JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1880 times:
This was on the cards though, wasn't it ? I'm surprised Colin Powell has stuck around this long, after being made to look a complete nana over the whole WMD Powerpoint presentation. It's a shame, because he has been IMHO a worthy and respected Secretary of State in spite of everything.
And of course, the question remains - who takes over ?
OYRJA From Denmark, joined Feb 2007, 77 posts, RR: 16 Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1860 times:
How long until this goes off topic?
I will just sit back and wait on BN747 and Falcon84 to check the thread.
Well with this comment you just went off topic your self smartass
But to be honest I was sure this would happen since there has been discussions about it before.
I really admired Powell. He was a very good man. And like JGPH1A said it really was a shame that he was the one who had to sit in the security council and providing that "evidence" at that time.
And I wish him all the best in the future. He really deserves it.
TWISTEDWHISPER From Sweden, joined Aug 2003, 709 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1838 times:
I like the rock you just threw... too bad you were still in the glass house...
Almost in the same class as the media whore statement...
Sad to hear about Mr Powells resignation, as far as I'm concerned, he is the better part of the administration....
Anybody have any thoughts about the reason for his resignation...?
I do, but I'll keep them to my self...for now...
Dl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1776 times:
It is relatively normal for the cabinet to have turnover, and all the exits so far have been anticipated. These have been 4 difficult years for these people and we should thank Sec Powell for his service. I personally hope he can go make some money now so he can retire comfortably. He has been in government service his entire life, and you don't make the big bucks that way.
I think its safe to expect another book in the next couple of years, and his presence on the speaking circuit.
N6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1771 times:
Bush should think outside the box and nominate Bill Clinton. With everything that's going on in the Middle East right now Clinton could play a huge role. It's well known that he wanted his legacy to include a lasting peace in the Middle East and this would give him a huge opportunity. Furthermore, he's been rumored to have said he wants the UN job, so forging a peace accord would go a long way towards getting him the job.
The move would be another indication of bi-partisanship by the White House.
I think it would be well accepted by the Europeans and developing nations as a conciliatory move.
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1762 times:
Bush should think outside the box and nominate Bill Clinton.
N6376m, I honestly think President Bush should ask Bill Clinton to become his Special Envoy to the Middle East, in the wake of the death of Arafat. I think Clinton's force of personality, and his relative popularity there would bolster US chances to get moving on the "peace process".
N6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1757 times:
Listen, I'm as partisan as it comes, but the writing's on the wall. The old way of doing things isn't working and something new has to be tried.
As SecState Clinton would have to carryout administration policy but it would give him a seat at the table where policy was drafted. I think it's a win/win, W keeps Clinton on a short leash; Clinton get the exposure and opportunity he wants.
Sure Karl Rove will go apeshit but can you think of how it would neutralize administration critics. Furthermore, I think that it would help solidify the moderates within the party by showing that the administration is willing to work with the other side.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1752 times:
I'm not arguing that it wouldn't be a smart move, sure. But this administration is a bit short of consensus-building initiatives thus far, and don't show the kind of humility and lateral thinking that the step you suggest would require.
Dl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
Well, heres something funny...I was thinking along the same lines as Falcon. I think it would be a smart move to send Clinton and Bush 41 as a team to work on a peace initiative. Now is the window and to appoint these two would be to put the two biggest horses possible on the project. Both of them have experience in the region and there will be no mistaking the seriousness of the mission. The negotiations would be handled by the professionals anyway, but both sides would have to take this more seriously than anything done previously.