Bush Policies a Failure, Retired U.S. Diplomats Say

[Quasi]

I agree with everything said but don't think I would have had the stones to sign this. Seems pretty damaging to me....thoughts?

Before anyone jumps to conclusions, the 27 people who signed it include a mix of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents....didn't see the mix listed but I'm sure it is heavier on the Democrats. Also, they have served under presidents of both parties.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=5440125

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush led the United States into an ill-planned Iraq war that weakened U.S. security, retired diplomats and military officers said on Wednesday in a challenge to one of Bush's main arguments for re-election.

"We all believe that current administration policies have failed in the primary responsibilities of preserving national security and providing world leadership," said a statement signed by the 27 retired officials. "We need a change."

The rare criticism by career senior U.S. officials came from a group that included members of both major political parties, two former ambassadors to the Soviet Union and a retired chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff.

In attacking Bush's national security record, they challenged a key Bush argument for his re-election against Democrat Sen. John Kerry, that the Iraq war has made America safer.

"Our security has been weakened," the group said.

The former officials, some of whom said they had voted for Bush, said the Republican president manipulated intelligence on Iraq to lead the United States into an "ill-planned and costly war from which exit is uncertain."
........

[Pseudolus]

Originally Posted by Quasi

didn't see the mix listed but I'm sure it is heavier on the Democrats.

You think?

I'm sure a similar letter has been written/signed/circulated against every Prez since the form was invented. I could probably dig one up criticizing a certain President's anti-USSR policies, and we all know how that turned out.

[Moe Szyslak]

Originally Posted by Pseudolus

You think?

I'm sure a similar letter has been written/signed/circulated against every Prez since the form was invented. I could probably dig one up criticizing a certain President's anti-USSR policies, and we all know how that turned out.

The rare criticism by career senior U.S. officials came from a group that included members of both major political parties, two former ambassadors to the Soviet Union and a retired chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff.

If the author knows what he is talking about, it doesn't happen that often. I guess it also depends on his definition of rare.

[Pseudolus]

So, to sufficiently support my statement, all I have to do is show that a Reuter's writer has a left-wing bias or doesn't know what he's talking about? Ooh, toughie.

[Moe Szyslak]

Originally Posted by Pseudolus

So, to sufficiently support my statement, all I have to do is show that a Reuter's writer has a left-wing bias? Ooh, toughie.

Hey now, I think you first owe us a letter stating how a former president needs to be ousted based on his handling of USSR. Then, find one about Clinton and I will give you full credit for a win.

[Quasi]

Originally Posted by Pseudolus

You think?

I'm sure a similar letter has been written/signed/circulated against every Prez since the form was invented. I could probably dig one up criticizing a certain President's anti-USSR policies, and we all know how that turned out.

I would be interested in seeing if something like this has happened "against every Prez since the form was invented". Feel free to enlighten me. I couldn't find anything similar in the past. This isn't some goofy form that a hippy passed around the coffee house for il-informed people to sign. Here are a few of the folks who signed...

...retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, the former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East under President Bush's father

.....Jack F. Matlock Jr., who was appointed by Reagan as ambassador to the Soviet Union and retained in the post by President Bush's father during the final years of the Cold War....

Adm. William J. Crowe Jr., named chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Reagan....

Several on the group's list were appointed to their most important posts under Reagan and the elder Bush. These include Matlock and Harrop, as well as Arthur A. Hartman, who served as Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1981 through 1987; H. Allen Holmes, an assistant secretary of state under Reagan; and Charles Freeman, ambassador to Saudi Arabia under the elder Bush.....

This isn't just a bunch of raving lefties taking a shot at the Prez....and their creditials lead me to think they might know a think or two about foreign policy....

[Westley]

I've never heard of a letter with the following characteristics:

Ask for the ouster of the current President
Signed by people who rarely if ever get involved in politics
Signed by a decent number of people who have been appointed by the political party that is being attacked.

I think this document meets those criteria; I doubt you could find a similar letter against Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan, Carter (note that I am not restricting to ouster based on military - if you can find a smiliar document stating that he should be ousted based on economy or wahtever, I would be impressed, too.

[Pseudolus]

Found a list of signatories.

The BBC notes GOP connections for 6 of the 26. 1 of the 6 is also noted as having served in the Clinton administration. Seems like a pretty Democratic bunch, with a little GOP window dressing.

I know a lot of letters were circulated against Reagan. I don't know if any of them were strictly "diplomatic". If I can turn something up, I will, but letters like this are not a rare phenomenon.

Can't speak about the others, but ...

Originally Posted by Quasi

Here are a few of the folks who signed...

Politics play only a minor consideration in naming the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs; it's a military appointment, not a political appointment.

Adm. Crowe's politics have been left-leaning since he earned his PhD in political science at Princeton, which happened before he even reached flag rank.

Since retiring from the Navy ...

He served as Chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board from 1993 to 1994, and served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland from 1994 to 1997.

So at least this one is NOT a GOP person.

[Pseudolus]

Originally Posted by Will Durant

So at least this one is NOT a GOP person.

He's the 1-of-6 that the BBC notes as having gone both ways. I guess we're down to 5/26 ~ 19%. That may be slightly more Republican than the media, but that doesn't sound like what I'd call a bipartisan group.