home

Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld

By Jeralyn, Section Foreign Affairs
Posted on Wed Oct 19, 2005 at 08:55:07 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

At a speech at Washington's New America Foundation Wednesday, Colin Powell's former Chief of Staff made some serious charges against the Bush Administration:

Vice-President Dick Cheney and a handful of others had hijacked the government's foreign policy apparatus, deciding in secret to carry out policies that had left the US weaker and more isolated in the world, the top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell claimed on Wednesday.

In a scathing attack on the record of President George W. Bush, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to Mr Powell until last January, said: “What I saw was a cabal between the vice-president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made.

Wilkenson had some scathing remarks for others as well:

  • The detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere was “a concrete example” of the decision-making problem, with the president and other top officials in effect giving the green light to soldiers to abuse detainees. “You don't have this kind of pervasive attitude out there unless you've condoned it.”
  • Condoleezza Rice, the former national security adviser and now secretary of state, was “part of the problem”. Instead of ensuring that Mr Bush received the best possible advice, “she would side with the president to build her intimacy with the president”.
  • The military, particularly the army and marine corps, is overstretched and demoralised. Officers, Mr Wilkerson claimed, “start voting with their feet, as they did in Vietnam. . . and all of a sudden your military begins to unravel”.
  • Mr Wilkerson said former president George H.W. Bush “one of the finest presidents we have ever had” understood how to make foreign policy work. In contrast, he said, his son was “not versed in international relations and not too much interested in them either”.

The transcript of Wilkerson's speech is here.

< Ex-Intel Officers: Miller a Charter Member of White House Iraq Group | American Forces Accused of Mistreating Taliban Corpses >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld | 37 comments (37 topical)
    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#1)
    by TomStewart on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Wow. This is stuff we already know happened, but someone close to it is finally speaking up. Maybe if this kind of thing was brought out when it was going on, it might have helped.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#2)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Powell may come out if this looking pretty good in the end.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    I don't think Powell will up looking good- I think he will end up looking bad. Really bad. People will look upon Iraq like Vietnam- a big fat bloody- literally bloody- mess. People will see that Powell was one person who knew the truth- and he wouldn't put his butt on the line to save us. One thing Powell's former aid says (quoted in Financial Times) is that Powell was just being the good soldier. I can not tell you how much that pisses me off. The position of Sect. of State is not supposed to be a good soldier He was my Sect. of State! I assume the founders wanted the Sentate to approve of Cabinet memebers so they were not just yes men- they have an accountablility to all of us. Yes Powell used to be a soldier. But from 2000-2004 he was not one.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#4)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Powell may have cooperated with Fitzgerald from the beginning of his investigations.
    Yesterday, a senior administration official said that before Novak's column ran, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife.
    WaPo Sept 28, 2003

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Nothing new, its about control, like our non borders this war is also just about money and that is that. if you can't see it sad, but normal in any totally corrupted state, after all most of you want one thing "the myth", and hate the ideals of the USA. Bush is one more neo-con and rat.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#6)
    by kipling on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    proving what so many people could guess was the case at the time... too little, too late, except to impeach Bushies. But what about all those wasted lives, eh?

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#7)
    by Steven Sanderson on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Every time I see or hear Colin Powell's name I instantly remember his attempts to cover-up My Lai. Colin Powell, truly a man of self-serving expedience.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#8)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    it was as a result of mr. powell's speech at the u.n. that a lot of people, reluctantly, supported the administration's plan to pre-emptively attack iraq. he was the only member that had that kind of credibility: he was a combat veteran, and the architect of desert storm. we figured he wouldn't lightly commit u.s. troops to combat, because he actually knew, from personal, first hand experience, what the potential consequences were. at this point, i still desperately want to believe that he too was led down the primrose path by the bushie's, and his recent comments cause me to suspect he was. i, along with john kerry, and many others, believed him, where we wouldn't believe bush, cheney, rice, rumsfeld, etc. looking back, this is almost exactly a duplicate of vietnam and the "tonkin gulf incident". history repeating itself. damn!

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Shorter Wilkerson: "My gosh, elected officials and their department heads making decisions! The horror! It should have been me and the permanent bureaucracy!"

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#10)
    by superskepticalman on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Methinks Powell is not so much going to look good as he is setting up his "McNamara redemption" process. At the rate things are going, Powell may regain a measure of respect - if not his Olympian level of credibility pre-Dubya - after a number of years for his public and civil repentance of enabling Dubya to destroy the reputation of the United States. Look for the Powell equivalent to McN's "Fog of War" in due course.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#11)
    by Dark Avenger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Sorry, whiffy, but the objection isn't that some people made decisions, but that they kept it hidden from the bureaucracy and as the gentleman said:
    You’ve probably all read books on leadership, 7 Habits of Successful People, or whatever. If you, as a member of bureaucracy, do not participate in a decision, you are not going to carry that decision out with the alacrity, the efficiency and the effectiveness you would if you had participated.

    When you cut the bureaucracy out of your decisions and then foist your decisions on us out of the blue on that bureaucracy, you can’t expect that bureaucracy to carry your decision out very well and, furthermore, if you’re not prepared to stop the feuding elements in that bureaucracy, as they carry out your decision, you’re courting disaster.

    TTFN, Whiffy.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#12)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    Shorter James Roberston: "Mah country boy, right 'er wrong"! They're the gummint, so they're right, cuz...well...ummm...they're the gummint! What dontchyoo git, boy? ---whiffy

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#13)
    by jen on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:10 PM EST
    I think I might just go re-read the declaration of independence. (the front of it)

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#14)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    Whenever I think of Powell, I remember that despicable performance of his at the UN, holding up fake vials of anthrax and presenting fake diagrams of Iraq's mobile bio-labs.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    edger, my point wasn't about who's right or wrong, policy wise. My point is, Wilkerson seems astonished that leaders would make decisions. He's either naive or stupid. Possibly both.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    Any damn fool can make a decision. Exhibit A: George W. Bush. But Wilkerson said leaders should make intelligent decisions by involving others, including the experts around them.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    Does anyone know if Bush has the authority to fire Fitzgerald at this stage of the game?

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    The Colonel’s speech may signal the revolt of the realist Lifers. To date, the officer corps has either drunk the neo-con Kool-Aid or if they spoke out against Rumsfeld they were silenced by charges of sexual misconduct or loss of contractor’s jobs. But, 25% of GWOT veterans have physical or mental illness. Marine Corps grunts are into their third tour in the never ending Holy War in the Middle East. I saw on DC’s Metro the other day something that I hadn’t seen since Vietnam. An unofficial SOP there was to tie one of your dog tags in your combat boots in case you were blown to smithereens. The boot usually stays intact. They then could identify you and wouldn’t be MIA. A Marine Major in fatigues on his way to the Pentagon had tied a dog tag in his boot. For the Major the war is on going here in America. If the American military rebels, it will not be pleasant and may not be suppressed like the French Paratroopers revolt in 1961 over Algeria.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    I think the most interesting comment that Wilkerson made was this one:
    Mr Wilkerson said former president George H.W. Bush “one of the finest presidents we have ever had” understood how to make foreign policy work. In contrast, he said, his son was “not versed in international relations and not too much interested in them either”. “There's a vast difference between the way George H.W. Bush dealt with major challenges, some of the greatest challenges at the end of the 20th century, and effected positive results in my view, and the way we conduct diplomacy today.”
    Not that I agree Bush Sr. was one of the best presidents ever, but the comment makes clear that this guy is not some closet liberal. He is, however, competent and informed. He has a lot of policy experience. So for some reason, that disqualifies him in Jimmy-boy's eyes. No, J.R. does not believe "my country right or wrong." He has clearly long ceased to care about this country. It's obviously "My Dubya (and his annointed ones) right or righter."

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    If you think I'm a Bush fan, you're sadly mistaken. IMHO, He's right on foreign policy and tax policy, but very little else. He's willing to spend like a drunken sailor, and willing to sign new welfare entitlements of enormous size. The problem is, the Democratic side is completely unserious about foreign policy. The Dems idea of a policy idea is to just pull the troops out, damn the consequences. I'm hardly the only American who holds his nose and votes the (R) side of aisle because the (D) side is filled with unrealistic people. You want to know which issue the Democrats are about to walk into a buzzsaw on? The Republicans have started to notice that their base - and Americans in general - are extremely unhappy about illegal immigration, and want the problem addressed. Thus far, all I'm seeing is buzzword level compliance, but it looks like the House and Senate (on the Republican side) might be serious. The President can't spell veto, so he'll sign the bill if and when it arrives on his desk. Meanwhile, the Democrats will call the whole thing racist, irritating the heck out of the broad middle of the electorate - who don't consider this a racial issue. By 2006, Iraq will be in better shape than it is now, and Katrina and Rita will be forgotten (it may be that storms from next summer affect elections, but I'll bet good money that the federal response will be pretty good next year). Illegal immigration will be a large issue though, and Republicans are going to be ready to face the electorate on that issue. Democrats will be on the wrong side, and wonder what the heck hit them (again).

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    Posted by James Robertson: "Bush...'s right on foreign policy" Then you are a RACIST, James. Well, we already knew that. As for your 'buzzsaw,' you believe the hype of your crooked media. Since Latinos are now or soon to be a majority in most of the southern border states, the fact is that there is VERY LITTLE support for your racist attempt to attack the poor. Stealing elections does not a mandate make. See if you can figure that out as you trot back to your favorite racist blogs for a refill.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    Paul, How am I a racist? Because I disagree with you? Is that all it takes now? Also, you might take a look at polling amongst latinos on illegal immigration - they don't much care for it either. I have no problem with legal immigration, and - given that there seems to be market demand for more workers - I'd be ok with expanding it. What I don't like is wide open, uncontrolled borders. So tell me Paul - being opposed to open borders that anyone can cross is racist? Do you have an actual argument, or do you just toss the race card out in order to end discussion?

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:11 PM EST
    No, James, you are a racist for a great deal of your views, but in the proximal case, since you support a foreign policy based on corporate greed and racism at the expense of poor people all over the world: • 130,000 dead Iraqi civilians, with massive destruction of water and electrical plants (WHICH IS A CLASS A WARCRIME), and massive destruction of cultural material -- GENOCIDE. The theory of that foreign policy, since Iraq had NOTHING to do with Nine-eleven, is that 'they are all the same,' aka Talat's Collective Guilt Theory. Collective Guilt Theory. The innocent can be destroyed to reach the guilty. "People worry a lot about how the Arab street is going to react," he notes. "Well, I see that the Arab street has gotten very, very quiet since we started blowing things up." -- racist Donald Kagan, PNAC • No connection to Nine-eleven. • No weapons of mass destruction. • No connection to Al Qaeda. • No nuclear program. • No second resolution from UN. • No report back to the Senate before taking action. • No protection of civlians, cultural property, and civilian infrastructure. • No planning for occupation. • Use of mercenaries in an occupation, including at least 1,500 Apartheid killers. • Use of proscribed weapons (DU, incendiary bombs, cluster bombs, chemical weapons). • Use of pogrom on Al Falujah and Al Qa'im, others. • Failure to guard 280 TONS of high-explosives. • Failure to guard radioactive materials at Tuwaitha and eight other repositories FOR A FULL MONTH after invasion. • Failure to guard 650,000 pounds of ammunition, and disbanding Iraqi army, while allowing them to keep their weapons. • Failure to guard 400 shoulder-fired missiles. • Failure to prevent looting; conspiracy to loot. It goes on and on. All of these actions and inactions are war crimes; in their totality they are GENOCIDE. And you support that. • You also apparently support the ousting by US-employed Blackwater mercs of legally-elected Haitian president Aristide. • You apparently support Bush's friendly relations with Libyan terrorist Kadafi, terrorist Islam Karamov, terrorist Musharaff, and terrorist Posada Carriles, who has admitted blowing up an airliner, who Bush is harboring in the US, refusing a legal request for extradition. I can go on and on, but that is PLENTY of evidence that you, James Robertson, are a RACIST, by your own confession of support for racist actions and racist actors.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#24)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    the swiftboating of powell and wilkerson begin!

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    As usual, Paul is unable to recall history. I invite you to read the Congressional authorization for the Iraq war - WMD were not the only (and not even the first listed) reason given for the war. You (and most of the left) like to forget that, because it undermines your entire world view. WMD was elevated solely because it was believed (wrongly, as it turned out) that doing so would make it easier to acquire UN backing. Hussein killed more people over time than have died in the war - and most of the civilians who have died have been killed by your beloved "insurgents" (or, as Michael Moore likes to call them, Minute Men). We haven't killed those people - terrorists have. Blaming us for that is like blaming the people of Beslan for the deaths of their children - only someone devoid of historical perspective would look at it that way. Heck, the Allied war effort in WWII led to the deaths of millions of civilians in Japan, Germany, and elsewhere. Did that erase the validity of the war? I guess in your book it probably would.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    These excuses on your part James don't change the fact of your racism. I lost five uncles in the fields of France on their way to put a bullet in Hitler's skull, so don't you try to wave WWII in my face. I also protested Reagan's support for Hussein the Eighties, so you can stuff that back where it belongs as well. The question was not 'what justifications do I, James Robertson, use to veil my racism from myself and others.' The question was the basis for calling you a racist. There they are, in plain text. NO amount of rightwing talking points addresses those ACTUAL actions and inactions that are racist war crimes individually, and genocide in toto. Lack of justification for hostile invasion WITHOUT UN or final Senate approval, use of mercenaries and death squad thugs, use of proscribed weapons, failure to guard and protect civilians and cultural property, pogroms on civilian centers, and the continued suggestion that Arabs can be treated en masse, as a 'street' (aka 'ghetto') -- this is all racism. You disgust me.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    Erm... I'm reading over that Congressional Resolution. Are we reading the same document? Especially since you're the one who helpfully provided the link! The shorter version of it is: We invaded Iraq in 1990 because Iraq invaded Kuwait. After the war, Iraq promised to stop developing WMDs. Inspections in the 1990s found that Iraq had gotten further along in its WMD development than had been previously thought. There was a big confrontation about this in 1998 which ended with the inspectors leaving. Congress passed a resolution against Iraq in 1998. Iraq is a continuing threat to the U.S. and the Gulf Region because, among other things, it is "continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;" and is repressing its citizens and non-citizens detained in Iraq. And after that are many, many paragraphs about Iraq's potential ability to use WMDs to attack others, and how it has ties with al Qaeda, and September 11, etc etc. And what about the authorization itself?
    SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to-- (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
    The first justification is security against a "continuing threat." What is that threat, if not WMDs? Yes, other reasons are given, in fine behind-covering fashion, but the one recurring theme is WMDs! They are mentioned in about 8 different paragraphs. I don't see how you can assume that they are anything but the primary reason. And since it turned out there weren't WMDs, and Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9/11, and Al Qaeda was only operating in the part of Iraq not under Saddam's control before... Well, other than that, Bush is doing a GREAT job on foreign policy!!!

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    JR-The pnac doc predates all of your sources, it was written in '98. The idea of getting rid of Saddam was considered minor to occupying Iraq in order to control the middle-east and then the world. The war was not about Saddam, as suckers like you either believe or just like to echo. The invasion of Iraq was about fulfilling neocon Imperial fantasies. The pnac link has been posted so many times by commenters on this site I will not bother linking it again. The pnac agenda is in plain english and the neocons are proud of it.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    Paul, Waving charges of racism around says more about me than it does about you. I mentioned WWII in the context of civilian casualties, something you ignored by getting personal. As to the war rationale, the truce after Gulf War I was violated, which was justification for war all by itself. For that matter, so was Hussein's plot to kill Bush sr.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#30)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    Jr-well at least you admit that you are a racist. We know what we are dealing with here:
    Paul, Waving charges of racism around says more about me than it does about you.
    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    yeah, a typo is revealing. Not.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    JR-some would call it a 'Freudian Slip'.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#33)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    Yes, the gulf war truce was violated, by the US and britain and SH. The 'no fly zone' was never sanctioned by the UN. The lie to the Kurds to protect them if they revolted (see, I completely ignored the easy pun about letting kurds have their way) was a total betrayal by bush1. And conducting foreign policy by 'I'm gonna get the man who tried to shoot my pa', bushco's aim from day 1 in the WH, is as moronic as a Tom Mix plot.
    WMD was elevated solely because it was believed (wrongly, as it turned out) that doing so would make it easier to acquire UN backing.
    Wrong, you are a liar, and at this point a serial liar. WMDs were the ONLY selling point by bushco to the US ... until they proved to be lies. Then they moved the goalposts. Almost no americans, (outside of PNUT) would have agreed to waste all these American lives because 'saddam is a bad man.' saddam had many years (and the backing of the US) to kill as many as he did. bushco has exceeded his record in just 2 short years. But back on topic, powell was a willing hore who laid the way his pimp told him to. He and his minions only confirm how egregious their parts in bushco's war crimes.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    A typo is generally comedic. Posted by James Robertson: "I mentioned WWII in the context of civilian casualties" Yes, you made this false comparison, as if there never was an atomic bomb, never was the founding of the UN, the coining of the word and concept of 'genocide,' and the signing of the Genocide Convention by Ronald Reagan. WWII had no UN to consider, and no concept or term 'genocide.' There was no treaty that is US LAW on the subject, as there is now, and there was no Vietnam, which is when most of America realized that such pogroms on civilians were immoral. There was also no "Powell Doctrine." None of these factors affects the basic racism of Bush Preemptive War, which follows the logic of Talat, the Turk who slaughtered the Armenians in the early part of the last century. Collective Guilt theory is racism -- it is no longer an acceptable theory of government or war. We were, and will be again, PLEDGED not to invade innocent countries on false pretexts, for cash and pipedreams of a totalitarian US power on the earth. The racism of pro-Bush commenters is an atavism, an attempt to swim back against the tide of human rights. YOU are an objective supporter of TERRORISM. Stop doing that. Reform your attitudes. Hatred is not the answer, and we have very little time for totalitarian anything any more. We need the solutions that ONLY TOLERATION AND RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS can bring about. Either that, or you can file your teeth down to points, get an Uzi and a Hummer, and be one of the galoots who give America its current (amply deserved) ugly reputation.

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:12 PM EST
    assisted in the buildup of Islamic terror world wide
    Actually, Cheney/Bush II has done a much, much more impressive job of that than Bush I. If only because that's what keeps the big crony contract money flowing out of the U.S. treasury. Are we feeling safer yet? Where do you store your dog tags, mister charley?

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:13 PM EST
    Hey Chuckie, I'm guessing international law is supposed to embarrass leaders into doing the right thing. You're right though -- it isn't working. President "Not on my watch" Bush is doing squat (with perhaps a pinch of diddly) about Darfur. (It's been recommended before, but "A Problem From Hell: America in the Age of Genocide" is a wonderful book on the subject. Why don't you try reading it?) But this is off-topic. Do you have anything to say about the fact that Cheney and Rumsfeld totally screwed up and screwed the country? Or is it more satisfying to accuse people of... er... being more intelligent than you (why thank you!) than to actually try to defend the indefensible?

    Re: Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:15 PM EST
    The fact is that it is ILLEGAL under the UN charter to attack innocent countries over pipedreams, racist ideas, and hopes of finding an excuse to justify it. Lying the Congress and the People into an little-justified debacle in Iraq is unconstitutional. No resolution gives cover to executive LIARS. The fact is that genocide, whole or partial, committed or simply planned, is illegal under Reagan's signature. If you have a problem with that, you have a problem with Ronald Reagan.

    Powell Aide Turns on Cheney and Rumsfeld | 37 comments (37 topical)