Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 9 of 14

Thread: Wolfowitz continues his cowardly ways

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    On the forums
    Posts
    8,345

    Default Wolfowitz continues his cowardly ways

    WASHINGTON, April 12 ? Paul D. Wolfowitz, the president of the World Bank, apologized today for his role in arranging a highly paid job at the State Department for a woman with whom he has a personal relationship.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/wo...hp&oref=slogin

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big View Post
    WASHINGTON, April 12 ? Paul D. Wolfowitz, the president of the World Bank, apologized today for his role in arranging a highly paid job at the State Department for a woman with whom he has a personal relationship.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/wo...hp&oref=slogin

    How is that cowardly?

  3. #3
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    On the forums
    Posts
    8,345

    Default

    COWARDLY implies a weak or ignoble lack of courage <a cowardly failure to stand up for principle>

    http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

    Wolfowitz consistently sells out principles for personal gain. He helped start an illegal war and now he is the President of World Bank. He promised everyone great success in Iraq and then ran to govern World Bank when things went south.

    Now, he illegally hooks up his mistress with a high paying job.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big View Post
    COWARDLY implies a weak or ignoble lack of courage <a cowardly failure to stand up for principle>

    http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

    Wolfowitz consistently sells out principles for personal gain. He helped start an illegal war and now he is the President of World Bank. He promised everyone great success in Iraq and then ran to govern World Bank when things went south.

    Now, he illegally hooks up his mistress with a high paying job.
    Illegal war, by the standards of the UN?

    Big, are you listening to talk radio again? (sorry, couldn't resist)

  5. #5
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default

    The article is a bit confusing but it sounds like his actions were perhaps unethical or lacked integrity or both. No cowardice, for he apparently admitted some wrongdoing. Again, the article is confusing: raising as many questions as it answers. A personal relationship with someone in his organization? What does this mean? I presume he's married, but maybe not.

  6. #6

    Default

    if he never held those principles to begin with he didn't fail to stand up for them.
    There's no such thing as a pretty good aligator wrestler.

  7. #7
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    On the forums
    Posts
    8,345

    Default

    On September13, 2001, during a meeting at Camp David with President Bush, Rumsfeld and others in the Bush administration, Wolfowitz said he discussed with President Bush the prospects of launching an attack against Iraq, for no apparent reason other than a “gut feeling” Saddam Hussein was involved in the attacks, and there was a debate “about what place if any Iraq should have in a counter terrorist strategy.”



    “On the surface of the debate it at least appeared to be about not whether but when,” Wolfowitz said during the May 9 interview, a transcript of which is posted on the Department of Defense website http://www.defenselink.mil/transcrip...ecdef0223.html. “There seemed to be a kind of agreement that yes it should be, but the disagreement was whether it should be in the immediate response or whether you should concentrate simply on Afghanistan first.”

    http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle3592.htm

  8. #8
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    On the forums
    Posts
    8,345

    Default

    Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war.

    The US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz - who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq is "swimming" in oil.

    The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die Welt.

    Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction had been found, the deputy defence minister said: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."

    Mr Wolfowitz went on to tell journalists at the conference that the US was set on a path of negotiation to help defuse tensions between North Korea and its neighbours - in contrast to the more belligerent attitude the Bush administration displayed in its dealings with Iraq.

    His latest comments follow his widely reported statement from an interview in Vanity Fair last month, in which he said that "for reasons that have a lot to do with the US government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on: weapons of mass destruction."

    http://foi.missouri.edu/polinfoprop/wolfowitz2.html

  9. #9

    Default

    Also, North Korea has nukes that they can use if attacked, and Iraq didn't. North Korea also borders Russia.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •