Only Powell Can Save (the) US!!!

I think Colin Powell has the MORAL IMPERATIVE to save the day.


Really I could go on all day about his achievements, but more than anything else I think he is maybe the only qualified party everyone could live with. Maybe one of the truely untarnished people in Washington.


The guy from what I know has been I the rightside of just about everything.


He spoke against the war in Iraq, but when ordered to fight, Fought brilliantly.


(Disclaimer: need to see who disbanded the Iraq army without pay. If that was him that's a blunder)


I know he doesn't want it, but I think he is the only guy who could unite the country and get us back to even.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Wait, what do you mean he "spoke against the War in Iraq"? I'm guessing you mean the 1st one/Gulf War? Because Powell was the one who gave the infamous pro-war Feb 2003 speech to the UN claiming we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were.

Many years later, he claimed he regretted the Iraq War. But make no mistake, he was one of the major forces that got us into that war.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

If you're relying on Colin Powell as a beacon of truth and honesty then you're clutching at straws.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

He spoke against the war in Iraq, but when ordered to fight, Fought brilliantly.

No he didn't. He led the charge in the UN with his little yellow vial speech. A speech that came at a precise tipping point, swaying everyone to join in the necessity of invading Iraq to 'Make Assad go'.

We're still bogged down there, will be forever. Until the empire crumbles.

Edit: I see others have already vetted it. In genreal, the last people you want to get diplomatic advice from is the military. All they see is military solutions.

Your telling me the guy who told Hillary to use private email to circumvent the government obtaining them or FOIA is a pillar or morality?

Good in the woods, sit down, and rethink some S***.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Wait, what do you mean he "spoke against the War in Iraq"? I'm guessing you mean the 1st one/Gulf War? Because Powell was the one who gave the infamous pro-war Feb 2003 speech to the UN claiming we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were.

Many years later, he claimed he regretted the Iraq War. But make no mistake, he was one of the major forces that got us into that war.

He was ordered to give that speech as a military officer.

He advised bush not to, but was ordered to anyway.

That said the bush administration definitely leaned on his credibility.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
Your telling me the guy who told Hillary to use private email to circumvent the government obtaining them or FOIA is a pillar or morality?

Good in the woods, sit down, and rethink some S***.

He didn't tell Hillary to..

I think Hillary knew ahead or time or found out later he did , and used him to blame shift.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Either way, that's how he did it and even informed others to do the same.

That being said, she asked, he answered. Don't just mold things to fit your narrative.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Wait, what do you mean he "spoke against the War in Iraq"? I'm guessing you mean the 1st one/Gulf War? Because Powell was the one who gave the infamous pro-war Feb 2003 speech to the UN claiming we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were.

Many years later, he claimed he regretted the Iraq War. But make no mistake, he was one of the major forces that got us into that war.

From his wiki page:

"

Powell came under fire for his role in building the case for the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. In a press statement on February 24, 2001, he had said that sanctions against Iraq had prevented the development of any weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein. As was the case in the days leading up to the Persian Gulf War, Powell was initially opposed to a forcible overthrow of Saddam, preferring to continue a policy of containment. However, Powell eventually agreed to go along with the Bush administration's determination to remove Saddam. He had often clashed with others in the administration, who were reportedly planning an Iraq invasion even before the September 11 attacks, an insight supported by testimony by former terrorism czar Richard Clarke in front of the 9/11 Commission. The main concession Powell wanted before he would offer his full support for the Iraq War was the involvement of the international community in the invasion, as opposed to a unilateral approach. He was also successful in persuading Bush to take the case of Iraq to the United Nations, and in moderating other initiatives. Powell was placed at the forefront of this diplomatic campaign."

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Wait, what do you mean he "spoke against the War in Iraq"? I'm guessing you mean the 1st one/Gulf War? Because Powell was the one who gave the infamous pro-war Feb 2003 speech to the UN claiming we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were.

Many years later, he claimed he regretted the Iraq War. But make no mistake, he was one of the major forces that got us into that war.

From his wiki page:

"

Powell came under fire for his role in building the case for the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. In a press statement on February 24, 2001, he had said that sanctions against Iraq had prevented the development of any weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein. As was the case in the days leading up to the Persian Gulf War, Powell was initially opposed to a forcible overthrow of Saddam, preferring to continue a policy of containment. However, Powell eventually agreed to go along with the Bush administration's determination to remove Saddam. He had often clashed with others in the administration, who were reportedly planning an Iraq invasion even before the September 11 attacks, an insight supported by testimony by former terrorism czar Richard Clarke in front of the 9/11 Commission. The main concession Powell wanted before he would offer his full support for the Iraq War was the involvement of the international community in the invasion, as opposed to a unilateral approach. He was also successful in persuading Bush to take the case of Iraq to the United Nations, and in moderating other initiatives. Powell was placed at the forefront of this diplomatic campaign."

Sounds to me like he tried to blunted the damage from what the bush administration was gonna do anyway..

a reply to: JoshuaCox

He was ordered to give that speech as a military officer.

Indeed , he's a company man , as I remember it he was a "dove" but against his personal belief jumped through all the hoops he was told to jump through , while that's an admirable quality it's not what I'd want in a leader.

Ea reply to: JoshuaCox

I don't think he's untarnished by any stretch but I could live with him as President much easier than Clinton or Trump.

He could never run. His wife has severe mental issues. He also lied about the chemical weapons. We gave them those chemical weapons. I know because a good friend of mine retrieved them in Iraq. Said all those chemical weapons had US nomenclature on them. Powell left that part out during his briefing to the UN.

originally posted by: Kali74
Ea reply to: JoshuaCox

I don't think he's untarnished by any stretch but I could live with him as President much easier than Clinton or Trump.

I can't think of anyone else just about everyone could...

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: JoshuaCox

He was ordered to give that speech as a military officer.

Indeed , he's a company man , as I remember it he was a "dove" but against his personal belief jumped through all the hoops he was told to jump through , while that's an admirable quality it's not what I'd want in a leader.

The military nor Secretary of State makes the calls.

If he had been pres. Do you think we invade Iraq??


The wife thing would make it really hard?

a reply to: JoshuaCox

The military nor Secretary of State makes the calls.

They have the option of resigning if they feel they are being asked to be part of something wrong , that's the call he made and got wrong.

If he had been pres. Do you think we invade Iraq??

No.

I miss that time-line.



Well not exactly, moreso just Dave.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

No he wasn't. He was the Secretary of State at the time.

ETA: As for the excerpt from his wikipedia page. It's laughable that they call his approach "diplomatic" when he was still advocating for war. The only "diplomacy" he did was pushing to get more countries involved in the invasion. That's still a pro-war stance.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

I'm sure he is knee deep into some of the crap that went on,don't look for him for help,I think he is looking himself,and wearing kevlar underwear