Wednesday, May 26, 2004

Wingnuttery

So, Perle's now being critical. Of what? 1st, the CIA (warning: Moonie Magazine link):

Perle has no doubts that some of the attacks on him are coming directly from members of the CIA, in order to cover their own exposed rears. By attacking Chalabi's intelligence they can distract attention from their own mistakes.

"I believe that much of the CIA operation in Iraq was owned by Saddam Hussein," Perle said. "There were 45 assassination attempts against Saddam -- and he survived them all. How could that be, if he was not manipulating the intelligence?"


The real problem? Not putting Chalabi in charge as soon as possible!

"I would be the first to acknowledge we allowed the liberation (of Iraq) to subside into an occupation. And I think that was a grave error, and in some ways a continuing error," said Perle, former chair of the influential Defence Policy Board, which advises the Pentagon.

With violent resistance to the U.S.-led occupation showing no signs of ending, Perle said the biggest mistake in post-war policy "was the failure to turn Iraq back to the Iraqis more or less immediately.

"We didn't have to find ourselves in the role of occupier. We could have made the transition that is going to be made at the end of June more or less immediately," he told BBC radio, referring to the U.S. and British plan to transfer political authority in Iraq to an interim government on June 30.


Hey may have a point - Chalabi probably could have handled the reconstruction budget at least as well as Simone "Frenchy" Ledeen.

And, then we have Hoagland, who is also running with the "you should've put my buddy in charge" line:

The decision to concentrate power in the hands of the Coalition Provisional Authority rather than establish a provisional Iraqi government a year ago has had disastrous results. As Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani and others have said, that step "turned an army of liberation into an army of occupation" resented across Iraq. Liberation was successful, and ousting Hussein was a justifiable action. Denying power to Iraqis once he was gone was not. You must face that.


Yes, I know, neither says Chalabi's name, but who else? Who else?