Powell is still head and shoulders above any remnants of the Bush regime even if he, lacking omniscience, chose not to martyr himself.

Some people blame God for installing the Bush administration, but God will tell you that it was a man-made affliction, since they stole the election despite his/her vehement objections. When they morphed after September 11 and focused on Iraq, Powell was as bewildered as anyone else. The Iraq war has been a zero-sum game in favor of the military corporate complex which in this case includes the energy sector. This pump-priming crew is not to be deterred by one individual, not even Powell if he was 100% sure of his own infallibility on the issue.

The fact that people seek unimpeachable virtue from this man when America has embraced mediocrity over the past 40 years from the executive branch, to Congress, to the Supreme Court, is the height of hypocrisy. As every estate in this country including the fourth estate resets their mealy mouths and policies in the face of continouous failure in Iraq, Powell is a handy straw man, after all if he fell on his sword can we be blamed for our inadequacies? Get over Powell and hold those who directed him fully responsible

Blumenthal describes Powell as "simmering" and resentful of the way he and the country were lied to and used. Also, that he's keeping a lid on his anti-war sentiments now, just barely.

What evidence does he have for that? What makes us believe that he really is that worked up about anything?

Cheney has always had some kind of hold on Powell. I can remember them giving press conferences together during the first Persian Gulf War, when Cheney was Secretary of Defense and Powell was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Cheney did most of the serious talking and answering of questions. Powell definitely knew who was boss. We are all sixteen years older, but not much has changed. Cheney and the neocons are prepared to deal harshly with Powell should he turn coat on them, and they have a number of levers. They can easily arrange for Powell to be booted from his sundry sinecures as director on the boards of defense industries. They can bring up his role in trying to cover up the My Lai massacre way back when. They can really ruin his reputation with a campaign in their house organs, such as the Weekly Standard, the New York Post, and the Wall Street Journal. They can have li'l Billy Kristol trash him with impunity on his network commentator spot. Sid Blumenthal

can't prevent that. Powell never was much of a leader anyway; he was always being used as front man and token by his superiors in the Army, then the Bush I White House, then the Bush II White House. Cheney is still boss, and Powell fears the boss.

Armitage was always the real leader and real warrior, from Viet Nam sailor days onward. He is also the real patriot here, and the only match for Darth Vader/Dick Cheney.

Methinks Powell is not Banquo's ghost. A much lesser man he. Banquo's ghost would not have stood quiet all this time, unless he were guilty of knowingly going along, for which you give ample evidence. I do not expect he will come back to live a life he never lived. I hope, too, I am wrong.

Stuart Cooke

Shanghai, P.R. China

Some have said that Colin Powell didn't run for president because his wife was fearful of what might happen to him and made him promise that he wouldn't do it. Whereas this may or may not be farfetched, I think it is quite possible that the Bush Administration is in a position to make Powell and his family fearful if not miserable should he speak out against them. Having had a military career, with it's obligation to respect the rules of the chain of command, Powell may simply be unable to bring himself to transcend that ingrained habit. He may also even yet be unable to admit to himself that he is wrong in supporting the insupportable.

Powell and his buddies have probably already discussed everything at Bohemian Grove.

I doubt Powell will stand up. Powell and Rumsfeld had a fundamental disagreement as to how the Iraq war should be prosecuted. Rumsfeld wanted to go in, knock off Saddam, install the Chalabi government, and then exit. This is essentially the small footprint plan that the WH followed in Afghanistan: Defeat the Taliban, install the Karzai government, and then retreat to the perimeter.

History has shown that Karzai hasn't been able to hold it together and Chalabi probably wouldn't have either. But the fact of the matter is that Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush blame Powell for getting us stuck in Iraq. If Powell speaks now, that will just be an invitation for Rumsfeld to fire back and blame the whole sorry mess on Powell.

The inside story as to why we abandoned the Rumsfeld plan in Iraq hasn't really been told (to my knowledge). Once it is, questions about Powell's judgment and influence on Iraq policy are going to get some serious scrutiny. Not only will Powell have to explain his role as enabler, he'll also have to explain his role in creating the Iraq mess.

It is sad that Blumenthal neglects to review Powell's biggest lies. His coverup of the Mai Lai massacre is well-known. But more recently, and more relevant, is the contradiction between Powell's assessment of Iraq's lack of danger to anyone in February 2001 and his later change of story to support the supreme international crime--the crime against peace--of an illegal, immoral invasion of a defenseless, resource-rich nation in March, 2003.

Here is the evidence:

Powell told the real story of the Iraq threat in a public forum with the Foreign Minister of Egypt on February 24, 2001.

Note especially the last two sentences in light of his lying UN presentation in 2003.

“We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions — the fact that the sanctions exist — not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein’s ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.”

www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2001/933.htm

Oh. One more thing. The sanctions he praises killed about 500,000 Iraqi children according to Unicef.

“Ms. Bellamy noted that if the substantial reduction in child mortality throughout Iraq during the 1980s had continued through the 1990s, there would have been half a million fewer deaths of children under-five in the country as a whole during the eight year period 1991 to 1998.”

http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm

How could Blumenthal write about whether Powell will "finally tell the truth" and neglect to report his biggest lies?