Powell's Stand for Iraq Diplomacy Failed

AP ^ | 3/17/2003 | BARRY SCHWEID

[a_Turk]

I kinda like Powell. But I'll post it anyway..

[Coop]

I like Sec Powell as well. He's a valuable asset to the Administration, even if I don't always see eye to eye with him.

[dirtboy]

Powell's Stand for Iraq Diplomacy Failed

It only failed if you wanted the UN to block action against Iraq. Considering how clearly the last few months have defined folks we once thought to be our allies, and raised public ire against the most obstinate of them, I think Powell's gambit worked just fine, thank you.

[Enduring Freedom]

Powell would make an excellent ambassador for America, say, to Spain.

But he is not the right person at the right time at State.

Bush has a higher calling, one that Powell can't fathom.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

I disagree with the AP's analysis. Resolution 1441 re-emphasized the previous UN resolutions and provides "serious consequences" language if the Iraqi regime did not fully disarm.

Second, France is now fully exposed as an Iraqi enabler. In the long-term, this exposure will mean their future efforts to obstruct the war on terror will viewed as hollow appeasment.

Third, we now know who we can count on for future military and diplomatic efforts. Like you, I like Colin Powell and believe his efforts will prove beneficial over the long haul. Just my opinion.

[danneskjold]

Agreed. Powell did his part, the UN (unwittingly) did theirs, now it's time for the US Armed Forces to finish up...

[haywoodwebb]

This is a BS article.

They were playing "good cop, bad cop" all along.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Fourth, Powell prove the UN is irrelevant.

[danneskjold]

a good house cleaning is in order; UN, State Department, etc...

It's coming...

[EternalVigilance]

I'll never like Powell, barring some huge philosopical transformation.

His politics and policy positions are indistinguishable from Clinton's, point by point.

He's a smart guy with a whacked out moral compass, IMO.

[Solson]

Anyone who was read David Frum's book, "The Right Man" has a MUCH better picture of what was played out.

Powell and Rumsfeld took opposite sides of the argument. No side "won" the argument but Bush decided to go the diplomatic route first. Having made that decision, Powell was given a timeline to get it done or it becomes a Rumsfeld issue. Bush never wavered once he made that decision and has seen that decision through to the end.

Having not succeeded on those terms, Rumsfeld now gets to deal with the situation.

In the end, it is a GREAT tribute to a GREAT President that he has established his administration to get ALL sides of an argument. Anyone who thinks Bush is stupid really needs to take heed. Bush has been an outstanding leader, delegating information gathering and presentation of options to his cabinet, gaining all sides of input and then making a decision...DECISIVELY.

Once Bush gives the go ahead to Rumsfeld, there will be no turning back. They will go and go until we win completely.

I highly recommend Frum's book because it's a quick read and because it gives great insight into the decision making process of the President.

[ambrose]

It only failed if you wanted the UN to block action against Iraq. Considering how clearly the last few months have defined folks we once thought to be our allies, and raised public ire against the most obstinate of them, I think Powell's gambit worked just fine, thank you.

I'll bump to that... The U.N., and many of our "allies" have been exposed for what they really are... And we have also learned who our true friends in the world are...

[Paleo Conservative]

But Powell has been a useful idiot (to use Stalin's term). The UN has finally been expose for what it is, an apologist for dictatorships. In the future we won't feel it necessary to bring issues to the Security Council. Instead the US will get its own coalitions to deal with rogue regimes.

[xzins]

As a result, the United States stands ready to go to war without the backing of a new resolution, and Powell's commitment to moderation in the administration has sustained a blow

I doubt it. Bush runs a CEO style. He wants his junior officers to fight it out. In that instance he liked Powell's presentation and reasoning.

If he likes it on a different subject in the future, he'll choose Powell again.

This administration has some excellent communicators. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell are the best. They'll square off again.....over Iran is my guess.

Rid the world of N. Korea's customers, and N. Korea must strangle.

[HairOfTheDog]

I kinda like Powell. But I'll post it anyway..

No kidding! - I liked Powell before it was fashionable to like Powell.

Is he saying diplomacy should not have been tried? - Bomb first and talk later? Yeah, that would have been more popular. - Give me a break. The job of Secretary of State is to hold diplomatic doors open until there is no chance. Powell's job is diplomacy, not war planning. That is what Rummy is for.

[Ancesthntr]

I have to go along with those who said that the series of events we have witnessed were part of a design by Bush & Co. I won't go so far as to say that anyone knew what the results would be, but I'm sure that GWB wanted to find out where various countries stand, and to get all of them on the record. He is doing the same with the Estrada nomination. After these 2 incidents are finished, GWB will be in a good position to put the screws to all of those that were on the wrong side.

[alloysteel]

Diplomacy did not fail. The belief that diplomacy is an effective tool to be used on a rabid dog has been thoroughly discredited. It is time to go to a more formidable option in our arsenal.

The next one makes noise, breaks things, and generally causes people in close vicinity to die. This is our military forces, not used except with grave provocation, and always after giving ample warning.

If you don't want to become sausage, don't jump into a meat grinder. The wurst is yet to come.