Whither Condi?

This is interesting. I’ve read that a number of serious people have been less than impressed with Condi’s performance, but until now have seen nothing to suggest that she might be sidelined by her husba… er, boss, George. Anyone else see anything related to this?

[quote=“Henry Champ: Whither Condi?”]

Right from the beginning Condeleezza Rice has been an untouchable in the Bush cabinet. She is also extraordinarily popular to the point of being mentioned as a presidential candidate in her own right, something she has always deflected.

This may be changing. Negroponte’s appointment as her chief deputy is seen by some as a chink in the shining armour.

Negroponte is being given full diplomatic responsibility for Iraq. The new UN ambassador will report directly to him on Iraq. The White House press release announcing Negroponte’s new position says Rice will concentrate on the Middle East peace process and Iran.

There have been the whispers for sometime that the state department has been underperforming on some key files, that morale is low and that Rice has found herself less in the centre of things. Negroponte’s new position does nothing to end that talk.[/quote]

I was thinking just the other day how remarkably invisible Condominiumlease Rice was/is. There used to be days when each news cycle brought pictures of a U.S. Secretary of State carrying out duties on the world stage but for the first time I can remember, a U.S. Secretary of State is noteworthy for their absence.

In my always correct opinion, this absence represents the impotency of United States foreign policy and the neo-impotency of the U.S. as a hole.

Before being elected, Bush I believe, stated something along the lines that he was not going to be a foreign policy President. Oddly, by fucking it up pretty much everywhere, he may have achieved that goal. Pity so many have died to achieve that for him.

The only thing good about Condomless Rice is that she is probably a much better shag than Madeleine Allbright (one ‘l’ or two, I dunno :s )


Another current key personnel change to watch is that the commander of Central Command, General John Abizaid, has just been relieved by a Navy admiral, Admiral William J. Fallon. Centcom’s area of responsibility is shown below.

The primary reason to replace an Army general whose job it has been to oversee two land wars (Iraq, Afghanistan) with a Navy admiral is if the central focus of Centcom is about to change from land wars to a naval war against land-based targets.

"President Bush is installing two experienced commanders from vastly different backgrounds to carry out the new Iraq policy he will announce this week, substituting them for generals who had qualms about a fresh buildup of U.S. troops in the war zone. . . .

The other new man, Adm. William Fallon, is a Navy veteran who to some is an odd choice to oversee a ground conflict in a nearly landlocked country. Yet as top U.S. commander in the Pacific, he has experience in a region that, like the Middle East, has several trouble spots. . . . "

Negroponte out because he was unwilling to cook intelligence (again) to the White House’s taste:

"The nomination of retired Vice Admiral John Michael “Mike” McConnell to be Director of National Intelligence is part of an effort by the Vice President to tighten the Administration’s grip on domestic intelligence and grease the wheels for a more aggressive stance towards Iran, current and former intelligence officials believe.

If confirmed, McConnell will replace current National Intelligence Director John Negroponte, who was tapped Friday to become Deputy Secretary of State under Secretary Condoleezza Rice. According to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, Negroponte’s exit followed a lengthy internal administration battle between the Office of the Vice President and the two-year-old Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

According to officials close to both men, two issues surround Negroponte’s departure and McConnell’s nomination: a forthcoming National Intelligence Estimate on Iran – which the White House could use to buttress a case for military force – and pressure from the Vice President to augment domestic surveillance.

[b]Negroponte had resisted both efforts. Tensions soared after Negroponte made a public statement last year that countered the administration position that Iran was an immediate threat and that its alleged nuclear weapons program was in an advanced stage.

“The NIE on Iran is at issue,” said one former senior intelligence officer close to Negroponte.[/b]

The National Intelligence Estimate is an interagency report that synthesizes information across all intelligence agencies on a particular topic, providing an overall assessment and analysis. . .

Parts of an earlier Iran Intelligence Estimate were leaked to the Washington Post in 2005. These excerpts asserted that Iran was at least ten years away from possessing any significant nuclear enrichment capability and contrasted sharply with White House estimates, which had warned Iran could mount a full-scale attack in 3-5 years.

“The carefully hedged assessments, which represent consensus among U.S. intelligence agencies, contrast with forceful public statements by the White House,” the Post’s Dafna Linzer reported. “Administration officials have asserted, but have not offered proof, that Tehran is moving determinedly toward a nuclear arsenal.”

Negroponte defended the published findings, attempting to push back against pressure from the Vice President’s office, and maintained his opposition to military action against Iran.

By March 2006, however, the Department of Defense – on orders from the Vice President’s Office – had created the Iranian Directorate, which was largely a recreation of the notorious Office of Special Plans. The Office of Special Plans operated in the build-up to the Iraq war and is believed by most experts to have been the conduit through which pre-Iraq war intelligence was allegedly manipulated, if not cooked outright. . . .

The creation of the Iran Directorate sharply undercut the Director of National Intelligence and what sources say were Negroponte’s efforts to collect the most comprehensive and accurate intelligence on Iran and provide it directly to the President. The Office was created in 2005 by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act to centralize information coming out of all 16 US intelligence agencies, including the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

According to officials, Negroponte, while trying to work around interagency tensions, was not given the requisite authority to override pressure from Cheney’s office.

In October, Negroponte publicly cautioned against the use of force with regard to Iran, telling President Bush that because of “technical errors” in Iran’s nuclear program, the situation was not an emergency. . . .

The other key area of concern for the intelligence community in McConnell’s nomination is the Executive Branch’s attempt to expand domestic surveillance programs, especially those conducted by the National Security Agency.

[b]Current and former intelligence officials say that Negroponte and his staff were not comfortable with the level of domestic surveillance or the use of NSA wiretaps that were being pushed by the White House.

“[The office of the Vice President] could not get Negroponte to do anything with NSA and domestic surveillance,” said one former senior intelligence official. “McConnell worked with Cheney during the Gulf War.”[/b]

Just wait for all the documents to be released so a thorough history can be written.
Where are those Condi for Prez buttons now?

[quote=“Washington Post: Kaplan”]The case against Condi starts with her dismal tenure as national security adviser in Bush’s first term – perhaps the worst in the office’s history. Her main task was to coordinate policy, but she was outmaneuvered at every turn by the ruthless infighters around her, especially Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. So she focused on the job’s other mandate: counseling the unschooled president on foreign affairs. As Bush’s tutor in the 2000 campaign, she’d gained his trust, which became the basis of her power: When she spoke, everybody knew that she was speaking on Bush’s behalf, not advancing her own agenda.

The State Department seemed a place where she could make the most of that asset. She would finally be a player, a Cabinet secretary with a budget, a bureaucracy and something her beleaguered predecessor, Gen. Colin L. Powell, never had: unfettered access to the commander in chief. At first, she did things that Bush had previously resisted – reopened nuclear talks with Iran and North Korea, pushed a U.N. Security Council resolution on war crimes in Sudan, and (unlike Powell) traveled, a lot.

The early reviews were glowing. The media compared her to George Marshall, marveled at her “perfectionist drive” and parsed “the Condi doctrine.” But she was only doing things that most secretaries of state do routinely. The substance of her views and the fruits of her globe-trotting weren’t clear – and still aren’t.

The problem was that, in the course of counseling George W. Bush, she fell under his tutelage much more than vice versa. Instead of informing his instincts, she formalized them into doctrine – and came to believe in it herself.
Finally, there looms Iraq, where the only recent tactical successes have involved building up tribal warlords, not creating a beacon of democracy. This war has been Rice’s war as much as anybody’s in the administration. Long after her celebrity and charm have been forgotten, her epitaph will endure: She pursued democracy at the expense of stability, and achieved neither.[/quote]

I’d vote for her, at least she’s smart and can put a sentence together. I think she’d make a better president that the rest of the republican candidates.

She may be able to string a few words together without umming and aahing too much but she never actually says anything of substance. Being better than the other Republican candidates is not that difficult; my skids marks have more substance than the idiots wishing to wear the Republican dunce cap. Condi is only good for a fuck.


Her boldest statement yet!

Condi in Tehran!

“And if the Iranians suspend their enrichment and reprocessing, I’m prepared to meet my counterpart anyplace, anytime, anywhere,” she added. “So the question isn’t why will we not talk to Tehran. The question is, why will Tehran not talk to us?”

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071111/ap_ … pe/us_iran

Meaning, “If you cash in all of your big chips–you know, those processing bits you have a right to under the non-proliferation treaty–we can sit down play poker.”

Maybe Condi should consider a summer program in Cairo to learn about the Arab World and Arabic to see for herself what the people are really like. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071114/lf_ … REAKVvaA8F


In my always correct opinion, this absence represents the impotency of United States foreign policy and the neo-impotency of the U.S. as a hole.[/quote]

I like what you did there. Whether you did it on purpose or not is another thing. :wink:

P.S. I realise you posted this about 90 years ago, but I’ve only just read it, so there.