Rumsfeld to Head Renamed War Department

[Singlecoil]

(3/17/03) Washington, D. C. – Donald Rumsfeld announced today that the Department of Defense has been renamed the War Department by executive order of President Bush. In 1946, the United States Congress changed the name of the War Department to the Department of Defense to reflect the containment strategies of the post World War II Truman Doctrine. “It was a different world in 1946,” Rumsfeld stated, “I think now Americans realize that a mistake was made by signaling to our enemies that we lacked initiative.” He added, “To always assume a defensive posture is to drastically limit our options in the post-9/11 environment.” Rumsfeld’s title was also changed to reflect the shift in strategy to Secretary of War. “At first I thought we should firm that up a bit,” Rumsfeld quipped with reporters, “Secretary sounded like a title for a Hilary Clinton type.” Further adding, to the howl of the Pentagon press corps, “I mean would you rather be led to war by a secretary, or a czar or something like that? But in the end, I agreed with conserving the tradition of the Department, so I will become the first Secretary of War since Henry Stimson.”
Under the new designation, Paul Wolfowitz, the former Deputy Secretary of Defense, will assume the new title of Director of Strategic Initiative, tasked with identifying new sources of concern and allocating War Department resources. When asked about the new position in the Department, Secretary Rumsfeld responded, “Mr. Wolfowitz has proven himself to be a capable and persuasive voice of direction in our Department. This new title will afford him the authority to act on his greatest strength, which is the ability to identify our enemies sooner than anyone else in the Administration. His proven zeal in dealing with our enemies, both foreign and domestic, is being rewarded with this greater authority. He will still report to me, but has been given greater autonomy by this executive order.” When asked if the Director of Strategic Initiative would have the authority to order military operations, Secretary Rumsfeld commented, “That is a more of a targeting or command and control type question you’re getting into there, and that is not the type of information we provide during times of war. The War on Terror continues today, it will continue tomorrow, and it will continue in the future.”

 

[ShawnC]

Source please, as I understand it, it's an unwritten rule of the internet, please post the link.

This appears to be an Onion story, but it's not Wednesday when the normally update.

 

[bobbysamd]

Baloney

There was a War Department until 1947. You had the Secretary of War and Secretary of the Navy. Both were part of the Executive Department until creation of the Defense Department, which unified the armed forces. Here's a piece about it from MSN Encarta.

We have TV news going in our house after the President's speech and there was no mention of a purported War Department. Moreover, it would require an act of Congress to change the name of an Executive branch department.

Someone's pulling your leg, my friend.

 

[RFtech]

silly

 

[surplus1]

Re: Baloney

Moreover, it would require an act of Congress to change the name of an Executive branch department.

Someone's pulling your leg, my friend.

Bobby,

The message is obviously a farse, but I also would not put too much faith in "acts of Congress". Congress is also supposed to be the government agency that delares war. Of course, that's only the Constitution. If Congress can ignore that and abidicate its responsibility, name changes wouldn't be a problem.

Rumsfeld and his side kick, would undoubtedly enjoy that. So would President Cheney. Oh, excuse me, Vice President Cheney.

PS. Pray for our troops, our country and the innocent Iraqis children.

PS 2. I enjoy your posts. Wish you could get out of paralegal and back into what you obviously love.

 

[bobbysamd]

Baloney

PS 2. I enjoy your posts. Wish you could get out of paralegal and back into what you obviously love.

Thank you. Is that flying airplanes or spending hours reading and writing posts?

I get the two confused sometimes.

 

[surplus1]

Re: Baloney

Thank you. Is that flying airplanes or spending hours reading and writing posts?

I get the two confused sometimes.

It's flying airplanes ...... I think you knew that.

 

[bobbysamd]

Re: Re: Baloney

It's flying airplanes ...... I think you knew that.

I did.

Maybe someday, though spending $150/hr. for a 172 dual is pricey. That is three times what I paid when I was a student twenty-one years ago. I'd need at least a few hours, probably more, to convince someone to sign off a flight review. And we haven't even discussed comp check (IPC) yet. And getting back my CFI . . . . . . . . <sigh>

Once more, thanks for your kind thoughts.

 

[Singlecoil]

Ok, Bobby got me. I should have done my research a little more carefully. Answer is, I wrote it. I thought it was dripping with enough sarcasm that nobody would buy it. It came out of an idea that popped in my head that I bounced off a friend. Wouldn't it be funny if the onion did a story on... He said I should write it myself.
I just couldn't resist posting it up here...

All this reserve as a commuter has turned me into a flightinfo.com junkie.

 

[nimtz]

I thought that was pretty d*mn funny. I was thinking you got it from The Onion or something like that. You should be writing for them, screw the flying thing.

 

[Singlecoil]

Thanks, man.

Here's another one.

Recipe for freedom fries...

Cut russet pototoes into half-inch slices, then cut again.

Soak in water for five minutes to remove starch.

Blot off excess moisture with paper towels.

Fry in motor oil at 400 degrees for 5-6 minutes.

Salt to taste.

 

[brianjohn]

Hey Bobby--
Actually, what I assumed you loved was watching re-runs of Elway and co. stick it to my team two years in a row in '87 and '88.
I give Elway credit for "The Drive" but to this day I insist that Karlis missed that field goal in o.t.
And then, why couldn't someone teach Byner to cover the ball with BOTH hands???!!!
I still haven't healed from that one.

 

[bobbysamd]

The "Drive"

Hey Bobby--
Actually, what I assumed you loved was watching re-runs of Elway and co. stick it to my team two years in a row in '87 and '88.
I give Elway credit for "The Drive" but to this day I insist that Karlis missed that field goal in o.t.
And then, why couldn't someone teach Byner to cover the ball with BOTH hands???!!!
I still haven't healed from that one.

Well, sure, I always love watching the Broncos playing, and winning. And, of course, "The Drive" was classic.

The truth, though, is that during those years Elway carried the team. It was primarily Elway and a bunch of guys named Joe. Exceptions would be such players as Karl Mecklenberg and Steve Atwater; Atwater hit hard but wasn't the greatest pass defender in the world. Reeves did it with Elway and mirrors. Invariably, the Super Bowl exposes a team's weaknesses (The Oakland-Tampa Bay Super Bowl was a classic example.). So, when the Broncos made it to the Super Bowl those years, it was an anti-climax because a loss was almost a foregone conclusion, and predicted embarassment. And not fun to watch, either.

It was better in 1997 and 1998. Elway had some real players with him.

The new Browns have a good team now, and a brewing quarterback controversy. You have much to look forward to.

 

[brianjohn]

Bobby-- I'm surprised you didn't mention Mark J., Vance J., and Ricky N., a.k.a. the "Three Amigos."
Who was it that stripped Byner on the one yard line in '88? For some reason I keep thinking it was Jeremiah Castilla? What a game that was. Like I said, I haven't fully recovered from that one yet.
My fav teams (Indians, Browns, and Cavs) are notorious for finding some way to screw it up. Names such as Ernest Byner, Jose Mesa, Michael Jordan, and of course Elway will live on in dubious infamousy in the hearts and minds of my fellow fans.
As much as I detested Elway for shafting us, in my opinion, he was the greatest (in his prime) of the last 20 years. Not only for his rocket, pinpoint arm, but also for his leadership skills.
In my opinion there shouldn't be a quarterback controversy in Cleveland this year. Holcombe is the man. Couch NEVER impressed me. I was livid when they drafted him. I was also livid the day I heard Brian Giles was on the trading block, and even more livid the day the Tribe shipped him to Pittsburgh for a situational lefty-- who isn't even with them anymore!
I could go on and on... I doubt you have to be a Brown's fan to know this one: Third and long = Metcalf up the middle.
Psshhhh. What a waste of talent.

 

[bobbysamd]

Football

Bobby-- I'm surprised you didn't mention Mark J., Vance J., and Ricky N., a.k.a. the "Three Amigos."

True about Mark Jackson. He was a good football player. The other two were overrated. Other teams in the league had better wideouts. The O-line was mediocre and actually went from bad to worse until Mike S. became coach.

Who was it that stripped Byner on the one yard line in '88? For some reason I keep thinking it was Jeremiah Castilla? What a game that was. Like I said, I haven't fully recovered from that one yet.

Close. Jeremiah Castille. A Tampa reject. I believe that he was gone after the next year.

As much as I detested Elway for shafting us, in my opinion, he was the greatest (in his prime) of the last 20 years. Not only for his rocket, pinpoint arm, but also for his leadership skills.

And just think how great he would have been had he had a real supporting cast.

In my opinion there shouldn't be a quarterback controversy in Cleveland this year. Holcombe is the man. Couch NEVER impressed me. I was livid when they drafted him.

Well, Kelly sure looked better than Couch during the first part of the year.

It's okay that we talk about football. Football is a perfectly good flight deck topic.

 

[brianjohn]

"It's okay that we talk about football. Football is a perfectly good flight deck topic."
Is that a nice way of saying you hate baseball?
I agree-- had Elway had a decent offensive line, who knows what he would have done.

 

[100LL... Again!]

'Pray for the innocent Iraqi children'?

W's going one better - he's gonna liberate 'em.

If I lived ther I'd rather risk being bombed than tortured.

Go W.

 

[mar]

Blah

Blah

 

[bobbysamd]

Baseball

"It's okay that we talk about football. Football is a perfectly good flight deck topic."
Is that a nice way of saying you hate baseball?

Not in the least. I'm primarily a football fan. Moreover, MLB here in Denver has been disappointing for several years.

The Rockies appear to have slightly better pitching this year. And they have a better catcher with Charles Johnson.