Finally, A Reason To Support John Bolton…

|

…Colin Powell, abysmal former secretary of state, is quietly opposing his nomination. Drudge links to Washington Post and New York Times coverage.

Advertisement

NEXT: New Kid on the Blog: Robert A. George

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Oh, how soon we forget the ?mps of the Clintom administration. Madeline Albright deserves a category of failure all her own, so unique was her lack of capacity for the job. Her predecesor Warren Christopher was one of the few dead men to occupy the position in the 20th Century

  2. Yeah, the way she actually got our allies on board for the Kosovo war, and kept them on the team when they got wobbly? That was really lousy.

    It’s pretty sad, though, that I find myself looking back fondly on a Secretaries of State whose greatest achievement was to not do our country damage.

  3. We should be thankful Condi is a more enthusiastic salesperson of a defective product than was Colin. It should hasten a critical mass realizing the product is defective.

  4. Hey, remember 14 years ago when Colin Powell was one of the heros of the Gulf War and all those people were touting him as a Presidential candidate? That was awesome!

    It’s remarkable how quickly Powell demolished any political opportunities he may have had with his inept, spineless performance as SecState. His best option now is probably to “write” another autobiography and join his pal Norman Schwartzkopf on the duck hunting/lecture tour circuit.

  5. Yeah, the way she actually got our allies on board for the Kosovo war, and kept them on the team when they got wobbly?

    Had she been good at her job, she would have kept us out of that war entirely. We had no national interests there.

    It takes skill to get allies on board with you to do something that serves your interests and not theirs. It does not take skill to get allies on board when you are doing something that serves their interests and not yours. Kosovo was just another case of us bailing Europeans out of a mess they created for themselves.

  6. Madeleine Albright: OK, now. You want to invade this country that there’s absolutely no reason for us to give a shit about. So what if we supply all the military resources, the planning and pay for it all, would you go along then?

    Chorus of Euro Leaders: Well it sounds very unilateral of you. We’re not really sure, but if you must we’ll make all the necessary sacrifices.

    Madeleine Albright: Oh thank you, thank you for letting us waste our resources on your foreign policy goals. I thought you might be wobbly.

  7. “Had she been good at her job, she would have kept us out of that war entirely. We had no national interests there.”

    See, when I talk about Albright being good at here job, I’m not referring to her ideological and policy preferences. I’m talking about being able to competantly administer the duties that come with her office.

    I know, foreign concept to you, Dan, to think that the government and its officials have actual responsibilities, besides pushing a political agenda.

  8. Actually, “allies,” NATO countries flew a considerable % of the sorties. But hey, don’t let that “reality based” thing get in your way.

    Yeah, we supplied all the military resources and paid for the whole thing. Whatever floats your boat.

  9. See, when I talk about Albright being good at here job, I’m not referring to her ideological and policy preferences. I’m talking about being able to competantly administer the duties that come with her office.

    So am I. Competent administration of her duties would have resulted in Europeans providing all of the money and manpower, and the United States putting in only a token appearance (if that).

    Instead, she let the United States get suckered into blowing a lot of money on something we had no reason to care about, while the Europeans who *did* have reason to care about it did all that they could to minimize the costs to them.

    I know, foreign concept to you, Dan, to think that the government and its officials have actual responsibilities, besides pushing a political agenda.

    Which is precisely why Albright, who failed in her duty to protect the foriegn policy interests of the United States because she was too busy pursuing her political agenda, qualifies as an incompetent government official. If she had been an employee of the European Union, my appraisal of her actions would be different; she served their interests admirably. The problem was, she was supposed to be serving America’s.

  10. “Yeah, we supplied all the military resources and paid for the whole thing. Whatever floats your boat.” ITS CALLED HYPERBOLE, joe.

    And considering this was something the Euros wanted, and we didn’t need, we certainly did supply a disproportionate share of the resources.

    Mad Albright is considered a joke as an academic and govt official by people across the political spectrum. Just google to find the depth of negative comments. She used her ex-husbands money and social connections and her father’s good name to get attention far beyond anything she was ever entitled to. (that seems to be the way american politics works an awful lot of the time, so it’s hard to fault her there.)

  11. “Competent administration of her duties would have resulted in Europeans providing all of the money and manpower, and the United States putting in only a token appearance (if that).”

    I don’t know, dude. Getting the European governments at the time to take on that level of responsibility would go well beyond “competent” in my book. But she did provide a huge shove to move them in that direction.

    And you keep slugging away at the fact that you don’t agree with the mission. I don’t agree with most of what Henry Kissinger did – I’d like to see him convicted for war crimes, to be blunt – but I can recognize that he was a very able NSA and SoS. Dick Cheney has been a very effective Vice President. This doesn’t mean I think he has advanced our country’s interests by any objective measure, just that he has executed his office ably. Sort of like Albright did, and Powell didn’t.

    “considering this was something the Euros wanted, and we didn’t need, we certainly did supply a disproportionate share of the resources.” It may not have been something that you and your roommates wanted, but stopping military agression on continental Europe was certainly something the administration wanted.

    “Mad Albright is considered a joke as an academic and govt official by people across the political spectrum.” As long as the spectrum runs from moonbat right to plain old right, you’re probably right, but she is most certainly not considered a joke among most people who follow foreign policy.

    Once again, you would both do well to recognize the difference between policy preferences and job performance.

  12. Which is “The International Action Center” moonbat right or plain old right?

    http://www.iacenter.org/albright.htm

    Which is “Democracy Now” moonbat right or plain old right?

    http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/30/1519218

    If you’ve got to reflexively promote democrats at least do it with someone worth defending.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.