Colin Powell laid out the reasons why he is voting for Obama in a very straight forward manner. Check it out and if you know any voters who are undecided about who they are voting for, them the link to this video.
Showing posts with label Colin Powell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Colin Powell. Show all posts
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Colin Powell's Attempt to Salvage His Reputation
Colin Powell told a crowd in Aspen, Colorado, that he had a meeting with President Bush in which he tried to talk him out of invading Iraq by telling him of the problems the United States would have in occupying an Arab country. (You can read a report on Powell's remarks here.)
Here is what really ticks me off about Colin Powell and Paul O'Neill, former Secretary of the Treasury and co-author of the book The Price of Loyalty: they knew that Bush was an intellectual lightweight, poorly suited for the Presidency of the United States, and yet in 2004, when he was up for re-election, they chose to remain silent. They chose to be loyal to a President who they knew was not worthy of that loyalty and, by so doing, they did a huge disservice to the people of the United States.
Now, when they realize how much of a disaster this administration has been, they want to try and salvage their reputations by giving speeches and writing books. Well, where were they in 2004, when they could have made a big difference?
Imagine the impact that Colin Powell's revelations would have had if he had come out before the 2004 election with his account of his meeting with Bush. Imagine the impact that O'Neill would have had if he had come out and blasted the Bush Administration for turning surpluses into deficits with his reckless tax cuts. Instead, when it could have mattered, they stood mute.
A friend suggested recently that Barack Obama should announce that if he wins the Presidency, he would appoint Colin Powell Secretary of State. Although such a move makes sense politically, it would be unfortunate because Powell should pay a price, not for being wrong about Iraq, but for staying silent when he could have made a big difference.
Here is what really ticks me off about Colin Powell and Paul O'Neill, former Secretary of the Treasury and co-author of the book The Price of Loyalty: they knew that Bush was an intellectual lightweight, poorly suited for the Presidency of the United States, and yet in 2004, when he was up for re-election, they chose to remain silent. They chose to be loyal to a President who they knew was not worthy of that loyalty and, by so doing, they did a huge disservice to the people of the United States.
Now, when they realize how much of a disaster this administration has been, they want to try and salvage their reputations by giving speeches and writing books. Well, where were they in 2004, when they could have made a big difference?
Imagine the impact that Colin Powell's revelations would have had if he had come out before the 2004 election with his account of his meeting with Bush. Imagine the impact that O'Neill would have had if he had come out and blasted the Bush Administration for turning surpluses into deficits with his reckless tax cuts. Instead, when it could have mattered, they stood mute.
A friend suggested recently that Barack Obama should announce that if he wins the Presidency, he would appoint Colin Powell Secretary of State. Although such a move makes sense politically, it would be unfortunate because Powell should pay a price, not for being wrong about Iraq, but for staying silent when he could have made a big difference.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Former Brit Defense Secretary Admits Brits Underestimated Cheney Influence
If you click on the link in this entry's title, you can read a story in the Guardian, a British newspaper, about David Hoon. Hoon was the British defense secretary during the invasion of Iraq. In this article he admits that the Brits totally missed the influence of Dick Cheney on Bush regarding Iraq. This is from the article: "Sometimes ... Tony had made his point with the president, and I'd made my point with Don [Rumsfeld] and Jack [Straw] had made his point with Colin [Powell] and the decision actually came out of a completely different place. And you think: what did we miss? I think we missed Cheney."
Hoon points out that the Brits disagreed with the Bush Administration over two key points. This is also from the article: Geoff Hoon reveals that Britain disagreed with the US administration over two key decisions in May 2003, two months after the invasion - to disband Iraq's army and "de-Ba'athify" its civil service.
Disbanding the Iraqi Army led to a lot of soldiers who had military training being put on the streets, free to link up with insurgent elements, especially among the Sunni Muslims. Purging the civil service of Ba'athist party members meant that the people who had been running the government, carrying out functions such as education, public utilities, etc., weren't there. The consequences of both of these decisions have been horrible for both the United States and Iraq.
In the past we have commented on the fact that anyone who gets involved with George W. Bush has their reputation tarnished. Take Colin Powell. There was a man who was well thought of by the American people and the American media. He was talked about as possibly a candidate for President. He was admired by members of both parties. After getting involved with the Bush Administration, his reputation has been greatly diminished and no one now speaks of him as a possible presidential candidate or even as a future Cabinet member. He is now scorned as one of the persons who helped lead us into a war that is costing us both lives and treasure.
He is but one example and to that list you can add Tony Blair. He is shortly to leave office after 10 years as Prime Minister and his popularity with his countrymen has plummented. He is referred to as "Bush's lap-dog." All because he got involved with George W. Bush.
Hoon points out that the Brits disagreed with the Bush Administration over two key points. This is also from the article: Geoff Hoon reveals that Britain disagreed with the US administration over two key decisions in May 2003, two months after the invasion - to disband Iraq's army and "de-Ba'athify" its civil service.
Disbanding the Iraqi Army led to a lot of soldiers who had military training being put on the streets, free to link up with insurgent elements, especially among the Sunni Muslims. Purging the civil service of Ba'athist party members meant that the people who had been running the government, carrying out functions such as education, public utilities, etc., weren't there. The consequences of both of these decisions have been horrible for both the United States and Iraq.
In the past we have commented on the fact that anyone who gets involved with George W. Bush has their reputation tarnished. Take Colin Powell. There was a man who was well thought of by the American people and the American media. He was talked about as possibly a candidate for President. He was admired by members of both parties. After getting involved with the Bush Administration, his reputation has been greatly diminished and no one now speaks of him as a possible presidential candidate or even as a future Cabinet member. He is now scorned as one of the persons who helped lead us into a war that is costing us both lives and treasure.
He is but one example and to that list you can add Tony Blair. He is shortly to leave office after 10 years as Prime Minister and his popularity with his countrymen has plummented. He is referred to as "Bush's lap-dog." All because he got involved with George W. Bush.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)