Exclusive: Powell Rebuts Media Reports Claiming He Supports Escalation
Exclusive: Powell Rebuts Media Reports Claiming He Supports Escalation
Yesterday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke at Purdue University. Articles on the event by the Lafayette Indiana Journal and Courier and the Associated Press report that Powell “said he supported President Bush’s decision to send more U.S. troops to Iraq”:
These reports are wrong. This morning, ThinkProgress spoke with Powell’s office, who told us that he never indicated his support for the escalation. According to his office, Powell simply said that the escalation is proceeding whether we like it or not:
The surge is on, and will soon be finished while Congress debates it. And we’ll have to see whether it works, and we’ll have to pass off to the Iraqis sooner or later.
Jeanne Norberg, a spokeswoman for Purdue who attended the speech, confirmed with us that Powell did not say he supported Bush’s escalation.
Powell has previously stated his opposition to Bush’s escalation strategy. On Dec. 17, he said on CBS’s Face the Nation that “I have not seen a case that persuades me that [Iraqi security] would be better” with more forces.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“We were not wrong about the nature of this regime…”
Really? Like when you said they had WMDs? Or were in cahoots with Al Qaeda?
*shakes head*
…
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:12 amWhat else do you expect from the RIGHT WING NUTs.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:15 amThey lie all the time.
Saddam was such a sweetheart.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:19 amHe’s madder than a bobcat caught in a piss fire. Nobody believes this fool.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:23 amSaddam was such a sweetheart.
Comment by Patrick1 — February 23, 2007 @ 11:19 am
—-Patrick1, If regime change (getting rid of “sweetheart” Saddam) was the only bogus reason for going into Iraq, we should have been told this up front by Bu$hco. I doubt we’d have wasted 3000 U-S lives and 4 years there had regime change been the only b.s. reason given for going.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:26 amSaddam was such a sweetheart.
Comment by Patrick1
First Bush now Saddam…..you really love those meglomanical despotic leaders don’t ya?
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:27 amHow much of a tool was Powell in that even now he is used to promote the agenda though he holds no official office and supposedly doesn’t even hold the opinions attributed to him. They can still put words in his mouth and play him.
Powell sold his soul and the irrelevance that he represents today is earned. This is unfortunate because Mr. Powell seemed to have such great promise earlier in his career. Regardless, what this shows is that because of his choices and the loyalties that he placed over the true interests of his country, neither anything the man says or anything said about him can reasonably be given any credibility whatsoever.
Good riddance Mr. Powell.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:28 amPowell is irrelevant and probably knows not of what he speaks. But he loves the money. A good republican.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:29 amSaddam was such a sweetheart.
Comment by Patrick1
So was the Shah of Iran, but hey, he was OUR tyrant, by golly!
Kiss, kiss!
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:29 amSaddam was such a sweetheart.
Comment by Patrick1
Rumsfeld said the same.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:32 amPowell needs to spill all the beans on the Bush Regime, but he might get killed if he did.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:33 amHow much does Powell get paid for those speeches?
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:36 amSaddam was such a sweetheart. Comment by Patrick1
Here’s your boy Donald Rumsfeld showing us what the Neocons really thought of Saddam: http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/history/husseinindex.htm
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:36 amHow much does Powell get paid for those speeches?
Comment by Zooey
I got this one!
TOO MUCH!!
;-)
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:46 amTOO MUCH!!
;-)
Comment by J-rock
Lemme reconsider that. If your asking about insightfulness, he was obviously overpaid. Comedy value, on the other hand…maybe he’s cheap at twice the price!
Nyuk nyuk!
:-)
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:54 amCould Jeanne Norberg possibly be related to the police officer on Naked Gun?
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:54 amPatrick – Saddam was a hell of a lot better at keeping the peace in Iraq than we’ve proven to be. I’ve always known Saddam was a megalomaniacal dickhead, so what does that make W?
Funny that Powell turned out to be a playa and a pimp, putting survival of the other playas ahead of his alliegiance to our Constitution.
February 23rd, 2007 at 11:55 am“Powell has previously stated his opposition to Bush’s escalation strategy. On Dec. 17, he said on CBS’s Face the Nation that “I have not seen a case that persuades me that [Iraqi security] would be better†with more forces.”
Oh, My GOD!
Powell sounds more like a progressive every day! I guess that comes from having your eyes opened after leaving the “bubble boy” administration.
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:00 pmThe only reason we went into Iraq was for OIL,OIL, OIL, and to make Old Bushie buddies richer.
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:19 pmfunny how mr. general acts now. quiet.
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:23 pma quiet general that is allowing his former boss to commit treason,
is also guilty of treason. this one knows he is one of those responsible as well.
how many more yes generals do we have?
Powell still defending Bush, the Civl-War Maker?
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:25 pmPowell is a snake and an apologist.
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:27 pmDoes what Powell say mean anything anymore?? This guy allowed himself to be used in the lead up to the war. I thought is was a intelligent man?? Sorry Powell, you’re i”Mr. Irrelevant” now.
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:30 pmThe article has been changed.
February 23rd, 2007 at 1:06 pmAnd executed swiftly before he could spill the beans on how the conservative cronies and USA defense contractors helped build and empower his regime in many weird and wonderfully illegal ways using OUR tax dollars…
Me a conspiracy theorist? No way… :-)
February 23rd, 2007 at 1:45 pmWho cares what Powell thinks. He’s nothing but a washed up arse licker. Google ‘colin powell my lai report’ for the real thing. Here’s a sample: http://www.usvetdsp.com/story13.htm
February 23rd, 2007 at 2:02 pmPoor Colin, doesn’t have the INTESTINAL FORTITUDE to tell off CHIMPya, Totricola Cheney, Rice, ALL THE REST of Bushland Uber Allies and tell these creeps where they can STICK their surge!!!!! Better join the Cowardly Lion(tm) and get some of those GUTS from the Emerald City of Iraq…OOPS! I meant OZ(tm)!!!!! Mr. Powell, why don’t you show America what a REAL MAN you are by becoming a DEMOCRAT, TOTALLY RENOUNCING your repugnant-repub ROOTS(tm) and KICKING SOME CHIMPya and Bushland Uber Allies ASS? You would ECLIPSE Senator Obama in the twinkling of an eye if you did so, and without a doubt would become the first African-American to become President of the United States!!!!! And DON’T WATCH “24(tm)”!!!!!!
February 23rd, 2007 at 2:17 pmAs TP points out, Powell is opposed to escalation. TP just got kudos on Thom Hartmann’s AirAmerica show.
In early 2001 when the media was saying how wonderful it was that Colin Powell was being made Sec of State, I was writing them saying “this is the man who helped coverup the My Lai massacre and who lied to congress during Iran-Contra”.
If our goal was regime change, we would have left in Dec 2003 when Saddam was put in jail. Heck, we never would have put him in power in the 60’s. If our goal was to insure they did not have WMD, we could have left in 2003. If our goal was to bring them democracy—they got it, let’s leave. If our goal is to always have control of Middle East oil, then we must stay.
February 23rd, 2007 at 3:03 pm“But we were not wrong about the nature of this regime, and I am glad that it is gone,” he said. “I hope the Iraqis will the seize the opportunity we have given them.”
ThinkProgress values his opinion enough to post his rebuttal of escalation.
I think we can all agree that Saddam was a menace and we can all thank President Bush for having the resolve to see an end to his tyranny. Hopefully, if we can get progressives on board, his resolve will cement a secure Iraq that offers an alternative to the ideology of hate dominated by fundamentalist Islam. But, I guess thats a decision for liberals to make.
February 23rd, 2007 at 3:27 pmI emailed Dan Shaw (at the email address on the article)…
…I gave him what for…
…he actually responded that there will be a correction tomorrow…
…and wrote that this was a “mistake”…
…I felt like a jerk for letting him have it with both barrels…
…but apologized…
…Communication DOES work though, that’s the point…
February 23rd, 2007 at 3:27 pmI think we can all agree that Saddam was a menace and we can all thank President Bush for having the resolve to see an end to his tyranny.
Comment by paul #29
…no more of a “menace” than the incestuous inbred pig…
…that gave birth to your inbred a*s…
…and no more thanks than the people of Chigago would’ve given to Mrs. O’Leary…
…for her cow…
February 23rd, 2007 at 3:39 pmLiberals were opposed to Saddam when he was strongly supported throughout the 80’s by Reagan-Bush. Carter had sanctions on Iraq that were immediately removed by the Reagan administration. Do you remember the $ billions in credits that went to Saddam illegally under GHWB? It was tagged “Iraqgate”. It was blamed on a vp in charge of mortgages of a bank in Georgia who didn’t even know how to use a computer.
When the CIA put Saddam in power in the 60’s, is it because it was full of “liberals”?
When Saddam killed 5,000 Kurds with gas, the Reagan administration lied and said Iran did it. Did Rumsfeld sell him the gas?
Organizations I support have always opposed Saddam—Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Int. Red Cross, the United Nations, you know, LIBERAL groups.
February 23rd, 2007 at 3:42 pmPaul,
If you think the problem in Iraq today is that progressives are not on board—you are really living in lala land. 655,000 Iraqis have died. Two million Iraqis have become refugees. Unemployment is around 65%. 90% of Iraqis want the US out ASAP. 70% of US troops want withdrawal. Morgues are overflowing. Hospitals have no supplies. Doctors, professors, and other professionals are fleeing the country. Only the Green Zone is safe. Power is out most of the time. There is no clean water. People are drinking straight from the river. This causes disease. Iraqis polled think we are still there because we want their oil (I don’t know how they got that idea). Religious “police squads” roam the streets.
I would like to hear precisely what you think progressives are doing, but because as far as I can see, conservatives are in charge of everything and everything W has wanted has happened.
February 23rd, 2007 at 4:08 pm#29 – “Hopefully, if we can get progressives on board, his resolve will cement a secure Iraq . . .” Comment by paul — February 23, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
Just ignore the absolute scre-up he did in Afghanistan. That was a mistake. Pres. Bush really didn’t care about Usama bin Laden or the taliban.
I’m sure Pres. Bush will apologize to the Taliban when the take Afghanistan back.
/sarcasm
February 23rd, 2007 at 4:25 pm[...] send more U.S. troops to Iraq.” But ThinkProgress followed up with Powell’s office and confirmed that these reports were wrong. Powell has never indicated support for [...]
February 23rd, 2007 at 5:02 pmCaption contest:
Somebody in the audience: Mr. Powell, after your shameful speech in the UN, a lot of innocent people have died in Iraq…
Powell: And?
February 23rd, 2007 at 5:22 pmhttp://newsmine.org/
News and Document archive source for uncovering and exposing
February 23rd, 2007 at 5:39 pmwith over 10,000 articles and documents
Bush and Cheney will be known as the biggest Decider of all times. They have been one of the most destructive forces against mankind in history. The words “truth”, “honor”, “kindness”, “compassion” or any word that deals with the concerns of workers, seniors or the poor are not in their vocabulary or the policies in which they pass.
February 23rd, 2007 at 6:25 pmYou don’t have to have a great deal of knowledge to see that they are only for Corporations, Oil Companies and the wealthy. It is not a mater of debate, it is a matter of Fact, all you need is the ability to read material other than which is hand feed by Fox news media or the other news media that Bush’s corporate friends either own or control.
The news media would rather feed you a daily BS of Nichols’ life of Britney Spears than to cover the corruption, deceit, propaganda and arrogant BS of this administration.
#34 They are trying to dig up the old bones from Vietnam. The spin that we lost the war at home. It took what, 12 years for the protestors to finally win? It is a pathetic little sham that makes the Republican losers feel better about themselves.
February 24th, 2007 at 12:02 amGenerals Powell, Tommy Franks, David Petraeus, Jack Keane, Ray Odierno, et al have sacrificed their professionalism and assisted the civilian political leadership in US to get us into this war, which we should not have got into the first time. The ONLY hope is divine intervention. Our young men and women of the armed forces died in Iraq in vain for a cause that was unjust, prsented to the citizenry devoid of honesty and full of untruths. These civilian and military leadership will take with them to their graves the bad decisions they made resulting in death of the US military forces and Iraqis. After all the divine court does not differntiate between an American and Iraqi bad person.
GOD save USA and Iraq.
Gen Ike E
February 24th, 2007 at 1:18 amFor those who praise W for taking out Saddam, I only have this to ask: What about North Korea? They are under FAR worse conditions than the Iraqi’s were under Saddam, why aren’t we going there to “liberate” those people?
People in NK are dying in the streets from lack of proper nutirtion, sometimes falling down and dying right where they stood. They have NO right to self expression, they are shot for political dissent. They have NOTHING for a free press, and the ONLY people eating well are the army. Why do you not DEMAND that we go in and save those people from their dictator, who is clearly a nut case? Is your “concern” only for those who have oil? Or is it just because you thought we could beat the Iraqis, and you KNOW the NK’s are far more prepared for an attack?
So Saddam was a bad guy, so what? We had NO business going in there in the first place, and those of us with a healthy American sence of scepticism KNEW that W was lying, we could see it in his face. He’s NOT that good of a liar, and neither is anyone in his administration or party. I could see it coming, why the hell is it that YOU can’t, even now?
Face it folks, you were lied to and you bought the whole thing. The fact that you still won’t wake up and realize that you have been lied to for over 6 years tells me that you aren’t interested in reality, just whatever you can say to make you feel good. Shame that the rest of the world has to suffer for your feelings.
February 24th, 2007 at 11:53 amRight on-WJM these crooks are not that slick.THE MSM bush & cheney pass out the koolade every day and the sheep are like pigs at feeding time.Some Repugs. would say Chimpster was just good old boy if they saw him molesting a blind person and telling them it was a wiener.
February 24th, 2007 at 2:36 pmYes, this is how it’s done. BTW, Lafayette Journal & Courier is Gannett Newspapers, ownber of USA Today, and a whack of media outlest incl print, radio, TV, and Internet.
You are what you read.
February 25th, 2007 at 2:31 pm