Embittered Insiders Turn Against Bush

[ckramer]

The weekend after the statue of Saddam Hussein fell, Kenneth Adelman and a couple of other promoters of the Iraq war gathered at Vice President Cheney's residence to celebrate. The invasion had been the "cakewalk" Adelman predicted. Cheney and his guests raised their glasses, toasting President Bush and victory. "It was a euphoric moment," Adelman recalled.

Forty-three months later, the cakewalk looks more like a death march, and Adelman has broken with the Bush team. He had an angry falling-out with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld this fall. He and Cheney are no longer on speaking terms. And he believes that "the president is ultimately responsible" for what Adelman now calls "the debacle that was Iraq."

Adelman, a former Reagan administration official and onetime member of the Iraq war brain trust, is only the latest voice from inside the Bush circle to speak out against the president or his policies. Heading into the final chapter of his presidency, fresh from the sting of a midterm election defeat, Bush finds himself with fewer and fewer friends. Some of the strongest supporters of the war have grown disenchanted, former insiders are registering public dissent and Republicans on Capitol Hill blame him for losing Congress.

A certain weary crankiness sets in with any administration after six years. By this point in Bill Clinton's tenure, bitter Democrats were competing to denounce his behavior with an intern even as they were trying to fight off his impeachment. Ronald Reagan was deep in the throes of the Iran-contra scandal. But Bush's strained relations with erstwhile friends and allies take on an extra edge of bitterness amid the dashed hopes of the Iraq venture.

"There are a lot of lives that are lost," Adelman said in an interview last week. "A country's at stake. A region's at stake. This is a gigantic situation. . . . This didn't have to be managed this bad. It's just awful."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/18/AR2006111801076.html

Love these idiots!

[ClassWarrior]

1. We can't let 'em get away with "splitting" with Bush/Cheney**.

This isn't the misAdministration**'s failure - it's the failure of conservatism itself.

NGU.

[GeorgeGist]

2. Dear Kenneth,

You get what you fall for.

Love,
Reality

[peacetalksforall]

3. The thought crosses my mind that there has been

a falling out and perhaps the reason stated in the article IS valid, but that there might also be another reason = one that is one layer below the common knowledge line? The way I remember words coming from Adelman is that he is a grand supporter of the 'invasion' of Iran for the benefit of Israel. Might it be that the fall-out is that Cheney no longer sees a way to pull off an Iranian invasion and Adelman is masking the real reason behind their breakdown in their relationship? Just a thought. Just a wish (about not invading Iran).

The other interesting concept I entertain is my conception of the relationship between PNAC and AEI. I see AEI as the entity that works out all the 'strategy and tactical thinking' for the PNAC plan. Through their 'experts', their 'funding', and the way they have organized - direct contact with the Pentagon, WHIG, etc. They are clearly have been a public relations arm of PNAC - there are so many ways there could have been a falling out.