Creative Speculation

> Step by step, point by point, it was the only possible way to achieve the desired goal. Any Secretary of
> Defense > who was committed to such intentions would be faced with doing exactly this, and it is exactly
> as Donald Rumsfeld did. I would challenge anyone to show otherwise.

This assertion is ridiculous and it's easy to show otherwise: Rumsfeld's behavior that morning was not the "only possible way to achieve the (presumed) goal" and it certainly was not the best possible way. The most direct way to achieve the presumed goal would have been to order a stand-down, as conspiracists accuse Cheney of doing. But even if Rumsfeld being "out of the loop" would have made any difference (which is itself disproved by what actually happened), then the best thing for Rumsfeld to do would have been to be completely out of the loop, i.e. not even in his office and completely out of communication, and with a credible excuse for it. You're not just accusing him of complicity; you're accusing him of being too stupid to come up with any semblance of an alibi for his inaction. Sorry, but you haven't explained why he "deliberately" chose a course of inaction that made him look like a confused old man who had his head up his ass that morning. You're just trying to force the facts to fit you preconceived conclusion, so even if your logic were valid (which it clearly isn't), your argument isn't sound because your premise isn't credible.