On Rumsfeld's departure

Some people lose lighters, gloves, scarves and virginity. George W. Bush lost allegiance on Wednesday. In my opinion, the most attractive quality he had. By firing Donald Rumsfeld, the US President once again proved that the concept of “betrayal” does not exist in politics.

The departed Rumsfeld is a savior for the current administration in all respects. Like ballast on a hot air balloon that must be dropped as a last resort. As long as everything is in order in the air there, you will sing a song of praise to the ballast. Like Bush, who announced shortly before the elections that Rumsfeld would serve until the end of the current administration's term in power.

I think that the 78-year-old veteran of the Republican movement is not offended by the president’s decision. Rumsfeld understands everything perfectly. And because I have seen this more than once, and because I myself was probably forced to do the same more than once. The Minister of Defense left to the cheers of the Democrats, finally quoting the phrase of Winston Churchill: “I have gained a lot from criticism, and there has never been a time when I suffered from a lack of it.”

However, Rumsfeld himself probably knows that he agreed to leave in disgrace, saving both the president himself and his closest ally Richard Cheney from him. So it seems to me. Because there is every reason to believe that Rumsfeld's resignation was part of the White House's rescue plan in case the Democrats take control of Congress.

If this is really so, then, despite all the vileness of the step taken by Bush and Cheney, their action can be understood. To keep their administration politically alive, they need to somehow engage with Democrats. I would like to know what Cheney was thinking when he agreed with the departure of his comrade who brought him to the White House forty years ago.

The Republicans and part of the Pentagon, stunned by this decision, are quietly trying to explain Rumsfeld's departure by saying that Bush had no other way out. Or they are looking for the culprits in the camp of the current president’s father’s comrades. Completeness to you. The answer to the question is much closer than Papa Bush, James Baker or Brent Scowcroft.

These are the mistakes of George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld himself. Mistakes that long ago turned the former Minister of Defense into a “sacrificial sheep” with the tacit consent of his two immediate superiors. I don’t know how Rumsfeld’s relationship with Bush will develop after the president leaves the White House, but it seems to me that they will continue to communicate with Cheney, despite this story.

Politicism on all continents is common and excusable. Especially when both sides have long learned the rules of the game. Therefore, the story of Rumsfeld's departure is only partially reminiscent of the biblical parable of Cain and Abel. With the condition that Abel is not very sorry, and he forgave Cain before his death.