Fred writes:

> Wirt "supported Powell in the past" because, in the past, Powell
>  espoused a calm, thoughtful approach to the Iraq problem.
>
>  When Powell switched to his CIC's position, Wirt could no longer
>  support him.
>
>  Yes, Powell is "the same person he was before the war" and Wirt should
>  have known that, as a loyal military man, Powell would ultimately
>  support his CIC.

No, I didn't expect this behavior from Colin Powell. Rather, I expected the
same level of personal integrity that Powell's predecessor, Gen. George C.
Marshall, showed when he too was Secretary of State. Marshall was an
extraordinary individual. Eighteen months before World War II was finished in
Europe, Marshall oversaw plans for the rebuilding of Europe, most especially
Germany, in order to prevent the rise of demogoguery that inevitably occurred
after World War I due to the victorious Allies' impositions of punitive
reparations on the German people.

In 1948, when push came to shove over the United State's recognition of the
State of Israel, Marshall told Truman to his face that if Truman recognized
Israel, Marshall wouldn't even vote for Truman in the next election. With the
same sense of clairity of vision that he had for Europe., Marshall could
forsee the great instability that the formation of a Jewish state would
forecast for Middle East. In a very direct chain of causation, the enormous
prosperity of Europe, and especially Germany, is a direct result of
Marshall's foresight and planning -- and perhaps to just as great a degree,
the reaction in the Arab world that our troops in Iraq are currently
receiving is due to our history of a 60-year highly distorted foreign policy
in the Middle East, due solely to internal political concerns, which Marshall
greatly condemned.

George Marshall was a five-star general; Colin Powell a four-star. But as
Secretaries of State, neither were any longer in any chain of military
command. They were then and are now charged with representing the best
long-term interests of the United States, if not the world at large, not a
particular president or his party. The fact that Powell presented his
arguments against the war so forcefully, but then fell in line, is to me the
ultimate betrayal of one's own personal integrity.

For a very brief sketch of Marshall's opposition to the recognition of
Israel, please see:


http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/1948.h

tm

although this sketch doesn't begin to portray the drama of the time nor the
arguments. I expected Powell to act as Marshall did a half-century earlier,
and I am greatly disappointed that he hasn't.

Wirt Atmar

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *