Woodward Book

[Smmenen]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/books/04/16/iraq.woodward.ap/index.html

Wow.  Just Wow.

Steve

[Matt]

Are you honestly surprised?

[Ric_Flair]

Not to stray into a political topic, which I thought were prohibited on TMD, but who cares?  

I find it so humorous that people are offended that Bush had a plan to take Saddam out.  I am sure that EVERY President has had a plan to take out some country or another.  About five different Presidents had a plan to take out Mexico.  Another two to take out Spain (or at least take it out of the Western Hemisphere and the Phillipines).  Two had plans to take out Germany.  And everyone since FDR minus Bush, Clinton, and W. had a plan to take out Russia.  And there are about a million other examples.  These plans are contingencies made necessary by the ruthless nature of world politics.  If they did NOT have such plans, I would feel that they were unprepared and naive.  Clinton and his international law buddies seemed to think that a dollar solved everyone's problems.  Guess what?  It doesn't.  People hate each other, they want to invade each other's countries and only the delicate balance of missiles pointed at each other or other such coercive means prevents all out war.

Now maybe Bush had bad reasons to make up such a plan, but I honestly believe that regardless of his reasons we, as the only country capable and willing in the international community (besides Israel and Britain) to punish what Rawls called "outlaw states," had good cause to invade.  The reasons Bush gave, the WMD, were terrible, but who cares?  We know they are pretextual anyway.  The real issue is whether there was good reason to go, and I believe there was.  The human rights abuses in Iraq and the ineffectiveness of UN sanctions are enough of a case for me.

PS:  I am more "liberal" than this comment makes me seem.  I am, however, a strong believer in realpolitik.  And I am NOT voting for Bush.  He is an idiot for other reasons.  This was one of the few things he did that made any sense, even if he still doesn't know why.

[kirdape3]

We literally have battle plans to counter invasions from Canada and Mexico.  Having a plan is fine - I'd personally plan contingencies against everyone.  It's acting on them that may not be fine, and for no particular reason that's REALLY not fine.

[TracerBullet]

I think the point is that Bush ordered up a new one...Normally, such plans are internal DoD plans, something that everybody but those specifically commissioned to do such work isn't concerned with.  All told, it's not a terribly shocking allegation, but at the same time, it speaks to Bush's state of mind in the days leading up to Iraq.


Honestly Steve, I find the fact that no reporter followed up on Bush's blatent disregard for the question of "Why are you and Vice President Cheney speaking to the commission together" more disconcerting.  Nobody pressed him for an answer, and the fact that a group like the White House Press Corp was intimidated into not forcing him to answer is much more shocking than his looking to draw up plans for a war in Iraq.  If he was gonna do it, I'm at least relieved that he had enough sense to order up plans (I was honestly worried that he wouldn't/hadn't).

[Zherbus]

RE: Political discussion on TMD

It's fine. The war isn't in such an emotional state right now. I think people can better compose themselves now, than when it started. Whether people were for the war or against it, noone is happy that we're there.

[Bram]

I am sure that EVERY President has had a plan to take out some country or another

LOL! yeah right.  Check out the Dutch president then:





I think it's a stretch to imagine this guy even has a plan to take out the trash. And he certainly won't be taking out any countries (or girls, for that matter). There goes that theory

[Dr. Sylvan]

Wait a minute, other countries have presidents now? Well color me surprised! I thought that the US ambassador to each country was the chief executive, too!

[Saucemaster]

Honestly Steve, I find the fact that no reporter followed up on Bush's blatent disregard for the question of "Why are you and Vice President Cheney speaking to the commission together" more disconcerting.  Nobody pressed him for an answer, and the fact that a group like the White House Press Corp was intimidated into not forcing him to answer is much more shocking than his looking to draw up plans for a war in Iraq.  If he was gonna do it, I'm at least relieved that he had enough sense to order up plans (I was honestly worried that he wouldn't/hadn't).

Even more surprising is the fact that Karl ROVE hasn't nipped that one in the bud, since as image gaffes go, this one's pretty much a disaster.  You know that most of the President's party, staff, and advisers are all telling him it makes him look like a tool, and for some reason he's doing it anyway.  It's a little inscrutable, really.  Plus, his evasion of that question was less than deft.  Much, much less.  It practically invited a followup to press him for an answer.  Does anyone remember who the President called on right after that?  Was it someone from an organization sympathetic to the administration?  Because that would be the typical way to handle that kind of situation.

[Jacob Orlove]

Wait a minute, other countries have presidents now? Well color me surprised! I thought that the US ambassador to each country was the chief executive, too!

In most countries, the president is a figurehead. The "Prime Minister" is the real leader (*wink*).

[rvs]

What Bram calls the dutch president, is actually the dutch minister. Presidents don't exists in Kingdoms. (Even though it's only a show function with little power).

[Magi]

We literally have battle plans to counter invasions from Canada and Mexico.

Hahaha...I can just imagine the day.


We Canadians skate down at full speed towards the border weilding hockey sticks, while the mexicans charge up with their insane taxi fleet...



¡Para La Libertad!

[Bram]

What Bram calls the dutch president, is actually the dutch minister. Presidents don't exists in Kingdoms. (Even though it's only a show function with little power).

You are mistaken, Rudy (at least partly). I didn't explain it in full for simplicity's sake but we're a constitutional monarchy, which means that while the true head-of-state is the queen, she has little or no political power other than the appointing the cabinet formators. The real power does indeed rest in the hands of the ministers, and hence the minister-president (letterlijk: voorzitter) has a function comparable to that of, say, Bush much more so than our ceremonial queen does.

[rvs]

so what I said was true Bram. Thank you for making my point.

[Bram]

Presidents don't exists in Kingdoms.

My point was you were wrong about that statement.

[Dante]

The sad thing is that I wonder how many people know what actually made Woodward famous....

[Joel Rojo]

Shut it dutch girls, you are going to unmake your braids and your cute makeup, what Rudy was referring when he spoke of a show function with little power was the kingdom, not the president/minister, you both are saying the same thing.

[TracerBullet]

It would surprise me if anybody who posted actual content in this thread (read: not dutch) didn't know where Woodward came into the spotlight.

[Bram]

You people are beginning to get immune to thread hijacks. Maybe it's time we mothballed the DTHT.

[rvs]

You people are beginning to get immune to thread hijacks. Maybe it's time we mothballed the DTHT.

Considering BWM, the one who came up with it, isn't here, I'd say you're right.

[Dante]

It would surprise me if anybody who posted actual content in this thread (read: not dutch) didn't know where Woodward came into the spotlight.

I really meant the user base (or even general US population) as a whole, I figured the people who can actually form a political opinion would generally know who he was..

[Bram]

While American (or anyone else's for that matter) domestic political issues/scandals are usually of little interest to anyone outside the country in question, I do seem to recall a journalist called Bob Woodward being involved in the Watergate thingy back in the day. I have no idea if this is the same one though (or maybe his son or something?). The way he apparently needs no introduction in the article, suggests he might well be.

[Dante]

Yes, that's him.