scott_harpell Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstrickland Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Never has the phrase "failing upward" been more appropriate. Â Word on the street is that Ridge is gone as well, and the early bet on a replacement is Douglas Feith - the man Tommy Franks called "the stupidest fucking guy on the face of the earth" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Frighteningly, Powell was the only voice of reason, the only voice with the military background to make competent decisions about entering Iraq, and the only one with the understaning of why we are in so much trouble there now. I wish he had not caved in and had to make all those ludicrous half-truths in front of the UN. You could tell even he knew it was BS but he did it serving his boss. Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_Kirby Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Head for the hills! Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 He didn't HAVE to make those "ridiculous half-truths" in front of the UN; I doubt he was tortured at Abu Ghraib shortly before. Â If he really was a voice of reason, then one would assume that reasonable things would emanate from within. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 If he really was a voice of reason, then one would assume that reasonable things would emanate from within. There was a reason the White House loathed Foggy Bottom the past 4 years... Â So when's Rummy gone? 6 months? 1 year? I bet whenever we have an apropriate "milestone" in Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Â It is obvious that NO MATTER whom Bush appoints to ANY position, they will immediately be the subject to character assassination and the politics of personal destruction by the opposition. Â Under a Democratic administration, all we would hear about from the left-leaning media would be fluff pieces about the nominees and how progressive the president is for nominating women and minorities to key cabinet positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirk Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 I think he probably is the voice of reason. I also think that as a good soldier his loyalty to the Pres. take precedence. He may disagree with a course of action, but it's his job to do it in the best way possible, and to mitigate the effects as much as possible. A great man working for a crappy administration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 What did you think of him? I'm only going on what I saw reported, and it seemed there were some strong conflicts between Powell and Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz over what constitutes invading a country. Â Maybe he was not entirely opposed to entering Iraq, but he (and others in the military) certainly seemed opposed to the strategy (low cost, smaller operation, no clear exit funding/support) being used to carry it out. Frontline just had an interesting special on this that supports this. Â What should he have done if he disagreed? Resign? I think he did what he felt was right for the country, and that was to stand behind the president, even if he disagrees. Maybe it was not the right decision, but it wouldn't look good to have the top tier bickering over this. He seemed like a good man to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisT Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Powell will be back with the Democratic Administration in 4 years! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Powell will be back with the Democratic Administration in 4 years! Â The U.S. could use Powell's service, no matter which party's administration he serves under. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryad Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Slate's assessment of Powell makes for some pretty sad reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 It seems to me that if you are a person of principle, you stand up for those principles. You don't let your name and reputation get used for unscrupulous purposes. Â I don't know him, but the feeling I have is that he's a military guy with a strong sense of loyalty and allegiance, and perhaps allows those traits to get the better of him. I'd like to know some day the honest truth of everything he wrestled with regarding this situation, if there was deep consideration etc etc. I doubt this truth would ever come out in a book though, maybe not even to his wife? Â So, if he really felt like his integrity was being compromised, then certainly he could have resigned. I suppose that my wish would be that he would've refused to do or say anything that he didn't really believe in, forcing the administration to take a step, ie. fire, reprimand, etc. Â Does this seem reasonable, not compromising on something as monumental as war, war that will kill thousands upon thousands? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 It seems reasonable to me, with the limited view of the facts one can get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirk Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 That's a very valid point, but I think he most likely felt that his duty was to the duly elected president. Voicing dissent, and getting himself fired may get his voice heard, but that's all. By doing as ordered, and expressing his opinions whenever possible he still has the potential to at least influence the foreign policy of the US. Once he's been fired, or resigned, now he is just a voice, although a respected one, of dissent, and there are all ready plenty of those. From the inside he can at least try to mitigate the damage done by the presidents foreign policy. Â I think it really comes down to him placing more value on his loyalty, and the desire to do what is best for the US, for Iraq, for the rest of the world, than on his own "integrity" though I don't think that's quite the right word, as I think his loyalty and good intentions are definitely aspects of his integrity. Â I've actually run into this in other places as well. I've talked to a few gov't employees who feel this way. By working for an administration they vehemently disagree with, they can still accomplish some good. They can mitigate the damage, and remain as voices of reason, even if they disagree with the policies they have to implement. I think this is ever bit as respectable, as an intelligent voice of dissent. There are plenty of people whining about what's wrong, and plent working to fix it from the outside, but without people like these still working on the inside I think the damage done by this administration would be even worse than we've already seen. Â Heres to all you civil servants sticking it out and fighting small battles for small steps in the right direction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Come on, selkirk, didn't you see him in front of the UN? Was this part of his "plan" of working for good "from the inside"? Trying to talk the world into supporting the invasion? Â (Perhaps he knew that the world wouldn't buy his shtick, so he felt justified in presenting it? This way he could be a good double-agent, pretending to work for the administration, yet secretly working for truth, justice, and the American way. Golleee he was more clever than I thought. So THAT'S why he accomplished so much good, and kept Bush and the rest moderated! Thanks for clearing it all up.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Sorry for getting so worked up, but I just don't understand this defense of a military guy who was a mouthpiece for such an antagonistic and militaristic administration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 funny how the left is so careful about how they criticize minorities. if condi rice was white the DNC attack machine would be running full speed ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double_E Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 i want to see a re-post of that pic someone posted a few months ago... sort of a WWII-recruitment-poster-looking thing, with Condi dressed up in military garb w/big smile, and the caption "I'M FIGHTING FOR WHITEY". Â (sorry, don't have time to go search for it right now, myself) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirk Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 So you would have rather had Powell resign on the spot refuse to serve the administration and the people due to his opposition to a war that was going to happen regardless of his presence or opposition? And then what, promote Wolfowitz, or some other chicken hawk? Then we'd be completely isolated instead of almost completely isolated. Â I could be completely off base but my gut says he hated presenting that information to the UN. I doubt he thought it was any thing but BS. However, i'd guess his orders from the Chimperor were, 'present our case for wmds to the UN and get us some allies'. So he took the information the administration was relying on and presented it, even if didn't agree with it. I'd be willing to bet that he also recognized that a completely unilateral war, unmoderated by the presence of strong allies would allow Bush co to be even more unchecked, but if the UN or European Union could be brought in, their pressure might be enough to tone down Bush a bit. Â I don't think his intentions were ever to thwart bush's plans or prevent the war, that would have been pointless, but if he softened the stances of administration even an inch, or forced them to consider their actions things even a second longer, than i'd say he was as successful as could have been hoped for. Â I'm sad to see him go, and more than happy to say the Condoleeza Rice, however educated and bright, is attack dog. If she can garner us even a single ally in this conflict through anything but intimidation and bullying, which seems to suit Bush co. just fine, i'll be shocked and amazed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double_E Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Heres to all you civil servants sticking it out and fighting small battles for small steps in the right direction  thanks Selkirk. I don't, buy my parents both spent the bulk of their careers at the US Department of State. by the time Powell took its helm in 2000, Dad was retired but Mom was still working there. she only met Powell like once i think but she did, thru the course of her day to day work, learn alot about the man. she had many good things to say about him, including the fact that he was an extremely intelligent, rational, levelheaded man.... and BTW she's about as liberal as they come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camilo Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 (edited) i want to see a re-post of that pic someone posted a few months ago... sort of a WWII-recruitment-poster-looking thing, with Condi dressed up in military garb w/big smile, and the caption "I'M FIGHTING FOR WHITEY". Â (sorry, don't have time to go search for it right now, myself) Took 5 seconds (edit: longer because I'm a dumbass and the image didn't show up) Edited November 16, 2004 by Camilo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marylou Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 funny how the left is so careful about how they criticize minorities. if condi rice was white the DNC attack machine would be running full speed ahead. Â Race is not an issue when I say: Â She was ineffective as head of the NSA, and she's going to be even more so as Secretary of State. Â I really didn't have a big problem with her until I listened to every word of her testimony in the 9/11 hearings, and then I decided she really, really sucked at her job, and was/is a weasel and a tool. Â Blech on Condi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel_Hutz Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 (edited) ... Edited November 16, 2004 by Lionel_Hutz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 One thing that is clear is that loyalty is what Bush craves. He DOES NOT like listening to dissenting opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.