English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

As a republican, I've had great respect for Colin Powell ever since he came to the Joint Chiefs under George H. W. Bush (commonly mis-referred to as Bush Sr). To hear Powell finally say, "This is all crap...it's a failed policy based on flawed intel..." I just don't need anymore. I'm all about finishing this war in one way, shape or form. But listening to Powell talk about the three-legged stool, and how we only have one leg on it, it really made me think.

This is not a republican vs. democrat thing. I'm seriously wondering though, if you're a conservative (as I seem to be labeled by those who like labeling people), how long do you hang on to the ideology before you look at things practically and say, "This $#it's for the birds?"

Your thoughts?

2007-06-11 04:28:59 · 16 answers · asked by Scotty Doesnt Know 7 in Politics & Government Politics

16 answers

I just went and read the transcript. Powell says many things in that interview: that he supported the invasion of Iraq, that he thought Saddam DID have stockpiles of WMDs, that CIA intelligence estimates supported that view. But we were wrong.

He also said that the invasion was carried out with too few troops. That the administration did not understand the need of the occupying force to defend, support, and re-establish civil control and the number of people who would be needed for that task.

As for our current situation, he says that it needs three things: US troops to keep a lid on the insurgency, training and support for Iraqi troops, and a national reconciliation by the government. We are apparently only putting efforts into ONE of those three things. This is his idea of the one-legged stool.

He also said that we cannot possibly just walk out and leave them. We broke it, we bought it. But also, he says that there WILL be a civil war there, in fact already IS a civil war there, and once we leave, it will boil over. Our only hope is to leave democratically-minded people with enough troops, material, and support that they can win the coming civil war and, afterwards, set up a democratic government.

I've always liked Colin Powell: he tells it like it is.

2007-06-11 04:52:37 · answer #1 · answered by Chredon 5 · 4 0

Many Americans have had suspicions about Powell ever since he was Secretery of State. Most Americans who have a clear understanding of terrorists and their goals, through past experience with the Baader Meinhof Gang, the RAF, IRA, JAF, ETA are not surprised by leftist logic concerning that subject. Powell probably didn't mention that he was the CJCS and Secretery of State when this "flailed policy" was formed. At any rate, it isn't the policy that is flawed. No one anticipated how dangerous the mullahs' insurgents would be, possibly due to the poor intelligence received back when Powell was in a position of influence. We probably should have done a better job of anticipating the number of treasonous Americans who would do everything they could to hinder the war effort Powell's backing of Obama further demonstrates that he is not the heavyweight people once thought he was.

If the intel was bad, why was it so? What had happened to the intel gathering capability of the US over the past eight years when Mr. Wonderful was in charge?

2007-06-11 11:46:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Colin Powell is a very wise man and close supporter of the Bushs. If he said that you can bet that he is saying it as a friend to Bush. Powell is the one who said it was a civil war about 3 years ago and no one listening I guess he's getting tired of the ignorance going on in the white house.

2007-06-11 11:38:23 · answer #3 · answered by Enigma 6 · 6 0

Ive always respected Powell, and thought he would be the first viable African American presidential candidate.

Then he went in front of the UN and related what he must have KNOWN were either the results of spotty, poorly gathered intel (the Republican version) or "designer" intel (the Democrat version), massaged to justify an Iraqi invasion. Rather than stand up to the person who ordered him to report lies to the UN, he went ahead and promoted the mistruths and half truths, THEN he quits, after the damage had been done.

Now we are in Iraq, we never should have been, more kids are dead and we have NOTHING but car bombs and mutilated soldiers to show for it.

NOW, after four YEARS, Powell goes on Meet the Press and wants to confess all? Were he a loyal American he would have been shouting this from as many pulpits as he could get access to for the last 4 years, ever since his resignation. Who better? Who had the information? POWELL did.

2007-06-11 11:36:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 11 1

Me to I've always admired and respected the guy, and I am glad that he is opening up and talking at last, maybe now a lot of these people who call leaving Iraq cutting and running will stop and listen to Colin Powell telling the "TRUTH".

2007-06-11 11:47:22 · answer #5 · answered by ~Celtic~Saltire~ 5 · 2 0

I'm not a Rep so this was no news to me, it's the few remaining "followers" that need to jerk their heads out of their as$es and listen to the truth,from someone in the know...but intelligence,it seems, is limited,and some just didn't get a large enough serving, too bad,and quite sad...Perhaps if this was a bungee jump and there was too much rope,they'd get a clearer picture of what kind of results that faulty calculations can cause

2007-06-11 11:46:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

655,000 people have died since we invaded Iraq. You know, that country who did not have WMD's, oh, and who had no connection to 9/11.. I think the whole war is being carried out for reasons unknown to us. Therefore it will not be ended until the agenda is met. Those are my thoughts..

Oh, and about Powell.. It is great to hear that someone said the policy is flawed. That is why middle easterners hate us. Not because we are free.

2007-06-11 11:38:51 · answer #7 · answered by jessica m 3 · 4 1

Powell also said intelligence leading up to the war was not made up stuff consisting of lies. It was just bad intelligence. Knowing what we know now we probably wouldn't be in Iraq, but decisions aren't made based upon what we know now, but what we knew (or thought we knew) then.

2007-06-11 11:49:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

As a republican my eyes were open before that. Everyone in general should listen to be listening to experts instead of morons like Cindy Sheehan.

2007-06-11 11:34:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

I'm considered liberal by most and I always admired Mr Powell. I think if he wrote a book, I would RUN to the store to get it. He is sharp.

2007-06-11 11:34:36 · answer #10 · answered by PATRICIA MS 6 · 8 1

fedest.com, questions and answers