Opinion: Tale of the Tape: Maliki v. Bush
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley didn’t mince words in his Nov. 8 memo on Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki’s failings, criticizing him for his political weaknesses. As many bloggers and pundits have noticed, some of the criticisms have a familiar ring.
Hadley on Maliki: “He impressed me as a leader who wanted to be strong but was having difficulty figuring out how to do so.”
Former Bush speechwriter David Frum on Bush: “[He was] a very unfamiliar type of heavyweight. Words often failed him, his memory sometimes betrayed him....”
Hadley on Maliki: “The information he receives is undoubtedly skewed by his small circle of Dawa advisers, coloring his actions and interpretation of reality.”
Former CIA analyst Paul Pillar: “The Bush administration deviated from the professional standard not only in using policy to drive intelligence, but also in aggressively using intelligence to win public support for its decision to go to war. This meant selectively adducing data--’cherry-picking’--rather than using the intelligence community’s own analytic judgments.”
Hadley on Maliki: “[Maliki should] Shake up his cabinet by appointing nonsectarian, capable technocrats in key service (and security) ministries.”
Veteran White House journalist Helen Thomas: “It’s time for President Bush to shake up his Cabinet, starting with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and some of his cohorts at the Pentagon who have made so many costly mistakes.”
Hadley on Maliki: “He may simply not have the political or security capabilities to take such steps.”
Former Clinton chief of staff Leon Panetta: “He has really burned up whatever mandate he had from that last election.”