Last night I attended the Speakers Series at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in Los Angeles to see Colin Powell speak. Informed that I would be allowed to ask a question submitted in advance in writing, I posted a thread soliciting advice on what to ask. I decided to ask this question:
If your speech to the UN about Iraq's supposed WMDs was truly "the lowest point" in your life, as your Chief of Staff Col. Lawrence Wilkerson says you described it, how come you went through the motion of trying to sell the UN a report filled with cherry-picked intelligence that US News & World Report quotes you as describing as "bullshit", and do you personally feel remorse for those who have died as a result of this tragic mistake?I arrived early, hoping I could grab more than one card, as I received a number of good suggestions for question from everyone at DU. But the ushers were strict about the one question policy and I had to submit it before the show started. And what a show! I was expecting Powell to at least divide his speech into the issues he wanted to explore. Instead it was more like watching a professional comedian ply his trade.
Who knew Colin Powell was funny? More importantly, who cares? I must admit the man is entertaining as he relates funny anecdotes about family life, telling Prime Minister Koizumi that Elvis is still alive, and negotiating a peace treaty between Spain and Morocco over an island the size of a football field. But retirement has relaxed him so much that he seems divorced from reality. He got the biggest applause during his speech when he admitted that mistakes were made by the administration after we invaded Iraq. Yet he spoke about it as if in denial of his own culpability in the mistakes the administration made in making the case for invasion in the first place.
Instead he preferred to wax in reverie over a world coming together, globalizing in a way America could take advantage of. I actually lost track of the number of times he paraphrased Thomas Friedman, whom he seems to idolize, by referring to the way the world is "flattening" into some kind of capitalist Shangrila. Every effort he made to counter the bad news we see every night by focusing on all the good coming out of our global efforts seemed almost Pollyannaish. He spoke glowingly of the progress in India, yet neglected to mention how his former boss basically patted them on the back for violating the NPT. He praised Deng Xiaoping for bringing capitalism to China, omitting his crushing of the protests for democratic reform at Tiananmen Square. But he did praise Afghanistan for their democratic reforms, despite their Constitutional right to execute Muslims who convert to Christianity.
Finishing with a beaming smile, the moderator sat down with him and motioned toward a line of people that had been selected to ask him a question. Sadly, I was not one of those chosen. But a couple people did ask some tough questions. Unfortunately, Powell chose to dance around them rather than deal with the questions directly. The first person in line I recognized as my wife's former boss, whom I have expressed my hatred for Bush with on numerous occasions. She asked about Hersh's story, whether the threat of using nukes against Iran is real or if the story itself constitutes enough of a threat for Iran to get our message. Powell's response focused on how when he was in charge of the military (over 10 years ago) there was never any military contingency planning that included the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. He said he thought the story was "ridiculous" but failed to address either the possibility of Rumsfeld allowing it or whether that falls under Bush having "all options on the table".
One other question seemed pretty gutsy, and that was from a former military man who asked him whether the failure to prosecute those responsible for the My Lai massacre contributed to a pervasive culture within the military that led to the crimes at Abu Ghraib. Powell sidestepped the specifics of his own involvement by stating that Calley was prosecuted (neglecting to mention his subsequent pardon) and that what happened at My Lai has no bearing on the atrocities at Abu Ghraib because we have an entirely different military structure now comprised of all volunteers. The logic behind this rationalization escapes me. But I suppose that since he still considers himself to be a good soldier, that's all we're going to get out of him.
Walking out of the pavilion, I ran into two co-workers. One had also submitted a question regarding his UN presentation in February 2003. We figured Powell must have instructed the moderator previously not to submit any question about that embarrassing debacle. But the other co-worker felt that perhaps Powell had conveyed he didn't want any questions submitted that required a direct answer. Such as, "In the last week, three retired generals have asked for Rumsfeld's resignation. Do you agree with them?" Of course, my co-worker's clever question was rejected. Why bother ruffling feathers when retirement is such a breeze?
Link to previous thread:
Someone gave me free tix to see Colin Powell tomorrow. What should I ask?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=889439
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
