“You can surge all of the American troops you want, but they can’t stop this. Suppose I’m a battalion commander. My troops ask, ‘What do I do today, boss?’ ‘Let’s go fight the Shia militias!’ ‘What do I do tomorrow?’ ‘Let’s go fight the Sunni insurgents!’ ‘What do I do the day after tomorrow?’ ‘Let’s go chase al-Qaida!’ ‘What do we do the day after that?’ ‘We’re going to guard streets!’ Our kids are fantastic. But this is not sustainable. Our surge can work only with an Iraqi political and military surge.”
– “Former everything,” including secretary of state, Colin Powell, in the October GQ, on the U.S. troop surge
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
26 Comments
Powell was always an armchair General. If it wasn’t for Schwarzkopt, Gulf War I would have been a disaster if it were left up to Powell.
Powell is the last person who needs to be attacked. If the republican party has anyone left in it with a shred of REAL HONOR and dignity, it’s Mr. Powell.
I find it interesting as a that we can think that we can maintain control of a country that we are an occupying force in. I also question how most think we can bring “Deomocracy”, to a part of the world that has a history without it out longer than the United States has existed. Lastly, I agree with the general.
It is easy to see where Gen. Powell is coming from. A “surge”, almost by definition, is not intended to be sustained.
I think it a mischaracterization to interpret his words as being being skeptical of the surge itself.
Gee, seems like I remember Powell promoting WMDs, the invasion and war. Now he has the audacity to criticize his successors. Trying to wash his hands? Miss the limelight? Have a book coming out?
Nothing but another flip-flopper endeared by the hate-Bush crowd.
Kansas illustrates a good policy of the reich wing. Find the most credible person to sell your story. Then when he/she realizes they were used, discredit and shun them. You should be ashamed of yourself Kansas for disrespecting a true American patriot. Mr Powell does more for this country by 6 am than you have done in your entire life. You people make me sick with the way you drag people through the mud after they serve your cause. You call yourself a true American. You are no better than a snake oil salesman. Your kind will find very soon that you are just white noise in the background.
Powell lost all credibility after he lied in his U.N. speech. He should hang his head and shut up instead of doing this media tour to repair his image. He threw away his personal integrity and now we should feel sorry for him?
Heh. I dont feel a BIT sorry for liars!
“Political surge.” Huh.
I almost was willing to come to Powell’s defense until he said THAT. Idiot.
Roscoe,
Lame, even by your standards.
OMG – Powell has become a cheese-eating surrender monkey!
If you don’t feel sorry for liars, how do you feel about your prez and vice-prez and every other yes man that sent us to war… lies,lies, all lies. Hypocrite at it’s best. Look in the mirror and repeat after yourself,” I don,t feel a BIT sorry for liars”.
Who can believe Powell now? He bought the bogus WMD b.s. and sold it to America.
“Gee, seems like I remember Powell promoting WMDs, the invasion and war. Now he has the audacity to criticize his successors. Trying to wash his hands? Miss the limelight? Have a book coming out?”
Uhh, no. Powell was thrown to the wolves by the Bush administration. He was given basically crap, told it was the truth, and left to be the scapegoat by the Bush admintration. His speech at the United Nations was orchastrated by the Bush regime, and Powell did his part as he should. But I firmly believe Powell is an honorable man who was dumped, as is the norm, by this corrupt administration.
If Powell ever writes a book about his time as secrataty of state, I expect bushco to come out smelling like a sewer, which would be an improvement over what they smell like now.
T. Minor, I dont feel sorry for this lying preznit or vice preznit or any of the lying enablers, including the democrats. WTF? If I dont feel sorry for liars, I dont feel sorry for ALL liars? Duh.
“If Powell ever writes a book about his time as secrataty of state”
I dont give a buggered rat how many books powell writes. He will NEVER smell any better than bushco.
Once a whore, always a whore…
OMG – Powell has become a cheese-eating surrender monkey!
Posted by: Ben | September 11, 2007 at 09:08 AM
=====================
Must we really have racial slurs against Gen. Powell, of all people?? I think we could think of better detrimental names to call him, if we must call him anything, but another “duped by Bush” govt. official….
We must also remember that Powell was the first man up the ladder from Armitage, when the Valerie Plame leak came out… Anybody wonder why Powell wasnt call in for testimony???
I have often wondered about some of these super secret CIA people, who leave/retire/quit/ the “company” and then write some scathing book against the agency, that sends wing nuts from both sides of the aisle, into a feeding frenzy… I wonder if they are merely doing that “last” job required by the “company” ???
I believe Powell was one of the ones questioning the need to go to Iraq before…he seemed like a reluctant player at the time as well, and like the rest of us -were duped. He was the first one to come out and say he was sorry, he was lied to, and he made a mistake.
Was he wrong to believe Bush? I don’t think so. Not at the time anyway. I’ll defend him as I do the democrats in Congress who also voted for the war. Many dems bit it despite our beliefs that it was too questionable. Because we were afraid for our safety as a nation after 9/11. We went in with the warning…YOU HAD BETTER BE RIGHT.
Now with all that has happened, why is Bush still leading us down the path of our own demise? Isn’t it time that someone else take over this trainwreck?
If one were to look at the attendence during the bushco/Iraq war talks, one would find Powel missing, at the request of bushco, from many of them. Powell always was going to be the man dumped on by bushco. He deserved much better that that. But expecting anything else from bushco would be impossible.
I think it a mischaracterization to interpret his words as being being skeptical of the surge itself.
Posted by: outlander
LOL.You’re kidding, right??
Is it a mischaracterization to say you are brearhing so therefore you can think??
Elizabeth Dole, of course, is on tv sucking up to the idea of war and trying to sound like she is concerned about it’s direction.
Another reason this whole b.s. is doomed.
Nobody stands up for the truth.
She’s a waste of air.
Chas – no racial slur was intended. That term has been applied by the BushBots to those of us who oppose their war. I think it also is used in regards to the French.
That could be Ben, but, the term “monkey” in reference to a black man, is usually considered to be a racial slur… Thought you might want to know that…
Please Chas I doubt anyone who read it did not understand nor had not heard the term before used by at least ten different people on here . To refer to someone that opposed the war or the actions in Iraq. Even if Ben had looked Powell in the face and said it to him. The last thought he would have considered was that Ben was commenting on his race.
P.C. is one thing but that was a real reach. I would be one of the first to call someone that used a racist slur against General Powell.
He made a mistake whether it was believing the Intel fed him by the inside “Iraq policy board” or simply for being a good soldier.I supported the invasion at first, but like Powell came to learn that the truth was other then what I was told.
Bush to Announce Troop Cut in Iraq
WASHINGTON — President Bush will tell the nation Thursday evening that he plans to reduce the American troop presence in Iraq by as many as 30,000 by next summer but will condition those and further cuts on continued progress, The Associated Press has learned.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296455,00.html
Kansas – GWB has already put in his out for any troop withdrawal by that pharase -’but will condition those and further cuts on continued progress’
Bush has no intention of withdrawing from Iraq until the OIL is his and Cheney’s.
Just because you keep posting this little tidbit does NOT mean that Bush has changed his mind about our troops in Iraq.
Bush is merely trying to gain some favorable polling for his insane Iraq War policies.
For the president that promised to restore honesty and integrity to the White House – everything that comes from his lips is suspected lies. What a shame and tragedy.
Bush to Announce Troop Cut in Iraq
WASHINGTON — President Bush will tell the nation Thursday evening that he plans to reduce the American troop presence in Iraq by as many as 30,000 by next summer but will condition those and further cuts on continued progress, The Associated Press has learned.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296455,00.html
Posted by: Kansas | September 11, 2007 at 07:08 PM
This is not news. This was always the way it was to work. Cuts in troops would be to reduce the numbers of pre-surge troop levels.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/AP_Military_running_out_of_troops_0820.html
AP: Military is running out of troops to maintain Iraq surge
Nick JulianoPublished: Monday AUGUST 20, 2007
As predictions intensify that next month’s White House-produced progress report on Iraq could push for a continuation to President Bush’s troop surge, the Associated Press reports the military simply does not have enough troops to maintain its current levels in Iraq much longer.”The Army’s 38 available combat units are deployed, just returning home or already tapped to go to Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere, leaving no fresh troops to replace five extra brigades that President Bush sent to Baghdad this year,” Lolita C. Baldor reports for AP, based on interviews and military documents.Without enough troops to sustain current troop levels, the Pentagon will face some painful decisions if President Bush argues for a continuation of the surge. It can accelerate deployments of National Guard units, break the military’s pledge to keep soldiers in Iraq for 15 months or less or reverse its commitment to give troops a year at home with their families before returning them to a war zone.