The Army You Have

A Philomedy Satire

Published on January 22, 2005 By philomedy In Humor

January 22, 2005

Washington, D.C.

In light of recent, hastily made comments, Donald Rumsfeld has volunteered to open his world up for a day, hoping to dissuade the popular opinion that he is a crass and unfeeling old man, the likes of which chase little boys off their lawns for disturbing the garden trolls.

Mr. Rumsfeld awoke at 9 in the morning, about an hour later than he should have, and shuffled to the dining room in quite a disheveled state. Being late, he did not have time to eat anything but a bowl of Special K. He seemed disappointed that they were out of Total, which as we all know has a full day's supply of vitamins and minerals, but he took it in stride, saying "You go to the table with the cereal you have."

After breakfast, Mr. Rumsfeld rushed around trying to find a suit to wear, a search that turned up a back issue of Playboy, 2 Nike headbands, a Kiss album, "The Fast and the Furious" on DVD, and a copy of the Necronomacon, but alas, no Giorgio Armani. An agitated Rumsfeld called his wife, who informed him that the dry cleaning was to be picked up that afternoon at five. Rumsfeld, as he often does, made lemons out of lemonade, finding a blue polo shirt on the floor and throwing it on, along with a pair of khaki slacks.

"Sure, I'd like to have my suit, but what can you do?" Rumsfeld said. "You go to work with the clothing you have, not the clothing you'd like to have. Have you seen the new Sean John line, by the way? Or the latest from RocaWear? That's the clothing you'd like to have."

Rumsfeld's day at the office was a rather uneventful one, filled with stamping his name on condolence letters and going online to find a recipe for bouillabaise. At 5, he decided it was time to head home.

As he was strolling through the parking lot, Rumsfeld noticed a sheepish (or shall I say, chimpish) looking President Bush standing next to his car. There was a sizable dent on the door. The two talked in private, after which Rumsfeld came back smiling from ear to ear.

"He's a sweet kid, he really means well." he said. "Just sometimes, I don't know...Anyways, you go to work for the president you have, not the president you wish you had. I mean, sure we'd like someone who knows that the Warner Brothers' female bunny is just Bugs in drag, but what can you do?"

Comments (Page 2)

philomedy

on Jan 23, 2005

reread history and try to use a dictionary..... that coalition was formed well before the attack on pearl...the war was already in full swing world wide, except for the unnited states... after dec.7th 1941 we got involved

My reference to "after WWII" was simply in response to your justification for entering a war with the army you have.

Of course the coalition was in place beforehand. Of course we should have gotten involved beforehand. Of course if we, or Britain, or anyone had shown any backbone instead of giving Hitler more land in hopes that he would go away everything would have been alot better. (By the way, I know that we, as in the US, did not give them any land, so hopefully I can save myself a derogatory comment.)

Either way, show me the coalition hell bent on taking over the world that we rushed into war with this time, and your argument will have the inkling of validity it so desperately seeks.

Moderateman

on Jan 23, 2005

Either way, show me the coalition hell bent on taking over the world that we rushed into war with this time, and your argument will have the inkling of validity it so desperately seeks.

I have already said many times bush made a mistake rushing to war with Iraq... BUT none of you demoncraps seem to comprehend this.. somehow my admission of that is overlooked or because I refuse to bash and trash MY president, that is viewed as me "approving" or "blindly following" The point is The demoncraps are dividing the country,in time of war.. for me its as yogi said, deja vu all over again, lol. I went thru this divisive shit in vietnam and here you guys go again.

Moderateman

on Jan 23, 2005

Reply #15 By: Philomedy - 1/23/2005 5:13:43 PM

don't know what a breath pad is.

let me send you some then, and for the rest of your response its just as silly as you wiping the "sarcasim" off of you!

philomedy

on Jan 23, 2005

I have said many times that I am not a democrat. I wanted Bush to beat Gore. I thought he would be the better man. I then watched him screw up royally.

I never said you were approving or blindly following anything. It's your prerogative to think that rushing into war was foolhardy but to stand behind the man that did it. It is also my prerogative to think rushing into war was foolhardy and to want the man that did it out.

As for your issue with the divisiveness that the Democrats are causing, it takes two sides to have a division. It is not the creation of purely one side. It is the result of two opinions that are different. So this division rests entirely on the shoulders of the Democrats and the Republicans both.

Eastern Diamondback

on Jan 23, 2005

I am of the opinion that the direct threat to the United States should have been taken care of first.

Would you also be in favor of the Chicago Police Department ignoring calls and investigations having to do with rapes, armed robberies, and burglaries because there are plenty of murders that haven't been solved and murderers who haven't been caught?

The situation is a psychopath developing nuclear capacity. Yeah it is different, considering that North Korea actually has the things we were in Iraq looking for. I don't know how you define size and scope of an operation, but this is pretty damn big in my eyes.

Now you're arguing over politics. North Korea has thousands of artillery pieces loaded and aimed at South Korea ready to fire at the first sign of hostile action. We could bomb the hell out of North Korea, but at the price of South Korea. They also have missiles that can easily reach Japan.

By size and scope, I simply refer to the allocation of finite resources for a particular objective: "What do we need to do, how do we need to do it, and what do we need in order to do it?"

My opinion is that your argument here is little more than self-righteous political posturing.

dabe

on Jan 23, 2005

One more thing, Philomedy...... If you want to delete my previous post, I'd understand. As I said, I sometimes just cannot help myself, and he's got me blacklisted, as have him blacklisted, so I took it here. I apologize.

philomedy

on Jan 23, 2005

No, but I'd have a problem with them going after a guy who might possibly be considering leaning in the direction of undertaking a path which could end up with him committing a crime if they knew the guy who bombed the Sears Tower was still at large and plotting.

Now you're arguing over politics. North Korea has thousands of artillery pieces loaded and aimed at South Korea ready to fire at the first sign of hostile action. We could bomb the hell out of North Korea, but at the price of South Korea. They also have missiles that can easily reach Japan. By size and scope, I simply refer to the allocation of finite resources for a particular objective: "What do we need to do, how do we need to do it, and what do we need in order to do it?"

You're making my argument for me. You can't honestly believe, with your obvious knowledge of the threat North Korea poses, that our finite resources are being better spent on Iraq.

My opinion is that your argument here is little more than self-righteous political posturing.

Ditto.

philomedy

on Jan 23, 2005

No worries. However, I deleted the post because it descended into completely unwarranted name-calling. You may attack someone's ideas all you want, but I think that name-calling leads to absolutely nothing. Thanks for understanding.

Moderateman

on Jan 23, 2005

Reply #21 By: dabe - 1/23/2005 6:45:39 PM
One more thing, Philomedy...... If you want to delete my previous post, I'd understand. As I said, I sometimes just cannot help myself, and he's got me blacklisted, as have him blacklisted, so I took it here. I apologize.

as usual you bend things to suit you, it was YOU that blacklisted me first,, then came into my posts and lambasted me..I did not even know how to blacklist someone and had to post a blog asking for help with it.

Moderateman

on Jan 23, 2005

Reply #19 By: Philomedy - 1/23/2005 5:57:39 PM

So this division rests entirely on the shoulders of the Democrats and the Republicans both.

finally something we can agree on!

Texas Wahine

on Jan 23, 2005

Philomedy: This was a really great piece . . . very creative . . . I loved it!

philomedy

on Jan 23, 2005

Moderateman:

My apologies for deleting your last post as well. I just don't want this forum to become fuel for you and dabe's fire.

philomedy

on Jan 23, 2005

finally something we can agree on!

It had to happen sometime.

Philomedy: This was a really great piece . . . very creative . . . I loved it!

Thank you. I aim to please.

Moderateman

on Jan 23, 2005

Reply #27 By: Philomedy - 1/23/2005 7:31:48 PM
Moderateman:

My apologies for deleting your last post as well. I just don't want this forum to become fuel for you and dabe's fire.

fair enough. btw/ that was not my post that I inserted in deleated remark, was dabes post.

Eastern Diamondback

on Jan 23, 2005

Does it take every policeman and detective in the department to drop everything and focus on the bomber alone? It better not. Otherwise that's a piss poor police department.

You're making my argument for me. You can't honestly believe, with your obvious knowledge of the threat North Korea poses, that our finite resources are being better spent on Iraq.

No, I'm not making the argument for you. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Unless your idea is that South Korea and Japan must face a savage retaliatory attack in order to keep North Korea from attacking South Korea and Japan. That doesn't make sense? It wan't supposed to. But that's what you are suggesting.
Here's what it seems you are missing. North Korea has a lot of firepower aimed at South Korea. Right now, at this very moment. Kim Jong Il is paranoid. Unless the United States can locate, attack, and destroy all of North Korea's offensive weapons directed at South Korea simultaneously as a first strike, South Korea is gonna take a real beating. And since North Korea may already have missiles that can reach Japan, and can most likely be armed with nuclear warheads which they probably already possess, we would also have to, at the exact same time, locate and destroy all missile launchers and/or silos. If Kim Jong Il believe he will be killed or removed from power, I highly doubt he will restrain himself from going out in a blaze of glory.

My opinion is that your argument here is little more than self-righteous political posturing.

Ditto.

I respectfully disagree. I'm pointing out the flaw in your logic. I'm not here now to defend or criticize war in Iraq
North Korean Missiles: Link

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!