« Minnesota Supremes: Franken Can Ask For His Immediate Certification...In Three Weeks | Home | Election Central Morning Roundup »
Cheney Takes On Torture, The Flaws Of The Iraqi People, And The Deaths In Iraq
Dick Cheney just conducted a farewell interview with Jim Lehrer, and it was a doozy.
For one thing, Cheney brushed off today's report in the Washington Post about Pentagon official Susan Crawford, who said that a 9/11 suspect was tortured, and dismissed the idea that there was a coordinated policy of torture:
As we dig in and look at hundreds of cases, we may well find a few people who were not properly treated. You know, I ran the Pentagon. I know that you can't absolutely guarantee, at all times, that everybody's doing it the way they're supposed to be doing it.
I can tell you what the policy was; I can tell you that we had all the legal authorization to do it, including the sign-off of the Justice Department. I can tell you it produced phenomenal results for us, and that a great many Americans are alive today because we did all that. And I think those are the important considerations.
Cheney did fault himself for having overestimated the ability of the Iraqi people to "bounce back" after the U.S. invasion, blaming the chaos on years of oppression under Saddam Hussein:
MR. LEHRER: The president has also said that he made some mistakes in the last eight years. Did you make any?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, make mistakes - I can think of places where I underestimated things. For example, talking about Iraq, the extent of which the Iraqi population had been beaten down by Saddam Hussein was greater than I anticipated. That is, we thought that the Iraqis would be able to bounce back fairly quickly once Saddam was gone or the new government established and step up and take major responsibilities for governing Iraq, building a military and so forth and that took longer than I expected.
Cheney said the deaths in Iraq, both American and Iraqi, have been worth it becuase of Saddam Hussein's connection to terrorism in the post-9/11 world -- not that Saddam was connected to 9/11, except that he was:
MR. LEHRER: Mr. Vice President, getting from there to here, 4500 Americans have died, at least a hundred thousand Iraqis have died. Has it been worth that?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: I think so.
MR. LEHRER: Why?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Because I believed at the time that what Saddam Hussein represented was, especially in the aftermath of 9/11, was a terror-sponsoring state - so designated by the State Department. He was making payments to the families of suicide bombers; he provided a safe haven and sanctuary for Abu Nidal and other terrorist operations. He had produced and used weapons of mass destruction, chemical and biological agents. He'd had a nuclear program in the past. He killed hundreds of thousands of his own people and he did have a relationship with al Qaeda. Now, we've had this debate, keeps people trying to conflate those arguments. That's not to say that Saddam was responsible for 9/11; it is to say - as George Tenet, CIA director testified in open session in the Senate - that there was a relationship there that went back 10 years.
Advertisement
Follow-up question: If most of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabie, do you regret not attacking the Saudis?
January 14, 2009 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me be the first to say that either Cheney is daring the political climate to start War Crimes Investigation or he knows that tomorrow's Presidential Address will be a blanket pardon and he is thumbing his nose at the world.
He can play this game, my guess is that the rest of the world will not. I think there is enough motivation for the US Congress to force an investigation with subpoena power, and if he and they are pardoned than there is no reason to not be compelled to testify. This then goes to the razor since if he and others testify they must do it under threat of perjury.
Then if they give up the goods it does not preclude the Hague to commence their own investigation if the US is unable to prosecute which then moves toward an International Crisis where what if Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi et all are indicted for war crimes in the Hague....will the US then give them up?
Let us say no, we thumb our moral authority nose at the world.
Okay now let us say Cheney & Bush in a trip to Dubai and his plane experiences engine trouble or worse he has a medical emergency over the Mediterranean and they have to land in Italy or France or Spain?
Then what if Cheney & Bush are arrested in said country and then handed over to the Hague?
what then?
January 14, 2009 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
We wouldn't need to wait for the plane to have an in-flight emergency requiring an emergency landing in a civilized country.
The US government has set the precedent of sending up fighters to intercept an airliner carrying wanted people in international airspace and forcing a landing. I refer you to the capture of the Achille Lauro hijackers in October, 1985 (severely pissing off the Italians, whose airspace was used, I might add).
This was approved by St. Ronald of Reagan, so I don't see how the GOP could possibly object. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Achille_Lauro for a brief outline.
January 14, 2009 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
As every other disgraced Republican thay perhaps shall simply remove themselves from further public view (Rove, uncannily, well, except for the "liberal media" leaving him alone, remains MORE in public view).
I doubt Bush or Cheney would EVER go anywhere overseas except for perhaps to our allies England and... and... and... um, well, England.
January 14, 2009 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good old Cheney. It's always the other guy's fault.
January 14, 2009 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"...the extent of which the Iraqi population had been beaten down by Saddam Hussein was greater than I anticipated".
Interesting interpretation. Cheney seems to have a strong ability to characterize his mistakes as the shortcomings of an entire population.
January 14, 2009 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney is a f*cking disgrace of a human being! To blame the Iraqi people for not responding they way he wanted them to when he blew apart their world. I know the chances of there being some kind of justice is minimal but how i would rejoice to see them in front of the Hague.
January 14, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another follow-up:
Do you feel your parents were especially prescient when they gave you your first name?
January 14, 2009 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would suspect Cheney's reflexes are not as good as Bush's. Wouldn't you just love to see a PF Flyer label in the center of his forhead?
January 14, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney knows he's not going to be investigated because it would bring down too many Dems with him. He'll go out naming names, and with top secret clearance for eight years, the truth is that he knows too much.
Bush and Cheney were re-elected in 2004. All the things folks want Bush and Cheney legally strung up for were done before their re-election and known to anybody who was paying attention.
January 14, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
But I'm betting that under his watch the CIA has curare darts that will render him a mute zombie, eliminating any leverage.
January 14, 2009 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a horrible person.
January 14, 2009 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dick.
January 14, 2009 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Try Prick!
January 14, 2009 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Arrogant Prick
January 14, 2009 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember that this farewell victory lap was Karl Rove's last, best bright idea. From comments almost EVERYWHERE, it would seem the program isn't going that well, except as fodder for commentators & maybe psychoanalysts.
The Constant Weader at RealityChex.com
January 14, 2009 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Why Didn't The Iraqis 'Bounce Back' More Quickly?"
Cheney speak for:
Why Didn't The Iraqis 'Roll Over' And Allow Us To Take Their Oil More Quickly?
Bush/Cheney ~The Hague '09
January 14, 2009 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
If one thinks like Cheney, one can ignore a pardon (assuming that Bush gives him one) by declaring Cheney (and Bush, while we're at it) to be an illegal combatant. The beauty of this would be obviating the need for due process, trials, right to legal representation, etc. Cheney could just be locked up and the key thrown away. Of course, we can't do this, because we are civilized. But Cheney has done this to others. Perhaps turnabout would be fair play.
January 14, 2009 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interchange on PBS reminded me of a Tom Cruise movie. Interview with a vampire/////Psycho
January 14, 2009 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
DSM=IV criteria for diagnosis of Narcissistic personality disorder
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique
4. requires excessive admiration
5. has a sense of entitlement
6. is interpersonally exploitative
7. lacks empathy
8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
January 14, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whoops. "Lacks empathy" should have been bolded and italicized.
January 14, 2009 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
You should have done an entire blog on this.
This is great. Wiki is not a PDR but, this is really great.
All we need is a person with an MD to sign a piece of paper and get this guy on a 72 hour hold.
January 15, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
sfc Wallace fits the criteria.
January 14, 2009 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL.
January 14, 2009 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why waste our time with this article, just ask SFC Wallace.
January 14, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am so glad I had to work late tonight. I don't think I could watch this in real-time without being dominated by nervous ticks. I'll take it all in later, happy for the benefit of a pause button to take 'break things and swear loudly' breaks as needed.
January 14, 2009 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't kknow if I'm the first on the Left Coast to check in, but I forced myself to watch the entire interview. What I found amusing (the only thing, and ironic amusement at that) was how Jim Lehrer's voice steadily increased in pitch as Cheney answered follow-up questions about the wars, economy, and overall responsibility.
It's a good thing Lehrer had that bypass operation last year.
January 14, 2009 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is quite clear that Cheney is a pathological liar. I mean, Bush looks like he is constantly fighting some kind of a conscience -- Bush says whatever he thinks will portray himself as a strong "Texan Male of substance" (or whatever he imagines his persona to be) -- but Cheney is completely pathological and lives totally in some weird la-la-land of his own making.
January 14, 2009 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
For this extraordinary delusionist, I recommend extraordinary rendition.
January 14, 2009 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
The victory lappers, which include -- have you noticed? -- Perino, seem to be all about how their legacy is what hasn't happened on their watch. Another 9/11. They kept Americans safe for seven years.
I can imagine historians in the next century marveling at that achievement.
January 14, 2009 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
They didn't listen to Richard Clarke and others who told them during their transition that terrorism was the hottest issue, and instead pursued porn pogroms at Justice, and missile defense tom foolery instead of sober national security planning.
They didn't listen to Tenet in July 2001 or respond to their apocalyptic briefing papers in August 2001. They have kept us completely safe for 8 years, except that by their loutishness they allowed 9/11 to happen even though they were warned many times.
January 15, 2009 8:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I believe that Cheney will be perceived as a blight on the American system of government. Although he seems to be the consummate power broker, Cheney lacks any appreciation of the American rebellious spirit.
Remember that America was founded by terrorists who were opposing the tyranny of British fascist rule. The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, these are all standing against a dictatorial style of government. Althugh they are tattered now, I like to think that America still harbors some of the old spirit.
Cheney has demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of these documents, and indeed represents the very mindset America fought against. A blight on the American system of government.
BP
January 14, 2009 11:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
A perfect sociopath, if ever there was one. They should bring back the racks just for him. After all, he luuuves torture.
January 14, 2009 11:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I recall reading an article in the WSJ in '81 or so when Cheney had just been named SoD. Seems he got lost in the Pentagon and was late for an appointment. Finally found his way out, straightened his tie, squared his shoulders and strode purposefully to his car. The article made the point that he didn't apologize or explain anything, ever, even then.
January 15, 2009 1:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm glad I didn't see this interview. Just reading it was enough to do bad things to my digestive system.
Five more days. Just five more days.
January 15, 2009 3:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, then that f***in' sociopath is gone and our darkest time is finally over.
January 15, 2009 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
But the precedents will persist unless Congress acts to expressly prohibit them.
And the depravity -- the demolishing of or moral/human rights standing -- and the stain of that will persist for at least decades, even if all those caused it is reversed.
January 15, 2009 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney: "I ran the Pentagon."
Since when does the VP run the Pentagon? Isn't that the Sec of Defense's job? Doesn't the Sec of Def answer directly to the president?
What Cheney really meant was "I kept Bush coked up so I could run the country."
(I'm only half-joking about that last comment.)
January 15, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Debbie, do not forget, Cheney was not even part of the executive branch when he decided to run the Pentagon. Maybe it was just another example of outsourcing.
January 15, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney actually WAS Secretary of Defense for George H.W. Bush (41), so he DID run the Pentagon back in those days.
-- ARG
January 15, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is the guy who thinks go *u*k yourself is how to greet people and show respect.
When you lie all the time and hang out with people that lie all the time there is no necessity for truth.Why bother.Why confuse the game at this stage?
January 15, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink