Conservatives Challenge Iraq Policy

Conservatives challenge Iraq policy

By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer 38 minutes ago

A leading conservative proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq now
says dysfunction within the Bush administration has turned U.S. policy
there into a disaster. Richard Perle, who chaired a committee of
Pentagon policy advisers early in the Bush administration, said had he
seen at the start of the war in 2003 where it would go, he probably
would not have advocated an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein. Perle
was an assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan.

"I probably would have said, 'Let's consider other strategies for
dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam
supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists,'" he told Vanity
Fair magazine in its upcoming January issue.

Meanwhile, the Military Times Media Group, a Gannett Co. subsidiary
that publishes Army Times and other military-oriented periodicals,
said Friday it was calling for Bush to fire Rumsfeld. An editorial due
to be published Monday says active-duty military leaders are beginning
to voice misgivings about the war's planning and execution and dimming
prospects for success. It declares that "Rumsfeld has lost credibility
with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with
the public at large."

The editorial concludes by saying that regardless of which party wins
in next week's election, the time has come "to face the hard bruising
truth: Donald Rumsfeld must go."

When asked about the Vanity Fair article and Perle's criticism, White
House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said, "We appreciate the
Monday-morning quarterbacking, but the president has a plan to succeed
in Iraq and we are going forward with it."

Other prominent conservatives criticized the administration's conduct
of the war in the article, including Kenneth Adelman, who also served
on the Defense Policy Board that informally advised President Bush.
Adelman said he was "crushed" by the performance of Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld.

The critiques in Vanity Fair come as growing numbers of Republicans
have criticized Bush's policies on Iraq. The war, unpopular with many
Americans, has become a top-tier issue in next week's congressional
elections.

Perle said "you have to hold the president responsible" because he
didn't recognize "disloyalty" by some in the administration. He said
the White House's National Security Council, then run by now-Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice, did not serve Bush properly.

A year before the war, Adelman predicted demolishing Saddam's military
power and liberating Iraq would be a "cakewalk." But he told the
magazine he was mistaken in his high opinion of Bush's national
security .

"They turned out to be among the most incompetent teams in the postwar
era," he said. "Not only did each of them, individually, have enormous
flaws, but together they were deadly, dysfunctional."

On 2006-11-04 11:04:11 -0500, Rita said:

A leading conservative proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq now
says dysfunction within the Bush administration has turned U.S. policy
there into a disaster. [snip]

So what else is new?

This single issue, taken alone, is merely a drop in the bucket.
EVERYTHING the Bush administration has done is a disaster. And
everything his mouthpiece Congress has done is a disaster also.

On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 20:48:33 GMT, sechumlib
wrote:

On 2006-11-04 11:04:11 -0500, Rita said:

A leading conservative proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq now
says dysfunction within the Bush administration has turned U.S. policy
there into a disaster. [snip]

So what else is new?

This single issue, taken alone, is merely a drop in the bucket.
EVERYTHING the Bush administration has done is a disaster. And
everything his mouthpiece Congress has done is a disaster also.

We will find out how many Americans agree on Tuesday, barring
a failure in the voting mechanisms, of course. I wonder it it
was deliberate not to test many of these electronic voting
machines before they are used for the first time?

On 2006-11-04 18:41:58 -0500, Rita said:

We will find out how many Americans agree on Tuesday, barring
a failure in the voting mechanisms, of course. I wonder it it
was deliberate not to test many of these electronic voting
machines before they are used for the first time?

The Republicans have created a scenario where they can challenge
virtually everyone who wants to vote but isn't a nice, comfortable,
prosperous burgher. Woe to the blacks, Hispanics, etc., etc. who show
up at the polls!

Anyone who says this election isn't fixed is living in a dream world.

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 02:56:09 GMT, sechumlib
wrote:

On 2006-11-04 18:41:58 -0500, Rita said:

We will find out how many Americans agree on Tuesday, barring
a failure in the voting mechanisms, of course. I wonder it it
was deliberate not to test many of these electronic voting
machines before they are used for the first time?

The Republicans have created a scenario where they can challenge
virtually everyone who wants to vote but isn't a nice, comfortable,
prosperous burgher. Woe to the blacks, Hispanics, etc., etc. who show
up at the polls!

Anyone who says this election isn't fixed is living in a dream world.

Must be fixed. They won't let me vote.

The guy in the Oval Office makes decisions that directly
affect my life - so I should be able to vote for or against
him.

Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/
latest: The Vatican
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/

Why must you import crappy politics into a travel group ??!!

"Alan S" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 02:56:09 GMT, sechumlib
wrote:

On 2006-11-04 18:41:58 -0500, Rita said:

We will find out how many Americans agree on Tuesday, barring
a failure in the voting mechanisms, of course. I wonder it it
was deliberate not to test many of these electronic voting
machines before they are used for the first time?

The Republicans have created a scenario where they can challenge
virtually everyone who wants to vote but isn't a nice, comfortable,
prosperous burgher. Woe to the blacks, Hispanics, etc., etc. who show
up at the polls!

Anyone who says this election isn't fixed is living in a dream world.

Must be fixed. They won't let me vote.

The guy in the Oval Office makes decisions that directly
affect my life - so I should be able to vote for or against
him.

Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/
latest: The Vatican
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/

On 2006-11-05 05:26:40 -0500, "Runge" said:

Why must you import crappy politics into a travel group ??!!

Because it's the only kind there is, these days.

On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 11:26:40 +0100, "Runge" wrote:

Why must you import crappy politics into a travel group ??!!

Actually I did not intend my post to go to this group -- I made
an error in not selecting the right group. I immediately
canceled the post but apparently some people saw it.

My apologies. Not that this is the only off topic post that
has ever appeared, but I do try not do that.

"Alan S" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 02:56:09 GMT, sechumlib
wrote:

On 2006-11-04 18:41:58 -0500, Rita said:

We will find out how many Americans agree on Tuesday, barring
a failure in the voting mechanisms, of course. I wonder it it
was deliberate not to test many of these electronic voting
machines before they are used for the first time?

The Republicans have created a scenario where they can challenge
virtually everyone who wants to vote but isn't a nice, comfortable,
prosperous burgher. Woe to the blacks, Hispanics, etc., etc. who show
up at the polls!

Anyone who says this election isn't fixed is living in a dream world.

Must be fixed. They won't let me vote.

The guy in the Oval Office makes decisions that directly
affect my life - so I should be able to vote for or against
him.

Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/
latest: The Vatican
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/

On 2006-11-05 09:43:45 -0500, Rita said:

Actually I did not intend my post to go to this group -- I made
an error in not selecting the right group. I immediately
canceled the post but apparently some people saw it.

My apologies. Not that this is the only off topic post that
has ever appeared, but I do try not do that.

Somehow, I can't be very sympathetic toward people who want to escape
politics two days before a big, highly contested and passion-surrounded
election.

In article 2006110511250816807-sechumlib@liberalnet,
sechumlib wrote:

Somehow, I can't be very sympathetic toward people who want to escape
politics two days before a big, highly contested and passion-surrounded
election.

Just because we don't want to plow through political postings on
a travel group doesn't mean we're trying to "escape" politics.
I personally have spent a good chunk of the last two days poring
over the California voter guide and reading background information
and recommendations on newspapers' websites. I have plenty of other
sources I can turn to for political information apart from off-topic
Usenet groups.

And thanks to Rita for her apology. I suspected that it might have
been an accidental posting in the first place.


Patty