Colin Powell breaking rank?

[Dennis M. Scott]

Either that or he's paving the way for a change in the Bush administration's position. Powell reportedly this morning said the conflict in Iraq is clearly a civil war now.

So is this an open door?

[Bob Wright]

He has been out of step with Bush for a long time. IMHO

[Bruce Carriker]

Colin Powell has been in basic disagreement with the Bush administration on Iraqi policy since before the war began. That's why he resigned as Secretary of State. Sadly, his views have proven to be largely correct.

I don't see anything wrong with Powell calling it a civil war, for a couple of reasons:

1. It is a civil war; and

2. Since he's no longer part of the administration, he's free to say what he believes, just like anyone else.

If he were still Secretary of State, it would be a different matter altogether.

[BobHunt]

I dont know how you know that this is why he resigned, unless you have a inside view that hardly anyone else has into his life, or unless he phoned you this morning. It is surprising to me of how many people who work with the Pres and make everyone think they are with him, and later you find out they disagree with him. But if he only watches tv and only goes by what they report, Iraq has been in civil war for 6 months to a year already.

[Bruce Carriker]

I dont know how you know that this is why he resigned, unless you have a inside view that hardly anyone else has into his life, or unless he phoned you this morning.

Bob, this is insulting and beneath you, and I won't bother to answer it, because you know the answer.

It is surprising to me of how many people who work with the Pres and make everyone think they are with him, and later you find out they disagree with him.

Bob, this is a rather sad commentary on your understanding of how leadership works. Leaders are owed the honest, discrete disagreement of their subordinates DURING THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS. Once the final decision has been made, subordinates owe their boss the loyalty to carry out that decision, or to resign in favor of someone who will.

But if he only watches tv and only goes by what they report, Iraq has been in civil war for 6 months to a year already.

I guess this just shows that the media do sometimes get some things right.

[John Kennedy]

He has been out of step with Bush for a long time. IMHO


If more people had been out of step with Bush we wouldn't have American soldiers dying in a loser of a situation. People in that area of the world have been quite cheerfully killing each other in the name of God for some time now. We need to get out the way and let 'em finish what they seem to most clearly relish. That whole crew isn't worth one more drop of American blood!

[Bruce Carriker]

Them's fightin' words to a lot of folks around these parts, John. You'd better duck! There's some room here in my foxhole if you need it.

[John Kennedy]

Yeah, I'm sort of prepared. I think the mind set of a lot of 'em is that they trusted in "W" for their 'political salvation' and they're determined not to backslide. The attitude seems to run parallel to the "God said it - I believe it - that settles it" regarding matters of the faith. "The neo-cons propose it - "W" does it - that settles it".

Sorry, I'm personally not ready to hand that kind of blank check to anyopne. At several different points had enough people been willing to stand up and say, "hold on, let's think this through". we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today.

Iraq is a totally artificially assembled country, crafted in the face of overwhelmingly contrary demographic indicators to the contrary - it was put together by the Brits for ease of colonial administration and they eventually walked away from it shaking their heads.

The wacko natives seem to have no higher purpose in life than to destroy those who are not like them ethnically or religiously. What on earth made us think we could reverse that?

There is only one Saviour of the world, and we're not Him. So once again, we dispatch brave you men to die for the sake of the hubris of tired old men in DC who should've known better.

And some want to mindlessly support that kind of leadership.

[David Cash]

I think I qualify as a conservative, yet I've been uncomfortable with the war in Iraq from the beginning. I don't know what the best solution is, but I don't think I could go so far as to say that the Iraqi's were less deserving of life than the Americans.

Where I would differ from a lot of people who are vocal against the war is that I'm inclined to think that it was an honest mistake rather than a plot to take over another country for the benefit of American corporations. As one who has made many mistakes over the years, I'm not eager to punish others for theirs.

David Cash

[Diane Likens]

The wacko natives seem to have no higher purpose in life than to destroy those who are not like them ethnically or religiously. What on earth made us think we could reverse that?

There is only one Saviour of the world, and we're not Him. So once again, we dispatch brave you men to die for the sake of the hubris of tired old men in DC who should've known better.

And some want to mindlessly support that kind of leadership.

WOW! Well put, John. And right on the money. These are people who are utterly convinced that anyone with a thought differing from their own is an infidel to be killed and discarded in the name of Allah. Brutal killing has gone on for generation after generation after generation. To think for even one moment that "democracy" and "peace" are words that can be easily grasped and adopted by this nation and it people is absolutely outrageous.

I'm reminded of a news story some years ago -- President Bush, Sr. went to a grocery store to prove that it was indeed possible to feed a family with the meager entitlement of food stamps available to the poor at the time. He stood IN ABSOLUTE AWE when he saw the scanners at the checkout -- something that by that point the average American was taking for granted. Upon hearing this story, I was convinced that my President was out of touch with reality. (Rather like Marie Antoinette -- when her advisors came and told her that the peasants were revolting because they had no bread. Her solution was, "Let them eat cake.") Absolutely and utterly clueless.

The fact that the second President Bush TRULY BELIEVES that the Iraqis want democracy (as if the word MEANS something) scares me. Again, absolutely and utterly clueless.

And still our soldiers do their jobs. I honor and respect each and every one of them, knowing minute by minute and hour by hour that I owe them a debt I can never hope to repay -- and I pray every day that by some miracle this war will come to a screeching halt and they can all come home where they belong. So far, the answer to that prayer has been "Not Yet".

I will continue to question my government -- and be thankful that I have the right to do so.

[John Kennedy]

I think I qualify as a conservative, yet I've been uncomfortable with the war in Iraq from the beginning. I don't know what the best solution is, but I don't think I could go so far as to say that the Iraqi's were less deserving of life than the Americans.

Where I would differ from a lot of people who are vocal against the war is that I'm inclined to think that it was an honest mistake rather than a plot to take over another country for the benefit of American corporations. As one who has made many mistakes over the years, I'm not eager to punish others for theirs.

David Cash

Didn't really mean to intimate that ALL Iraqis were 'less deserving of life' than Americans. Not sure I can say the same for those who seem to relish destroying the infidel. Since they seem bent on destroying anyone who diverges from them, we need to get out of their way and let 'em finish the job.
One thing that is becoming more evident as I look at the swamp called the Middle East is that we should get down on our knees and thank God for a secular, pluralistic society.
Have come to no opinion as to whether this was a plot or an honest mistake. Given the stuff we were told going in, I'm not sure the term 'honest' really belongs here. I'll give 'em the benefit of the doubt - the whole fiasco stemmed from the kind of arrogance that they had in mind when they came up with the term hubris.

[John Kennedy]

I emphatically share your feelings about our troops. They are there doing what they are supposed to do. Soldiers follow orders. My criticism of the war is not, in any manner, shape, or form, a criticism of them.

The ones who have been killed or wounded, I think of a double victims. Victims not only of the enemy shooting at them, but of inept, arrogant leaders who placed them, needlessly, in harms way. Their courage and valor is not, in any way, diminished, by the hubris of the tired old men who sent them to their deaths.

I may well be accused, as a result of my remarks, or not supporting our troops. Nothing could be farther from the truth, and anyone making such an accusation would be guilty of intellectual dishonesty of the first order, and they know it.

[Bruce Carriker]

I think that many...perhaps even most...Iraqis DO want democracy. But to the VAST majority (who are Shiite, BTW), that means the right to decide they want an Islamist theocracy, along the lines of Iran. That's what THEY want.

But that's not acceptable to the Kurds, to the Sunnis, to the US, to Turkey, to Saudi Arabia, to Kuwait, or to Israel. And so we're not going to let that happen.

That leaves them scratching their heads about what words like "democracy" and "self determination" mean, and they look at us not as liberators who are going to give them self-determination, but as occupiers who are determined to replace one government they didn't like with another government they don't want.

[Hans Deventer]

I think that many...perhaps even most...Iraqis DO want democracy. But to the VAST majority (who are Shiite, BTW), that means the right to decide they want an Islamist theocracy, along the lines of Iran. That's what THEY want.

But that's not acceptable to the Kurds, to the Sunnis, to the US, to Turkey, to Saudi Arabia, to Kuwait, or to Israel. And so we're not going to let that happen.

That leaves them scratching their heads about what words like "democracy" and "self determination" mean, and they look at us not as liberators who are going to give them self-determination, but as occupiers who are determined to replace one government they didn't like with another government they don't want.

Agreed. So democracy only works if the vast majority in a country has similar ideas about what they want. If not, better split it up.
(Which in the case of Iraq won't work either because the Sunnis have no oil)

That leaves us with the option of another dictator.

[Bruce Carriker]

Agreed. So democracy only works if the vast majority in a country has similar ideas about what they want. If not, better split it up.
(Which in the case of Iraq won't work either because the Sunnis have no oil)

Well, that's one reason it won't work. Others:

Saudi Arabia (which is Sunni) doesn't want ANOTHER strong Shiite theocracy in the region, which is what most of Iraq would become.

Turkey will is adamantly opposed...to the point of threatening their own invasion...to an independent Kurdistan. They don't even want the Kurds to have limited autonomy under a loose Iraqi confederation type of government.

That leaves us with the option of another dictator.

Or a king, which was actually discussed a few years ago as a possibility.