Article

2003-09-03 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2003-09-03 10:04:45 AM|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 State Dept??? Boucher?? I'd expect this more from Rumsfeld, and the phrase would be "fudge packers"

Posted by Frank G 2003-9-3 10:09:14 AM|| 2003-9-3 10:09:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 ROFLMAO!!! (cough, cough, sputter, snicker) WTF?!!?!?

Another Instant Classic. Definitely a keeper. Given the recent NorK statements - and now this, is someone lacing the State Dept dining room chocolate pudding with truth serum? Too good to be true!

Posted by .com 2003-9-3 10:26:41 AM|| 2003-9-3 10:26:41 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 dot com - this is far more surprising than the Nkor comments. Those were made by John Bolton, who's the offical neocon mole in Foggy Bottom. While Boucher, AFAIK, is a genuine Powell guy.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-9-3 11:01:34 AM|| 2003-9-3 11:01:34 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 LH - My Take on State / Powell:
Dubya definitely runs his ship his way, top to bottom. Recall the speechwriter who penned the Axis of Evil phrase and how he described the inner workings of the Bush admin? Dubya is the Big Dog, period. So I think virtually everything Powell does is at Dubya's direction. He may have wiggle room on style, but I doubt Charles at LGF when he (and others) bastes Powell on a spit over a low fire. I don't buy the notion that he's a renegade. Far from it, I think he's a politically astute soldier, and definitely not an idiot. I think he plays the lightening rod for those unhappy (for Dubya) moments when the WH has to soft-peddle something or set up a strawman for criticism / feedback. A couple of levels below Powell is where it gets dicey, I'd bet - with the occasional Ivy Leaguer from Old Money thinking he can get away with being a moron and bucking the WH. Exception, not the rule. Bolton is definitely a Dubya guy!

I'd bet a patcheck that this episode was cleared in advance - prolly scripted by the WH with Powell and Boucher. I'll bet another paycheck that Boucher was absolutely tickled with the assignment! Definitely a "heads up" for the diplo corps. I eagerly await the next moment as this new approach gets fleshed out - it'll be interesting to find out where the edges of the envelope are, now. 8-)

Posted by .com 2003-9-3 11:46:40 AM|| 2003-9-3 11:46:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 "I should not have called them the 'Axis of Weasels'."

Posted by Dishman 2003-9-3 12:08:45 PM|| 2003-9-3 12:08:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 .com: I agree with you on the role Powell plays within the Administration, including his working at GW's behest. State is a tough posting for *anyone* who wants to actually accomplish anything, since diplomacy without a strong strategic component is *only* endless talking.

Am I the only one who is seeing a repeat of last summer here? A summer of discontent, Bush on vacation letting the opposition talk themselves to death proposing things like "Bring in the U.N.", yada yada... then coming back from vacation and saying "OK, lets give it a try -- with this twist...", and leaving the opponents standing there sputtering "But... but..."

Posted by snellenr 2003-9-3 12:12:20 PM|| 2003-9-3 12:12:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 i dont agree with you on powell - theres too much from folks like Jim Hoagland who are clearly close to Wolfie, Feith, etc. that indicates otherwise. And the Scowcroft-Zinni campaign on the Iraq war looked too much like a it was organized by Powell - HE has the army contacts like Zinni, not the Foggy Bottom Foreign Service types. If this is a good cop/bad cop routine its the most elaborate, most extensive, in the history of the human race. It seems much more likely that the dispute is real, and that Bush and Condi cant control the two sides. But we wont know the truth till the admin is out of power and the memoirs start. (I doubt the speechwriter in question had enough access to see the real issues here)

If they were all in synce, how the hell DID they screw up on the occupation of Iraq - if State agreed that going to the UN was a bad idea, and the neocons agreed that using the INC was a bad idea, what the hell WAS their plan for keeping order in Iraq? and why did they not appoint most of the CPA people till the last minute?

The divided admin is the BEST excuse - if theyre not divided, and Dubya is really fully in charge, then Dubya has ALOT to answer for as far as planning the occupation.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-9-3 12:20:04 PM|| 2003-9-3 12:20:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 I think there is more to the word "chocolate." In the African conflicts where France and Belgium are actively engaged, the main exports are products that support the chocolate industry of those two European countries. It's sort of like merchantilism. They are almost treating chocolate like ... well... oil or something.

Posted by Super Hose 2003-9-3 1:04:59 PM|| 2003-9-3 1:04:59 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 LH - we're ALL guessing here in Rantburg. I note that you discount and dispute, not disprove - so I'll continue guessing back!

I saw the interview I spoke of and the guy did live by Bush's side every moment that his security clearance allowed it. Bush doesn't tell his speechwriters what he wants, they must come to know him and write wearing his shoes - that comes from the interview, as well. The fact that the writer took credit, publicly, for the Axis of Evil phrase was why he was on the street hawking a book - he had been dismissed for speaking out of order. Does that sound like Dubya's a little touchy about being in control? The entire interview was precisely about that point.

The rest of what I have to say won't be popular with some, but hey - it's Rantburg...

So... post-war Iraq. I would bet some amount, not a whole paycheck, that there was a tug-of-war between the State, Pentagon, NeoCons, etc factions and the muddle is the result of no one actually being in charge but Dubya - and no one read his mind very well about What Comes After. Wanna holler? Then he's your man, I think. Of course, just as with the speechwriter, he doesn't give specific marching orders, but expects his people to think for themselves - and read his mind. Yeah, I gag on that idea too, but the evidence I've seen adds up that way.

I think Dubya decides some things, some important things, on the fly. I think he believes he has hired smart people to do his bidding - and they must figure out how to do it without being told the specifics. If they botch it, they're gone. If they get it and understand the assignment, they stay and gain his confidence. If you consider that he's a businessman type, who never had to work his way up the ladder - started in the boardroom - then this makes sense. I've consulted for several outfits (and yes, you've heard of several of them) run this way. They had some flamboyant CEO who was glib or photogenic or just amazingly charming or rich beyond your wildest dreams - with only the dimmest awareness of the details of how his business worked. A hood ornament, if you're being derogatory, a "winner" if you're a fan. The successful guys of this type recognize that the little people, as well as his high-paid exec staff, are responsible for his success - and he takes care of them and keeps them very happy - which keeps him successful. I think Dubya's style is definitely along these lines. Very, uh, Reaganesque.

When he was Gov of Texas, I was in Dallas - and thought he was a Grade A twit. Only thing he cared about was getting a concealed-carry law passed. Got him elected, in fact - and he got the law passed. You ought to read some of the anecdotal stories about it - The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler would love them!

When Dubya became Prez I was out in San Diego - and thought Oh shit! Then 9/11 came along - and the soft side, the non-detail side bloomed. What we needed was a leader. He had to be gutsy and say gutsy things. He had to grow, quote and confidence-wise, to fill very large shoes. He had to be tough and publicly act tough. These are the things he can do - and do pretty well, in fact. But if you asked him how much a loaf of bread costs, he can't tell you - just like his daddy. He's not a detail guy or even a strategist - he's a leader, and that involves more acting than knowledge.

Just my take - given what I've seen over the years. Guess what? I'll vote for him this time (didn't vote for anybody for Prez last time) because what we need is a gutsy leader who's smart enough to surround himself with smart people. The mind-reading requirement is nothing new, BTW. Same for many Presidents. Ok. Have at it!

Posted by .com 2003-9-3 1:14:19 PM|| 2003-9-3 1:14:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 One of the few things I like about the adminstration is its propensity for letting the Eurocrats know just what they're worth.

When the New Carolingian Empire comes up with an army worthy of Mordor let me know.

Posted by Hiryu 2003-9-3 1:23:12 PM|| 2003-9-3 1:23:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 In unusually blunt language that drew surprised gasps from reporters,

The Eurotrash diplomats can call the US any damn thing they want along with their reporters and the tag along Hollywood Halfwits. But when the shoe is on the other foot, gasp, horrors of horrors those nasty "mericans are saying bad things about me

Posted by Someone who did NOT vote for William Proxmire 2003-9-3 1:59:47 PM|| 2003-9-3 1:59:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 dot com - based on what you just posted, im not sure we disagree, just we describe it differently. You say no one OTHER than dubya is in charge - well i certainly agree with that - the problem is when the underlings have to read his mind, and they choose to read it differently.

We've had divided national security teams before - nat sec system seems to generate that. Now one way to deal with that is to have a hands on, detail oriented president, like Nixon to keep the cats herded. The other way is to have a clear ideological vision, so that the CEO can lay back, but everyone KNOWS, ultimately, what he wants, by reference to his vision. THAT was Reagan. That model failed when there were situations were the ideology didnt give clear direction, like Lebanon or Iran-Contra - but in retrospect the end of the cold war is so much more important than those episodes, that they fade from memory.

Bush on Afghanistan and AQ had a fairly clear vision, and so was able to keep the cats in line. In Iraq he did not, and the thing several times almost went out of control. That we had the domestic and Coalition of the Willing support we needed to go in was largely a function of Saddam's insanity - Powell, Saudi, etc werent able to cover for him. A slightly saner Saddam and the case for war wouldnt have worked, and Ebay and Queasy would be alive and having fun today. Ditto on the Iraq aftermath. Again, we're getting by ONLY because SO MANY IN Iraq hated Saddam so bitterly, theyre giving us time they might not otherwise have done. And as it is we ARE going back to the UN, and NOT at a time of strength. If we were going to go back to them anyway, werent there times when we had more leverage than today? This incoherence seems to sometimes get the worst of both worlds - we piss off our "allies" and then turn to them anyway.

Bush was good on afgan and WOT - but 90% of what he did anyone not on the insane fringes would have done - I mainly give him credit for NOT escalating in Afghan at the first calls of quagmire in November 2001 - and for balancing a sense that this was a WAR, not a criminal investigation, with a definite sense that it is NOT a war on Islam. I fault him for weak follow through on Afghanistan. WRT to Bush and the Saudis and AQ - I dont know, as the most important info - how much did the Saudis cooperate post 9/11, and what kinds of pressure did the admin use, and what are there future plans - are secret or unknown. WRT to Iraq I think Dubya made the right ultimate choice - but i think, as i said above, that it could have been done better, and that it worked out as well as it has through a certain amount of luck. I fault Dubya for "unilateralism" not in the WOT, or in Iraq so much as pre-9/11 - when a lot of "good will" (not the right word - its not so much being loved as others thinking our power is in their interest) was squandered. And of course i have my issues on domestic affairs - peshawar.

So how i vote will depend on both what Dubya does between now and election day, and who the Dems nominate.

I wont judge the

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-9-3 2:05:42 PM|| 2003-9-3 2:05:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 LH - excellent recall! If I may pick one point out (I don't have an argument with any of it *LH feints dead away*) it is the Saudis. That's the area I feel comfortable talking about in specific. There is some sort of weird disconnect there. Geo41 was very soft on them (amazingly so, IMO) and Geo43 seems more or less in the same camp. I accept criticism of 43 on how he's handled it so far, from the blocked pages of the report to letting them stonewall the Fibbies on several fronts - the money being the one that pisses me off most. It's possible that he's coming around, albeit too slowly for my tastes.

KSA and Iran are the crux of the entire matter. All of the others only contribute warm bodies and state coverage (passports, sanctuary, etc). These two regimes direct (prolly right down to approving or issuing target lists) and fund the whole shebang. Stop the money and 90% of the grief evaporates. The asshats don't take freighters or fishing boats or donkey carts to get around - they fly and stay in hotels and have cellphones and all the trappings of money. It's definitely a draw to a young jihadi to have some mullah hand him a plane ticket, pocket money, and a "secret" phone number to call upon arrival - swells his tiny little head to join what must appear to be the big leagues after hanging out at the Al Rashid Mall dropping his cellphone # on little slips of paper from the 2nd or 3rd floor of the central atrium to the little ladies (miniature Ninjas to us) below - who call if you look swank enough and cool enough. Yeah - they do this little Muslim ritual almost every night - and, of course, guys like me are definitely not welcome there to see it. One of the saddest / funniest things I've ever seen.

Anyway, my bone to pick is about being successful in the WoT. To tell the truth, the domestic side will heal itself - as it always does, in spite of most of the "programs" and BS. Most of what is done to "fix" problems is dumber than dirt and based on flawed or outright stupid economics. Both parties. Most takes 2 yrs or more to reach fruition - so often the next guy takes the credit or blame.

I want the Saudis shut down. I want to aid the revolution in Iran - and I think we can do it without setting foot in the country. I'm VERY disappointed that so little has been contributed on that thread. The people are ready - they just need to face a lot fewer guns and truncheons and organized opposition from the very centralized Black Hat power centers. Make that a working problem at the CIA and you'll get 10 scenarios back that don't require a headcount of US troops, I'll bet. Ok, enuff. Thx for the feedback - I'm listening!

Posted by .com 2003-9-3 3:02:58 PM|| 2003-9-3 3:02:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Basically I agree with .com's comments above. I call it Good Cop (state) Bad Cop (Defense) but its basically the same thing. I would add one additional bit though. I think Bush takes his time making decisions and allows his people to vet their opinions during that time (opinions which often back their chosen roll anyway and which cause media discussions that may sway him with facts his people possibly had not considered yet).

Posted by Yank 2003-9-3 3:30:55 PM|| 2003-9-3 3:30:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Here's Powell echoing the party line on Arafat being the roadblock:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/breaking_news/6683504.htm

Methinks he's the good soldier - in thankless job.

Posted by .com 2003-9-3 9:59:52 PM|| 2003-9-3 9:59:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 .com, my husband doesn't know how much a loaf of bread costs, either.

In fact, I really don't pay attention myself. Just get what I like.

The #41 scanner thing never bothered me. Why in the world would we expect our VP and Pres to do their own grocery shopping?

Posted by Anonymous 2003-9-4 12:27:12 AM|| 2003-9-4 12:27:12 AM|| Front Page Top

22:47 stageleft
08:56 raptor
01:32 ZoGg
00:45 ZoGg
00:27 Anonymous
00:24 Lucky
00:12 Lucky
23:52 Lucky
23:40 Zhang Fei
23:38 Baba Yaga
23:35 Laurence of the Rats
23:12 steveerossa
23:11 Baba Yaga
23:04 Lucky
23:00 Lucky
22:54 Baba Yaga
22:52 Anonymous
22:45 Baba Yaga
22:32 tu3031
22:21 tu3031
22:08 Super Hose
21:59 .com
21:55 .com
21:43 john
Merry-Go-Blog