Colin Powell's New Book: War With Iraq Never Debated

[George Gervin's Afro]

Colin Powell's New Book: War With Iraq Never Debated
Posted: 05/09/2012 3:23 pm Updated: 05/10/2012 12:22 am


2003. WASHINGTON -- In his new book, former Secretary of State Colin Powell provides what may be the most authoritative confirmation yet that there was never a considered debate in the George W. Bush White House about whether going to war in Iraq was really a good idea.

In a chapter discussing what he calls his “infamous” February 2003 speech to the United Nations where he authoritatively presented what was later exposed as gross misinformation about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Powell notes that by that time, war “was approaching.”

“By then, the President did not think war could be avoided,” Powell writes. “He had crossed the line in his own mind, even though the NSC [National Security Council] had never met -- and never would meet -- to discuss the decision.”

The National Security Council, which was at the time led by Condoleezza Rice, is the president’s foremost advisory body for national security and foreign policy.

The book, “It Worked For Me: In Life and Leadership,” which will be released May 22, is largely a series of leadership parables from Powell, who now spends a lot of time on the lecture circuit. The Huffington Post obtained an advance copy.

Bush insisted in his own 2010 memoir, "Decision Points," that the invasion was something he came to support only reluctantly and after a long period of reflection. During his book tour, he even cast himself as “a dissenting voice” in the run-up to war. “I didn't wanna use force,” he said.

But Powell supports the increasingly well-documented conclusion that there was actually no decision-making point -- or decision-making process -- during the events between the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, which had nothing to do with those attacks.


Former CIA Director George Tenet made an admission similar to Powell’s in his own 2007 memoir. "There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat," he wrote. Nor "was there ever a significant discussion" about the possibility of containing Iraq without an invasion.

Indeed, history shows that Bush had long wanted to strike out at Saddam Hussein and was trying to link Iraq to 9/11 within a day of the terrorist attacks.

The first concrete evidence was the Downing Street Memos first published in 2005, which documented the conclusions of British officials after high-level talks in Washington in July 2002 that “[m]ilitary action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”

An analysis of the historical record by the National Security Archives in 2010 concluded that, “In contrast to an extensive record of planning for actual military operations, there is no record that President George W. Bush ever made a considered decision for war. All of the numerous White House and Pentagon meetings concerned moving the project forward, not whether a march into conflict was a proper course for the United States and its allies. Deliberations were instrumental to furthering the war project, not considerations of the basic course.”

The war, which President Barack Obama officially brought to an end Dec. 31, cost the U.S. government around $3 trilllion, left 4,487 U.S. servicemembers dead and killed more than 100,000 Iraqis. The Pentagon counts 32,226 U.S. servicemembers wounded, but the toll, including cumulative psychological and physiological damage, may be as high as half a million.

In Powell’s explanation of how he came to provide the misleading and inaccurate account of Iraq’s WMD capability at the UN, the former secretary of state points an incriminating finger at Vice President Dick Cheney’s office -- confirming previous reports such as the one by Karen DeYoung, in her Powell biography.

In the new book, Powell describes his reaction to the initial “WMD case” from the White House. “It was a disaster. It was incoherent,” he writes. “I learned later that Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, had authored the unusable presentation, not the NSC staff. And several years after that, I learned from Dr. Rice that the idea of using Libby had come from the Vice President, who had persuaded the President to have Libby, a lawyer, write the ‘case’ as a lawyer's brief and not as an intelligence assessment.”

Powell gives himself credit for rejecting continued appeals from Cheney to add “assertions that had been rejected months earlier to links between Iraq and 9/11 and other terrorist acts.”

All in all, Powell acknowledges that the speech was “one of my most momentous failures, the one with the widest-ranging impact.” But he also concludes that “every senior U.S. official would have made the exact same case,”

He adds: “I get mad when bloggers accuse me of lying -- of knowing the information was false. I didn’t.”

The lesson of all this, Powell writes, is to follow these guidelines: “Always try to get over failure quickly. Learn from it. Study how you contributed to it. If you are responsible for it, own up to it.”

But Powell didn’t exactly own up to this for years. His former chief of staff, Col. Larry Wilkerson, first went public in 2005 with details of a secret cabal led by the vice president which hijacked U.S. foreign policy and hoodwinked the president. Wilkerson also argued for years that there was never a formal decision to go to war. Powell conspicuously failed to back him up at the time.

So what does Wilkerson make of Powell’s conclusory lessons? “Powell’s rules are for everyone else,” he told HuffPost on Wednesday.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/09/colin-powell-book_n_1503592.html




Yet the GOP Congress was silent.. now we have a GOP Congress outraged that 1 Border patrol Agent was killed and now they have opened a full investigation... Solyndra? Oh the horror.. GOP Congress is outraged.. yet totally silent when 5000 Americans died...

[boutons_deux]

the Iraq invasion was decided by PNAC+MIC before dubya took office.

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/8-secrets-of-cheneys-energy-task-force-come-to-light/

Robert Sheer wrote that Johnson not taking down Nixon/Repugs for sabotaging the Paris peace talks showed the Repugs that the Dems would let them get away with anything.

eg: Repugs sabotaging Carter's Iranian Embassy hostage negotiations so release would occur when St Ronnie The Diseased took office.

[CavsSuperFan]

Perhaps the greatest office manager to ever wear four stars...:smokin

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Screw Powell. If he felt there wasn't enough evidence or if he wasn't kosher with it then he should've put his foot down until he was satisfied. Now he's crying about it and pointing fingers all while making a buck. Fuck him :jack cry me a river

[Wild Cobra]

Screw Powell. If he felt there wasn't enough evidence or if he wasn't kosher with it then he should've put his foot down until he was satisfied. Now he's crying about it and pointing fingers all while making a buck. Fuck him :jack cry me a river
What if it's in intentional phrase to get democrats to buy his book? What does that chapter come to?

[ChumpDumper]

I didn't know the Secretary of State outranked the POTUS.

SpursTalk posters teach me new things every day.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

What is it's in intentional phrase to get democrats to buy his book? What does that chapter come to?

Huh?

[Blake]

I thought that 9/11 gave us the reason to go to Iraq?

Man I'm confused.

[Blake]

Huh?

:lol

+1

[Wild Cobra]

Huh?

"Is" should have been "if."

[clambake]

powell told us years ago that the evidence used to justify the war was deliberately misleading.

why shouldn't it be in the book?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Screw Powell. If he felt there wasn't enough evidence or if he wasn't kosher with it then he should've put his foot down until he was satisfied. Now he's crying about it and pointing fingers all while making a buck. Fuck him :jack cry me a river

The Bush Administration took his good faith and made him the fool. He doesn't need to point fingers. That's all been public knowledge for a long time.

Powell resigned.

How about fuck you.

[spursncowboys]

Powell resigned because Bush took Cheney and Rumsfeld's side on everything. I agree that powell feels like he got screwed in all the faulty intel. But I think Bush. like all the democrats and bill clinton, made decisions in good faith.

[spursncowboys]

Plus no one ever gets fired. They always "resign"

[spursncowboys]

Condi Rice did a better job anyways

[Nbadan]

Unless Powell was living in some kind of FAUX News mind-warp he had to know that Cheney was leading the CIA/NSA into war against Saddam with phoney evidence....his shame, our loss...

[Nbadan]

On the other hand, he is the only former member of the Bush administration to admit that we were duped into war with Iraq....a war crime...

[spursncowboys]

Can you define duped

[Nbadan]

duped = curveball

[Nbadan]

Cheney and all his appointed cronies in the State dept along with the CIA and Tenet where suppressing evidence that Saddam was not connected to Al Queda or 9/11 nor that Saddam any longer possessed chemical weapons and were practically sponsoring anyone who would say that Saddam was an imminent threat...

[Viva Las Espuelas]

The Bush Administration took his good faith and made him the fool. He doesn't need to point fingers. That's all been public knowledge for a long time.

Powell resigned.
So he couldn't simply resign in protest of the evidence that was gathered? You don't think that would've made everyone make sure that the evidence was solid? It sure would've made the media question the administration. I mean the guy looked like the cab was outside with the meter running, double parked during his presentation. If you're told by your employer or anybody to do somehing that your not comfortable with are you going to do it because they told you??

[Viva Las Espuelas]

"Is" should have been "if."

Huh?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So he couldn't simply resign in protest of the evidence that was gathered? You don't think that would've made everyone make sure that the evidence was solid? It sure would've made the media question the administration. I mean the guy looked like the cab was outside with the meter running, double parked during his presentation. If you're told by your employer or anybody to do somehing that your not comfortable with are you going to do it because they told you??

Someone is not familiar with the military or the notion of chain of command whatsoever.

It was POTUS and his VP that were directing him not some middle management scab.

[Blake]

Cheney and all his appointed cronies in the State dept along with the CIA and Tenet where suppressing evidence that Saddam was not connected to Al Queda or 9/11 nor that Saddam any longer possessed chemical weapons and were practically sponsoring anyone who would say that Saddam was an imminent threat...

So you can come up with this type of theory for the war in Iraq but not one for 9/11

I don't get it

[Sec24Row7]

Colin Powell wasn't elected president... the President decides whether there is even a conversation with him about what his policy/decision is going to be.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Someone is not familiar with the military or the notion of chain of command whatsoever.

It was POTUS and his VP that were directing him not some middle management scab.

Didn't answer any of my questions.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Didn't answer any of my questions.

So what? I found the premise of those questions to be ignorant. I am not your quizbot and I am not going to answer leading questions premised on stupidity.

The reason why that is was relayed to you. He was given directives and intelligence by his superiors. This is not middle management and Powell was career military.

Perhaps you go about second guessing and undermining your superiors in other agencies/commands but its obvious that you have no idea how the concept of chain of command works.

He honored the POTUS until they dishonored him.

[EVAY]

Cheney and all his appointed cronies in the State dept along with the CIA and Tenet where suppressing evidence that Saddam was not connected to Al Queda or 9/11 nor that Saddam any longer possessed chemical weapons and were practically sponsoring anyone who would say that Saddam was an imminent threat...

I think this is inaccurate, Dan. Cheney and Rumsfeld were involved in CREATING evidence, and had to fight with the CIA to get it into the conversation. Tenet's book said much the same thing that Powell has said.

Personally, I believe Tenet and Powell more than Cheney and Rumsfeld 10 days out of ten.

Bush, Cheney, Rice and the neocons WANTED to go to war with Iran, and made the facts match the intent. Everybody else, including Powell and Cheney went along with them. Not exactly profiles in courage, but also not the deceit that the principles could be charged with. (Sorry for the preposition at the end there). :)

[Nbadan]

I think this is inaccurate, Dan. Cheney and Rumsfeld were involved in CREATING evidence, and had to fight with the CIA to get it into the conversation. Tenet's book said much the same thing that Powell has said.

Personally, I believe Tenet and Powell more than Cheney and Rumsfeld 10 days out of ten.

Bush, Cheney, Rice and the neocons WANTED to go to war with Iran, and made the facts match the intent. Everybody else, including Powell and Cheney went along with them. Not exactly profiles in courage, but also not the deceit that the principles could be charged with. (Sorry for the preposition at the end there). :)

Tenet sat on his fat ass while he knew Powell was being misled into lobbying Congress to go into Iraq by Cheney and the Neocons...he either lied or was grossly incompetent...

Neither speaks well for Tenet...

[Winehole23]

they don't give out the Medal of Freedom out for nothing, you know

[Winehole23]

Tenet fell on his sword, like a good centurion

[Winehole23]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63623-2004Dec14.html

[Wild Cobra]

Tenet sat on his fat ass while he knew Powell was being misled into lobbying Congress to go into Iraq by Cheney and the Neocons...he either lied or was grossly incompetent...

Neither speaks well for Tenet...
If you know that as fact, you need to testify before congress!

[Nbadan]

If you know that as fact, you need to testify before congress!

Someday, this will all come out before a war crimes tribunal...book it...

[ChumpDumper]

Someday, this will all come out before a war crimes tribunal...book it...By what date? I'm willing to bet.

[Nbadan]

Does it matter? They are war criminals...

[ChumpDumper]

Does it matter? They are war criminals...You made a prediction.

You aren't going to put your money where your mouth is.

That's fine.

[Nbadan]

Yes, Bush and other Neocons will be convicted of war crimes someday...that is my prediction...what's your again?

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, Bush and other Neocons will be convicted of war crimes someday...that is my prediction...what's your again?Mine is they won't.

Ever.

If you are willing to put a time limit on it, I'd love to make a bet on it.

I know you won't.

[Nbadan]

Why is that important? Either they are or aren't...

[ChumpDumper]

Why is that important? Either they are or aren't...Either they will be convicted or they won't.

I say they won't and am willing to bet on it. The only way to really do that is to put a time limit on it.

I'm sure you won't take the bet because you chicken out every time. No big deal.

[Wild Cobra]

Does it matter? They are war criminals...
No they aren't.

I was in the military during Desert Storm. Saddam Hussein violated the agreements to put in effect to implement the cease fire. This alone gave us the right to pursue war.

[Wild Cobra]

Think about this Dan...

It isn't very often Chump and I agree on something.

Are we both wrong?

[ChumpDumper]

lol the right

[Wild Cobra]

lol the right
We may agree for different reason.

[spursncowboys]

Yes, Bush and other Neocons will be convicted of war crimes someday...that is my prediction...what's your again?

No president will ever be tried or convicted of war crimes. Book it.

[boutons_deux]

there's a convention that the preceding administration's crimes are not prosecuted by succeeding administrations. dubya, dickhead, rummy, cunty, etc are home free.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

So what? I found the premise of those questions to be ignorant. I am not your quizbot and I am not going to answer leading questions premised on stupidity.if they're so stupid then why reply to my post, Stupid?

Perhaps you go about second guessing and undermining your superiors in other agencies/commands but its obvious that you have no idea how the concept of chain of command works. I do if i'm not comfortable with what I'm given. This was one of my stupid questions I asked before, Stupid, but you're refusing to answer which pretty much makes this whole exchange stupid, Stupid. Have it your way.





One more thing


How about fuck you.

[spursncowboys]

LOL @ bringing up the same garbage that didn't have clout years ago. No one ever created any "evidence". Everyone in the world thought he had WMD's. Powell said from the beginning he wanted to bring up all the other atrocities that Saddam did and Bush said to focus on WMD's.

[George Gervin's Afro]

LOL @ bringing up the same garbage that didn't have clout years ago. No one ever created any "evidence". Everyone in the world thought he had WMD's. Powell said from the beginning he wanted to bring up all the other atrocities that Saddam did and Bush said to focus on WMD's.

mobile bio weapons labs? the administration showed us the images ....

rummy told us the wmds were 'in and around Tikrit'..except they weren't...

either incompetents or liars...

[EVAY]

LOL @ bringing up the same garbage that didn't have clout years ago. No one ever created any "evidence". Everyone in the world thought he had WMD's. Powell said from the beginning he wanted to bring up all the other atrocities that Saddam did and Bush said to focus on WMD's.

The created evidence was not the WMD's. It was the Al Quaeda connection.

And that 'evidence' was spouted by W., Cheney, and Rumsfeld repeatedly as why we were going to war against Iraq. The WMD evidence was believed by most but was insufficient to get the American public behind another war. They 'linked' Hussein to Osama Bin Laden falsely, blatantly, and in contradiction to the data from the CIA, the Military intelligence, and other countries' intelligence agencies.

The administration wanted to go to war with Iraq, not because of WMD's (which they believed but which were wrong), not because of Al Quaeda connections (which they didn't even privately believe since they KNEW that was wrong), but for two quite separate reasons.

Reason 1: Bush 43 thought his dad had dropped the ball by not pursuing Hussein all the way into Iraq in the first Gulf War, plus ( He [Hussein] TRIED TO KILL MY DAD).

Reason 2: The neocons wanted to establish a democracy in the the middle of the Arab world, believing it would be a stabilizing influence in the region. Condi Rice literally said that was one of the reasons in her testimony before congress.

Linking Iraq to the attack on the U.S. was a way to sell it to the American people.

[spursncowboys]

The created evidence was not the WMD's. It was the Al Quaeda connection.

And that 'evidence' was spouted by W., Cheney, and Rumsfeld repeatedly as why we were going to war against Iraq. The WMD evidence was believed by most but was insufficient to get the American public behind another war. They 'linked' Hussein to Osama Bin Laden falsely, blatantly, and in contradiction to the data from the CIA, the Military intelligence, and other countries' intelligence agencies.

The administration wanted to go to war with Iraq, not because of WMD's (which they believed but which were wrong), not because of Al Quaeda connections (which they didn't even privately believe since they KNEW that was wrong), but for two quite separate reasons.

Reason 1: Bush 43 thought his dad had dropped the ball by not pursuing Hussein all the way into Iraq in the first Gulf War, plus ( He [Hussein] TRIED TO KILL MY DAD).

Reason 2: The neocons wanted to establish a democracy in the the middle of the Arab world, believing it would be a stabilizing influence in the region. Condi Rice literally said that was one of the reasons in her testimony before congress.

Linking Iraq to the attack on the U.S. was a way to sell it to the American people.

Your reasons are your opinion. There is no evidence to support it. The first one is pretty ridiculous. Seeing how serious he was about death of soldiers and not politicizing it, that is pretty dispicable to even conceive that. The second one is equally ridiculous. Rumsfeld's "small footprint" goes against the nation building idea. The only neocon position for the middle east is to fight the anti israel groups.

Both "reasons" are in the same category as "war for oil" nonsense.

Come on EVAY. You're better than that.

[spursncowboys]

Now if you said that another reason we went to Iraq to scare any other country trying to cide with terrorists or to be able to move into Iran easier-that would make a little more sense.

[spursncowboys]

I honestly think after 9-11, Bush looked at our threats a little more serious and imminent.

[Blake]

I honestly think after 9-11, Bush looked at our threats a little more serious and imminent.

I think Bush seriously wanted to see what happened to The Pet Goat.

[Wild Cobra]

I think Bush seriously wanted to see what happened to The Pet Goat.
Wow...


What can we extrapolate about your thinking skills form that?

[EVAY]

Your reasons are your opinion. There is no evidence to support it. The first one is pretty ridiculous. Seeing how serious he was about death of soldiers and not politicizing it, that is pretty dispicable to even conceive that. The second one is equally ridiculous. Rumsfeld's "small footprint" goes against the nation building idea. The only neocon position for the middle east is to fight the anti israel groups.

Both "reasons" are in the same category as "war for oil" nonsense.

Come on EVAY. You're better than that.

There is evidence to support reason No. 1 in W.'s own words "He tried to kill my dad" is a QUOTE from W. And several of W's biographers have said that W believed that the U.S. should have followed Iraq's army into Iraq in the first Gulf War. I'm not going to look them up for you, but if you care to check it out, it is there.

The second reason is a quote from Condi Rice's testimony before congress. She flat out said that the rationale included discussions about the value of a stable democracy in the region. I remember watching that on tv and thinking at the time "Then why don't you say to the American people that is what you are doing"?

I don't happen to believe that we went to war with Iraq for oil. But we also didn't go to war with Iraq because they were supporting Al Quada. Because they weren't. Hussein and Osama Bin Laden hated each other with a passion. They were opposing Islamic followers (one Sunni and one Shia). But you have to admit that the Al Quaeda 'connection' was loudly and often touted as a reason to go to war with them.

Starting that war doesn't mean that Bush didn't care about our soldiers. He just cared about other things more.

[Nbadan]

'war for oil nonsense...yEah. because that worked out so bad for global conglomerates...why they did nt even get 100% of Iraqs oil...

[Nbadan]

Tenet fell on his sword, like a good centurion

So he is a war criminal...he was a ' soldier' who led his country into war under false pretenses and fabricated evidence... Back in the day we called them traitors...Today they are Freedom medal winners..

[ChumpDumper]

No one ever created any "evidence".You never read about Curveball either.

[Nbadan]

No they aren't.

I was in the military during Desert Storm. Saddam Hussein violated the agreements to put in effect to implement the cease fire. This alone gave us the right to pursue war.

Who put in the no fly zone again? (hint: not the UN)
Who was sponsoring state terror before the war? (hint:
Not Iraq)

[ChumpDumper]

I honestly think after 9-11, Bush looked at our threats a little more serious and imminent.He sure didn't take them seriously before 9/11.

[Nbadan]

Who used chemical weapons during the war? (hint: again not Iraq)

[FuzzyLumpkins]

if they're so stupid then why reply to my post, Stupid?
I do if i'm not comfortable with what I'm given. This was one of my stupid questions I asked before, Stupid, but you're refusing to answer which pretty much makes this whole exchange stupid, Stupid. Have it your way.

One more thing

You understand the notion of what a leading question is? What presenting a false choice is? This isn't cross-examination.

You are going to have to try much harder than this.

I only repeated myself. Are you even going to address the chain of command or you just going to continue with the bluster? And lol at you trying to be someone you are not.

[spursncowboys]

There is evidence to support reason No. 1 in W.'s own words "He tried to kill my dad" is a QUOTE from W. And several of W's biographers have said that W believed that the U.S. should have followed Iraq's army into Iraq in the first Gulf War. I'm not going to look them up for you, but if you care to check it out, it is there. yeah he has disagreed with his dad's decision to stop and not go and finish saddam and his loyalists off. That has nothing to do with him wanting to go into a war to avenge his dad.



The second reason is a quote from Condi Rice's testimony before congress. She flat out said that the rationale included discussions about the value of a stable democracy in the region. I remember watching that on tv and thinking at the time "Then why don't you say to the American people that is what you are doing"? Yeah but that has nothing to do with your assertion that we want to make a colony. I remember when Bush said that he wanted to rid the world of evil and thought to myself "what?!" But Bush doctrine of premptively striking a country ran by a tyrant is different than some kind of nwo idea of nation building just to have american airports and seaports in the middle east. Plus we already had it in Saudi Arabia, UAE, turkey, and western afghanistan.


I don't happen to believe that we went to war with Iraq for oil. But we also didn't go to war with Iraq because they were supporting Al Quada. Because they weren't. Hussein and Osama Bin Laden hated each other with a passion. They were opposing Islamic followers (one Sunni and one Shia). But you have to admit that the Al Quaeda 'connection' was loudly and often touted as a reason to go to war with them.

Starting that war doesn't mean that Bush didn't care about our soldiers. He just cared about other things more.

They didn't hate each other with a passion. Saddam did have al qeda in iraq to train. He also said any terrorist can train in iraq as long as they are targeting american or israeli interests. The part that bush and co. got wrong was that bin laden never had personal talks with saddam. Yeah the al queda and wmd's were definitely overused for sure. They should have focused on the un resolution violations; the attempted eradication of the kurds; and the fact that he would not allow the un inspectors to do their job. We should have also gone after governments and companies who went against our embargo.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

snc:


The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq.

Along with the contention that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials have often asserted that there were extensive ties between Hussein's government and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network; earlier this year, Cheney said evidence of a link was "overwhelming."

But the report of the commission's staff, based on its access to all relevant classified information, said that there had been contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda but no cooperation. In yesterday's hearing of the panel, formally known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, a senior FBI official and a senior CIA analyst concurred with the finding.

The staff report said that bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq" while in Sudan through 1996, but that "Iraq apparently never responded" to a bin Laden request for help in 1994. The commission cited reports of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda after bin Laden went to Afghanistan in 1996, adding, "but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship. Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

Further the Pentagon did their own study they released in 2008 that says there was no link. Not 'wrong about meeting OBL' but no collaboration at all.

Quite frankly thinking that Saddam wanted an organization whose purpose was to create a Sharia state in his country to become relevant is dumb.

[ChumpDumper]

Saddam did have al qeda in iraq to train.:lol

[George Gervin's Afro]

mobile bio weapons labs? the administration showed us the images ....

rummy told us the wmds were 'in and around Tikrit'..except they weren't...

either incompetents or liars...

[Blake]

Wow...


What can we extrapolate about your thinking skills form that?

I don't know, what?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

You understand the notion of what a leading question is? What presenting a false choice is? This isn't cross-examination.

You are going to have to try much harder than this.

I only repeated myself. Are you even going to address the chain of command or you just going to continue with the bluster? And lol at you trying to be someone you are not.

Ah. So I guess you would jump off a bridge if your superiors told you to. Cool. Nice to know.

[ChumpDumper]

Took three pages for a straw man to show up. Getting better, I guess.

[boutons_deux]

Colin Powell Owes Us an Apology, Not Another Excuse


Has there been a more vastly overrated person in the past 50 years than Colin Powell?

He helped cover up My Lai.

He did his part to make sure that the Iran-Contra mess never came fully to light.

He buckled under to chickenhawk bullies in the Bush White House and did his part to lie us into a destructive war with a speech to the U.N. that he knew was based on stovepiped bullshit from people he already didn't trust.

And still, people trust him and revere him and, I have no doubt, if he came to them shilling another war, they'd salute and agree with him as devoutly as they did back in 2003, when he was before the UN talking about those lagoons of anthrax consomme that didn't really exist.

And now, of course, he's back with another book in which he polishes his own apple to a high gloss while ducking his responsibility for the greatest foreign-policy foul-up of our time. And he's still talking like a hapless apparatchik:

"By then, the President did not think war could be avoided," Powell writes. "He had crossed the line in his own mind, even though the NSC [National Security Council] had never met — and never would meet — to discuss the decision."

The president "didn't think war could be avoided"? Jesus H. Christ on a 10-day contract, at what point in his presidency did George W. Bush try to avoid a war with Iraq?

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/colin-powell-it-worked-for-me-8834861#ixzz1uxpCvLBk

[johnsmith]

Wow...


What can we extrapolate about your thinking skills form that?

I don't know about Blake's thinking skills, but based on you making that post it's a pretty safe bet to say that you're a fucking idiot with no sense of humor and no idea what sarcasm is.

[johnsmith]

Colin Powell Owes Us an Apology, Not Another Excuse


Has there been a more vastly overrated person in the past 50 years than Colin Powell?

He helped cover up My Lai.

He did his part to make sure that the Iran-Contra mess never came fully to light.

He buckled under to chickenhawk bullies in the Bush White House and did his part to lie us into a destructive war with a speech to the U.N. that he knew was based on stovepiped bullshit from people he already didn't trust.

And still, people trust him and revere him and, I have no doubt, if he came to them shilling another war, they'd salute and agree with him as devoutly as they did back in 2003, when he was before the UN talking about those lagoons of anthrax consomme that didn't really exist.

And now, of course, he's back with another book in which he polishes his own apple to a high gloss while ducking his responsibility for the greatest foreign-policy foul-up of our time. And he's still talking like a hapless apparatchik:

"By then, the President did not think war could be avoided," Powell writes. "He had crossed the line in his own mind, even though the NSC [National Security Council] had never met — and never would meet — to discuss the decision."

The president "didn't think war could be avoided"? Jesus H. Christ on a 10-day contract, at what point in his presidency did George W. Bush try to avoid a war with Iraq?

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/colin-powell-it-worked-for-me-8834861#ixzz1uxpCvLBk

It's because he speaks so clearly.....for a colored fella.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ah. So I guess you would jump off a bridge if your superiors told you to. Cool. Nice to know.

There is a difference between understanding what another man's position is and what you would do in a mythical position.

Powell was told by his commander in chief of specific intelligence that indicated these things and he honored that. When how he had been used came to light, he just resigned his post.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Shoulda, woulda, coulda.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Shoulda, woulda, coulda.

You are the one talking in strawman hypotheticals.


Powell was told by his commander in chief of specific intelligence that indicated these things and he honored that. When how he had been used came to light, he just resigned his post.

Thats a declarative compared to:


I guess you would jump off a bridge if your superiors told you.

I have another one: if you were a 1st lieutenant and you were commanded by your captain to assault a position on intelligence that you personally consider to be unreliable, what are you going to do?