Join 3,363 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Blaming Bush
November 3, 2006 3:27 PM   Subscribe

Now they tell us. Neocon hindsight is 20/20. War architect Richard Perle on invading Iraq, 2002: "We have no time to lose, and I think the president understands that and it's probably taken too long already, but I don't think it'll be much longer... Support for Saddam, including within his military organization, will collapse at the first whiff of gunpowder.... Now, it isn't going to be over in 24 hours, but it isn't going to be months either." Four years later: "If I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, 'Should we go into Iraq?,' I think now I probably would have said, 'No, let's consider other strategies'... Could we have managed that threat by means other than a direct military intervention? Well, maybe we could have."
posted by digaman (105 comments total) 2 users marked this as a favorite

 
"'If I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, "Should we go into Iraq?," I think now I probably would have said, "No, let's consider other strategies"..."

Well freakin' duh.
posted by clevershark at 3:34 PM on November 3, 2006


So Perle's gonna get a Presidential Medal of Freedom?

I mean seriously, this fool's still going to be making millions as a lobbyist, will still be referred to as a pundit, will still have his ass kissed in public as one of the DC "wise men".

"Oh, sorry, I'm not the Oracle at Delphi, so ya know, shit happens." That's his excuse?

Something tells me this fat fool isn't going to be knocking on the doors of 2829 husbands and waives and sweethearts and fathers and mothers of our soldiers fallen in Iraq, apologizing for not being "Delphic".

But he'll still collect his millions in fees and show up unashamed on the swank clubby cocktail circuit and on CNN and Fox as paid commentator.

How is you can fuck up your country so grandly and still be feted as a "wise" "public servant"? How? How the fuck?
posted by orthogonality at 3:35 PM on November 3, 2006 [2 favorites]


Being a dumb-ass is all it takes to join a think talk and talk a lot of shit apparently.
posted by chunking express at 3:35 PM on November 3, 2006


Does delphic mean "able to make strategic judgements at least as effectively as a dolphin"? I wish he had been delphic.
posted by Arcaz Ino at 3:40 PM on November 3, 2006


From this tool's Wikipedia entry:
When discussing his new book "Battle Ready" co-authored with retired general Anthony Zinni, author Tom Clancy stated that he almost came to blows with Perle. According to Clancy:
"He was saying how (Secretary of State) Colin Powell was being a wuss because he was overly concerned with the lives of the troops," Clancy said. "And I said, 'Look ..., he's supposed to think that way!' And Perle didn't agree with me on that. People like that worry me."

Christ, how do people with that mentality get Pentagon jobs? The only part of the guy that should be even close to the Pentagon is his head, mounted on a pole, with the sign "sic semper proditoris" displayed prominently under it.
posted by clevershark at 3:48 PM on November 3, 2006


This was a minor blip in the Vanity Fair piece, but still:

Michael Ledeen, American Enterprise Institute freedom scholar: "Ask yourself who the most powerful people in the White House are. They are women who are in love with the president: Laura [Bush], Condi, Harriet Miers, and Karen Hughes."
posted by digaman at 3:49 PM on November 3, 2006 [3 favorites]


Too Hawkish for Tom Clancy?
posted by delmoi at 3:51 PM on November 3, 2006


"I don't say that because I no longer believe that Saddam had the capability to produce weapons of mass destruction, or that he was not in contact with terrorists. I believe those two premises were both correct. Could we have managed that threat by means other than a direct military intervention? Well, maybe we could have."
He's still in loonyland. The only thing that's changed is that maybe he'd think twice about pulling out a sword and charging.

Whatever reality he inhabits, it is not the one where the rest of us are living.
posted by Malor at 3:56 PM on November 3, 2006


So let's see who he's blaming for the mess:
"The levels of brutality that we've seen are truly horrifying, and I have to say, I underestimated the depravity," Perle says now, adding that total defeat—an American withdrawal that leaves Iraq as an anarchic "failed state"—is not yet inevitable but is becoming more likely. "And then," says Perle, "you'll get all the mayhem that the world is capable of creating."
In other words, it's the Iraqis fault, for being so damn uncivilized. On the other hand:
According to Perle, who left the Defense Policy Board in 2004, this unfolding catastrophe has a central cause: devastating dysfunction within the administration of President George W. Bush. Perle says, "The decisions did not get made that should have been. They didn't get made in a timely fashion, and the differences were argued out endlessly.… At the end of the day, you have to hold the president responsible.… I don't think he realized the extent of the opposition within his own administration, and the disloyalty."
It's those damn nay-sayers in the administration who just didn't believe hard enough, or who had doubts, or who just didn't commit.

No blame rests with him, of course, or the other architects of this poisonous folly.
posted by jokeefe at 3:58 PM on November 3, 2006


All jokes about "Reality Based Community" aside, where does the administration find these people? I probably have one-tenth the education this guy does, and I'm sure as hell not making as much money as he is, but I knew that this was a bad idea from the start. Is there some Advanced Being Full Of Shit class at Princeton?
posted by lekvar at 4:02 PM on November 3, 2006


Previously (Jonah Goldberg's repentance).

But there are no consequences for these people for being wrong, wrong, wrong. Rice was National Security Advisor when 9/11 happened. She was promoted. Rumsfeld has sat watch over not only the disintegration of Iraq, but a military infrastructure that is falling apart.

Military guys at all levels has a well-earned reputation for keeping their mouths shut for fear of whining. Not because they're afraid of consequences, so much as they don't want to be thought of as complainers.

But at some point, they need to be heard. How can they possibly trust Rumsfeld any longer? As they deploy for their fourth and fifth rotations, how can they not want to ask a question as simple as "when will this adventure be over?" Perhaps the most important question they can ask is "Who's in charge in Iraq?" Moqtada al-Sadr is calling more of the shots then the officers on the ground. Why does the American military now do what a pro-Iranian theocrat wants them to do?
posted by bardic at 4:02 PM on November 3, 2006


An apology isn't enough. They should do the honorable thing and kill themselves. I'll be satisfied with nothing less.
posted by empath at 4:02 PM on November 3, 2006 [1 favorite]


How can they possibly trust Rumsfeld any longer?

In mid-2004, at a military base, a very senior Army officer told me in confidence that Rumsfeld would be fired "within the month." It didn't happen -- and why? Because admitting error wouldn't have helped the GOP win elections (they think).

Well, there's an election coming up...
posted by digaman at 4:07 PM on November 3, 2006


Ships ... sinking ... rats...
posted by dash_slot- at 4:08 PM on November 3, 2006


Hey, Dick, did you know that the Persians paid off the Oracle at Delphi before the Peleponnesian war?

Another way of phrasing that question might be HAVE YOU EVER READ A FUCKING BOOK
posted by spiderwire at 4:10 PM on November 3, 2006 [2 favorites]


When the onion consistently has a better predictive algorithm than you, I think it's time to admit you are a moron, and step down from public influence.
posted by Freen at 4:11 PM on November 3, 2006 [1 favorite]


Honestly, the choice of 'delphic' is almost too-convenient enough to make me think that it's an implicit "ha ha" to us smarty liberals who didn't come around to the whole democracy project. Perle can't be ignorant of the connotations there.

I mean really, that statement is ironic at so many levels it makes my head hurt.
posted by spiderwire at 4:13 PM on November 3, 2006


Oh the bright side: all of us who saw this whole mess coming back before it started, we're delphic!

IM IN UR TEMPUL DICTIN YER FUTUR
posted by davejay at 4:20 PM on November 3, 2006


Because no one else has said it:"Mothafucka!!"
posted by vhsiv at 4:25 PM on November 3, 2006


Is there some Advanced Being Full Of Shit class at Princeton?

You're thinking of Yale. There's nothing at all advanced about the Princeton course; it's required.

But you do get to study abroad in Iraq... helping run the Coalitional Provisional Authority.
posted by spiderwire at 4:26 PM on November 3, 2006


Bush won't apologize for thousands of American soldiers deaths, and I doubt Perle will either.

I hope they haunt his nightmares and torture him in the whatever afterlife he believes in.
posted by Kickstart70 at 4:30 PM on November 3, 2006


And the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead, well, they can now be satisfied as Perle has admitted it was a mistake.

The senior people in the Bush administration and the people who pushed for war like Perle are responsible for more deaths than most of the people convicted for crimes in the Holocaust.

They should be held accountable.

The war they fought was illegal under international law.

The Hague should prepare now.
posted by sien at 4:46 PM on November 3, 2006


wow, I must've been delphic in 2002.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 4:46 PM on November 3, 2006 [1 favorite]


Sad thing is, the closest to justice he'll ever get is to be vilified in the history books. He probably won't even get that.
posted by mullingitover at 4:47 PM on November 3, 2006


I got the feathers, honey
You got the tar
Jo's bringing a rail, honey
Load up the car
posted by taosbat at 4:48 PM on November 3, 2006


Please watch the Frontline show 'The Wasted Year' on PBS, it's absolutely jaw dropping.

One of the most interesting things was how much of a hurry the Pentagon was to get out of Iraq -- they thought they'd get the troops down to 30K in 3 months -- and how upset Rumsfeld and the White House was when that diddn't happen.

To compare that to today's 'cut and run' makes the head spin.

This country would be 100% better off if that show was manditory viewing.
posted by belling at 4:49 PM on November 3, 2006


Sorry, it is called 'The Lost Year in Iraq'.
posted by belling at 4:50 PM on November 3, 2006


There is no accountability in this country and that is a HUGE problem for those who actually love America.

For those who truly hate or could care less about America, people like this getting rich and powerful is a good thing, as it destroys the thing that made this country special in the first place.
posted by cell divide at 4:53 PM on November 3, 2006


lekvar : I probably have one-tenth the education this guy does, and I'm sure as hell not making as much money as he is, but I knew that this was a bad idea from the start. Is there some Advanced Being Full Of Shit class at Princeton?

No it's not about knowing it's a bad idea, nor is it about WMDs or deposing a tyrant or spreading democracy. It's about providing a fertile environment for no-bid contracts to your corporate buddies so they can make huge fistfuls of cash. That sort of thing doesn't take much education at all. Just a certain moral flexibility.

Cynical? maybe. Correct? Probably.
posted by quin at 4:55 PM on November 3, 2006 [1 favorite]


Could this be the same Richard Perle who, in 2002, accused German Chancellor Schroeder of trying to incite pacifism?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 4:55 PM on November 3, 2006


I was going to say exactly the same as empath.

Or he should do some penance in an Iraqi orphanage. That smug buttondown face makes me want to go all Old Testament on him.
posted by Rumple at 5:02 PM on November 3, 2006


"I think if I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, 'Should we go into Iraq?,' I think now I probably would have said, 'No, let's consider other strategies"

He says probably? He is a coward and has learned nothing. Get the noose.
posted by Rumple at 5:05 PM on November 3, 2006


I hope the bastard can't sleep at night for the blood on his hands
posted by A189Nut at 5:07 PM on November 3, 2006


Here's a link to "The Lost Year in Iraq." Thanks for the tip, belling.
posted by maryh at 5:14 PM on November 3, 2006


You don't go to war because you think it will turn out to go well. You go to war because you have to. You do it because it is the only right and just thing that you can do. The end most certainly does not determine the means when it comes to war. He doesn't get that, and neither do most of the people who are now against the invasion. If we had washed our hands of the affair and left there after six months, it would not have changed the fact that we invaded a sovereign nation and killed thousands of people.

This line of thinking will allow for this to happen all over again. We will be assured that it will not turn out the same the next time. We will be told of a plan to make sure that it turns out different. And people will buy it, because they are not questioning the premise of the invasion in the first place. They simply don't like how it has turned out. Nothing has been learned, and it will happen again.
posted by flarbuse at 5:18 PM on November 3, 2006 [4 favorites]


I agree, flarbuse.
posted by taosbat at 5:20 PM on November 3, 2006


Perle gets all delphic on yo azz, 2003:

We've had smart weapons for some time now, but finally the doctrine for the use of smart weapons has caught up with the technology, and this war was planned and executed in a way that was intended--as it should have been since it was a war of liberation--to minimize the damage that would be done to Iraqis, to Iraq's ability to rebuild itself after that war, which is why the bridges were still standing when the war was over. It is why the power stations were not attacked. It is why the basic infrastructure was carefully protected...

So we've seen what can be done, and there were undoubtedly those who feared a very different kind of war, and so it's perhaps understandable that the polls were so heavily weighted against military action. Had people understood what was coming, we might have seen a different result...

A year from now, I'll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after President Bush. There is no doubt that, with the exception of a very small number of people close to a vicious regime, the people of Iraq have been liberated and they understand that they've been liberated. And it is getting easier every day for Iraqis to express that sense of liberation.


Hell, he even predicted Bush's next war in the same speech:

Iran is obviously a very large problem for us. The Iranians are determined to build nuclear weapons. They support terrorism on a big scale. They are probably the single most important supporter of terrorism. And they believe in a state in which a few mullahs dictate every aspect of people's lives. So by every measure, the place is objectionable and dangerous.

It must by now be clear to everyone that if the people of Iran were free to choose a government, it would not include the people who, in fact, are governing them. It might include some people who have been elected to parliament, but it certainly would not include the mullahs, who are, in fact, the effective government in Iran. And my own view is that, out of sympathy as well as self-interest, we should be supporting those Iranians who want to free their country from the heavy hand of the mullahs. And others should be doing the same.

We've been very timid in this respect--much too timid, in my view, and I don't understand why we have been so timid.

posted by digaman at 5:27 PM on November 3, 2006


Those Annie Leibovitz portraits sure give us a glimpse into some dark souls. She somehow captures the coldness of these neocon perpetrators who brought us one of history’s greatest blunders.

Dubya's got that blank, nobody’s home, and beadyeyed look over a coked-up hawk nose. Notice his mouth lifted in a slight smirk. Something says clueless sociopath to me.

Same thing with Dick Shooter, his right lip actually lifted in a permanent scowl. I see something wolf-like in Cheney. Is that blood running down his lip?

For Rummy, Annie switched to black and white. He probably won’t leave an image on modern film. What’s up with that same cruelly turned lip? Is this a mark?

Condi too, bringing that pissed off, nasty little hoe cake pout. She rides on top, you just know, especially if you name an oil tanker after her.

Leiobovits evidently left Beast Perle, who claws an old oak rocker, and snarls sidelong at the camera to Nigel Parry. Imagine he was that close to the prince of darkness and a living Greek tragedy.

Nothing warm or even human from this crowd, does it take a photographer to see it? Sinister faces who are responsible for 655,000 Iraqi deaths and untold maiming of our young.

Some kid kills a liquor store clerk, and we see him in chains and an orange jump suit. Why not these bastards? Could November 7 please be our 9-11 change the world event?
posted by BillyElmore at 5:33 PM on November 3, 2006


Trust the Neocons to be looking for a way back into the action. I present Operation Comeback!
posted by scalefree at 5:44 PM on November 3, 2006


I think Rumple went for the rope, scalefree.
posted by taosbat at 5:48 PM on November 3, 2006


As Scott Ritter put it (more or less) there is no anti-Iraq war movement in America, but there is a burgeoning anti-losing movement. Great.

During the lead-up to the invasion I was working with a handful of Delphic carpenters who foresaw the disaster. I tried to reassure them that even Bush wouldn’t be stupid enough... but, as it turned out, I was wrong about that and the Delphic carpenters were right.
posted by Huplescat at 5:55 PM on November 3, 2006


If there wer other strategies to consider, as he says, then war was not justified. War is a last resort. I'm beginning to think these guys had the intention of weakening the US military and crippling the economy with debt to advacne some global business agenda. I just don't know what that agenda is. Yet.
posted by Pastabagel at 6:06 PM on November 3, 2006


WTF? WTF?

Perle says:
"Huge mistakes were made, and I want to be very clear on this: They were not made by neoconservatives, who had almost no voice in what happened, and certainly almost no voice in what happened after the downfall of the regime in Baghdad. I'm getting damn tired of being described as an architect of the war. I was in favor of bringing down Saddam. Nobody said, 'Go design the campaign to do that.' I had no responsibility for that."
My god, I'm.... speechless. Really. There are no words.
posted by jokeefe at 6:07 PM on November 3, 2006


All jokes about "Reality Based Community" aside, where does the administration find these people?

The Nixon administration.
posted by Chuckles at 6:10 PM on November 3, 2006


No it's not about knowing it's a bad idea, nor is it about WMDs or deposing a tyrant or spreading democracy. It's about providing a fertile environment for no-bid contracts to your corporate buddies so they can make huge fistfuls of cash.

Amen.
I'm probably mostly preaching for the choir here, but that's in my top five required reading for everyone, and I don't know what the other four are..
posted by Anything at 6:10 PM on November 3, 2006



All jokes about "Reality Based Community" aside, where does the administration find these people?

The Nixon administration.
posted by Chuckles at 9:10 PM EST on November 3


We wish. These hacks came from the Ford Administration. Remember the great Ford administration? Yeah, neither does anyone else.
posted by Pastabagel at 6:14 PM on November 3, 2006


that's in my top five required reading for everyone, and I don't know what the other four are..

That's an excellent, clear-eyed article Anything, thanks for that.

It breaks my heart to think what happened after he wrote it.
posted by jokeefe at 6:18 PM on November 3, 2006


When they first mentioned Iraq, I said wtf? So did my mom.

That's when I started learning to wring Google. And even then, within 12 to 72 hours of each major statement marching us to war, I found credible debunking on the web...much of which has since shown up in our own, lame, official government inquiries.

My mom, a 'Party of Lincoln' Kansas Repulican of Free Stater stock, 30 years an army wife, went to her county seat and toddled her way down Main Street in an anti-war demonstration before we invaded.

Between those events, my first wtf and my mom's little old lady walk, my son enlisted.

Fuck.

I really, really want these people impeached (or prosecuted, as the term applies) and imprisoned. I think some should swing; but, I don't dare hope for it.

On preview:

What jokeefe said.
posted by taosbat at 6:20 PM on November 3, 2006


cell divide: There is no accountability in this country and that is a HUGE problem for those who actually love America.

For those who truly hate or could care less about America, people like this getting rich and powerful is a good thing, as it destroys the thing that made this country special in the first place.


I really want to believe you, but I can't help thinking of the Vietnam war. And, you know, the rest of it.

Chomsky has a point when he says there has been real social progress in the last 50 years. It took a few years for anyone to question the Vietnam war at all, and 6 years before there was a real uproar. There was enormous disagreement with the Iraq war from the beginning, and it has only taken three years to really hit the fan.



BillyElmore: Those Annie Leibovitz portraits sure give us a glimpse into some dark souls. She somehow captures the coldness of these neocon perpetrators who brought us one of history’s greatest blunders.

They certainly are sinister portraits.. I'm thinking they have been doctored - Bush and Cheney are both squinting a little more with their right eyes, than their left. Either they both share equal parts of Satan's soul - unlikely, we are talking about Cheney here - or, you know, something..



Pastabagel: If there wer other strategies to consider, as he says, then war was not justified. War is a last resort. I'm beginning to think these guys had the intention of weakening the US military and crippling the economy with debt to advacne some global business agenda. I just don't know what that agenda is. Yet.

It is a stated conservative strategy, I think. Bankrupt the federal government, so that it can't afford to provide any services equals Free Market Utopia - Q.E.D.
posted by Chuckles at 6:30 PM on November 3, 2006


A very unwise interview to have given, Mr. Perle. As I recall, you resigned from the Defense Policy Board after some question of financial conflict of interest, and that strange scratching noise you may have heard just now was your name being struck from Bush's list of last second pardons.
posted by jamjam at 6:31 PM on November 3, 2006


These people are slowly admitting they were wrong and nobody is taking them to task.

IM IN YR IRAQ QUASHING YR INSURGENCY WITH A WHIFF OF GUNPOWDER
posted by fire&wings at 6:33 PM on November 3, 2006


squinting a little more with their right eyes, than their left.

Sorry, that is squinting with their left eyes (on the right of the picture) more than their right. Which makes more sense - the devil's half is squinting to get a good look at the viewer :P
posted by Chuckles at 6:35 PM on November 3, 2006


Why does the American military now do what a pro-Iranian theocrat wants them to do?

Abdel Aziz al-Hakim, who, as the leading representative of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) is heavily supported by Iran could be easily called pro-Iranian. Moqtada al-Sadr could not be so easily described.

See also Shiite Groups and Factions
posted by y2karl at 6:38 PM on November 3, 2006


David Frum:
"I always believed as a speechwriter that if you could persuade the president to commit himself to certain words, he would feel himself committed to the ideas that underlay those words. And the big shock to me has been that although the president said the words, he just did not absorb the ideas. And that is the root of, maybe, everything."
What? Does he think he is chief unique at the court of the emperor or something?
posted by Chuckles at 6:52 PM on November 3, 2006


Richard Perle: "In the administration that I served [Perle was an assistant secretary of defense under Ronald Reagan], there was a one-sentence description of the decision-making process when consensus could not be reached among disputatious departments: 'The president makes the decision.' [Bush] did not make decisions

He had no problem deciding to fire Perle's sorry ass. I wonder how much of an irritation, how obviously sneaky and underhanded he had to be for Bush to decide to get rid of him.

Pay close attention to what is happening here. All these guys are blaming Bush, because he's an easy target. But in 1999, they picked Bush to be their guy. They knew he was a little dim and easy to manipulate. That's why they picked him. Their job in the whitehouse was to help him decide. And they're blaming him for not making decisions contrary to what they advised? They blame Bush for not making decisions? The decisions were being made by cheney, who was their dear leader from PNAC.

Yes, Bush is the President and is responsible, of course, but he is out. Love him or hate him, Bush is gone in two years. These guys will keep coming back and coming back until they get power again. They aren't term limited. By and large people don't know who they are. Who are Perle's top advisers, Rumsfeld's, etc.

These guys are trying to pick a fall guy now, regroup in two years, come up with a differnt PR spin and maybe some unknown faces to front their group, and make a run at the presidency again in 2008. Cheney's not going to run then, but they are setting themselves up to back somebody.

The question is who. Of the leading 2008 republican contenders, Guiliani, McCain, Romney, Barbour(?), who has connections with these people?
posted by Pastabagel at 7:01 PM on November 3, 2006 [2 favorites]


Why does the American military now do what a pro-Iranian theocrat wants them to do?

When my son was in Iraq the second time, 2004-2005, their mission was to support the Iraqi government. He told me that when they 'took prisoners' it was really 'detaining criminal suspects' for the Iraqi authorities. These so-called suspects, otherwise called terrorists or insurgents or even dead-enders, were supposededly remanded to the custody of Iraqi criminal courts for cirminal complaints, like LA hoods.

I questioned then how our troops could properly be put under the employment of a foreign government, even our puppet.

Just a few days ago, Maliki ordered our troops off the streets and we complied.
posted by taosbat at 7:03 PM on November 3, 2006


Once the country pulls itself out of its national nightmare, Bush will appear to even the average person as he has been all along -- a facile faker, a little boy in his daddy's suit, a spoiled millionaire's kid who shouldn't have been trusted with taking care of the birth control on a sloppy date much less the arsenal of a global superpower. He's a phony, a huckster, a bullshit artist who knows how to use his little nicknames to keep people in their place, with a mind as deep as a birdbath and a mountain of unprocessed anger and fear smoldering in what's left of his soul. In future years, if we're still around after what's been done in his name, people will shake their heads when they see film clips of him and ask themselves, "How could anyone have been so naive as to take him seriously?"
posted by digaman at 7:06 PM on November 3, 2006 [2 favorites]



It is a stated conservative strategy, I think. Bankrupt the federal government, so that it can't afford to provide any services equals Free Market Utopia - Q.E.D.
posted by Chuckles at 9:30 PM EST on November 3


I was thinking more along the lines of "buy euros and yuan, bankrupt and weaken the US, float the yuan, trigger conflict betwen the US and china = Chinese utopia = profit.

Rumsfeld's key China advisor
posted by Pastabagel at 7:19 PM on November 3, 2006


Pastabagel: If there wer other strategies to consider, as he says, then war was not justified. War is a last resort. I'm beginning to think these guys had the intention of weakening the US military and crippling the economy with debt to advacne some global business agenda. I just don't know what that agenda is. Yet.

A lot of people are beginning to notice that things may have gone as planned in the end, although perhaps not destructive enough to both countries. That's a reason to fire the failed planners, so we aren't forced to assume that they actually succeeded by failing.
posted by Brian B. at 7:21 PM on November 3, 2006


scalefree, I want to believe that link is a work of satire. But it's not, is it...
posted by maryh at 7:23 PM on November 3, 2006


And he's ugly...god he is ugly. Stupid and fcuking ugly like the rest of those PNAC and American Enterprise Institute schmucks who're now positioning themselves for a quiet and merciful private life or retirement without being held accountable for death and disaster and profound stupidity. I think the Neocons saw a thousand years reign at any cost...it was about power and only about power, not terrorism or WMD's or justice, it was all nothing less than rewriting the most basic principles of what this country was founded on. It's so gratifying to see that insane utopian dream come apart brick by brick. And I'll be a little "delphic" here and prophesize that when this country finally realizes the full scope of what they and the Bush White House wrought you won't be able to stop the criminal investigations and the rats blaming one another as the sick Neocon ship goes to the bottom of the ocean of bad political theories and cults. Amen.

I wish that chair Perle was sitting on was electric and 60,000 volts were flowing through his ugly face, now let me...let me tell you how I really feel...let me just freshen up my drink a bit...
posted by Skygazer at 7:53 PM on November 3, 2006


RU pissed? I'm way past pissed.
posted by taosbat at 7:58 PM on November 3, 2006


From scalefree's link (thx, btw):

Prepare to Bomb Iran. Make no mistake, President Bush will need to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities before leaving office. It is all but inconceivable that Iran will accept any peaceful inducements to abandon its drive for the bomb.

Let me translate that:

1) The rule is "Buy low, sell high". But when is low and when is high?

2) It is now low, $59.14, relative to the last Iran confrontation + mideast flareup.

3) Muravchik above just told us when it will be high - when they bomb Iran, before Bush leaves office. Assuming these guys have any influence on the president anymore, that is.

4) Oil's high in the summer of 2006 was $79 and change. That's 33% higher than it is now. If we bomb Iran, it is reasonable to think it will at least go as high as it has in the past.

This is a convenient vehicle.
posted by Pastabagel at 8:05 PM on November 3, 2006


wow, I must've been delphic in 2002.

join the club, pal.
posted by norm at 8:18 PM on November 3, 2006


RU pissed? I'm way past pissed.

Do you mean as in "three sheets" or as in "visions of waterboarding revenge" and in both of those cases I think the correct answer would be: IS the Pope Cathollic? But I think I know what you mean, it takes a lot of work to get angry about this stuff anymore it's simply soul deadening...
posted by Skygazer at 8:19 PM on November 3, 2006 [1 favorite]


...it takes a lot of work to get angry about this stuff anymore it's simply soul deadening...
posted by Skygazer


Every morning, right after I read my favorite comics on-line, these folks never fail to piss me right the fuck off first thing. It wasn't always like that; but, it is now. So, it seems the Pope's Cathollic.

It is deadening sometimes...until the rage builds anew.

I mean as in trials, imprisonments...God willing and the creek don't rise: a few death sentences for treason.
posted by taosbat at 8:32 PM on November 3, 2006 [1 favorite]


Seriously, does anyone else think it's weird that Perle would use a word referencing a group of corrupt, reclusive prophets with a grip on state policy who were bribed off by Persian agents?

I mean... Ahmad Chalabi? Anyone?
posted by spiderwire at 8:34 PM on November 3, 2006


Delphic Carpenters, Inc.
posted by anthill at 8:34 PM on November 3, 2006


jokeefe writes "My god, I'm.... speechless. Really. There are no words."

Cognitive dissonance/reality denial reaches new heights. Film at 11.
posted by clevershark at 8:44 PM on November 3, 2006


If I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, 'Should we go into Iraq?,' I think now I probably would have said, 'No, let's consider other strategies'...

You don't need to be "delphic." This guy hasn't heard of planning for the worst-case scenario?

Historian Eric Bergerud:
Bismarck in particular never thought that events could be predicted with precision. When a policy was pursued a range of outcomes could be expected. The trick was to develop policy where the minimum outcome (today we might call it a worst case scenario) was acceptable. If a triumph ensued great. If it was something in between, don't die of surprise.
The actual thinking of the neoconservatives and the Bush administration was more like this:
Much that was said and written about international politics between 1919 and 1939 merited the stricture applied in another context by the economist Marshall, who compares "the nervous irresponsibility which conceives hasty utopian schemes" to the "bold facility of the weak player who will speedily solve the most difficult chess problem by taking on himself to move the black men as well as the white." (E. H. Carr, The 20 Years' Crisis 1919-1939)
posted by russilwvong at 9:54 PM on November 3, 2006


But there are no consequences for these people for being wrong, wrong, wrong. Rice was National Security Advisor when 9/11 happened. She was promoted.

And now she's on the radio using the latest Republican fuckup to justify the war. Pathetic.
posted by homunculus at 10:32 PM on November 3, 2006


Pastabagel writes "The question is who. Of the leading 2008 republican contenders, Guiliani, McCain, Romney, Barbour(?), who has connections with these people?"


Pay close attention to what Pastabagel wrote.
posted by orthogonality at 11:16 PM on November 3, 2006


What Barry says.
posted by zenzizi at 11:32 PM on November 3, 2006


coming soon: Bush says Iraq is all y2karl's fault
posted by matteo at 1:24 AM on November 4, 2006


About Yale and the neo-Cons: Back in the 90s I picked up a few issues of The Weekly Standard (and where was Bill Kristol when these Vanity Fair interviews were being done?). I was interested in some articles on the re-direction of the Russian economy after the breakup of the USSR. The Standard articles all claimed that (1) Russia was a disaster and that (2) Harvard experts were at fault. Harvard had gone to Russia and fucked up was the bottom line of the supposed scholarly analysis in the neo-Con journal of record. I thought the Harvard-Yale rivalry outweighed intelligent analysis. When Iraq came up, I formed the notion that it was Harvard vs. Yale all over again, with Yale seeking its own Vietnam. Not the Best and the Brightest but the Also-rans and the Foolish. God, I wish I had been wrong.
posted by CCBC at 2:50 AM on November 4, 2006


Elect me president, and I will use all the power of my office to have this man (as well as Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and a few choice others) executed for treason.

The war in Iraq is the largest strategic blunder in American history, and these people have done more to damage our credibility and capacity to wage a justified defense against terrorism than anyone else in the entire world.
posted by moonbiter at 4:13 AM on November 4, 2006 [1 favorite]


Oh, where the hell is Christopher Hitchens now?
posted by DenOfSizer at 7:41 AM on November 4, 2006


I'm beginning to think these guys had the intention of weakening the US military and crippling the economy with debt to advacne some global business agenda. I just don't know what that agenda is. Yet.

Pastabagel, when you say Oil's high in the summer of 2006 was $79 and change, you've hit the nail on the head.

Exxon Mobile Closes On Record Profit

Exxon Mobil Corp. is less than $7 billion away from breaking its own record for the highest annual profit ever recorded by a U.S. company.

The Irving-based oil colossus on Thursday reported $10.5 billion in third-quarter net income, trailing its own record quarterly profit of $10.7 billion in the July-September period of 2005 by $200 million.

Combined with $18.8 billion in profits from the first and second quarters, Thursday's result pushes the company's net income so far this year to $29.3 billion — only $6.8 billion behind its eye-popping record 2005 profit of $36.1 billion.

Howard Silverblatt, senior index analyst for Standard & Poor's, said Thursday that the company could break the record — and perhaps reach $40 billion in annual profit.

"We are looking for an all-time high," he said.


Chevron's third quarter profit soars 40% to a record US$5 billion

A US$5 billion third-quarter profit from Chevron Corp. (NYSE:CVX) lifts the cumulative results of the five major oil companies that reported July through September earnings this week to more than $31.5 billion.

Exxon, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP PLC and Royal Dutch Shell PLC earned a total of $31.6 billion in this year's quarter, a four per cent decrease from $32.9 billion a year ago.

Those companies still remain well ahead of 2005's record-setting pace. Through the first nine months of this year, the companies earned a combined $94.5 billion, an 11 per cent increase from $85 billion last year.

posted by Fuzzy Monster at 8:13 AM on November 4, 2006


And as for Richard Perle, he and Douglas Feith should be forced to fight each other to the death using rusty straight razors in a pit full of shit.

Feith led the controversial Office of Special Plans at the Pentagon from September 2002 to June of 2003. This now defunct intelligence gathering unit has been accused of manipulating intelligence to bolster support for the 2003 US invasion of Iraq. According to the British newspaper, The Guardian, "This rightwing intelligence network [was] set up in Washington to second-guess the CIA and deliver a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force." According to Feith's former deputy, Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, the Office of Special Plans was "a propaganda shop" and she personally "witnessed neoconservative agenda bearers within OSP usurp measured and carefully considered assessments, and through suppression and distortion of intelligence analysis promulgate what were in fact falsehoods to both Congress and the executive office of the president." Senator Carl Levin, in an official report on Feith's Office of Special Plans singles Feith out as providing to the White House a large amount of Iraq-Al Qaeda allegations which, post-invasion, turned out to be false.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 8:22 AM on November 4, 2006


When asked about the Vanity Fair article and Perle's criticism, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said, "We appreciate the Monday-morning quarterbacking, but the president has a plan to succeed in Iraq and we are going forward with it."
posted by taosbat at 8:45 AM on November 4, 2006


Perle has been a persistently stupid man for decades. I can't understand why anyone still takes him seriously.

Sometimes it seems as if the US has no memory.
posted by Coventry at 9:06 AM on November 4, 2006


We appreciate the Monday-morning quarterbacking, but the president has a plan to succeed in Iraq and we are going forward with it."

He must not mean the kind of Monday morning quarterbacking in which the actual members of the team that lost on the field are discussing what they did wrong instead of pretending they won, and won big.

Or maybe he just means its only half time, and the score is 97 to nothing and the quarterback insists on running the wrong way after every snap and then blames the grunts in the trenches but no one should talk about it?

God I hate sports analogies, they are nothing but air.
posted by Rumple at 9:23 AM on November 4, 2006


Jail. For all of them. This is treason on a grand scale.
posted by fourcheesemac at 9:38 AM on November 4, 2006


Ahmad Chalabi Says, 'The Real Culprit is Wolfowitz' via

~~~
Now, in an interview in his London home, Chalabi, betraying what Filkins calls “a touch of bitterness,” declares, “The real culprit in all this is Wolfowitz,” the former assistant secretary of defense, whom he still considers a friend. “They chickened out. The Pentagon guys chickened out…The Americans screwed it up.”

But that’s not because they did too little but, rather, too much. Chalabi thinks the U.S. should have exited quickly and turned things over to Iraqis, such as himself and Moktada al-Sadr. “It was a puppet show!" he says referring to the occupation. “The worst of all worlds. We were in charge, and we had no power.”

He adds: “America betrays its friends. It sets them up and betrays them. I’d rather be America’s enemy.”
~~~
posted by taosbat at 10:05 AM on November 4, 2006


Jail. For all of them. This is treason on a grand scale.

Actually fourcheesemac, the US has a more stringent policy than jail for treason.

(though to be honest, it's only been used half the time, the other was a sentence of solitary confinement and hard labor.)
posted by quin at 10:18 AM on November 4, 2006


More from taosbat's incredible link:

[...]

What about the WMD propaganda? Chalabi counters views that he was the catalyst, saying that it was Bush officials who "came to us and asked, 'Can you help us find something on Saddam?'"

He also claims that he warned the Bush people that various Iraqi informants were unreliable, only to hear the Americans say, referring to the source, "This guy is the mother lode." Chalabi, of all people asks, "Can you believe that on such a basis the United States would go to war?"

Chalabi has nothing to say about his leaks to Judith Miller of The New York Times, but Filkins does recall her famous email from 2003 when she boasted that Chalabi had "provided most of the front-page exclusives on WMD to our paper."

[...]
posted by digaman at 10:25 AM on November 4, 2006


When is someone gonna tell the poor teenagers trying to keep each other alive in the desert that, like, "Sorry dudes, the guys who uhm, thought you should give your life for your country are sort of, well, they're not too into it anymore, except for like, your Commander-in-Chief and your Secretary of Defense, uhm, I guess we sorta fucked up..."
posted by digaman at 10:29 AM on November 4, 2006


Kenneth 'Cakewalk' Adelman:

I've worked with [Rumsfeld] three times in my life. I've been to each of his houses, in Chicago, Taos, Santa Fe, Santo Domingo, and Las Vegas...

What an odd but telling detail.
posted by y2karl at 10:37 AM on November 4, 2006


"It may not be popular with the public — it doesn't matter in the sense that we have to continue the mission and do what we think is right. And that's exactly what we're doing," Cheney said. "We're not running for office. We're doing what we think is right."
posted by taosbat at 11:27 AM on November 4, 2006


Oh, where the hell is Christopher Hitchens now?

Here.
posted by homunculus at 11:28 AM on November 4, 2006


The only thing that's changed is that maybe he'd think twice about pulling out a sword and charging.
posted by Malor at 3:56 PM PST


I see no evidence that he is willing to pick up anything to attack something that could hurt him back.
posted by rough ashlar at 12:34 PM on November 4, 2006


The GOP base in Missouri warns of the Grand Muslim Invasion Plot
posted by homunculus at 12:42 PM on November 4, 2006


Cheney said... "We're not running for office. We're doing what we think is right."

WE'RE JUST TAKING IT, CHUMPS

...Assuming they don't attempt a coup in 2008, this is the first thing I can remember Cheney saying that wasn't a complete pile of horseshit.

Of course that should probably tell me something about what's being planned for the next election, but I'm a doe-eyed liberal.
posted by spiderwire at 3:05 PM on November 4, 2006


Of course that should probably tell me something about what's being planned for the next election, but I'm a doe-eyed liberal.

For a look past the finger-pointing & where Neoconservatism may be headed next, I'll again point people to this paean just posted on AEI's website: Operation Comeback.
posted by scalefree at 3:48 PM on November 4, 2006


And the recanters have started recanting their recant: David Frum (an appalling waste of human flesh at the best of times; a disgrace to his mother the rest of them) is now backpedalling -- probably got the message: no more free smorgasbords at GOP lovefests for bad, bad, off-message mouthpieceboy.
posted by Rumple at 5:34 PM on November 4, 2006


You got the rope, Rumple?
posted by taosbat at 5:58 PM on November 4, 2006


For a look past the finger-pointing & where Neoconservatism may be headed next, I'll again point people to this paean just posted on AEI's website: Operation Comeback.

Reading that piece, I'm thinking public diplomacy, soft power, disavow Strauss, ok, good, yes --

"BOMB IRAN AND RECRUIT JOE LIEBERMAN."

-- guh. Wha?

The neocons are screwed and they know it. Not to take the 'doe-eyed liberal' metaphor too far, but if there's one thing we know about Cheney, it's that the deer aren't really much more safe than his hunting buddies.

I always wondered what the glue was holding the whole conservative coalition together was made of, and the answer turns out to be exactly what everyone thought it was. Political opportunism and money. It'll be interesting to see whether self-interest or fundamental values wins out and they all get back together and hug.

I'm betting that after the ideological purging of a few people at the top -- which is already happening -- the whole mishmash of religious nuts and corporate whores and military whackos will be buddy-buddy again in no time. The question, I think, is whether the pre-election timing of the whole debacle makes the falling-out permanent.
posted by spiderwire at 6:23 PM on November 4, 2006


taosbat: still looking for enough rope, but I got the soundtrack figured out
posted by Rumple at 6:31 PM on November 4, 2006


Oh, but Digaman, you skipped the best parts:

1. "The levels of brutality that we've seen are truly horrifying, and I have to say, I underestimated the depravity."

Now ... is that any way to talk about our troops?

2. "This situation, [Frum] says, must ultimately be blamed on "failure at the center"—starting with President Bush.

Hey, at least they're not trying to blame Clinton's spurt. But really -- does anyone believe Beloved Leader cooked up this plan? [Pearle: "the machinery of government that he nominally ran was actually running him"]

3. Adelmann on Rummy: "I'm crushed by his performance. Did he change, or were we wrong in the past?"

If you go to the longer version of this story,
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/12/neocons200612?currentPage=2
you'll see this, best quote:

4. "Adelman believes that neoconservatism itself—what he defines as "the idea of a tough foreign policy on behalf of morality, the idea of using our power for moral good in the world"—is dead, at least for a generation. After Iraq, he says, "it's not going to sell." And if he, too, had his time over, Adelman says, "I would write an article that would be skeptical over whether there would be a performance that would be good enough to implement our policy. The policy can be absolutely right, and noble, beneficial, but if you can't execute it, it's useless, just useless."
posted by Twang at 7:21 PM on November 4, 2006


I liked that movie; but, "Welcome to Hell."
posted by taosbat at 7:22 PM on November 4, 2006


President Bush visits Greeley, I hope he liked the smell.
posted by taosbat at 8:09 PM on November 4, 2006


"Huge mistakes were made, and I want to be very clear on this: They were not made by neoconservatives

These are the same assholes who (in the 70s, before they became neocons) would have blame the failure of Communism on the way Stalin, Lenin, and Mao implemented.
posted by MikeKD at 8:47 PM on November 4, 2006


They were not made by neoconservatives--

With Paul Wolfowitz as Rumsfeld's deputy, and Douglas Feith in charge of planning the occupation? Give me a break.
posted by russilwvong at 8:55 PM on November 4, 2006


Roger Ailes (the non-evil Roger Ailes): "Success Has A Thousand Fathers, Failure Just Has These Bastards."
posted by ibmcginty at 11:44 AM on November 6, 2006


Neoconservatism -- RIP
posted by homunculus at 8:14 PM on November 13, 2006


« Older Youtube video of Philly cops vandalizing Philly co...  |  [NSFW] People are always tryi... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments