-
Self-Righteous Republic
May 8, 2013 | 258 comments
-
Understanding the Forest, One Tree at a Time
March 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
A Stone’s Throw From the White House
March 14, 2013 | 11 comments
-
Echoing the Last Lion’s Roar
February 1, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Grits and Glitz
January 18, 2013 | 0 comments
Buy the Book
Two Cheers for The World According to Cheney
There’s no giving up on Dick Cheney.
In My Time: A Personal and Political
Memoir
By Dick Cheney with Liz
Cheney
(Threshold Editions, 565 pages,
$35)
IF I HAD to sum up both the tone of this memoir and the character of its author in six words, I would quote—as he does on page 18—the words of Miss Korbel, his kindergarten teacher. “Richard,” she wrote on his first report card, “does not give up easily.” This simple, straightforward evaluation goes far to explaining both Dick Cheney’s many impressive achievements in public life and his occasional missteps. But before going any further, I need to make a personal disclosure. Although three years his junior, I was briefly, and only technically, Dick Cheney’s boss when we first met on Capitol Hill 42 years ago. I formed a high opinion of him then, and I still hold it today.
What brought us together in 1969 was an unofficial task force of 22 rising young Republican members of Congress created and headed by Rep. Bill Brock of Tennessee (later a senator, Republican National Committee chairman, U.S. trade representative, and secretary of labor), for whom I worked at the time. As Brock’s man on the task force I served as de facto staff director, coordinating the activities of the 21 other staffers detailed by the participating congressmen. One of those congressmen was a future president and vice president, George H. W. Bush; one of the staffers was Dick Cheney—a very smart, slightly stolid young PhD candidate on a congressional fellowship in the office of Rep. Bill Steiger of Wisconsin. So, without knowing it, I had one future president and two future veeps on board.
The mission of the task force was to visit college campuses around the country—a listening tour before the invention of the term—and meet with students, faculty, and administrators in as calm and non-confrontational a setting as was possible at the height of the Vietnam War. Afterward, as Dick Cheney explains in this memoir, back in Washington, “the congressmen briefed the president on their campus visits and issued a public report that offered a number of ideas, including lowering the voting age to eighteen.”
Lending momentum to the drive to lower the voting age was not, however, the task force’s only historic legacy. Over lunch at the GOP Capitol Hill Club shortly after the task force wound down, Dick confided that the experience had convinced him that his future would be better spent in the corridors of power rather than in the halls of academe. Or, as he puts it in his forceful but sparely-written memoir, “I was beginning to realize that it was the political life that I preferred.” He soon hitched his wagon to one of the Congress’s fastest rising stars. Don Rumsfeld was a promising Illinois House member President Nixon had just named head of the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO), the organizational residue of Lyndon Johnson’s long lost and long forgotten—though we’re still paying for it—“War on Poverty.” Like Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld has a well-earned reputation for bluntness. Witness the way he welcomed Cheney to his OEO staff: “You, you’re congressional relations. Now get the hell out of here.”
In fact, Cheney would stick close, becoming Rumsfeld’s trusted trouble-shooter at OEO and then following him to the Cost of Living Council and the Nixon White House staff. Post-Watergate, when Rumsfeld was named President Ford’s White House chief of staff, Cheney would be his deputy. Both men were alpha male Washington political types, very smart, very aggressive, and very ambitious, but they were far enough apart in age—Cheney being younger by nearly a decade—to avoid career collisions. Indeed, as the younger man, Cheney would literally follow in Rumsfeld’s footsteps, replacing him as White House chief of staff when Ford named Rumsfeld secretary of defense, then, while still a young man, successfully running for Congress just as Rumsfeld had before him. Later, he would emulate Rumsfeld by transferring to the private sector and becoming a dynamic CEO (Rumsfeld at Searle Pharmaceuticals, Cheney at the energy giant Halliburton), amassing a personal fortune that would allow him to re-enter public life whenever and however he chose. Cheney would also follow in his mentor’s footsteps at the Pentagon, serving as the senior Bush’s defense secretary just as Don Rumsfeld had served Jerry Ford.
Only in 2001, more than 30 years after they first worked together, would their roles be reversed with Cheney jumping the queue to be W’s vice president and Rumsfeld returning to the Pentagon for a second stint as secretary of defense. Small wonder that the two men would think so much alike politically and militarily when facing the biggest challenge of their careers: charting the right response to 9/11. Their like-mindedness would be reinforced by a mutual reliance on a tight circle of advisors with a doctrinaire view of the world and a lock-step approach to foreign policy. To label this influential group of unelected operatives as Straussian neoconservatives is a gross oversimplification, but men like Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld’s right hand man at the Pentagon) and Scooter Libby (Cheney’s vice presidential chief of staff) shared a formulaic, interventionist view of Middle East policy and recognized the unique opportunity that the national trauma of 9/11 offered for putting it into effect by launching twin wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Billions of dollars and thousands of American lives later, what is one to make of that response? In his thoughtful, well-researched Sands of Empire, the distinguished journalist and historian Robert Merry—hardly a raving lefty—summed it up rather neatly:
Administration rhetoric justifying and explaining the war policy turned out to be riddled with inaccuracies and misperceptions. The war was justified primarily on the basis of the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam possessed and was building. No such weapons were ever found. Vice President Cheney insisted Saddam was linked to the al Qaeda network that perpetrated the September 11 attacks, but there was no evidence of consequence to that effect, and Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet felt obliged to correct Cheney privately on more than one occasion.
Donald Rumsfeld, he adds, bluntly asserted that “no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.” Subsequent events proved that statement erroneous, Merry points out; the ongoing terrorist threat “was much greater than any threat from the hapless Saddam Hussein and his military, severely attenuated by the 1991 Gulf War and subsequent U.N. Sanctions.”
Believing what his advisors told him, Dick Cheney had said of the Iraqis, “I really believe we will be greeted as liberators.” The same advisors had also sold both Cheney and Rumsfeld on the merits of the London-based Iraqi National Congress, a shadowy exile group headed by convicted bank swindler Ahmed Chalabi who fed his backers doctored or fabricated intelligence inciting America to invade. Interestingly, in the many pages he devotes to defending his role as chief administration hawk, Dick Cheney omits any mention of the dubious Mr. Chalabi.
IT IS UNFORTUNATE that a book with such an overwhelmingly positive story to tell—a triumphant and honorable personal rise from humble beginnings to the pinnacle of power, a warm family saga, and an instructive look behind the curtain of public politics to the way the executive and legislative branches really work—should in the end be weighed down by an obsessive attempt (as Miss Korbel recognized all those years ago, “Richard does not give up easily”) to justify understandable mistakes rather than acknowledge them.
Given his parlous state of health, I can sympathize with Dick Cheney’s sense of urgency in going to press. And, like the president he served, he deserves full credit for keeping our country safe from further mass terrorism in the aftermath of 9/11. But history will surely record that the greatest victories in the war on terror have been won on the ground in America where murderers with box cutters can no longer board planes at their pleasure, and through carefully targeted intelligence work and small, elite force operations like the one that took out Osama bin Laden.
And let’s not forget Dick Cheney’s masterful election debate performances in 2000 and 2004. They helped keep two prime liberal goofs (Al Gore and John Kerry) and one dirty, rotten scoundrel (John Edwards) at a safe distance from the White House. In the end, that alone should earn Dick Cheney a place of honor in the conservative pantheon.
About the Author
Aram Bakshian, Jr. served as an aide to Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan and writes frequently on politics, history, gastronomy, and the arts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (40) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aram Bakshian, Jr.
More Articles From Buy the Book
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/30/two-cheers-for-the-world-accor
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Chef Schnauzer| 11.30.11 @ 7:12AM
Thank you, looking forward to reading past your articles. Your work with Presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan coupled with your current role are commentator - may I suggest a topic for a future writing? The seismic shift of government organs into overt political pit bulls. President Nixon brought in Moynahan - had Buchanan on staff but also Price (and Colsen) - but every fiber of every office of the executive branch wasn't overtly twisted into an electoral 'profit center'. What Kennedy did in the Senate, Obama in the executive: the blatant disregard for law, tradition, and tasteful restraint has become not only prototypical but rewarded. Our republic is slipping away because (in part) the JV squad currently in power are so terribly second rate and are absent in honor and conscience.
Alan Brooks| 11.30.11 @ 1:42PM
Couldn't disagree more:
IMO Cheney ought to be placed under house arrest.
Rove should have his citizenship revoked and be deported.
The two are good businessmen, but very bad politicians. They, G. Gordon Liddy, Oliver North, Sununu, are enemies of all that is decent.
JimBob7| 11.30.11 @ 2:15PM
Where in the U.S. Constitution do you propose to find supporting concepts allowing the stripping of these men's citizenship? Oh, wait, that's what DICTATORS do. You reveal your inner self, sir.
Alan Brooks| 11.30.11 @ 3:06PM
They are worse than dictators. Mussolini was in power 21 years, but we are saddled with these two froglike bunglers until they die--
hopefully not more than 2o years from now.
To spite America, they might live another 40 years!
Solo| 11.30.11 @ 7:17AM
Love him or hate him....the man was accomplished in both the private and public sectors. He possesses a strong and quite serious intellect and the entire nation would be better off with more like him in the public domain.
I vividly recall my relief, after 8 years of the Clintonista Regime, that adults were finally in charge at the White House.
Alan Brooks| 12.1.11 @ 12:10AM
"the man was accomplished in both the private and public sectors"
So were Warren G. Harding (newspaper); LBJ (owned a proftable ranch); Nixon (private law practice); Carter (peanut farm).
Dana| 1.17.12 @ 7:04PM
Yeah, that Clinton budget surplus was such a drag. Bush and Cheney (deficits don't matter) sure fixed that.
Mike W| 11.30.11 @ 8:13AM
Old Five Draft Deferments/During Vietnam I Had Other Priorities Dick.
Put this old troll in prison. He and George W. did more damage to the Republican party than any Democrat.
Alan Brooks| 11.30.11 @ 3:07PM
I second the motion.
Anthony| 11.30.11 @ 8:44AM
A great book written by a great man. History will shower V.P. Cheney with the accolades he so much deserves, but will not get now in our leftist dominated culture full of trolls, like Mike W.
A principled statesman, who as V.P. had no political ambitions to become president, was a major benefit to Bush. His advise was somber, astute, spot on and void of personal political calculations, an absolute rarity in Washington.
Compare this great man to other Bush appointees, such as Gen. Powell, who can't seem to find anything good to say about conservatives and the Tea Party, but who has nothing bad to say about Obozo and OWS. And Ms. Rice, who truly belongs in academia, where her Polly-Annish views can no longer hurt American interests.
Mr. Cheney is a great man. He would of made a great president. Boy, could we use him now!!!
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.30.11 @ 8:57AM
Thank you Anthony.
Aram also forgets the ship-load of yellow cake secretly sent to Canada from post-Saddam Iraq.
Mr. Cheny is THE brightest, most honorable man I have known.
Stammon| 11.30.11 @ 10:08AM
And how about the Sarin gas detected in the Euphrates river?
Moe Blotz| 11.30.11 @ 2:16PM
Also Salman Pak where the Hussein Group trained high jackers on a 707 fuselage.
C Bowen| 11.30.11 @ 10:24AM
LOL--still scared of Iraq.
Anthony| 11.30.11 @ 9:30AM
Mr. Bakshian, I take exception to your baseless comment that V.P.Cheney's book was an attempt to justify "understandable mistakes" about the war, as you so quaintly put it.
Your memory of the events, starting with the 1st Gulf War, up to the invasion of Iraq and Afghanastan is riddled with conclusions that are not accurate. I don't have the time or all the information at hand now to set the record straight, but many here at TAS have done so over the years in reply to the historical revisionism that the trolls who frequent this site attempt to throw at us from time to time.
I am not familiar with Mr. Merry, whom you seem to find more credible than Mr. Cheney, but he too appears to have an agenda, like you.
The issue of WMD was not the only justification for going to war, there were many other oft mentioned justifications, but WMD stuck with the MSM, albeit because the Bush Administration made a hash of the issue, leading Americans to believe the troops would find warehouses full of WMD ordinances, which by the way, may have existed, but were disposed of during Bush's one year build up with the U.N. to war.
You might recall the whole concern over WMD was the ability of Saddam to reconstitute the program once the dupes at the U.N. left the country. The program only required samples of contagion to be secretly held, easily done in a container the size of a suitcase.
Links to al Qaeda have also been proven beyond any doubt. It is sheer sophistry on your part and that of Mr. Merry to ignore the obvious connection between Saddam and the aims and desires of al Qaeda. Both you and Mr.Merry fail to "connect the dots".
And speaking of dots, just when exactly did Tenet "set Cheney straight" on WMD. Did he not famously intone when Bush asked the question of WMD that the issue was a "slam dunk".
You appear to be a RINO who took a walk on the war as things got bogged down. I suspect there's a reason Mr. Cheney makes no mention of you in his book, with friends like you........
John| 11.30.11 @ 10:57AM
Anthony's right, there were tons of reasons other than the intelligence pointing to existing WMD stockpiles for invading Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a singular threat to the stability of the region simply because of his past record of aggression AND his sponsoring of terrorism. The only reason people focus so much on the fact that WMD stockpiles were not found - even though Saddam clearly still had the capability and the desire to resume their production, as evidence uncovered in 2003 confirmed - is that the anti-Bush media kept putting "Bush lied, people died" in the headlines in order to elect Democrats. That worked, because people in general aren't too bright. Reinforcing that perception, by ignoring the fact that both Cheney and Rumsfeld acknowledge that the WMD intelligence ended up mistaken, is historically irresponsible.
richard ryan| 11.30.11 @ 11:50AM
I think as it turned out, the whole Iraq thing was a disaster. However, I often point out to my Bush bashing friends the fact that Saddam mass murdered hundreds of thousands of people. I ask if removing Hitler from power was justified based only on his slaughter of millions of Jews. Of course! they say. Well, are you suggesting that to justify removal, a dictator has to murder 1 million people? 2 million? Saddam, like Hitler, mass murdered. He invaded neighboring nations. I realize this is an oversimplification, but the principles are very similar.
da monk| 11.30.11 @ 12:37PM
John: You too name some of the "tons or reasons"...other than OIL
da monk| 11.30.11 @ 12:35PM
Anthony: Please name some of the other reasons for going into Iraq not "many oft mentioned justifacations" Don't give us inneuendo.
Anthony| 11.30.11 @ 2:41PM
Off the top of my head, as I attempt to get some workd done, 1) WMD 2)Terrorist state harboring terrorists, ie al Queda, 3) Human rights abuses 4) violation of numerous U.N. resolutions. The U.S. action was supported by two U.N. resolultions 678 & 687.
Derek Leaberry| 11.30.11 @ 2:45PM
I didn't know that true conservatives gave a hoot about the United Nations or UN Resolutions. What ever became of the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US?
Anthony| 11.30.11 @ 7:09PM
I don't, but Bush did, because trolls on the left, in their attempt to thwart the war effort, insisted Bush jump through hoops not required by the Consittution.
Unlike Obozo who invades countries without congressional approval, calling it a NATO exercise, but taking credit when Quadaffi went down, Bush was hampered by the Ds and the left the entire war effort.
I merely mentioned the U.N. resolutions because da monk asked me for justifications, and I wanted to remind him that the removal of Saddam had world wide support, including the reprehensible U.N.
Jean| 11.30.11 @ 9:36AM
I love Dick Cheney.
Richard Baker| 11.30.11 @ 10:27AM
Mike W:
Aside from your contempt for the man, what did he do wrong in seeking deferments, a perfectly legal way to go, when he went to college? I had 2-S student deferment in 1970 when I graduated from High School until I enlisted in the Army in 1971. Doesn't bother me. Why does it bother you?
Dana| 1.17.12 @ 7:06PM
How many young people did you send to a senseless death in a senseless war?
Mike Hawk| 11.30.11 @ 10:39AM
I avoided the draft too. I enlisted. I'm now classified 4-A . Sufficient prior service.
As a former SecDef and a fine one. Dick CHeney has nothing to apologize for. His is everything Algore and Plugs Biden aren't and could never hope to come close to being.
Richard| 11.30.11 @ 10:52AM
Just spent last evening at a talk by Nathaniel Fick, author of "One Bullet Away", the lapidary ground-level account from one former Marine officer of the early months of the Afghanistan and later Iraq campaigns. We are blessed to have a committed, adaptable, and fiercely efficient military. The manifold failures in Iraq and Afghanistan are not directly the result of the decisions to invade (certainly not with Afghanistan; arguably not in the case of Iraq, which remains more problematic). They are the consequence of a succession of poor decisions that followed, in allowing scope and mission creep, in failing to provide adequate resources for execution of the missions that evolved, in failing to listen to and to adapt to intelligence coming back from the field as events in the field went south, and in the stubborn (and, one might say, obstinate) persistence in listening to the echo chamber of the Cheney-Rumsfeld axis rather than the emergence of new realities. These are manifestly failures of leadership, and they lie at least partly in the former Vice President's lap. Doggedness is not a substitute for insight or adaptability. Ideological conviction pursued to a logical end - while admirable to a point - is not a substitute for meaningful response to changing circumstances. No, I don't think the former Vice President belongs in jail, and I continue to think that in terms of basic integrity, he is an honorable man. Saying that does not excuse his role in the previous Administration's failures of judgment that have left us with a ten year war in two countries that we are no longer winning.
RJ| 11.30.11 @ 11:42AM
I just finished reading Dick Cheney's book the other day; a good book. It is a story of his life; he tells of his love of his family, his great respect for the men and women in the armed forces, and gives his views of the events he was involved in during his many years in public service. [I agree with Anthony's comments, above.]
I also read Don Rumsfeld's book last summer. It went into more detail as to his philosophies, objectives and reactions to events. An excellent book.
Derek Leaberry| 11.30.11 @ 12:57PM
As Mr. Bakshian demonstrates by stumbling into the truth, Dick Cheney is part of the avaricious two-party, influence peddling plutocracy that has left the country in financial ruins but at financial advantage for themselves. Mr. Cheney came to Washington with little wealth, served several politically powerful bosses, made hundreds of important contacts, climbed the greasy pole, achieved political power, and then shook down the corrupt political system and became rich. Many men have operated this way- Albert Falls, many in the Grant Administration, Tommy "the Cork" Corcoran, Clark Clifford, Lyndon Johnson, Phil Gramm, John Breaux, George Mitchell, Tom Daschle and Newt Gingrich immediately come to mind. Most stayed out of jail.
So what of Dick Cheney's career? He ably served three failed presidents- Richard Nixon, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. He ably served a president, Gerald Ford, who was put in the position where he could not succeed due to the criminality of his predecessor. He was elected six times to the US House representing Wyoming(a state he largely forgot once he rose to power), rising fast within the House Republican hierarchy. Three of the presidential administrations he served- Nixon, Ford and Bush II- culminated in the political collapse of the party of which they headed. He became a multi-millionaire by using his colossal political pull. For good measure, his family's personal peculiarities help in defining deviancy on down in this socially dysfunctional age of ours. The country which Dick Cheney served has collapsed into permanent decline, financially and socially bankrupt. Great job, Dick!
Alan Brooks| 11.30.11 @ 1:50PM
Bakshian wont listen, Derek; he is stuck too far into the past.
If he lived in Iran he'd be preaching Sharia. Bakshian's an educated, cultured person-yet with little sense of justice. All too common.
Anthony| 11.30.11 @ 7:25PM
Derek, you are a jewel of a leftist moron. Unlike the Clintons, Jamie Gorelick, Franklin Raines, and dozens of Ds who have made millions doing absolutely nothing, or while in congress, thanks to their secret legislation allowing for insider trading as members of congress, Cheney made his millions the old fashioned way, he earned it in the private sector. Just because his government service opened doors, what is the crime in that?
You are full of leftist carnards, none of which come close to the truth. Cheney left congress to go into the private sector and was called back into government service by I believe Rumsfeld.
Why don't you go to your library and read the book, since you won't or can't pay for it. You'll learn a whole lot of things that will send your lefty head spinning.
Alan Brooks| 11.30.11 @ 3:13PM
"two-party, influence peddling plutocracy"
You are correct, Derek, it is a duopoly. However the thought of a GOP candidate winning the election 11 months from now is revolting in the extreme; gives me the heaves-- enough to vomit on the keyboard.
Solo| 11.30.11 @ 6:25PM
Now, Alan! You're just saying that to make us feel better.
;)
Alan Brooks| 11.30.11 @ 9:49PM
Yes you must be feeling great knowing we are in debt for who knows how many trillions. Mark Steyn write 130 trillion.
Alan Brooks| 11.30.11 @ 9:51PM
Steyn write that months ago- we must be up to in total 133 trillion by now.
POST American| 11.30.11 @ 10:18PM
-----------Dick CHAIN---knee
-------------BAR--ROCK O!--BAMMMA!
--------------SUB-Mitt ROME--knee
-----------------ME--shell BALK---men
---------------------Knew-IT GETTING-rich
"Understand,we are living in a psychopathic
system. At the top their ALLLLL psychopaths.
Psychopaths run on PURE ego, they love
applause, know how to smell the wind,
are superb actors and liars, recognize
each other, worship power and those 'above'
and have absolutely NO conscience. NONE.
So don't feel bad if you're not 'making it',
because it probably means you yourself
are NOT a psychopath. The Globalist
system IS a psychopathic system. ALLLL
of it."
-----------------------------------------------ALLLLLL
Naturalborn Texicanette| 11.30.11 @ 10:55PM
Cheney is what he is.
There are no pretensions, no fake pontification, no sly underhanded acts from this man. He says what he thinks and isn't afraid to be extraordinary.
I think people don't like him because he IS so real, and boldly straightforward. He doesn't mince words or make no apologies for standing up for his beliefs.
What a breath of fresh air!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cheney doesn't play the games that liberals delight so much in doing.
I repeat, he is real.
Oh! And by the way...........so is Rick Perry!!!
Think about it.
Richard Baker| 12.1.11 @ 12:34AM
Mike Hawk:
I'm sorry that you look at the old Selective Service deferment system as a "dodge" instead of just another option after High School. If you've nothing positive to add then why your contemptuous comments about Cheney in the first post?
nathan| 12.1.11 @ 9:38AM
Bush and Cheney took an oath to uphold and defend what, not the people of the United States, no that's not in that oath is it? The Constitution of The United States. Read the book Takeover sometime. Cheney and Bush showed utter contempt for the document they swore to uphold and defend. Go back again to the 1866 Supreme Court ruling which said in very clear terms that war, national emergencies whatever were no excuse for throwing the Constitution under the bus. Cheney did just that. Madison himself warned about this very problem. There's a marvelous quote from him regarding wars being used to take away individual freedoms. We saw that throughout the Bush/Cheney regime. Padilla, an American citizen on American soil was stripped of his fundamental rights and held in conditions that clearly violated the Eighth Amendment.
Bush and Cheney grossly over reacted to 911. OBL had maybe what, 500 men, clearly less than a thousand and yet these guys committed two trillion dollars or more going after him. Iraq was a ghastly failure. How many civilian deaths? Maybe as high as one million not counting the 500,000 children who died from the poorly imposed embargo before that. (Albright used that figure in an interview and casually justified the death of all those children in terms of "remaking" the Middle East. How do you think THAT played on Al Jareeza?)
The human rights abuses during the Bush/Cheney years were widespread and ghastly. Abu Ghraib, Saddam's most notorious prison was the site of detainees being tied to shower heads and being beaten to death. One detainee was told by an interrogator that if he didn't talk the interrogator would go get his children and torture them in front of him something Saddam's people actually did within those very walls.
In Afghanistan at Kunuz SOF personnel stood by and watched Dostom's troops massacre thousands of POW's and did nothing. The torture convention, supported by no less than Reagan himself, was completely ignored. Read "Ghost Plane" sometime. You all know about the Canadian that was sent to Egypt(?) or Morocco where they knew he would be horribly tortured. Turned out he wasn't a bad guy. There are so many people like him they are formally organized. We behaved so badly that we have been told by international human rights organizations that we not welcome in international forums because we simply have no credibility any more. We look and act too much like the bad guys.
All th principles we laid down at Nuremburg and Tokyo we routinely violated and continue to do so. Three Americans, non judicially executed in Yemen on the basis of "information". Don't kid yourselves. If they can be executed without due process, you can too.
Cheney is not a conservative, in terms of the principles of the Founders. Not in terms of keeping to his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Not in terms of adhering to those international agreements we not only signed but pushed to have written and implemented regarding the treatment of detainees. Not in terms of the principles we laid down at Tokyo and Nuremburg.
Intentions are meaningless. By their works we shall know them. You can not accomplish good by acting bad. Every tyrant in past century had great reasons for doing what they did. Lincoln did too and in the end the 1866 Supreme Court didn't drink the Kool Aide.
I challenge any and all of you to find any quotes from ANY of the Founders that support any of the actions Cheney took during those eight years. Just one quote. You can't. Not one.
Abu Nudnik| 5.5.12 @ 10:51AM
I had always assumed that the intervention in Iraq was a ruse to get boots on both sides of the prime target, Iran. The real pity was that the war did not proceed directly to Iran after Afghanistan and Iraq were occupied. Had this been done quickly, it might have been done well.