Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn the Darkness of Dick Cheney The Smile of Secret Power
http://www.tomdispatch.com/<snip>
Today, Mark Danner reminds us, as he did in his remarkable three-part series at the New York Review of Books on Bush-era Secretary of Defense Donald (stuff happens) Rumsfeld, that if the cast of characters from those first post-9/11 years is gone, we still live in the ruins they created and the special darkness they embraced. In an essay that focuses on Cheneys memoir, a movie about the former vice president, and a book by his surgeon, Danner takes us deep into that darkness. Thanks to the kindness of the editors of the New York Review of Books, its an honor to be able to post Danners latest piece for the first time online. The start of a three-part series on Cheney, it will appear in that magazines March 6th issue. Tom
In the Darkness of Dick Cheney
The Smile of Secret Power
By Mark Danner
[This essay appears in the March 6th issue of the New York Review of Books and is posted at TomDispatch.com with the kind permission of that magazine. The film and two books under review in this piece are listed at the end of the essay.]
If youre a man of principle, compromise is a bit of a dirty word.
-- Dick Cheney, 2013
1. We Ought to Take It Out
In early 2007, as Iraq seemed to be slipping inexorably into chaos and President George W. Bush into inescapable political purgatory, Meir Dagan, the head of the Israeli Mossad, flew to Washington, sat down in a sunlit office of the West Wing of the White House, and spread out on the coffee table before him a series of photographs showing a strange-looking building rising out of the sands in the desert of eastern Syria. Vice President Dick Cheney did not have to be told what it was. They tried to hide it down a wadi, a gulley, he recalls to filmmaker R.J. Cutler.
Theres no population around it anyplace... You cant say its to generate electricity, theres no power line coming out of it. Its just out there obviously for production of plutonium.
The Syrians were secretly building a nuclear plant -- with the help, it appeared, of the North Koreans. Though the United States was already embroiled in two difficult, unpopular, and seemingly endless wars, though its military was overstretched and its people impatient and angry, the vice president had no doubt what needed to be done: Condi recommended taking it to the United Nations. I strongly recommended that we ought to take it out.
Launching an immediate surprise attack on Syria, Cheney tells us in his memoirs, would not only make the region and the world safer, but it would also demonstrate our seriousness with respect to nonproliferation. This was the heart of the Bush Doctrine: henceforth terrorists and the states harboring them would be treated as one and, as President Bush vowed before Congress in January 2002, the United States of America will not permit the worlds most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the worlds most destructive weapons. It was according to this strategic thinking that the United States answered attacks on New York and Washington by a handful of terrorists not by a carefully circumscribed counterinsurgency aimed at al-Qaeda but by a worldwide war on terror that also targeted states -- Iraq, Iran, North Korea -- that formed part of a newly defined axis of evil.1 According to those attending National Security Council meetings in the days after September 11,
The primary impetus for invading Iraq... was to make an example of [Saddam] Hussein, to create a demonstration model to guide the behavior of anyone with the temerity to acquire destructive weapons or, in any way, flout the authority of the United States.2
Read more »
The Smile of Secret Power
By Mark Danner
[This essay appears in the March 6th issue of the New York Review of Books and is posted at TomDispatch.com with the kind permission of that magazine. The film and two books under review in this piece are listed at the end of the essay.]
If youre a man of principle, compromise is a bit of a dirty word.
-- Dick Cheney, 2013
1. We Ought to Take It Out
In early 2007, as Iraq seemed to be slipping inexorably into chaos and President George W. Bush into inescapable political purgatory, Meir Dagan, the head of the Israeli Mossad, flew to Washington, sat down in a sunlit office of the West Wing of the White House, and spread out on the coffee table before him a series of photographs showing a strange-looking building rising out of the sands in the desert of eastern Syria. Vice President Dick Cheney did not have to be told what it was. They tried to hide it down a wadi, a gulley, he recalls to filmmaker R.J. Cutler.
Theres no population around it anyplace... You cant say its to generate electricity, theres no power line coming out of it. Its just out there obviously for production of plutonium.
The Syrians were secretly building a nuclear plant -- with the help, it appeared, of the North Koreans. Though the United States was already embroiled in two difficult, unpopular, and seemingly endless wars, though its military was overstretched and its people impatient and angry, the vice president had no doubt what needed to be done: Condi recommended taking it to the United Nations. I strongly recommended that we ought to take it out.
Launching an immediate surprise attack on Syria, Cheney tells us in his memoirs, would not only make the region and the world safer, but it would also demonstrate our seriousness with respect to nonproliferation. This was the heart of the Bush Doctrine: henceforth terrorists and the states harboring them would be treated as one and, as President Bush vowed before Congress in January 2002, the United States of America will not permit the worlds most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the worlds most destructive weapons. It was according to this strategic thinking that the United States answered attacks on New York and Washington by a handful of terrorists not by a carefully circumscribed counterinsurgency aimed at al-Qaeda but by a worldwide war on terror that also targeted states -- Iraq, Iran, North Korea -- that formed part of a newly defined axis of evil.1 According to those attending National Security Council meetings in the days after September 11,
The primary impetus for invading Iraq... was to make an example of [Saddam] Hussein, to create a demonstration model to guide the behavior of anyone with the temerity to acquire destructive weapons or, in any way, flout the authority of the United States.2
Read more »
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
0 replies, 440 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post