HOME | BIO | MUSIC | JOURNEYS BY DJ | STUDIO BLOG | POLITICAL BLOG | BOOKING INFO | CONTACT

Looks like we've got another retired general criticizing Rummy and Bush for their poor pre-war planning. I think you may have heard of this guy before. Take a look:

In an interview with a private British television station on Sunday, Powell said there had been debates about the size of the force and how to deal with the aftermath. "I don't think we had enough force there to impose order," he said on ITV's Jonathan Dimbleby program. "The aftermath turned out to be much more difficult than anyone had anticipated," said Powell, adding he had favored a larger military presence to deal with the unforeseen. "I made the case to General (Tommy) Franks, to (Defense) Secretary (Donald) Rumsfeld and to the president that I was not sure we had enough troops," Powell said. But he said the military leaders felt they had the appropriate number.

I love the bit where Condi tries to pretend like she doesn't remember what Powell is talking about. The man was one of the few individuals inside the administration who worked to slow the rush to war. He pushed back, and he was marginalized and ostracized for it. And yet somehow she doesn't remember?

For those playing along at home its really very simple:

In his time as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Colin Powell developed something known as "the Powell Doctrine." Powell believed, rightly in my opinion, that when a nation is engaging in war, every possible resource should be put to use to ensure an overwhelming use of force against the enemy. Commit, commit fully, and destroy those you face on the battlefield. It was a policy that successfully guided us through the 1991 Gulf War. Enter Rumsfeld and, even pre-9/11, his belief that in war smaller is better, a complete rejection of Powell's approach.

So given that... we're supposed to believe Condi when she tells us that Powell never objected to Rumsfeld's new approach? his life's work was being rejected, and we're supposed to think he never once said anything in front of here? And for god's sake, its not as if it didn't apply here - just a decade earlier it had guided us to victory in a war against the exact same adversary! How hard is this to understand?

--------