Posted on 11/22/2004 12:47:15 PM PST by demlosers
WASHINGTON -- The resignation of Secretary of State Colin Powell sends a bad signal to the rest of the world.
It means that right-wing ideologues who believe in pre-emptive war and who ignore international treaties will be in charge of U.S. foreign policy during President Bush's second term.
The president apparently believes that his election victory is a mandate for his ill-advised "might-is-right" foreign policy.
Considering the Iraqi quagmire, I doubt that is what the voters had in mind. If he pursues that track over the next four years, the United States will be even more alienated from friends and allies. And bankrupt, too.
In selecting National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice as Powell's successor, Bush will have the State Department under his thumb. She is almost part of the president's personal family. You won't catch her out of the loop or freelancing.
Diplomacy is not her strong suit, and she lacks Powell's stature and experience in statesmanship. This is a hard-liner.
It's been widely reported that Rice would have preferred to be secretary of defense. Picture that. Giving orders to the Pentagon brass.
Powell had misgivings about invading Iraq. But Dr. Rice, as her staff reverentially refers to her (Bush calls her "Condi"), had no reservations. She became a key part of the Bush administration's marketing team in the months before the war when she and others set out to convince Americans that attacking Iraq was in their best interest.
Her fervor about the Iraqi threat led her once to warn ominously about "mushroom clouds."
Powell gave the first Bush administration a look of some moderation and conciliation. But from the outset, it was clear to other nations that he was outgunned and outmanned by the neo-conservatives in the White House and the Pentagon.
He clashed with Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, both of whom had the president's ear. They appealed more to Bush's "High Noon" self-image and zeal for war with Iraq.
Powell had served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under former President Bush. And Powell gave his name to the doctrine that military action should be commenced only with overwhelming force, a strong coalition of allies and an exit strategy.
That proved to be a winning formula in the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, and Powell could not understand why that blueprint was not applied again in the current conflict.
Powell will be remembered for his tour de force appearance in February 2003 before the U.N. Security Council when he made the U.S. case for strong action against Iraq. During his mesmerizing 90-minute presentation, Powell held up samples of toxins of which he claimed Saddam Hussein had tons and would use in biological and chemical warfare. He helped convince the country that Iraq was a major threat.
Despite some later slippage in his credibility, his popularity is intact.
Powell's softer approach to world affairs sometimes clashed with the administration's hawks. Early on, he tried to work with South Korea on a more conciliatory policy toward North Korea, but Bush rejected his approach. He also may have made more headway on Middle East policy had he been given a free hand.
Powell went into the State Department with the thought that the job entailed peacemaking. Wrong.
More and more, Powell found himself powerless and required to sell policies that he did not wholeheartedly support. Even for Powell, always known as a "good soldier," it must have been frustrating to be thwarted by those who were pushing a different hard-edged agenda.
Government officials who reach the pinnacle often run into an ethical dilemma: Should they throw in the towel or accept a policy they oppose? Powell inevitably chose the latter option, though news accounts often appeared with anonymous officials telling how much he disagreed with the White House or the Pentagon on various issues.
Now, with Powell gone, the president will be surrounded by those who tell him only what he wants to hear.
Helen Thomas is a columnist for Hearst Newspapers. E-mail: helent@hearstdc.com. Copyright 2004 Hearst Newspapers.
That ain't DIMP.
LOLOLOL
Right, Helen, and look how much credit you gave him for that...none. You did EVERYTHING you could against this administration. Well guess what? As long as you're gonna go all out no matter what we do, we may as well go right ahead and do what we want.
Sigh. Helen knew better than to play the race card, but oh, she wanted to. Instead, she went the 'hard liner/right winger/ route. She's a fool.
These liberals are all mind readers...incredible! 59 million at a time! So smart!
"Ugly is skin deep"
Problem is that she has so much skin and the ugly goes all the way through.
To who? To Helen's knuckle-dragging, Joo-hating compatriots in 'palestine?'
LOL
Actually, more like forty years. Dowd is 70 and Helen looks 110 or 20 years past death.
Uh Helen--guess you never got the PC message straight, empowering black women is a very good very thing. Don't let us think you are just like Bobby "sheets" Byrd when it come to having accomplished blacks actually exerting real influence in this country. Maybe there is still time to avoid a visit to hypocrasy-land and re-write this sucker.
"Not true bag lady. You still hang around the White House. Heehee..."
But she will hang around the press room in the back row, no longer in the seat of honor for old washed up hags....hehehe
Such things written by a LEFTWING HARD-LINER, such as Helen Thomas, are to be taken just for what they are worth.
Yes, I see your point, but please remember that when posting a column by Thomas, the Coulter/Malkin rule need NOT apply. Thank you!
Helen's husband didn't dump her for Catherine Zeta-Jones.
Did Helen ever have a husband?
Doubt it..For his sake..I hope not...This conversation sounds like the very funny line from Andrea Peyser's column in today's NY Post. She toured the Clinton Library..went to thefull size replica of the Oval office, which includes an exact duplicate of Clinton's desk, looked under it, and wrote "that there is NO way Monica could have fit down there.."
My eyes!!!!!!
Anna Kournikova antidote please
Bad message to who? Terrorists and those who support them....
Helen, for God sakes will you shut up until you get your teeth fixed!
Helen, citation please? I mean aside from the ones we are not part of.
Just Say NO!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.