Neo-Cons Turn on Bush Over Iraq

Prominent neo-Conservatives, who had been vocal proponents of the Iraq war, have turned on US President George W. Bush, lambasting his administration for failure to handle the war and questioning the wisdom of the 2003 invasion-turned-occupation.

Neo-Cons Turn on Bush Over Iraq

"I think if I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, 'Should we go into Iraq?', I think now I probably would have said, 'No, let's consider other strategies for dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists'," Richard Perle, a former assistance Defense Secretary, told the Vanity Fair magazine on Saturday, November 4.

The Bush administration invaded Iraq in 2003 on claims of stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, the claim refuted by a recent presidential report.

With violence raging in the US occupied country and the American casualties mounting, the Iraq war turned to be unpopular in the United States.

Perle, who chaired the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board from 2001 to 2003 under the Bush administration, said that if he could turn back the clock, he would not recommend the Iraq invasion.

Perle said that if he could turn back the clock, he would not recommend the Iraq invasion.

"The decisions did not get made that should have been. They didn't get made in a timely fashion, and the differences were argued out endlessly," he said.

"At the end of the day, you have to hold the president responsible."

Opinion polls showed that nearly 60 percent of Americans now believe the Iraq war is was not worth fighting.

A report by the Rothenberg Political, an independent analytical firm, predicted that Republicans will most likely lose five to seven Senate seats and 34 to 40 seats in the House of Representatives when voters go to the polls on Tuesday, November 7.

An international poll on Friday, November 3, showed that the majority of voters in four main US allies believe that US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have made the world less safe.

The poll also showed that most Britons believed Bush was most dangerous to the world peace than the leaders of the "Axis of Evil," a phrase coined by the United States to describe North Korea, Iran and Syria.

Incompetence

Adelman said that the Bush administration "turned out to be among the most incompetent teams in the post-war era."

Kenneth Adelman, a Reagan era hawk, also blasted the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq war.

Adelman said that the Bush administration "turned out to be among the most incompetent teams in the post-war era."

"They turned out to be among the most incompetent teams in the postwar era. Not only did each of them, individually, have enormous flaws, but together they were deadly, dysfunctional," he added.

He specifically lashed out at Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

"I'm crushed by his performance," he said. "Did he change, or were we wrong in the past? Or is it that he was never really challenged before? I don't know. He certainly fooled me."

Adelman, who sat on the Defense Policy Board until last year, had in the past argued that the Iraq war would be a "cakewalk".

He, however, insisted that the US policies for the March 2003 invasion of Iraq were sound, but their execution was fraught with "huge mistakes".

"I guess that's what I would have said: that Bush's arguments are absolutely right, but you know what, you just have to put them in the drawer marked 'can't do'. And that's very different from 'let's go'."

David Frum, a former Bush speech writer, said that Bush failed to craft sound policies in the post-war era or even understand or believe that speeches he delivered.

"Although the president said the words, he just did not absorb the ideas," added Frum.

Michael Rubin, who worked on the staff of the Pentagon's office of special plans and the coalition provisional authority in Baghdad, accused Bush of betraying Iraqi reformers.

The president's actions had been "not much different from what his father did on February 15 1991, when he called the Iraqi people to rise up and then had second thoughts and didn't do anything once they did," he said.

Under Pressure

Bush has defended Rumsfeld all along.

Adelman specifically lashed out at Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

"I'm crushed by his performance," he said. "Did he change, or were we wrong in the past? Or is it that he was never really challenged before? I don't know. He certainly fooled me."

Four US military newspapers catering to all the branches of the US armed forces will publish an editorial on the eve of the November 7 congressional election, demanding the resignation of Rumsfeld, NBC News reported Saturday.

An advance copy of the article titled "Time for Rumsfeld to Go" was obtained by the television network and posed on its website late Friday.

It is scheduled for simultaneous publication Monday, November 6, by the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times, NBC News said.

"Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large," the advance copy said.

"His strategy has failed, and his ability to lead is compromised," the editorial continued. "And although the blame for our failures in Iraq rests with the secretary, it will be the troops who bear its brunt."

In all, 2,817 Americans have died in Iraq since the start of the occupation in April 2003.

Addressing Bush, who reaffirmed his confidence in Rumsfeld just this past week, the editorialists assured him they were not trying to influence the elections.

"Regardless of which party wins November 7, the time has come, Mr. President, to face the hard bruising truth: Donald Rumsfeld must go," the article said.

Feeling the increasing heat of loosing a media battle, especially against Al-Qaeda and in Iraq, the Pentagon is launching a new up-to-date media unit to "rapidly respond" to stories critical of its performance and of Rumsfeld.

Güncelleme Tarihi: 20 Eylül 2018, 18:16
YORUM EKLE