Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 17, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

Star-Spangled Baggage
Science Finds New Routes to Energy

Paul Robeson: A Life

Truthdig Bazaar
The Conscience of a Liberal

The Conscience of a Liberal

By Paul Krugman

more items

Ear to the Ground

With Friends Like These…

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Nov 19, 2006

President Bush has been hemorrhaging allies recently, with Republicans upset over the loss of Congress and the neoconservative architects of the war scrambling to point fingers as Iraq spirals further and further into chaos.

UPDATE: Even Henry Kissinger says Iraq can’t be won militarily.

Washington Post:

The willingness to break with Bush also underscores the fact that the president spent little time courting many natural allies in Washington, according to some Republicans. GOP leaders in Congress often bristled at what they perceived to be a do-what-we-say approach by the White House. Some of those who did have more personal relationships with Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld came to feel the sense of disappointment more acutely because they believed so strongly in the goals the president laid out for his administration.

The arc of Bush’s second term has shown that the most powerful criticism originates from the inside. The pragmatist crowd around Colin L. Powell began speaking out nearly two years ago after he was eased out as secretary of state. Powell lieutenants such as [Richard] Haass, Richard L. Armitage, Carl W. Ford Jr. and Lawrence B. Wilkerson took public the policy debates they lost on the inside. Many who worked in Iraq returned deeply upset and wrote books such as “Squandered Victory” (Larry Diamond) and “Losing Iraq” (David L. Phillips). Military and CIA officials unloaded after leaving government, culminating in the “generals’ revolt” last spring when retired flag officers called for Rumsfeld’s dismissal.

On the domestic side, Bush allies in Congress, interest groups and the conservative media broke their solidarity with the White House out of irritation over a number of issues, including federal spending, illegal immigration, the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers, the response to Hurricane Katrina and the Dubai Ports World deal.

Most striking lately, though, has been the criticism from neoconservatives who provided the intellectual framework for Bush’s presidency. [Richard] Perle, [Kenneth] Adelman and others advocated a robust use of U.S. power to advance the ideals of democracy and freedom, targeting [Saddam] Hussein’s Iraq as a threat that could be turned into an opportunity.

In an interview last week, Perle said the administration’s big mistake was occupying the country rather than creating an interim Iraqi government led by a coalition of exile groups to take over after Hussein was toppled. “If I had known that the U.S. was going to essentially establish an occupation, then I’d say, ‘Let’s not do it,’ ” and instead find another way to target Hussein, Perle said. “It was a foolish thing to do.”

Perle, head of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board at the time of the 2003 invasion, said he still believes the invasion was justified. But he resents being called “the architect of the Iraq war,” because “my view was different from the administration’s view from the very beginning” about how to conduct it. “I am not critical now of anything about which I was not critical before,” he said. “I’ve said it more publicly.”


More Below the Ad


Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By elendil, November 19, 2006 at 9:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Several of the neocons interviewed for the Vanity Fair piece referred to above (“Neo Culpa”) have claimed that their remarks were misrepresented and taken out of context. See their response here.

Though honestly I’m not sure which is worse: to express regret without taking responsibility or to not realise the need for regret at all. Both are an insult, especially to the people of Iraq, who will pay for these men’s arrogance and incompetence for many generations to come.

Report this

By Abdul sheikh, November 19, 2006 at 7:53 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The neocons are adding insult to injury.  After leading us to an wanted war on wrong pretext, they now are blaming the president for their follies.  I believe their statements are all lies.  These neocons have accomplished their objective of making Israel a super power in Middle east.

Report this

By Jackie T. Gabel, November 19, 2006 at 6:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Just added to the menu: Kissinger’s calling the war not winnable. The floodgates are open. Limited hangouts everywhere! If only the knock-down, drag-out broiling within the oligarch class would actually produce some real casulties, not just political fallout — start shooting each other up like gangsters used to do — we’d be rid of at least some of them without the expense of prosecution. The only hope is to press for 911Truth, get them in the doc, show them the noose and make them to start flipping on one another. Support 911Truth! End the War of Terror!

Report this

By rabblerowzer, November 19, 2006 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Sure, we can bomb any country back to the stone age, but we can’t subdue a nation of millions with less than two hundred thousand troops on the ground. They can’t stop our bombers, but millions of survivors crawl out of the rubble and attack our troops in a frenzy of hatred. One would think our leaders would have learned that lesson in Viet Nam.

But then again, maybe they couldn’t resist the temptation of billions of dollars in war-profiteering. Win, lose or draw, war is a bonanza for the Military, Congressional, Industrial Complex and it’s owners and investors. But that applies only to little wars against relatively defenseless countries. Our plutocrats aren’t eager to attack any country with the ability to strike America with missiles armed with nuclear warheads. Sacrificing the lives of poor and middleclass troops is one thing, but risking their own lives and property is something else entirely.

Problem is, we now have about a billion Muslims seriously annoyed with us, and some of them do have missiles armed with nuclear warheads.

Of course, the Rabid Right will say, “No problem, we just nuke them first . . . Right after we move our families to Wyoming.”

Report this

By suziq, November 19, 2006 at 10:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

We all know the old saying about the rats deserting the ship.  These ‘rats’ owe the families of every soldier and civilian killed or wounded in Iraq an apology. A personal apology!!  Hit the road ‘rats’ - you have a lot doors to knock on.  Bu$h, Cheney, Rummy, and all the rest can join in the road trip.  Better yet, there are enough of these rats to become troops and we can drop them off in Baghdad so they can fight their war themselves.  They all have enough money to supply their own helmets and vests.  America should be angry with these poor excuses for human beings.

Report this

By ananymous, November 19, 2006 at 10:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The neocon agenda has been stalking the corridors of ‘power’in a Washington of the past,for 20 years.Cheney and rumsfeld,perle,wolfowitz,the bush oligarchy{specifically george},kristol, have had designs on taking,by any means necessary,the reigns of power.GW bush’s appointments to the Supreme Court were the linchpins in the plan.The SC appointed the younger bush to power in a corrupted election{and kept him there in another,corrupted election}in order to carry out the{nazi based and influenced theories}the pax americana theories to rule the world through military domination,gathering the last resources from the oil rich geological basins of the world for the energy corps who would supply the US military with the energy to carry out this task.Profiting the oligarchs and the oligarchs in the making{cheney}.

Perle can now say the idea of occupying a country of 26 million people,whose country you’ve devastated{Iraq},and whose families you’ve killed,is a lunatics idea.But who could have known how attempting military domination of the world would cause those who’ve ceased power, to become blind. The colonial mindset of past generations has emboldened current white supremacists to mistaken calculations of world dominance through military force.We are living in a different era.An age of enlightenment and an age of ignorance,where indigenous people are recognizing who the current day colonialists are and how they will use any means necesssary to steal the planet out from under the native inhabitants of earth,and I mean all the inhabitants{‘whitepeople’are also indigenous,the earth was stolen from them erlier}.Their wars for profit only work as long as the people fund their armies.Resistance movements can become as powerful as modern equiped armies,as they have access to the same weapons,access to other assymetrical tactics are abundant,ie.nuclear devices assembled inside a country used to coerce a nation to cease and desist.It goes both ways.
Unfortunetly for the narcissists among us,what’s in its ‘death throes’ is not the insurgency of resistance to occupation,but the colonialism by a few hundred people,of a planet that belongs to the ancient intelligent species that is the body of humanity,us.The people of the world will resist torture,imprisonment and the devastation of our societies by those few who still practice greed and militarism{domination}at the expense of the whole.The planet belongs to everyone,this will not change.

Report this

By Bill, November 19, 2006 at 9:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

These idiots still won’t recognize (admit?) that the war was wrong to begin with. they just think they could have done it better Fact is the initial war was a “cakewalk” as Adelman says, no one really gave any thought to the aftermath. They all believed that bullshit about being “greeted as liberators”. Perle thinks he would have done it better. More bullshit. Maybe Rumsfeld is a moron. But, while I don’t pretend to be an expert on military strategy, the fact is he was right on his invasion strategy; the Iraqi military fell apart like wet toilet paper.
It is the post-invasion problems that not one of these geniuses considered. Neocons Wolfowitz, Perle, Adelman, Feith, Rumsfeld, Abram, Etc were the biggest supporters of the war. All staunchly pro-Israel Jews. People in other parts of the world do read the paper. Don’t you think they realized who was behind this war? In light of the record of the US in the region, primarily on the issue of Palestine, there was nothing the US could do post-invasion that would be perceived as done in the interest of ordinary Iraqis.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, November 19, 2006 at 9:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Does not merit a lengthy response, especially to this SOB Perle who tries to wash his hands off all the blood he has on his hands! Bush along with those around him who advocated this criminal war deserve to be hanged in public for all their crimes against America and humanity!

Report this

By RS Janes, November 19, 2006 at 7:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How long until Rove resigns to spend more time scaring his family, Cheney quits for ‘health reasons,’ and Condi decides it’s time she made some money in the private sector?

All three, according to rumor, are at the top of the ‘no-fly’ list of Dubya’s incoming staff—Poppy pals Baker, Gates, et al—and have been blamed as the enablers who led Junior down the path to presidential disaster. They also aren’t much beloved by the GOP in general right now.

Replacements could include Scowcroft making a tour of duty as Sec. of State, if not Baker himself; Eagleburger as close presidential aide instead of Rove, and, who knows, maybe Andy Card as caretaker vice president, although I’d bet Poppy himself would want that job—or Babs.

“Yuh, I made my Mom muh vice president—who better to make sure stuff gets done right around here? An’ she’s the first woman veep, too!”

The comic possibilities are endless.

Report this

By MARIAM RUSSELL, November 19, 2006 at 6:35 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

And these pricks could not reason it out to it´s logical conclusion? If your plans are to ultimately take posession of the raw materials of the world, and are willing to kill the people who object, and this is a multi-generational plan, and one family of pricks with a brood of seriously defective kids is chosen to be the public talking suits of this effort, and that family of pricks puts the most problematical prick in the position with lots of older pricks to control what happens…....and it is a disaster….nothing works….not even the elections…..then the surrounding pricks cannot even run a decent war! Oh! Woe!

I re-suggest my proposal that the Ivy League Universities be razed to the ground. They are obvioulsy very expensive baby sitting institutions for the very rich and serve no other purpose, and do not do that job very well as they have, in my lifetime turned out people whose lack of ability to reason have killed lots of the people I grew up with and made an unconscionable mess of the world my grand children are to inherit.

Report this

sign up to get updates

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.