Tuesday May 20, 2008 | Col. Ann Wright

May 19, 2008 at 3:29 pm | Posted in On Air | 15 Comments

Veteran and former U.S. diplomat Col. Ann Wright made headlines when she resigned from  foreign service in protest of the war in Iraq.  She has written about that experience and about her beliefs in Dissent: Voices of Conscience.

Listen to Show

Advertisements

15 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-bugliosi/the-prosecution-of-george_b_102427.html

    “in 152 out of 152 cases, Bush refused to show mercy even once, finding that not one of the 152 convicted killers should receive life imprisonment instead of the death penalty.”

    Hmm…what next?

  2. Is Col. Wright hosting a book signing or speaking in Charlotte?

  3. Mike only brings opposition questions to people who he personally disagrees with. Case in point, with this interview he leads the witness several times by bringing up several points, affixing them with ‘if true’ before agreeing with it completely. WFAE should be doing opposition research to separate where Ann has a point and where she is being partisan.

    It’s very telling that there are never any stories about the good news in the war. And if there were, he’d have it gutted up with opposition questions.

  4. Gary, it’s called playing “Devil’s Advocate.” At least someone is asking questions in this market about how our current administration behaves. The current level of political discourse in our country is at an all-time low. I applaud Mike for having a reasoned discussion with this woman.

    At the very least, it’s better than listening to some blow hard telling his minions he wants the country in chaos during the election year.

  5. Warren, Mike did not once even bother playing the devil’s advocate with Ann. There was not a single challenging question in the entire interview even when Ann was blatantly talking outside her area of expertise such as economics, diplomacy [that’s the state department’s job], and international law.

    Discourse moves the argument forward. This interview was an echo chamber pure and simple.

  6. correction, ann does have state department experience. though mike could have questioned her more in-depth about original premise of an ‘illegal’ war because the UN security council didn’t authorize it. They never would have done such a thing, principally because several of its members had illegal money for oil schemes going with Saddam that were highly profitable. These include France and China. Ann would have known this when she gave her resignation letter to Powell and she should have answered to this disconnect on the show.

  7. Great points Gary, I agree totally. In Bush’s speech to the UN on 9/12/2002 he went through most of the 17 resolutions that Hussein had violated. The oil for food scandal that you refer to was one. Bush talked about human rights,prisoners from the Kuwait invasion ,our jets routinely being shot at and many other things besides WMD. BTW our jets were patrolling the no fly zone to protect the Kurds who were gassed by Hussein with WMD that he evidently never had. Regime change in Iraq had been the US policy since HR4655 “The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998”. In a post 9/11 world I believe any responsible President would have removed Hussein. That includes Al Gore had he been elected. The premise, that if we hadn’t invaded Iraq we would be safer than we are now, is seriously flawed. In my opinion we’d be much worse off but it’s impossible to know. Ann (and sadly Mike)seem to assume that they do know and that we’d have been just fine.

  8. Was Saddam a bad guy? Yep. But our ADD Commander-In-Chief says things like, “Bin Laden is wanted dead or alive,” one day and then months later comes up with the, “I don’t think about Bin Laden all the time.” Houdini himself is probably amazed at the amount of misdirection we’ve experienced as a nation over the last seven + years. He took his eyes away from what he should’ve been doing (tracking down Bin Laden) to resolve his “Daddy Issues.” Of course, that’s just my theory.

    Billions of dollars spent, thousands of our young men and women dead, thousands of Iraquis dead, all for something that would be over in a few weeks? Don’t tell me I’m the only person who remembers these predictions? And we still hear from Bin Laden on a fairly regular basis.

  9. It’s not about something as small and petty as revenge. It’s about changing the face of the Middle East because the oceans that separate us no longer protect us. Al Qaida has been decimated. Terrorism fatalities worldwide are way down. Bin Laden is huddling in a cave.
    Every death is a tragedy. Rape, murder and torture (real torture)by Sadaam’s thugs were the norm before we got there. Now these people have a shot at lasting peace. Our brave soldiers are heros and many paid the ultimate price. That includes the 4,417 military deaths during Clinton’s first term.

  10. Warren is correct about the bin laden hunt. It does need to happen, though it would involve invading Pakistan, which isn’t feasible at this time [at least openly]. We’re just going to have to make do with isolating this foe for now. I appreciate the demand for bin laden ‘now now now’ especially because it has become political. But contrast this hunt with Eric Rudolph, who eluded a federal manhunt for seven yrs. He had no network of support and was hiding in the US woodlands not 200 miles from DC. These were prime conditions for our government to capture a fugitive without international barriers and it still took a lucky accident to apprehend him. Finally some good news [of which Bush deserves some credit after being blamed for ‘not making america safer’]: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/War_Terror/2008/05/21/5630796-cp.html

  11. I do think Bin Laden needs to be killed and didn’t mean to imply otherwise. It would send a message throughout the Middle East. It would quiet the Bush bashers… for a few minutes. Important as that is it’s much more symbolic than tactical. It would not make us safer. That was the point I was trying to make. I suppose Eric Rudolph would have been caught sooner if we put every resource available into finding him and ignored all other crimes. Warren seems to saying that we should have gone after Bin Laden at all cost and ignored Iraq. That’s what I inferred anyway and I disagree. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize Bush and the war I just don’t think the “took his eyes away from what he should’ve been doing (tracking down Bin Laden) to resolve his Daddy Issues” argument is one of them.

  12. concur

  13. Gregg and Gary,

    I want to invite you both to submit your names for inclusion on our Average Joe show. We are seeking perspectives such as your. I hope you will consider emailing us at charlottetalks@wfae.org to submit if you haven’t already. Gregg, your name seems very familiar. I don’t produce the Avg. Joe shows, but if you’ve already been on, forgive me and ignore this appeal

  14. Tim,
    I was an “Average Joe” on the second episode. Thanks for the invite anyway. I’d encourage Gary to do it!

  15. Gregg,

    I thought your name sounded familiar. The guy who runs a stable near my ancestral home of Statesville? That may be a bad guest, but it’s amazing to think of how long the Average Joe show has been going on now. Thanks to you guys! So join the “Joe’s” Gary.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: