 |
|  |
 |
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The true test of loyalty is not whether you follow someone when you know they are right, but what you do when you believe them to be wrong.
I find him an honourable man. There is no shame in arguing as hard as you can against the prevailing notion, and then being overrruled. His duty is to support the president, and to argue against the president, when he believes the president is wrong. But there always comes a time, when even if they overrule your decision, you have to go along with the decision to the best of your ability.
I can see Powell serving to the end of his term, and then saying to Bush, thank you for the opportunity, but I have had enough. I have fulfilled my duty, and you can ask nothing more. |
The Japanese Samurai had still the by far most honorous way out of this dilemma.
If faced with either doing an dishonourable deed at the will of their master, or disobeying their master, they could always commit Seppuku.
AFAIK in this case in Form of a Kanshi (Seppuku s admonisment to the Lord for his Behavior).
So they wouldn´t loose face by doing a dishonourable deed, nor would they disgrace themselves for not folowing their Lords Orders.
But yes, leaving Bushs Service as son as his term runs out wuld be the best thing, Powell can do.
quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So you believe that we should not try to encourage democratic governments around the world? You would prefer thriving, Islamic fundamentalisms? |
The Problem is that now,
after the Conquest of Iraq, the country stands nearer to the Islamic Fundamentalism, than it did underb the reign of Sadam Hussein
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
As for Saddams WMDs:
I think Saddam made everyone believe that his country still had WMDs because he feared his enemys, outside of Iraqb as well as Inside of Iraq.
Both could be kept at bay with the fear of WMDs, those from outside of Iraq could be prevented from invading Iraq, which probably would have been successful, if you think about the Condition, Saddams Army was in, and the enemy from the inside could be prevented from overthrowing the Government.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000 time: 23:33
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ned
Gatekeeper, and it is downright unfair for you to say that Powell and others in administration were lying about the intelligence. This assumes they knew that the intelligence was bad when even Dr. Kay says just the opposite. |
The focus of my post — my ramblings, more accurately — was more or less a self-examination following the revelations of Kay ("We were wrong") amid the almost daily increase in dead and wounded, the poor intelligence, the alleged tensions rising among Iraqi factions (thus increasing the risk of civil war), the letter to al-Qaida from that Jordanian pleading for help from the group and numerous other things over the past year and half or so.
I thought I posted my thoughts in a fair manner, and stand by them.
Now, touching on Saddam's delusions of WMD ... it's apparently true he thought he had WMD, postured about it, and never thought that his underlings might be feeding him lines of bullsh*t. But why is it that our military was capable of phoning Iraqi military officers in *their* homes up to and during the war, convincing them (or not) to lay down their arms, but our intelligence apparatus couldn't phone scientists, et al., and find out whether the rumors of WMD were true? You'd think some of them would have squeeked, what with a 100,000 U.S. troops on the Iraqi border and Saddam's time coming to an end. It worked in some cases for the military (i.e. pressure tactics).
Look, I'm not a spook. But if we're going to limit debate to only those with actual experience, I guess we can close the books on freedom of expression in the United States. I've read over and over again that the U.S. has focused too much on "hands-off" intelligence gathering (i.e. satellites, gee-whiz technology) at the expense of human intelligence (HUMINT) or, worse, relying on the likes of Ahmed Chalabi as the main source of anti-Saddam information. Then you have Rumsfeld setting up his own "Office of Special Planning" w/i the Pentagon to circumvent less-than-favorable information from the CIA and other agencies (info that apparently painted Iraq as less threatening than first imagined). The OSP channeled Rumsfeld what he mostly wanted to hear, from what I understand.
Ah, heck. I'm rambling again. Gotta go. Work and exercise beckons.
Gatekeeper
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gibsie
|
 |
all over the proverbial shop
Jan 1970 time: 05:33
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Patroklos
Actually they did lift many fingers, with triggers behind them, to stop the looting of Palaces and Museums so that the heritage of the country would not disappear into the black market.
Try again. |
Wow. I've written three responses to this, but none can quite top what's already been written (Even though they're very simple posts), so I'll just sit back and quietly chuckle at you. Teehehhehehehehe.
Last edited by Gibsie on 13-02-2004 at 02:05
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
debeest
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc
Most of you would have gone home had Bush waited 6 weeks or so for the go ahead from the UN. |
I wouldn't have. And I'm not an out-of-work actor but a responsible adult working to support a family.
But more importantly, consider the possibility that the unprecedented domestic and world-wide turnout in opposition to the invasion may have convinced the UN not to approve an invasion which, as we predicted, was thoroughly unjustified (even though Hussein is a vicious bastard who did kill lots of his own people).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
debeest
|
|
Kudos to Gatekeeper, who shows a US flag and a stealth fighter with every post, for acknowledging that our government lied to us and the invasion was wrong.
Those of us who feel as if that was obvious long before the invasion still need to salute anyone who will admit he was wrong. There are darned few who will.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33. Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|