Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: 4-star betrayal

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    57
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    212

    Default 4-star betrayal

    Powell forgot what it means to serve the People, but at least his chief of staff seems to have remembered. Better late than never.

    Powell's Chief of Staff Proposes Impeachment
    By David Swanson
    AfterDowningStreet.com

    Thursday 10 May 2007

    On Thursday, May 10, 2007, Lawrence Wilkerson, speaking on National Public Radio, proposed impeaching President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

    Wilkerson is a Retired Army Colonel, the former Chief of Staff at the State Department from 2002 to 2005 under then Secretary of State Colin Powell, a Vietnam War veteran, the former Acting Director of the Marine Corps War College at Quantico, and currently a teacher of national security at William and Mary College.

    The program, On Point, was hosted by Tom Ashbrook, who focused the discussion on a need for greater public accountability for the Iraq War, but who maintained that the public was not outraged or interested. (Ashbrook should read some polls and invite on organizers of the impeachment movement.)

    Also on the program was Ken Adelman, who promoted the war and said it would be "a cakewalk". Adelman argued a case for not holding public officials accountable.

    Wilkerson said in early comments on the show: "This administration doesn't know how to effect accountability in my opinion." But he did not raise the possibility of impeachment until after a member of the audience had phoned in.

    The first caller who was put on the air demanded an investigation of the lies that launched the war, and asked for accountability "all the way up." In response to Adelman's claims that history would hold people accountable, the caller said "I would love to have a job where, worst case scenario, my historical record is flawed."

    Ashbrook framed the question in terms of alleged limitations of the U.S. political system, and Wilkerson replied: "Well I do think that that's a reality of our system. However, let me back up just a minute and say that I really do think that our founding fathers, Hamilton, Washington, Monroe, Madison, would all be astounded that over the course of our short history as a country, 200 plus years, we haven't used that little two to three lines in Article II of the Constitution more frequently, the impeachment clause. I do believe that they would have thought had they been asked by you or whomever at the time of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia 'Do you think this will be exercised?' they would have said 'Of course it will, every generation they'll have to throw some bastard out'. That's a form of accountability too. It's ultimate accountability."

    After an interruption, Wilkerson continued: "The language in that article, the language in those two or three lines about impeachment is nice and precise - it's high crimes and misdemeanors. You compare Bill Clinton's peccadilloes for which he was impeached to George Bush's high crimes and misdemeanors or Dick Cheney's high crimes and misdemeanors, and I think they pale in significance."

    Ashbrook asked for some examples of such high crimes and misdemeanors, and Wilkerson replied: "I think that the caller was right. I think we went into this war for specious reasons. I think we went into this war not too much unlike the way we went into the Spanish American War with the Hearst press essentially goading the American people and the leadership into war. That was a different time in a different culture, in a different America. We're in a very different place today and I think we essentially got goaded into the war through some of the same means."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    7,727
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    8
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    8
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    243662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zefrendylia View Post
    Powell forgot what it means to serve the People, but at least his chief of staff seems to have remembered. Better late than never.

    Powell's Chief of Staff Proposes Impeachment
    By David Swanson
    AfterDowningStreet.com

    Thursday 10 May 2007

    On Thursday, May 10, 2007, Lawrence Wilkerson, speaking on National Public Radio, proposed impeaching President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

    Wilkerson is a Retired Army Colonel, the former Chief of Staff at the State Department from 2002 to 2005 under then Secretary of State Colin Powell, a Vietnam War veteran, the former Acting Director of the Marine Corps War College at Quantico, and currently a teacher of national security at William and Mary College.

    The program, On Point, was hosted by Tom Ashbrook, who focused the discussion on a need for greater public accountability for the Iraq War, but who maintained that the public was not outraged or interested. (Ashbrook should read some polls and invite on organizers of the impeachment movement.)

    Also on the program was Ken Adelman, who promoted the war and said it would be "a cakewalk". Adelman argued a case for not holding public officials accountable.

    Wilkerson said in early comments on the show: "This administration doesn't know how to effect accountability in my opinion." But he did not raise the possibility of impeachment until after a member of the audience had phoned in.

    The first caller who was put on the air demanded an investigation of the lies that launched the war, and asked for accountability "all the way up." In response to Adelman's claims that history would hold people accountable, the caller said "I would love to have a job where, worst case scenario, my historical record is flawed."

    Ashbrook framed the question in terms of alleged limitations of the U.S. political system, and Wilkerson replied: "Well I do think that that's a reality of our system. However, let me back up just a minute and say that I really do think that our founding fathers, Hamilton, Washington, Monroe, Madison, would all be astounded that over the course of our short history as a country, 200 plus years, we haven't used that little two to three lines in Article II of the Constitution more frequently, the impeachment clause. I do believe that they would have thought had they been asked by you or whomever at the time of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia 'Do you think this will be exercised?' they would have said 'Of course it will, every generation they'll have to throw some bastard out'. That's a form of accountability too. It's ultimate accountability."

    After an interruption, Wilkerson continued: "The language in that article, the language in those two or three lines about impeachment is nice and precise - it's high crimes and misdemeanors. You compare Bill Clinton's peccadilloes for which he was impeached to George Bush's high crimes and misdemeanors or Dick Cheney's high crimes and misdemeanors, and I think they pale in significance."

    Ashbrook asked for some examples of such high crimes and misdemeanors, and Wilkerson replied: "I think that the caller was right. I think we went into this war for specious reasons. I think we went into this war not too much unlike the way we went into the Spanish American War with the Hearst press essentially goading the American people and the leadership into war. That was a different time in a different culture, in a different America. We're in a very different place today and I think we essentially got goaded into the war through some of the same means."
    I'm still waiting to hear the high crimes and misdemeanors.

    A nutcase will do nutty things.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Northern Indiana
    Posts
    2,371
    Thanks (Given)
    2
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    36962

    Default

    i thought that one of the main things that Clinton got in trouble for was not because of his peccadilloes but because he committed perjury...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    7,727
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    8
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    8
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    243662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Monkeybone View Post
    i thought that one of the main things that Clinton got in trouble for was not because of his peccadilloes but because he committed perjury...
    And you would be correct. Dems just didn't think he should even have had to answer the question so they prefer to claim he was impeached for the blow job. Minimizes it a bit for PR.

    A nutcase will do nutty things.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    a place called, Liberty
    Posts
    9,922
    Thanks (Given)
    102
    Thanks (Received)
    314
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    441563

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Monkeybone View Post
    i thought that one of the main things that Clinton got in trouble for was not because of his peccadilloes but because he committed perjury...
    Huh...I never knew that!

    They had me convinced, it was "JUST" over a blowjob...
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself."
    Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    445
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    215

    Default

    It's clear that Bush went shopping for generals and only keeps the ones that agree with his already decided "vision".

    I'm sure that Bush and the other republicans, when talking about this general and several others that have spoken out against Bush, aren't going to be saying, "listen to our military commanders"...
    Man is a marvelous curiosity … he thinks he is the Creator's pet … he even believes the Creator loves him; has a passion for him; sits up nights to admire him; yes and watch over him and keep him out of trouble. He prays to him and thinks He listens. Isn't it a quaint idea.
    -- Mark Twain

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    12,504
    Thanks (Given)
    6
    Thanks (Received)
    210
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    565785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lightning Waltz View Post
    It's clear that Bush went shopping for generals and only keeps the ones that agree with his already decided "vision".

    I'm sure that Bush and the other republicans, when talking about this general and several others that have spoken out against Bush, aren't going to be saying, "listen to our military commanders"...
    Why on earth would you want employees who were fighting against what you were trying to do?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    O-hi-o
    Posts
    12,192
    Thanks (Given)
    8017
    Thanks (Received)
    1650
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3656129

    Default

    Lincoln went shopping for generals too. Took him two years to find a general who would fight. Bush is listening to generals, and making decisions based on what they tell him. Not based on what he wants to hear. After they tell him their opinion he tells them what they are to do. That's how it works.

    Wilkerson is a retired colonel not a general. Which means he didn't have the political pull to go any higher.
    When I die I'm sure to go to heaven, cause I spent my time in hell.

    You get more with a kind word and a two by four, than you do with just a kind word.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer View Post
    Lincoln went shopping for generals too. Took him two years to find a general who would fight. Bush is listening to generals, and making decisions based on what they tell him. Not based on what he wants to hear. After they tell him their opinion he tells them what they are to do. That's how it works.

    Wilkerson is a retired colonel not a general. Which means he didn't have the political pull to go any higher.
    So there you go, to get promoted beyond Colonel it's necessary to curry political favour. So the more you suck the higher you get. Hell of a way to run a military, generals get to be promoted because they get a political hand up. They could be borderline incompetent but provided they toe the party line they're assured of promotion. That explains a lot
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    O-hi-o
    Posts
    12,192
    Thanks (Given)
    8017
    Thanks (Received)
    1650
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3656129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diuretic View Post
    So there you go, to get promoted beyond Colonel it's necessary to curry political favour. So the more you suck the higher you get. Hell of a way to run a military, generals get to be promoted because they get a political hand up. They could be borderline incompetent but provided they toe the party line they're assured of promotion. That explains a lot
    You pretty much have it. Anything beyond colonel is political. Generals get the credit while the colonels do the work. Generals have a staff of officers that put together plans and presentations. The days of leading the troops in battle ended over a hundred years ago. I'm not saying they are all incompetent, just that they have to get a certain amount of political clout to continue to climb the ladder.
    When I die I'm sure to go to heaven, cause I spent my time in hell.

    You get more with a kind word and a two by four, than you do with just a kind word.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    14
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    213

    Default

    That shopping for generals comment doesn't make sense to me. What should he do? Stay with the ones who weren't getting the job done?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tim_duncan2000 View Post
    That shopping for generals comment doesn't make sense to me. What should he do? Stay with the ones who weren't getting the job done?
    When he runs out of Generals to get the job done he can promote some Colonels to Generals and work his way through them as well. Hey, good time to be a PFC! Rapid promotion coming up - just sit and wait.
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,021
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zefrendylia View Post

    Ashbrook asked for some examples of such high crimes and misdemeanors, and Wilkerson replied: "I think that the caller was right. I think we went into this war for specious reasons. I think we went into this war not too much unlike the way we went into the Spanish American War with the Hearst press essentially goading the American people and the leadership into war. That was a different time in a different culture, in a different America. We're in a very different place today and I think we essentially got goaded into the war through some of the same means."

    Yet, still at the end of the discussion, Wilkerson did not have an example. You can't blame it on the press for "goading" us into this war and the turn around and try and impeach on high crimes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums