Political Discussions

Political Discussions » General Discussion

Rachel Maddow missed the boat on this one

Posted by Agit8r • 9/03/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: iraq, pnac, tom ridge

After "civilly" grilling Tom Ridge on the decision by Bush (et al) to go into Iraq, she then backed off by saying:

“Maybe everybody wasn’t in on it and maybe that is a radical thing to conclude…”

Radical? Hardly!

Take for instance the Open letter to Bill Clinton (circa 1998), signed by like half the senior officials in Bush's Pentagon!

"...this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy."

www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

Exceedingly diplomatic of Ms. Maddow

User Comments

9/03/09

clioandme

But what has that got to do with Tom Ridge?

[reply]
1. 9/03/09
  
  Agit8r
  
  he's still defending them; saying that it wasn't predetermined when Bush took the White House. Of course it was! Look at his Defense department!
  
  Isn't objective reality important?
2. 9/03/09
  
  clioandme
  
  Okay, I get it. I thought you were saying he had something to do with those demands back in 1998.
9/03/09

People

I think he was pretending only conspiracy theory nuts would think the country went to war based on lies and that Homeland Security made us fear a Democrat as a President. What she was implying, I think, was that her so-called radical views were shared by every Democrat in the country.

[reply]
1. 9/03/09
  
  Agit8r
  
  I'm just wondering why she pulled her punch? Was it part of Ridge's agreement to have the interview?
  
  I mean this is a smoking gun. Bush hired a radical jingoist and his radical compatriots to run his justice department--And then LOOKED FOR a reason to invade. And eventually they had to cite a bogus memo, that Cheney's people sent to a media source, as their excuse. And some people still beleive that it was not premeditated... crazy!
2. 9/03/09
  
  csiunatc
  
  Predetermined by his appointments. Dangerous position to take...
  
  Hmm, what do you think is predetermined with Obamas Appointing of self admitted communists, radicals etc then?
  
  What excuse are they looking for to accomplish what goal?
3. 9/03/09
  
  Agit8r
  
  the goal that they laid out in the letter that THEY SIGNED TOGETHER (see OP)
  
  "We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.
  
  We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett
  
  Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
  
  Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad
  
  William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman
  
  Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber
  
  Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick"
4. 9/03/09
  
  clioandme
  
  Obama wasn't even a U.S. senator at the time of this letter. I don't see how he is relevant to the OP's question, except as a diversionary tactic.
5. 9/03/09
  
  Agit8r
  
  I understand where he is going with this. He is saying that there is possibly a similar conspiracy afoot now. What could it be?
9/03/09

Agit8r

For those of you who are unfamiliar with some of those signees, here is a rundown of a few... and the positions they held in the Bush administration:

Donald Rumsfeld--Secretary of Defense

Paul Wolfowitz--United States Deputy Secretary of Defense

Peter W. Rodman-- United States Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs

Richard L. Armitage-- Deputy Secretary of State

Zalmay Khalilzad--Counselor to Secretary of Defense//later, Ambassador to Iraq

Jeffrey Bergner--Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs from 2005 until July 2008.

Paula Dobriansky--Under-Secretary of State for Democracy & Global Affairs

John Bolton--Undersecretary of State for Arms Control

[reply]