Thank you! :^D
Posted on 12/22/2004 10:36:58 PM PST by kattracks
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- In the bowels of the Pentagon, the colleagues and subordinates of Donald Rumsfeld were not upset by Republican senators who were sniping at him. Instead, they complained bitterly about a call for his removal by a private citizen with no political leadership position: William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard. His position was, in effect, a declaration of war by the neoconservatives against the secretary of defense.The capital's feeding frenzy over Rumsfeld's fate did not begin until Kristol's Dec. 12 op-ed column in The Washington Post. While critical senators did not get to the point of demanding Rumsfeld's removal, Kristol did. He said the troops in Iraq "deserve a better defense secretary than the one we have." A firm declaration by a prominent Republican activist turned journalist who is the clarion of neoconservatism counts for more than equivocation by U.S. senators.
Rumsfeld's civilian colleagues at the Pentagon are furious because they consider Kristol a manipulative political operative, critiquing the war in Iraq after years of promoting it. But his criticism has a broader base. Kristol long has called for big-government conservatism, which on the international sphere involves proactively pursuing democracy around the world. He and the other neocons do not want to be blamed for what has become a very unpopular venture in Iraq. Thus, it is important to get the word out now that the war in Iraq has gone awry because of the way Rumsfeld fought it.
Rumsfeld is often bracketed with the neocons, but that is incorrect. In a long political career that dates back to his election to Congress in 1962, he has not even been associated with the traditional conservative movement. In the run-up to the attack on Iraq, he was not aggressively pressing intervention by force of arms, but instead was shaping a military response to fit President Bush's command.
Rumsfeld did name Richard Perle, one of the foremost neocon voices calling for a change of regime in Baghdad, as chairman of the part-time Defense Policy Board. Also named to the board was Kenneth Adelman, an old friend of Rumsfeld's who is identified as a neocon. Adelman gained notoriety by promising that the conquest of Iraq would be a "cakewalk." Indeed, rejoicing over the quick rout of Saddam Hussein's army, Adelman wrote that cakewalk -- a word always rejected by Rumsfeld -- turned out to be a correct description.
With the bloody occupation of Iraq underway, Adelman's demeanor changed in his frequent appearances on CNN's "Crossfire" (where I often was a co-host). His mood became more subdued. The garish, oversized American flag necktie that Adelman wore as he urged war on Iraq was retired, as he somberly began to criticize (while never mentioning Rumsfeld by name).
On April 30 of this year, Adelman said a "miscalculation" had been made in war planning because the operation in Iraq "has gone worse than we expected a year ago." On June 28, he said "there were failures," adding that the purge of Baath Party members and "the dismissal of the army was something that we could have done a lot better." On Nov. 8, he said failure to clean insurgents out of Fallujah was "a bad decision."
Unlike Adelman, Kristol pinned defects in war-fighting tactics directly on Rumsfeld. In a Weekly Standard essay of Nov. 17, 2003 (written with his frequent collaborator, Robert Kagan), Kristol assailed Rumsfeld for sending insufficient troops to Iraq. "Rumsfeld remains dogmatically committed to a smaller force," he wrote.
Thus, the neocon message is that the war was no mistake but has been badly conducted. While Adelman does not blame his friend Rumsfeld, the accountability of the secretary of defense is implicit. Kristol's call for Rumsfeld's dismissal removes culpability for those who beat the drums to go to war.
Getting rid of Rumsfeld does not answer agonizing questions. Was the change of regime in Baghdad worth going to war? Could Saddam Hussein have been removed from power by other means? Is the use of U.S. military power to topple undemocratic regimes good policy?
There are no clear answers. To say simply that all would be well in Iraq, save for Don Rumsfeld, only begs these questions.
Though Novak doesn’t address it in this article, to certain paleos, they’d simply be thought of as under the control of the Jews, aka neocons.
Certainly FDR was strongly influenced by his advisors near the end of his life, as was Nixon at the height of impeachment. GWB seems both physically healthy and mentally alert to me. The fact that some commentators somehow consider him under the spell of a cabal of DOD employees and commentators bent of serving Israel, rather than able to construct and take responsibility for his own foreign policy is bizarre.
And beyond this, it is a pejorative term used by just about any colicky conservative, against any other conservative they don't like. ;-`
With all due respect, not everyone has heard of Richard Perle so I was just giving a friendly tip. And like you say, he is now "oddly off the reservation". The guy has suddenly 'disappeared'.
But what kind of bugs me now about Perle's .. ah... 'absence' and Kristol (of course I don't like him anyway) is that with their new 'stance' they give ammo to the anti-semites who'll say (again) we only toppled Saddam for "the jooooooos". But I don't care IF we DID it for "the jooooos", Saddam was a threat to us and our families, if Israel benefited so be it. Hell the whole world benefited - except the French, China and the Ruskies taking bribes.
OFF TOPIC,
How's the weather in Big Sky Country? I'm hoping (dreaming) to move to Montana 'some day'. From what I've seen your weather seems better there on average than where I'm at in the Chicago burbs. Milder winters and NO humidity in summer.
Weather here is another below zero kind of day. (2nd day in a row). Not quite as windy, so it doesn't feel quite as cold as the temperature would indicate. I don't mind the cold weather, I just hate shoveling "global warming" 6 months out of the year. LOL
None that I know of (kooks & crackpots). All the articles and some quotes from books are from legitimate, 'mainstream' writers. At least the ones that will come up first.
However, as I recall they are the liberal-leftists types of 'mainstream' authors/journalists. But the facts are the facts, just ignore the obvious leftist slant (bias).
Right now it's 14.3o with a wind chill of zero in beautiful DuPage County IL :-).
Tomorrow the "high" is supposed to be 5o. So I guess the winters are about even, but you still don't have the nasty humidity in summer like we do in IL.
So you can't talk me out of it. I still want to move to Montana
Thank God for that. ;D
Worst humidity I've ever been in was when I was staying with relatives in Virginia one summer about 20 years ago, in mid-August. I could take a shower in the morning and no matter how much I tried, I could never towel off the moisture.
Thank you! :^D
...you're the greatest. Simply.
Thanks. You are so kind. :^)
And keep up the great work! :^D
Exactly -- thank you, S!
What a big bunch of babies they are!
None that I know of (kooks & crackpots). All the articles and some quotes from books are from legitimate, 'mainstream' writers. At least the ones that will come up first.
However, as I recall they are the liberal-leftists types of 'mainstream' authors/journalists. But the facts are the facts, just ignore the obvious leftist slant (bias).
Facts or opinions? More than likely, they are crackpots and/or have a distinct agenda -- blaming everything on the JOOOOOOOOOOOS!
And the great majority of normal people see neoconservatism for what it is, a political philosiphy. A crummy one, but a philosiphy, nothing more, nothing less.
So the Jewish people who call themselves neocons are in actuality smearing themselves?!? The logic here is escaping me.
Name one who has come out and said that he or she is a neocon. With a direct link to that, of course.
Off the top of my head, I recall Dane and Torie claiming to be a neocon. I'm to lazy to go Googling.
Yep, I am a neocon through and through and proud of it, and have posted it often. I'm also not Jewish. And there you have it.
My guess the great majority of normal people don't include neocon in their vocabulary and wouldn't have the faintest idea what it means. It's popularity rests largely in the media and the internet.
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.
