Colin Powell- The Reluctant Leader

20 Responses to “Colin Powell- The Reluctant Leader”

1. D. E.Rodriguez says:

   July 11, 2009 at 4:12 pm

   I have a similar, but very different view on General Colin Powell.

   Let me explain.

   First, as an ex-military, I have always admired him and respected him. Albeit such respect and admiration came down a notch when he didn't speak up, or even resign, during the shame that was the Bush administration.

   But, when you have two SOB's (and I definitely don't classify Powell as one), and one of them eventually admits he is wrong (such as McNamara and Powell did), that counts for something.

   And proof that it–admitting that one was wrong–counts for something is the reaction we have seen from Republicans (including on this blog's comments), when Powell finally admitted that he was wrong to go along with the Iraq charade: Republicans just skewered him, called him a traitor and worse. That alone make me respect him even more.

   Just as Republicans suddenly will forget how much they adulate and idolize—and rightly so—military service and our brave troops…until they do something politically they don't like. Suddenly these heroes are the scum of the earth. There are just too many example of this shameful phenomenon to list here.

   This sadly has been the case even with such a great patriot as Colin Powell, who was truly a Conservative.

   As you note:

   And you are so correct: “Powell is the embodiment of [true conservatism]. During his time as Chairman of the Joint chiefs he reluctantly responded to international crisis by advocating military intervention. He believed that you should have a strong national defense, but you hould also use your military power sparingly.”

   I, too, am sorry that he did not run for President, but I sincerely believe that he did not do so out of respect for his family.

   But this is as far as you and I have similar views of General Colin Powell.

   I vehemently disagree with your statements that:

   “Powell is very much a political coward. How this man who served admirably for his country doesn’t have the stomach for political warfare is beyond me.”

   “…this was an opportunity for Mr Powell to get rid of the stereotypical view that if a black person is a republican than (sic) he is a traitor.”

   Where do you get this nonsense from?

   “Maybe a man of color running for higher office wouldn’t have to deal with questions of patriotism or whether he is a ‘true’ American. Strange thought, but maybe a man of color could be judged on his merits as a Presidential candidate and not his ‘story’ (Sorry Obama)”

   If you are alleging to certain disgusting accusations about our President, this is certainly a low blow, that discredits your entire discourse.

   Dorian de Wind
2. ordinarysparrow says:

   July 11, 2009 at 4:18 pm

   Just an opinion from an ordinary person that is not sophisticated in the ways of Washington, military, or politics. . .Colin Powell is an adult. . .exhibits integrity with principles that speak both mind and heart. . .he may not be perfect. . .but so wished there where more Colin Powells in this United States and world. . .
3. joeinhell says:

   July 11, 2009 at 5:36 pm

   After evidence surfaced that he was the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup, I've thought of him as being lower than a turd in a big toilet. After his crying over his lying the country into these filthy. illegal,
   and war crimes he helped coverup for the bushcheneyrove gang, I wish he would find a quiet place that he likes, put his mouth around a pistol barrel and check to see if it is loaded. I have no use at all for Colin Powell. He not extraordinary he's another GOP suckup, just a different flavor. His lips move, he's lying.
4. D. E.Rodriguez says:

   July 11, 2009 at 5:56 pm

   joeinhell:

   Can you provide some evidence to back up your accusations?
5. Don Quijote says:

   July 11, 2009 at 6:14 pm

   Can you provide some evidence to back up your accusations?

   Watch the speech in made in front of the UN in 2003… or read the transcript

   He is either a lying sack of shit or to fucking stupid to be a general…

   Just another little Eichmann.
6. superdestroyer says:

   July 11, 2009 at 6:16 pm

   The problem with Powell is that he is not a conservative. Powell is actually more liberal than most of the Blue Dog Democrats. Powell is a social liberal (in a non-libertarian way), believes in social engineering and the nanny state, and loves big government.
7. Don Quijote says:

   July 11, 2009 at 6:25 pm

   loves big government.

   And why wouldn't he? Big government has been good to him…

   A free college education at government expense (CUNY), a glorious thirty career in the military, followed by a delightful stint in the Bush administration in which he started another pointless war in which some brave louis can start a glorious career killing defenseless civilians.
8. imavettoo says:

   July 11, 2009 at 7:01 pm

   If not for Colin Powell, we would have never gone into Iraq. His BS briefing to the UN was the straw that…
9. D. E.Rodriguez says:

   July 11, 2009 at 8:10 pm

   Don Quijote:

   I would appreciate it if you would not direct e-mails with obscenities to my pesonal e-mail box through DISQUS' “Reply”. If you must, express yourself as such, just post them as a comment. The moderators will take care of it.

   Thank you
10. Don Quijote says:

    July 11, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    If you must, express yourself as such, just post them as a comment. The moderators will take care of it.

    Sorry, Did not mean to offend your delicate sensibilities…

    If there is an obscenity here it is not my blunt assessment of our fine political/military leadership, but the half a million dead bodies and the couple of million of refugees. The real obscenity here is that we have succeeded in making Saddam look like an enlightened humanitarian.

    And one of the people who made this happen is named Colin Powell.

    So let's stop being so d **n polite and call a spade a spade.
11. D. E.Rodriguez says:

    July 11, 2009 at 8:54 pm

    DQ:

    When I asked Joeinhell to provide some evidence to back up his accusations, I was referring to this accusation (not Iraq)

    “After evidence surfaced that he was the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup, I've thought of him as being lower than a turd in a big toilet.”
12. keelaay says:

    July 12, 2009 at 1:42 am

    “After evidence surfaced that he was the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup,”

    This is more than an erroneous and stupid statement… it is slander. Colin Powell was not “the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup,”. He was major at the time charged with investigating a letter that accused the military of generally abusing Vietnamese civilians. The letter was not specific to My Lai. Colin Powell was a member of the unit involved with the My Lai Massacre — but was assigned to the unit after the event. Its amazing what people will say, and believe, on the internet. (Source Wikipedia. “My Lai Massacre”) The Moderate Voice can do better than to perpetuate such stupid b.s.
13. Don Quijote says:

    July 12, 2009 at 7:30 am

    Colin Powell's Vietnam Fog

    As Powell notes in his 1995 autobiography, My American Journal, in 1969 he was an Army major, the deputy operations officer of the Americal Division, stationed at division headquarters in Chu Lai. He says that in March of that year, an investigator from the inspector general's office of Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) paid a call. In a “Joe Friday monotone,” the investigator shot questions at Powell about Powell's position at the division and the division's operational journals, of which Powell was the custodian. The inspector then asked Powell to produce the journals for March 1968. Powell started to explain that he had not been with the division at that time. “Just get the journal,” the IG man snapped, “and go through that month's entries. Let me know if you find an unusual number of enemy killed on any day.”

    Powell flipped through the records and came upon an entry from March 16, 1968. The journal noted that a unit of the division had reported a body count of 128 enemy dead on the Batangan Peninsula. “In this grinding, grim, but usually unspectacular warfare,” Powell writes, “that was a high number.” The investigator requested that Powell read the number into the tape recorder he had brought, and that was essentially the end of the interview. “He left,” Powell recalls, “leaving me as mystified as to his purpose as when he arrived.”

    It would not be until two years later (according to the orginal version of Powell's book) or six months later (according to the paperbck version of the book) that Powell figured out that the IG official had been probing what was then a secret, the My Lai massacre. Not until the fall of 1969 did the world learned that on March 16, 1968, troops from the Americal Division, under the command of Lieut. William Calley, killed scores of men, women and children in that hamlet. “Subsequent investigation revealed that Calley and his men killed 347 people,” Powell writes. “The 128 enemy 'kills' I had found in the journal formed part of the total.”

    Though he does not say so expressly, Powell leaves the impression that the IG investigation, using information provided by Powell, uncovered the massacre, for which Calley was later court-martialed. That is not accurate.

    The transcript of the tape-recorded interview between the IG man–Lieut. Col. William Sheehan–and Powell tells a different story. During that session–which actually happened on May 23, 1969–the IG investigator did request that Powell take out the division's operations journals covering the first three weeks of March. (The IG inquiry had been triggered by letters written to the Pentagon, the White House and twenty-four members of Congress by Ron Ridenhour, a former serviceman who had learned about the mass murders.) Sheehan examined the records. Then he asked Powell to say for the record what activity had transpired in “grid square BS 7178″ in this period. “The most significant of these occurred on 16, March, 1968,” Powell replied, “beginning at 0740 when C Company, 1st of the 20th, then under Task Force Barker, and the 11th Infantry Brigade, conducted a combat assault into a hot LZ [landing zone].” He noted that C Company, after arriving in the landing zone, killed one Vietcong. About fifteen minutes later, the same company, backed up by helicopter gunships, killed three VC. In the following hour, the gunships killed three more VC, while C Company “located documents and equipment” and killed fourteen Vietcong. “There is no indication of the nature of the action which caused these fourteen VC KIA,” Powell said. Later that morning, C Company, according to the journal, captured a shortwave radio and detained twenty-three VC suspects for questioning, while two other companies that were also part of Task Force Barker were active in the same area without registering any enemy kills.

    Powell did not find in the journals any evidence suggesting something terribly amiss had happened in My Lai. No suspicious numbers of enemy killed, such as the 128 figure he recounts in his memoirs. The official records merely reflected what Powell had referred to as “a hot combat assault” during the IG interview. Seven weeks later, the MACV IG recommended that the case be closed, but a Pentagon IG investigation was already under way, and the Army's Criminal Investigation Division was soon pursuing an inquiry. The matter could not be smothered, and in November of 1969, journalist Seymour Hersh exposed C Company's massacre of civilians at My Lai.

    There had been attempts at cover-up. Prior to Ridenhour's letter, the Army promoted the story that C Company had killed 128 VC and captured three weapons in the March 16 action. (Note the 128 figure–which Powell, in his memoirs, uses in describing the number of enemy kills he supposedly found in the journals. In his book, he is repeating the cover story, not recalling what was actually in the journal.) And information pertaining to My Lai disappeared from the Americal Division's files. A military review panel–convened after the Hersh stories to determine why the initial investigations did not uncover the truth of My Lai–found that senior officers of the Americal Division had destroyed evidence to protect their comrades. Powell keeps that out of his account.

    Powell has never been implicated in any of the wrongdoing involving My Lai. No evidence ties him to the attempted cover-up. But he was part of an institution (and a division) that tried hard to keep the story of My Lai hidden–a point unacknowledged in his autobiography. Moreover, several months before he was interviewed by Sheehan, Powell was ordered to look into allegations made by another former GI that US troops had “without provocation or justification” killed civilians. (These charges did not mention My Lai specifically.) Powell mounted a most cursory examination. He did not ask the accuser for more specific information. He interviewed a few officers and reported to his superiors that there was nothing to the allegations [see "Questions for Powell," The Nation, January 8/15, 2001]. This exercise is not mentioned in his memoirs

    Behind Colin Powell's Legend — My Lai
    

    Maj. Powell's Response
    The letter's troubling allegations were not well received at Americal headquarters. Maj. Powell undertook the assignment to review Glen's letter, but did so without questioning Glen or assigning anyone else to talk with him. Powell simply accepted a claim from Glen's superior officer that Glen was not close enough to the front lines to know what he was writing about, an assertion Glen denies.

    After that cursory investigation, Powell drafted a response on Dec. 13, 1968. He admitted to no pattern of wrongdoing. Powell claimed that U.S. soldiers in Vietnam were taught to treat Vietnamese courteously and respectfully. The Americal troops also had gone through an hour-long course on how to treat prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions, Powell noted.

    “There may be isolated cases of mistreatment of civilians and POWs,” Powell wrote in 1968. But “this by no means reflects the general attitude throughout the Division.” Indeed, Powell's memo faulted Glen for not complaining earlier and for failing to be more specific in his letter.

    Powell reported back exactly what his superiors wanted to hear. “In direct refutation of this [Glen's] portrayal,” Powell concluded, “is the fact that relations between Americal soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent.”

    Powell's findings, of course, were false. But it would take another Americal hero, an infantryman named Ron Ridenhour, to piece together the truth about the atrocity at My Lai. After returning to the United States, Ridenhour interviewed Americal comrades who had participated in the massacre.

    On his own, Ridenhour compiled this shocking information into a report and forwarded it to the Army inspector general. The IG's office conducted an aggressive official investigation and the Army finally faced the horrible truth. Courts martial were held against officers and enlisted men implicated in the murder of the My Lai civilians.

    But Powell's peripheral role in the My Lai cover-up did not slow his climb up the Army's ladder. Powell pleaded ignorance about the actual My Lai massacre, which pre-dated his arrival at the Americal. Glen's letter disappeared into the National Archives — to be unearthed only years later by British journalists Michael Bilton and Kevin Sims for their book Four Hours in My Lai. In his best-selling memoirs, Powell did not mention his brush-off of Tom Glen's complaint.

    Colin Powell and the Power Elite By Justin Raimundo

    colin powell: don't ask about my lai, don't tell about iran-contra
14. D. E.Rodriguez says:

    July 12, 2009 at 9:30 am

    DQ

    The charge by Joeinhell was:

    “After evidence surfaced that he was the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup, I've thought of him as being lower than a turd in a big toilet.”

    I asked him:

    “Can you provide some evidence to back up your accusations?”

    You then came up with Colin Powell's UN testimony about Iraq

    When challenged, you quote extensively from a book that in part says:

    “Powell has never been implicated in any of the wrongdoing involving My Lai. No evidence ties him to the attempted cover-up. “

    and in some other piece, at worse:

    “But Powell's peripheral role in the My Lai cover-up did not slow his climb up the Army's ladder. Powell pleaded ignorance about the actual My Lai massacre, which pre-dated his arrival at the Americal.”

    All speculation and innuendo, and as Keeelay says:

    “This is more than an erroneous and stupid statement… it is slander. Colin Powell was not “the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup,”. He was a major at the time charged with investigating a letter that accused the military of generally abusing Vietnamese civilians. Colin Powell was a member of the unit involved with the My Lai Massacre — but was assigned to the unit after the event. Its amazing what people will say, and believe, on the internet. (Source Wikipedia. “My Lai Massacre”) The Moderate Voice can do better than to perpetuate such stupid b.s. Further, there is absolutely no place for the violent threats in the post. Moderate Voice is devolving with these vitriolic hate posts.”

    Now, where is the evidence that General Colin Powell, a major at the time of the Vietnam War, was “the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup,
15. kritt11 says:

    July 12, 2009 at 11:17 am

    Colin Powell has been long admired for his military leadership, his intellect, and his forthright style. Those attributes contributed to what I would label as hero worship— many believed that he would make a great politician and ought to run for president.

    IMO, he thrived in the military environment, leading to many worthy achievements, but those achievements did not translate over to the political realm. He didn't run for office himself because he worried about threats against his family. That makes him a hero in my book, because I think men should put their families ahead of their ambition.

    Powell did serve as the first African-American Secretary of State under George W. Bush, but did not stand up for what he believed would work. In his view, the president's will ought to be carried out- whether or not he agreed with it. He was a figurehead in the administration, however, who was used by the Bush administration for his spotless reputation when it was convenient, and circumvented when it wasn't. Colin Powell was never part of Bush's inner circle, and mostly found himself going through Condi Rice, when he needed to get the president's attention.

    He probably should have resigned when he realized that the administration mostly valued his name and reputation, and not his political or diplomatic skills. Diplomacy was not highly valued during Bush's first term. The fact that he allowed himself to be used in this way and didn't speak out shows a sense of loyalty to a president that superseded loyalty to his country. It also demonstrates that the General is human and has flaws just like everyone else. But these flawed judgments DO prove to me that he would not have been able to handle the political minefield that is the office of the presidency.
16. Don Quijote says:

    July 12, 2009 at 11:18 am

    Now, where is the evidence that General Colin Powell, a major at the time of the Vietnam War, was “the officer in charge of the My Lai Massacre coverup,

    Let's see if we can agree on the basic facts here.

    A) Tom Glen writes a letter to Gen. Creighton Abrams, the commander of all U.S. forces in Vietnam, in which he accuses the Americal division of routine brutality against civilians.

    B) Glen's letter was forwarded to the American headquarters at Chu Lai where it landed on Maj. Powell's desk.

    C) Powell (probably following orders) buries letter and investigation.

    So Powell was in charge of an investigation that if it had been conducted properly would in all likeliness have discovered the My Lai massacre, but since he did his job so well ( or poorly depending on your view point ) nothing comes out until an infantryman named Ron Ridenhour kicks of a civilian controlled process that uncovers the My Lai Massacre.
17. D. E.Rodriguez says:

    July 12, 2009 at 1:17 pm

    “But Powell's peripheral role in the My Lai cover-up…” My emphasis
18. skeedro says:

    July 12, 2009 at 8:39 pm

    “But this was an opportunity for Mr Powell to accomplish his greatest achievement, to show the extreme right wingers in his own party how idiotic their views on race truly are and an opportunity to get rid of the stereotypical view that if a black person is a republican than he is a traitor.”

    Colin Powell voted for Obama. If that is not a traitor please tell me what is…… and can anyone tell me a good reason that he would make that vote? (leaving the race card alone)
19. D. E.Rodriguez says:

    July 12, 2009 at 9:06 pm

    Conscience?
20. keelaay says:

    July 12, 2009 at 11:22 pm

    “I wish he would find a quiet place that he likes, put his mouth around a pistol barrel and check to see if it is loaded.”

    So much for the “Moderate Voice”. This blog has turned into another venue for extremists. Right or left — who cares? They are hateful and vile.