NYT: Wolfowitz Nod Follows Spread of Conservative Philosophy

Wolfowitz Nod Follows Spread of Conservative Philosophy
By TODD S. PURDUM

Published: March 17, 2005


Charles Dharapak/Associated Press
Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense, was one of the architects of the U.S. campaign to topple Saddam Hussein.


WASHINGTON, March 16 - Paul D. Wolfowitz once wrote that a major lesson of the cold war for American foreign policy was "the importance of leadership and what it consists of: not lecturing and posturing and demanding, but demonstrating that your friends will be protected and taken care of, that your enemies will be punished, and that those who refuse to support you will regret having done so."

Mr. Wolfowitz's career has hewed to those same unshrinking precepts, and in nominating him for the presidency of the World Bank, President Bush simultaneously removed one of the most influential and contentious voices in his war cabinet and rewarded one of his administration's most dogged loyalists with an influential and contentious spot in a wholly new realm.

By sending Mr. Wolfowitz to the World Bank, and another outspoken administration figure, John R. Bolton, to be ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Bush all but announced his belief that both institutions could benefit from unconventional thinking and stern discipline. At the same time, Mr. Wolfowitz's resignation as deputy secretary of defense, and the planned departure this summer of Douglas J. Feith as undersecretary for defense policy, would seem to give Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who often tangled with Mr. Wolfowitz, expanded influence over national security policy and minimize public feuding - something Mr. Bush is said to want badly.

But Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney, who share many of Mr. Wolfowitz's interventionist views, remain in place, and some debates will doubtless go on.

In her first weeks on the job, Ms. Rice has taken pains to put her own stamp on diplomacy and the American image abroad. But she and the president have absorbed Mr. Wolfowitz's longstanding optimism about the prospects for democracy in the Middle East, so his departure probably marks more an evolution than a radical shift in policy....


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/17/politics/17assess.html?hp&ex=1111035600&en=d17c4fef075ab93b&ei=5094&partner=homepage

the war criminal receiving his reward for loyal stooge service to the zionists who own this usa..
wolfie is brilliant in his treason..
I remember that he did not even know the US death count in Iraq..

a neo-con for all seasons..a true coward,traitor and war monger
He could have relieved his blood lust in the war of his generation..Ho Chi Mien had a formidable Army and wolfie could have killed for the thrill..

But alas history will prove the neo-cons for their cowardice and blood lust..
He may actually be more dangerous than cheney...

Real impressive guy.

Europeans turn thumbs down to him. What a maniacal creep. We already know he can't count.

I am still upset with Kerry but this chikenhawk bushfraud and his neo-con armchair commandos are the worst assault on Liberty in US History

He might as well be on the bench cheering Wolfowitz on to a Home Run...sheesh. NYT's how much lower can it go...

and magazines who either suck up to Bush or don't print the truth, the whole truth,
or both.

Don't give them a single dime until they start reporting real news again instead of propaganda. The only way to get their attention is by impacting their bottom line. Nothing else has worked. Let's hope money talks.

I think that this headline in NYT says it all!!--my sentiments exactly.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/17/politics/17assess.html?th
March 17, 2005


Wolfowitz Nod Follows Spread of Conservative Philosophy

By TODD S. PURDUM

WASHINGTON, March 16 - Paul D. Wolfowitz once wrote that a major lesson of the cold war for American foreign policy was "the importance of leadership and what it consists of: not lecturing and posturing and demanding, but demonstrating that your friends will be protected and taken care of, that your enemies will be punished, and that those who refuse to support you will regret having done so."

Mr. Wolfowitz's career has hewed to those same unshrinking precepts, and in nominating him for the presidency of the World Bank, President Bush simultaneously removed one of the most influential and contentious voices in his war cabinet and rewarded one of his administration's most dogged loyalists with an influential and contentious spot in a wholly new realm.

By sending Mr. Wolfowitz to the World Bank, and another outspoken administration figure, John R. Bolton, to be ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Bush all but announced his belief that both institutions could benefit from unconventional thinking and stern discipline. At the same time, Mr. Wolfowitz's resignation as deputy secretary of defense, and the planned departure this summer of Douglas J. Feith as undersecretary for defense policy, would seem to give Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who often tangled with Mr. Wolfowitz, expanded influence over national security policy and minimize public feuding - something Mr. Bush is said to want badly.

But Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney, who share many of Mr. Wolfowitz's interventionist views, remain in place, and some debates will doubtless go on.
.........

Bush expands the concept

:argh:

Hekate

The last five years have been a voyage of discovery into vast uncharted realms of retrograde lameness formerly unimaginable. It is not so much that matters have never been worse; certainly we have not nationally regressed so far back as the slavetrade or the "guilded age" of widespread child labor in openly-corrupt company towns. Bush has not really broken new ground in that respect.

However, what he has done that no other president has managed to accomplish, to my knowledge, is outright reverse decades of social and economic progress. Every president in my lifetime has attempted, sometiems in stupid ways but nonetheless sincerely, to leave the office at least as intact as it was when they took over. Bush is truly unique among presidents and perhaps all world leaders in his desire to regress, to utterly lay waste to the very infrastructure he now controls with an iron fist, but to do it in such a way that it can collapse shortly after sibling rival Jeb steals the 2008 elections. It is not so much that Bush is mistakenly steering a course for national disaster, but that he courts such disaster and proportionally rewards the malfeasance and incompetence that creates disasters.

Soon, we will disembark upon the shores of a Brave New World, which will suspiciously resemble that from which we departed 70+ years ago. This will not be due to bush's stupidity, but rather to his direct intentions, and we will generally be much poorer for them.

thats the way bush sr and cheny planned it...repukes push it through..destroy the middle class unti it collapses upon the poor and re-creates the age of wealth and privlege and American nobility ruling "with the iron fist"

bush jr has been underestimated throughout his career.. but that ain't bringing back the dead soldiers in Iraq..civilians and 9/11 victims..
I personally believe that the bush family is the most dangerous family in US and possibly world history..

The ascent of family bush and the descent of family Kennedy..since 60s

No Coincidence!

Bloaming the Cubans for the West Nile Virus (as Bolton did) is "unconventional thinking", sure enough.