I don't doubt Powell felt he was working just as hard on Rummy and the establishment, as he was with France, Germany... That was probably a very lonely man in the Bush administration during the year of the run up. But, I remember tough Powell statements after the fact toward France and Germany, uncharacteristic of his normal diplomatic stance.
There was a time immediately after the war, that Powell and Rummy seemed to have changed positions. Powell was the cannon.
Powell was the one saying we would have to re-evaluate our relationships... He did soften in time.
----------------
If you have references to any of the quotes I'd like to see them. Not that I doubt them, I noticed Powell was a bit different after the war started. I'd chalked it up to the realization that the die had been cast and he had a role to play.
After touting the UN, his boss decided to abandon it. At that moment it was important to portray the situation as a French snobbery. Anything that spites the French is an easy sell in the US. The majority of the world was against the war. I believe that the immediate post-war characterization of the French as wet blankets was deliberate. Backing out of the UN was a move that had the potential for loss of face. IMO the harsh comments about France were always given with the US audience in mind.
Please remind me: what is it about Colin Powell we're supposed to admire, then and/or now? What did he have a good reputation for, substantively?
Like your observations, craven.
I have no conflict. If you're a team player, then you go along with what the head ofice says, whether you feel it is right or wrong. Or, at least, you try to find some concensus. If you have integrity and beliefs, you try to put them into play. So, for me, the team player part won out, and I lost respect. So, I'm afraid, did a large part of the world. Although I understand that Aznar of Spain is supposed to have said he'll try to work with Powell, but not with Rumsfeld.
As for the UN stonewalling - they had a position from the start. Because they didn't agree with and wouldn't go along with the US insistence doesn't translate ino stonewalling. And they have held firm to that. There is a lot that's wrong aout the UN, but we invested them with a lot of importance when we kept going back for approval and assistance, which we must have felt we needed. And that's an area of expertise where Powell was held down. Increasingly, I feel the US did itself some wrongs by taking the attitudes they did, letting the know-nothings ride over the only figures of repect we had.
To a large extent I agree. My point was that in the eyes of the world every single American has lost their standing.
The whole nation has lost some respect in the eyes of teh world. Including subordinates and people who have had nothing to do with the decision to go to war.
I don't have the same problems with Powell other progressives seem to, and would certainly not rule out voting for him in some future election.
Boy, though, he has packed a lot of baggage that's going to get opened if someday he runs...
Italgato wrote:I am interested in Frank Apisa's comment on President Bush's intelligence level( doesn't match most high schoolers).
Does Mr. Apisa have any empirical evidence as to President Bush's IQ or is he just guessing?
Open your ears and close your biases -- and you too will easily see that this guy is bush league when it comes to intelligence.
But don't get me wrong -- I'd love to see him sit for a proctored IQ test. MY GUESS: He wouldn't come close to scoring as high as some of the young high schoolers I know.
By the way -- I also had concerns about the intelligence of Dan Quayle. Now Dan was no Rhodes Scholar, that's for sure -- but in my estimation, he a hell of a lot sharper than Dubya. And frankly, I trusted him more.
Italgato wrote:Perhaps Frank Apisa is right. I don' t think so.
There are others who don't think so.
Judge Richard A, Posner doesn't think so.
Judge Posner wrote( in his book "An Affair of State"
P. 266
"For those who think that authority depends on mystery, the shattering of the presidential mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought of rights to have paid with his job."
Not all will agree, of course, but I think Posner's comment is true and beautiful.
Clinton certainly liked getting his dick tended to -- there is no denying that.
I have trouble faulting him on that score, though, because (don't let this get around) so do I -- and so do most of the guys I know with the exception of some very Republican dudes who are about as asexual as any people I've ever known.
People like George Will use to have lots to say about Clinton's "failings" in that area.
MY GUESS: George Will would have trouble scoring in the Tijuana red-light district if he walked down the street with rolled up hundred dollar bills sticking from his nostrils.
And as for Clinton's lying -- why charging a politician (of either party) with being a liar is like charging him with wearing a tie to work.
Bush was a C- at Yale (that's was a bought C-), and Havard Business school is a mail order college - same as Phoenix.
As to Powell, I don't consider him a lost cause; but, he must show something to rise to the level of receiving my vote, again!
Now you threw that one out, husker, just to throw a monkey wrench in the works. I hope.
(Besides, with her hubby on Viagra I don't know how she has any time to work in politics).
Right, Frank -- Clinton was about as mysterious as a completed crossword puzzle.
That's me a monkey wrench
Ticket: Dole and Powell or Powell & Dole
Dick Powell? Ruby Keeler for Secretary of State maybe? (Arghh, and I think they are both dead but don't the people now running the country act like it?)
Craven--
You're right about one thing--
At this point, how Powell's statements are interpreted can be nothing more than a guess--which is what my statement was, as well.
I did pay attention to what I percieved to be between the lines in several documentaries, and his articles--but one can't know if his words mirror his boss's preferences, his loyalty, or his true, personal opinion.
I'm looking forward to reading his memoirs.
I do believe he had serious problems with some actions of the Bush admin., but I also believe he felt France, Germany et al were pulling his chain. I know you can fake anger and disappointment--and I know the faking of these emotions can be part of the job--but I felt I understood Powell from my research. Thie facts about his opinions will hopefully be known not too long after his retirement.
Re Powell - what about his big presentation to the UN to try to get UN support for the war, using some very discredited "intelligence" info? Does this affect his standing, at all, for people who are supporting him? (Whether we think he knew, or not?)
Re his putative resign/ameliorate dilemma - (surely one of the oldest political dilemmas there is) - do people say he would be finished politically if he resigned, because the Republican Party would never forgive him, no matter how much his decision might, with hindsight, appear principled and correct? (Here, people can resign from Cabinet, but, because they are elected members of parliament, they remain able to mount a quiet campaign, and challenge for party leadership, if they believe the tide has turned.)
Supposedly Deb, Powell didn't use the 'discredited "intelligence" info?' on the UN because it was bad intelligence - okay for Bush to use, but not Powell. Go figure!
And, supposedly, the chickenhawks - Rummy, Wolfowitz, Cheney - put out the resignation stuff to see how it floated. Apparently, no one in the WH laughed!
I would've voted for Teddy Roosevelt every time he ran.
Elizabeth Dole - inspired! An inspiration for American womanhood. And she'd never have to worry about time needed for her hair - it never moves. And how about good old Dan Burton?
A great ticket would be Rick Perry of Texas and Janklow of SD - a winning team.
And, you know, it's funny. Not once on this thread have I heard anyone refer to what a great candidate Bush is. But I did read in a foreign newpaper lately the conjecture that Karl Rove is big enough to sit on and crush anyone who gets in his way of the presidency. The Spaniards have an earthy sense of humor.
A next to last thing on Powell. Every time I see him now I think, "what a waste." Here's an administration that did have an international asset, and they destroyed it. Was it out of fear, envy?
