such as his grade in algebra, the first girl he kissed, how many Cubs games he attended as a kid, etc., but a line needs to be drawn when editing (I am a professional editor). In this case, there are so many "big facts", the dispropotionate attention to "smaller facts" cheapens the overall flow. If others disagree, that's fine and that's what this site is for, I guess. But I think it reads better without the overload of detail about relatively insignificant facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.96.247 ( talk) 15:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Any objections to removing this in its entirety? McGovern is a crank and a 9/11 truther to boot, he has squandered any credibility he once had when he went down thermite Ave. CENSEI ( talk) 00:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Self-published books, zines, websites, and blogs should never be used as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article (see below). "Self-published blogs" in this context refers to personal and group blogs. Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control. Where a news organization publishes the opinions of a professional but claims no responsibility for the opinions, the writer of the cited piece should be attributed (e.g., "Jane Smith has suggested..."). Posts left by readers may never be used as sources.[4]
Parry is self published, and as such the use of material from his site, Consortium News is in violation of BLP. CENSEI ( talk) 01:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad the pov tag was added to this page. I haven't been paying attention lately but I see a number of things have been systematically whitewashed from this page; it is no wonder that certain editors have put the microscope on minor issues like the Ray McGovern incident or the lawsuits. Most of the information about the "generals' revolt" -- an unprecedented fact in US history -- has been already deleted, as well as the material about the " pentagon pundits," not to mention the claims of those like McCain that Rumsfeld " will go down in history as one of the worst secretaries of defense in history." Obviously the page should be about the man's entire career, not its worst incidents, and I am sympathetic to those who believe that the section on McGovern is too long, but I sense a preference that such things be deleted entirely. The POV tag should stay up until these facts are (re)entered into the article. csloat ( talk) 06:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I just came across this page. I don't like Rumsfeld at all but I think the current section on his career is terrible and contains a bunch of random irrelevant negative tidbits. The writing is terrible and un-encyclopedic -- it should describe the major controversies, and not just consist of a bunch of random quotes! If you don't already know what happened, there's no way you'll figure out what the problems with Rumsfeld were, and why he eventually had to resign:
Why don't we just say these things? I'm sure some pro-Bush editors will disagree with my assessment but at least the above points should serve as the basis for the section on his career.
I've deleted all the following as either irrelevant or incomprehensible:
Benwing ( talk) 07:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I've come to the conclusion that a major reason I'm so dissatisfied with this article is that, frankly, the section on Rumsfeld's second term as SecDef is a mess. There is no clear chronological or conceptual organization; it ends up being a laundry list without coherence. I wish to propose a reorganization of existing information, but there is a lot of material to cover, so I'm soliciting help and suggestions in fleshing it out. I tentatively suggest a grouping by type of topic, with events detailed in approximate chronological order inside each topic. The topics would be
We would handle criticism of the various wars inside appropriate subsubsections pertaining to the individual wars. Miscellaneous topics would address things like the State-Defense turf wars, the Tamiflu section and other accusations of conflict of interest (insofar as we consider them to be relevant -- but that's another discussion) , his role in media relations, his cultural image, etc. Thoughts? RayAYang ( talk) 06:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Come on CENSEI, try to work with your fellow editors towards compromise rather than making this some kind of war. On McGovern the version I edited after Ray's editing kept things short and to the point, left most of the comments to Rumsfeld, and kept in the directly quoted material I felt was important. The version you reverted to was sterile and empty of content. As for the general's war, the "unprecedented" is a well sourced and important fact; why would you delete that? Ray is proposing some major improvements to the organization and content of this page but we're not going to get anywhere on those if we edit war on minor points. Even though we disagree this article will be better off if we work together on it. csloat ( talk) 15:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Am I being particularly dense? I went through the notes in that section looking for that quote ... there is a Congressional record for aspartame on that date, but I can't find the corresponding quotes. There actually is testimony by Dr. Goss on that point, but the precise phrases "beyond a shadow of a doubt," "the FDA has violated the Delaney Amendment," "who is left to protect the health of the public" appear nowhere in the testimony. He has certainly made remarks towards that point; however, the quotes used only appear, as far as I can see, on an advocacy website (I suspect the website of "spicing" up the relatively technical Congressional testimony). I can have Lexis email the record I pulled for that date to those who are interested.
Also, I fail to see how the quote adds meaningfully to Rumsfeld's bio; the appropriate place for its insertion is our article on the Aspartame controversy, which is linked from the paragraph. It seems a matter of deliberately inserting material to promote a particular point of view, attributed or not, and its placing here violates principles of neutrality, as it leaves us with unbalanced coverage of the aspartame controversy in the Rumsfeld article. RayAYang ( talk) 11:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I have added a sentence and reference indicating that a UN representative (the special representative on torture at the UN Commission on Human Rights) has called for this man's prosecution. This just a factual statement. -- Fremte ( talk) 20:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I want to know what happened to the original text with regards to Stephen Cambon's 9/11 notes. Before anything I would like to hear a valid explanation for the removal of the well formulated sentences which stood in "Run up to Iraq" heading for a very, very long time. We had vigorous discussion about it couple of years ago, the consensus for inclusion was reached and I hate to stumble upon same issue which already fueled a lot of debate because it shows our, somewhat ridiculous love for entropy. So before we go on another ride, I'd like to see who and why removed a whole section leaving dubious sentence while violating long time reached consensus. Thanks. DawnisuponUS ( talk) 12:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
To readers just dropping in: here is the text of the passage in question. Ray Talk 22:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Approximately five hours after the attack on the World Trade Center, Rumsfeld told aides he wanted the; "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time. Not only UBL [Usama bin Laden]." He instructed general Richard Myers to; "Go massive (…) Sweep it all up. Things related and not." DoD staffer Stephen Cambone who took the notes ended them with sentence "Hard to get a good case." [12] [13]
I'm moving the section on lawsuits here. They don't seem to be going anywhere, and they don't have any lasting historical significance to Rumsfeld's life. WP:NOTNEWS and all of that. As it is, the descriptions of personal lawsuits only exist to repeat charges against Rumsfeld which no court has found even remotely worthy of consideration. The lawsuits against him in his official capacity are sufficiently irrelevant to his life that they shouldn't be included at all. If one of these actually goes somewhere with impact on his career, the information archived below may become meaningful. Ray Talk 19:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
For example, "Politician" should come before "Businessman". The most significant role should come first, not last.
Otherwise you would have Wikipedia articles like "Barak Obama: Lawyer, Neighborhood Activist and U.S. President". That would be ridiculous.
I also don't know why "Secretary of Defense" isn't in the first career descriptions.
Hopefully this is not a case of people with political agendas manipulating the article.
69.171.160.86 ( talk) 01:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
I changed link "[non-]state terror"-->"State terror" because as it was, the link really went 180• off target. I changed the link to "non-state terror"-->"History of terrorism" because the History of Terrorism page describes many, many non-state terrorist organisations and gives an excellent counter-example in the French "Reign of Terror." I didn't point the link to the "Non-state terror" page because there isn't one and because creating one is currently a bit beyond my scope at the moment.
I didn't sig the original edit because I forgot to log in. oops. Fred ( talk) 17:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
{{hidden|Lawsuits|
I think some of the images can be used under fair use?
Here is one image:
-- Timeshifter ( talk) 03:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
The article states "and also defended him in his controversial decider remark." but I can't find anything about such remark in the article. Did I miss it? or maybe info should be added? Thanks. Airproofing ( talk) 18:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
This isn't really a full blown media mention, but a new book by a former Bush speechwriter apparently claims that "Donald Rumsfeld had to be talked out of editing his own entry on Wikipedia, which he referred to as "Wika-wakka."" Joshdboz ( talk) 15:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Do we really need a section for one sentence, do we? InnerParty ( talk) 16:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I disagree with InnerParty, and support Unomi's work, which is of value and properly sourced. Will revert it myself manually. Jusda fax 21:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Now that we've got some activity again, I went and took a look at Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, which surprised me with the fact that WMD were found in Iraq, albeit presumably not at the scale or quantities claimed in the leadup to the invasion. Thus, I've removed that sentence - anybody who wants to take a stab at summarizing a decently complicated subject, feel free -- I just didn't feel comfortable with a factually wrong statement on the page. In general, I think we should strive for a good, narrative treatment of Rumsfeld's role in the leadup to the Iraq war, instead of regurgitating 6-year old bits of news reporting. If anybody's willing to dive through one or two of the Rumsfeld biographies that have been written of late, that would be very welcome. Ray Talk 00:20, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't have time to go through the full article right now, but just at a glance, the summary that opens the page seems to be HEAVILY biased against Rumsfeld. "Rumsfeld is one of the key people responsible for the misguided direction the United States took when experimenting with torture"? "This is his most infamous legacy."? Both statements are anything but neutral in tone. NathanDahlin ( talk) 07:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Along those lines, there is no controversy section which makes the whole article read like a fluff piece. Good job WIKI!! you're such a bad joke. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.78.183.102 (
talk)
12:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Donald Rumsfled,George W.Bush and Dick Cheney had involvement in 911.Dick Cheney had the responsibility of the pentagon & flight 93.George W.Bush had operation of the world trade center and Donald Rumsfled planned 9/11.Rumslfed made sure the two planes went into the world trade center.There has been evidence that Bush,Cheney and Rumsfled where involved in the September 11,2001 terrorist attacks.A U.S. House Representative & U.S. Senate is trying to find a prosecutor to prosecute Bush,Cheney and Rumsfled for murder on 9/11.George H.W. Bush helped bush jr with the 9/11 terrorist attacks.Bush,Cheney and Rumsfled could face charges of treason,murder and could face a life sentence or the death penalty.Bush could face prosecution for the Iraq war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.25.186.198 ( talk) 19:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Q.: I had heard that on or soon after 9/11, Rumsfeld announced a de facto continental military perimeter. I don't see that mentioned on his page. Any info? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.178.183.222 ( talk) 00:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
in the "Nixon Administration section, Rumsfeld is described as "a member of the President's Cabinet (1969–1970)" and then again as a "member of the President's Cabinet (1971–1972)." But the info panel doesn't describe any cabinet level positions until he became Secretary of Defense in 1975. The positions he held were United States Office of Economic Opportunity (1969-1970) and Director of the Economic Stabilization Program (1971-1972). Are these generally considered cabinet-level positions? — MiguelMunoz ( talk) 03:58, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Something should certainly be said about the status of various arrest warrants Rumsfeld has internationally. He is considered an internationally fugitive by many nations. Germany: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,473987,00.html France: http://www.alternet.org/story/66425/ Spain: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_03/017494.php The ICC http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/12663-international-criminal-court-complaint-filed-against-bush-cheney-rumsfeld-tenet-rice-and-gonzales-international-arrest-warrants-requested.html ECT. This needs to go in, it is a very notable part of his life 97.91.187.161 ( talk) 17:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"Statesman" is an overly glowing term, this is just peacock lanugage. I would suggest "public servant" or simply give his former titles. Hairhorn ( talk) 04:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I cannot fathom that anyone would apply wikipedia's own definition of statesman to Sec. Rumsfeld: "Statesmanship also conveys a quality of leadership that organically brings people together..., a spirit of caring for others and for the whole." Rumsfeld was intentionally divisive in his policies and language. He ranked very low in public approval, and still does. This is not the hallmark of a statesman. -- Cjs56 ( talk) 21:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I replaced a word laden with value judgment (statesman) and replaced it with a neutral one (politician). In all but the most indisputable cases, wikipedia should probably avoid value laden terms like statesman, in favor of more neutral terms. In addition, I think that politician is a far more descriptive term than statesman, as Rumsfeld was certainly not a statesman while serving in Congress as a young man, and could not have possibly been a statesman until the last few years of his life, while he was most certainly and unarguably a politician. Cjs56 ( talk) 05:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Check out the Financial Times of February 11, 2011, for Gideon Rachman's Lunch with the FT: Donald Rumsfeld. Asteriks ( talk) 02:49, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Please see: Known and Unknown: A Memoir, it should be linked from this page. Sugar-Baby-Love ( talk) 02:59, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
The rumsfeld surname is actually scottish so rumsfeld is scottish on his father's side. The link that says he has german ancestors no longer gives that information and may have never had that information so it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.102.153.66 ( talk) 15:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
In the overview tab below the lead image, there is a US-O6 Colonel insignia (Eagle) to the left of the rank, Captain. I'm not exceptionally knowledgeable of military ranks and insignias, but the description for the US-O6 insignia succinctly states that it is for Army, Air Force, and Marines—excluding the US Navy. So considering that, along with Rumsfeld's retiring rank as captain, am I right in saying this needs fixed? If not, pardon my misunderstanding. I also do not have access to edit this article to do it myself.-- Lennybird ( talk) 18:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On sept 10th 2001, It should be noted that he announced the pentagon lost/missplaced 2.7 Trillion dollars. Not million, not even billion, but TRILLION?!? Hmmmm I wonder where the corresponding finacial information was stored... Quelle suprise, in the same spot the pentagon was hit. Makes ya wonder... And I'm not a conspiracy nut (Jesse Ventura hahahhahaha so crazy) Sources- Gov/millitary websites 24.69.85.54 ( talk) 11:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
It's actually 2.3 trillion not 2.7 trillion and it's not lost, it's "untracked". The biggest single robbery I know of. Just Google "2.3 trillion" - it's all fucking there, including videos of him saying it himself.
Did his literary agent have much to do with this blarney?
"His tenure has been noted to be one of the most pivotal in recent history; as one of the key individuals responsible for the restructuring of the military in the new 21st century, Rumsfeld was crucial in planning the United States' response to the September 11, 2001 attacks, which included two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Highly popular with the media for his outspokenness and candor,"
He is one of the most hated figures of the modern era, despised for his wholesale incompetence and his appalling mixture of arrogance, bullying, and cluelessness. By hanging on to him, Bush lost the Senate to Democrats in 2006. I'm sure he was wildly popular on the Republican-controlled Fox network, otherwise, this is disinformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mare Nostrum ( talk • contribs) 12:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Donald Rumsfeld great-grandfather Johann Heinrich Rumsfeld emmigrated from Weyhe in Lower Saxony (Germany) to the USA in 1876. Donald Rumsfeld's father George Donald Rumsfeld was the grand child of Johann Heinrich Rumsfeld. Henry Rumsfeld (Henry is the english form of Heinrich), the son of Johann Heinrich Rumsfeld, is the father of George Donald Rumsfeld.
Donald Rumsfeld visited Weyhe at November 16th 1976.
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The link to a current version of 'Rumsfeld's Rules' in the 'Works' section of 'External links'is broken. A current version is available at www.rumsfeldsrules.com. Please update accordingly. Matt9311 ( talk) 00:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
No mention is made of the editorial published by the Military Times Media Group which played a substantial role in Rumsfeld's resignation / removal. If this extraordinary event can't be fully covered by Wikipedia while he's alive, due to the rules on biographies of living persons, it should at least be noted as a unique event in United States history.
Ref: "Time for Rumsfeld to go." 11/3/2006. Army Times; Air Force Times; Navy Times; Marine Corps Times. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15552388/. Accessed: 2013-07-25. (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6INvORWn0) alternately, http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fid%2F15552388%2F&date=2013-07-25 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janeqpublique ( talk • contribs) 21:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
undid the removal of war crimes controversy by User:Fat&Happy as wikipedia is international, and NPOV. it might be better to discuss this here before removing controversial text as "unsourced" from an article bearing "promotes the subject in a subjective manner". -- ThurnerRupert ( talk) 11:31, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Friends, we do not write thinly sourced, bad things about living people, such as stating or implying that they are war criminals. See WP:BLP. Please discuss sources and hash out what, if anything, has been reported in reliable sources. Once there is a good consensus, editing on this topic might resume. Anybody who restores a thinly sourced war crime allegation may be blocked without further warning. Jehochman Talk 03:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
This is one of the funniest interviews ever aired with a man of Rumsfeld's stature. I think it's deserving of an External link, but I think I tried it earlier, and it got reverted as vandalism, which it was not meant to be. Please do check, it's very much worth listening: [14] LizardHunter ( talk) 21:19, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
References
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 09:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
This talk page is a mess with all this "correcting" and formatting. Clean it up somehow. Its ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.112.68 ( talk) 06:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Donald Rumsfeld has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could the hatnote please be moved above {{ recently died}} per MOS:ORDER? Thanks, 142.161.113.242 ( talk) 19:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm interested in improving wikipedia navigation around Rumsfeld-related topics. To this end, I have started a potential template for related articles at Draft:Template:Donald Rumsfeld. I am interested in hearing from others how this template might be improved, if it is even necessary at all, if it should take the form of a "series"-type navbox or a "see also"-type navbox, which other articles might be included, if there should also be a Category:Donald Rumsfeld, etc. Please feel free to make edits to the draft, share thoughts here, or go to the draft talkpage. - - mathmitch7 ( talk/ contribs) 20:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Donald Rumsfeld has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change "A day after Rumsfeld announced that the Department of Defense could not account for about $2.3 trillion worth of transactions,[61] al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked commercial airliners and crashed them in coordinated strikes into both towers of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan, New York City, and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C." to "On September 11th, al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked commercial airliners and crashed them in coordinated strikes into both towers of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan, New York City, and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C."
The source given for the statement about the transactions not being accounted for is unreliable and is misrepresenting a speech that Donald Rumsfeld gave chastising the accounting standards for certain aspects of the pentagon. Including that clause to the sentence about 9/11 serves to further false conspiracy theories. 192.91.171.34 ( talk) 16:18, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm wondering why the blue link in the caption below the first pic next to this section says "Andrews Air Forces base", instead of Andrews Air Force base. Editrite! ( talk) 03:08, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:23, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
interesting how there's not one mention of the fact that this man is a war criminal and presided over torture and the extrajudicial killing of non-combatants L33tSpeak ( talk) 02:11, 20 October 2021 (UTC)