Wolfowitz named Man of Year by The Jerusalem Post

minibush1

Member
Sep 14, 2003
119
0
0
The Jerusalem Post -registration reqd.
Oct. 1, 2003
Man of the Year
By BRET STEPHENS

NO question: This was Paul Wolfowitz's year. On September 15, 2001, at a meeting in Camp David, he advised President George W. Bush to skip Kabul and train American guns on Baghdad. In March 2003, he got his wish. In the process, Wolfowitz became the most influential US deputy defense secretary ever - can you so much as name anyone else who held the post? And he's on the shortlist to succeed Colin Powell as secretary of state.

Not that this alone qualifies Wolfowitz as the Jerusalem Post's Man of the Year. The war in Iraq had many authors: Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Tony Blair, George Bush. Wolfowitz may have been an early and vocal advocate, but he was cheering from the second row.

What's not in dispute is that Wolfowitz is the principal author of the doctrine of preemption, which framed the war in Iraq and which, when it comes to it, will underpin US action against other rogue states.

This is more remarkable than you might at first think. Following September 11, many people grasped intuitively that it was useless to contain or deter foes for whom suicide was an acceptable option. The difference with Wolfowitz is that he's been talking about this since at least 1992. (The prescience is of a piece with his warning - in 1979 - that Saddam Hussein might someday invade Kuwait.)

The difference with Wolfowitz, too, is that his hawkish leanings on defense (the Economist once called him the administration's "velociraptor") combine with a remarkable optimism about the prospects for Mideast democracy. When President Bush says, "America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons" - that's Wolfowitz talking. When the president calls for "a new Arab charter that champions internal reform, greater political participation, economic openness and free trade" - that's Wolfowitz's talking, too.

But perhaps the greatest measure of Wolfowitz's influence is that Colin Powell now waxes rhapsodic about an Iraq "on the road to democratic self-government." This from the man who, after the first Gulf War, mocked: "Where's Iraq's Thomas Jefferson?"

To our ears, the sudden stress on Mideast democratization is "transformative," to use the Pentagon jargon. Israel has long waited for an administration that understands that the principal problem in the Middle East is not the unsettled status of our borders. It is the unsettling nature of Arab regimes - and of the bellicosity, fanaticism, and resentments to which they give rise. Israel has also long waited for an administration that understands that the regimes that threaten Tel Aviv also threaten New York.

There's a downside. Earlier in the year, the notion took hold that the president was taking the country to war at the urgings of his Jewish advisers, themselves shills for Israel. "Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Bill Kristol [are]... the clique of conservatives who are driving this war," wrote New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd. She may as well have written "the clique of Jews," some felt. Other critics of the war were more explicit. "If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war in Iraq," said Democratic Congressman Jim Moran, "we would not be doing this."

In this year when anti-Semitism is once again a fact of life, the name "Wolfowitz" has become its lightning rod.

Surely this is one distinction he does not relish. Yet it remains a part of what makes this, uniquely, Wolfowitz's year.

***

A word about the selection criteria of this feature, which inaugurates an annual event. We have called it "Man of the Year," though of course the year we are speaking of is the Jewish year. This does not mean we have restricted our field to Jews, much less Israelis. But we are the Jerusalem Post and our choice is dictated by the same considerations that drive our news coverage - relevance to Israel and the Jewish world. It will therefore be likely, though by no means inevitable, that future Men or Women of the Year will be Jews - sometimes Israelis, sometimes not.

 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Troll.
 

rchiu

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2002
3,846
0
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Troll.

So you agree, then, that this article PROVES there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" behind the war with Iraq? If not, then you just called me a troll for challenging a false claim. I'm not sure you understand what the word 'troll' means, G. :)
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.

Exactly, if this is all you need to PROVE a "Jewish Conspiracy", then you should have been all for invading Iraq.

The fact is we had 'justification' for invading Iraq...not proof. If there was proof it would have been indisputable and France and Germany would have been on board and you'd have nothing to bitch about. You can say this article gives creedance or justification to the claim that there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" and we'll, then, argue about it, but claiming this PROVES it is assinine.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.

Exactly, if this is all you need to PROVE a "Jewish Conspiracy", then you should have been all for invading Iraq.

The fact is we had 'justification' for invading Iraq...not proof. If there was proof it would have been indisputable and France and Germany would have been on board and you'd have nothing to bitch about. You can say this article gives creedance or justification to the claim that there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" and we'll, then, argue about it, but claiming this PROVES it is assinine.
Justification? Was the Bush Administration justified in decieving the American Public into supporting the Invasion and occupation of Iraq?

 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.


Damn, I wish I had text searching available. Unfortunately, my sub ran out...and I can't remember if you were one of the ones I was turning blue in the face by trying to convince that just because the supposed bio/chem weapons were unaccounted for that it doesn't = proof of existence. I know Alistar7 was one person, and it seems like you were another...but I can't remember.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.

Exactly, if this is all you need to PROVE a "Jewish Conspiracy", then you should have been all for invading Iraq.

The fact is we had 'justification' for invading Iraq...not proof. If there was proof it would have been indisputable and France and Germany would have been on board and you'd have nothing to bitch about. You can say this article gives creedance or justification to the claim that there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" and we'll, then, argue about it, but claiming this PROVES it is assinine.
Justification? Was the Bush Administration justified in decieving the American Public into supporting the Invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Saddam didn't provide an accounting of the WMD he'd previously possessed. So, yes.

Whether or not we were deceived is yet to be seen. You absolutly cannot say we were or were not deceived. We'll see...but that's actually an entirely separate issue from the validity of attacking Iraq.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.

Exactly, if this is all you need to PROVE a "Jewish Conspiracy", then you should have been all for invading Iraq.

The fact is we had 'justification' for invading Iraq...not proof. If there was proof it would have been indisputable and France and Germany would have been on board and you'd have nothing to bitch about. You can say this article gives creedance or justification to the claim that there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" and we'll, then, argue about it, but claiming this PROVES it is assinine.
Justification? Was the Bush Administration justified in decieving the American Public into supporting the Invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Saddam didn't provide an accounting of the WMD he'd previously possessed. So, yes.

Whether or not we were deceived is yet to be seen. You absolutly cannot say we were or were not deceived. We'll see...but that's actually an entirely separate issue from the validity of attacking Iraq.
I see so according to you the ends justify the means as long as it accomplishes the goal of a few who are in power! Interesting and very disturbing.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.

Exactly, if this is all you need to PROVE a "Jewish Conspiracy", then you should have been all for invading Iraq.

The fact is we had 'justification' for invading Iraq...not proof. If there was proof it would have been indisputable and France and Germany would have been on board and you'd have nothing to bitch about. You can say this article gives creedance or justification to the claim that there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" and we'll, then, argue about it, but claiming this PROVES it is assinine.
Justification? Was the Bush Administration justified in decieving the American Public into supporting the Invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Saddam didn't provide an accounting of the WMD he'd previously possessed. So, yes.

Whether or not we were deceived is yet to be seen. You absolutly cannot say we were or were not deceived. We'll see...but that's actually an entirely separate issue from the validity of attacking Iraq.


You are aware of what you are saying 'yes' to, aren't you? Read RD's post again. Do you see the word 'deceived'? You are saying that Bush was justified in deceiving us?
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.

Exactly, if this is all you need to PROVE a "Jewish Conspiracy", then you should have been all for invading Iraq.

The fact is we had 'justification' for invading Iraq...not proof. If there was proof it would have been indisputable and France and Germany would have been on board and you'd have nothing to bitch about. You can say this article gives creedance or justification to the claim that there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" and we'll, then, argue about it, but claiming this PROVES it is assinine.
Justification? Was the Bush Administration justified in decieving the American Public into supporting the Invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Saddam didn't provide an accounting of the WMD he'd previously possessed. So, yes.

Whether or not we were deceived is yet to be seen. You absolutly cannot say we were or were not deceived. We'll see...but that's actually an entirely separate issue from the validity of attacking Iraq.
I see so according to you the ends justify the means as long as it accomplishes the goal of a few who are in power! Interesting and very disturbing.

Your powers of reasoning are truly astounding. Perhaps that's why we'll never agree. *sigh*

I'm saying the justification for invading Iraq was there if Bush didn't say a word. The justification for the war was based on the fact that Saddam wouldn't or couldn't provide proof that he destroyed the WMD he admitted to having.

Now, Bush's specific claims can be held to the candle of speculation until they are proven or disproven within a reasonable timeframe. But his claims were not the justification for going to war.

Your illogical and absurb conclusions to my posts makes you look like a flaming maniac.
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Learn how to read jackass. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true. I said that the article proves that there was heavy influence by powerful Jews to go to war, not that it proves a Jewish conspiracy. And from your refrences to me as a "G" I can tell that you are a graduate from the John Galt school of retards. Pull your head out of your ass.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well imagine that!

And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.

Proves it, eh? I'm not sure you understand what the word 'proof' means, G.

Funny, you didn't seem understand it as well when you were busy kissing GWB's @ss for invading Iraq.

Exactly, if this is all you need to PROVE a "Jewish Conspiracy", then you should have been all for invading Iraq.

The fact is we had 'justification' for invading Iraq...not proof. If there was proof it would have been indisputable and France and Germany would have been on board and you'd have nothing to bitch about. You can say this article gives creedance or justification to the claim that there's a "Jewish Conspiracy" and we'll, then, argue about it, but claiming this PROVES it is assinine.
Justification? Was the Bush Administration justified in decieving the American Public into supporting the Invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Saddam didn't provide an accounting of the WMD he'd previously possessed. So, yes.

Whether or not we were deceived is yet to be seen. You absolutly cannot say we were or were not deceived. We'll see...but that's actually an entirely separate issue from the validity of attacking Iraq.
I see so according to you the ends justify the means as long as it accomplishes the goal of a few who are in power! Interesting and very disturbing.

Your powers of reasoning are truly astounding. Perhaps that's why we'll never agree. *sigh*

I'm saying the justification for invading Iraq was there if Bush didn't say a word. The justification for the war was based on the fact that Saddam wouldn't or couldn't provide proof that he destroyed the WMD he admitted to having.

Now, Bush's specific claims can be held to the candle of speculation until they are proven or disproven within a reasonable timeframe. But his claims were not the justification for going to war.

Your illogical and absurb conclusions to my posts makes you look like a flaming maniac.
Well coming from another flaming maniac I will take that as a compliment:)

 

Wag

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
8,288
8
81
And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.
I'm sorry, this is specious reasoning. Some Jews were for the war, so that means all Jews were? I'm surprised you didn't say this confirms that the Mossad was behind 9/11 and all the Jews didn't show up for work that day.

Do you have any Jewish friends let alone know any? Most Jews I know are moderate or even liberal and are stridently against the war.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Your illogical and absurb conclusions to my posts makes you look like a flaming maniac.
Well coming from another flaming maniac I will take that as a compliment:)

:)

Read this. It sums up most of my feelings on the matter and explains more patiently, and in many more words, why the justification for war with Iraq was dependent solely on the actions of Saddam and not what the President of the United States did or did not claim. Bush should be held accountable for ALL claims he made and if shown false, he should pay for his deception, but, again, he could have claimed Saddam was harboring Martians and it would make no difference...the justification for war was independent of anything but Saddam's actions.

http://www.aijac.org.au/review/2003/287/saddam-wmd.html
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
On September 15, 2001, at a meeting in Camp David, he advised President George W. Bush to skip Kabul and train American guns on Baghdad.
So he is man of the year because 4 days after 9/11, while the site was still smoldering, he advised Bush to skip going after the guys who caused it sitting in Afghanistan, and go after Saddam instead. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense
rolleye.gif
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,569
6,711
126
Unfortunately the appearance of a close alliance between the United States and Israel means a lot of Americans have and will continue to die. The question then is whether there is a more pro Israeli stance in official Washington than in the people of the US in general. If so these American deaths will be against the will of the people and because of the pro Israeli bias. This is the very kind of thing that breeds cynicism and contempt.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
I thought the invasion was justified by the WMD and their immanent use by Iraq against the US falling therefore, under Article 51 of the UN Charter. What would Israel have to do with this exigent circumstance?
Has the justification changed to: Saddam didn't account for WMD to the UN's satisfaction? The UN, the entity that remained seized of the situation with out granting plenipotentiary power to the US to act in its stead.
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: Wag
And then people wonder why there are "Jewish Conspiracy Thoeries" on the war in Iraq floating around. I do not beleive it is anti-Semetic to say that Jews heavily influenced the decision to go to war, as this article itself proves, it is true.
I'm sorry, this is specious reasoning. Some Jews were for the war, so that means all Jews were? I'm surprised you didn't say this confirms that the Mossad was behind 9/11 and all the Jews didn't show up for work that day.

Do you have any Jewish friends let alone know any? Most Jews I know are moderate or even liberal and are stridently against the war.

Yes, as a matter of fact I have many Jewsish friends, and you are absolutely right, most of them were against the war. I should have written "powerful Jews in government" instead of just "Jews". For that I apologize.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
i guess logically the palestinians have the entire EU in their pocket and have convinced them that attacks on civilians are ok:p let alone all the arab states. devious bunch
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i guess logically the palestinians have the entire EU in their pocket and have convinced them that attacks on civilians are ok:p let alone all the arab states. devious bunch

No, they just convinced them that settlements, collective punishment, unlawful imprisonment, extra-judicial killings ect, ect, ect are wrong, something we have yet to grasp and something no one in power has the balls to point out from mortal fear of being labeled an "anti-Semite" and being black balled from politics.