digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Bush wants to create new "War Czar?"

washingtonpost.com — The White House wants to appoint a high-powered czar to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with authority to issue directions to the Pentagon, the State Department and other agencies, but it has had trouble finding anyone able and willing to take the job, according to people close to the situation.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • ElvisLives, on 10/12/2007, -0/+86You gotta love the line near the end of the article. Frederick W. Kagan, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, said, "It's a real problem that we don't have a single individual back here who is really capable of coordinating the effort."

    Hmm... The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State both report directly to the President...

    It is, indeed, a real problem that we don't have a single individual back here who is really capable of coordinating this effort.
    • iching, on 10/12/2007, -2/+127Isn't that job description and responsibilities already called


      THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF?
    • Verchiel77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+72Rahm Emanuel hit it on the head:

      "The Washington Post reports that the White House wants to appoint a war czar to run the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but they can't find anyone to do it. Someone needs to tell Steve Hadley that position is filled, it's the Commander in Chief, unless the decider's become the delegator."
    • trghpy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29Isn't this the job of one of those 5 star generals/admirals?
      Oh wait the generals keep retiring.
    • stupidverizon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I'll do it!
    • littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -8/+75So we have a Homeland Security Czar, and now we'll have a War Czar?

      Does this mean we're getting a new "Department of War?"

      Why is this sounding more and more like Nazi Germany every day?

      Do I need to start reading Mein Kampf?
    • Arkavus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+33@littlebylittle

      Actually the Department of Defense used to be called the Department of War until 1949 when its name was changed.

      Otherwise I pretty much agree with you, I just hope we get a new president before Bush screws up anything else...
    • oxdeltaxo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@iching

      Yeah, but since when has Bush been able to co-ordinate much else than his clothing?
    • Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26Bush can't be the War Czar, he's already the Idiot Czar.
    • okaroleo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5i assume their thinking is:
      "but... but... it worked in the 40s..."
    • iceperson, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I thought that the Congress was taking over the running of the war(s).
    • ZennZero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@trghpy

      I realize this is unrelated to the point you are making, but there hasn't been a 5-star since WWII. Technically 5 stars are only supposed to be created during times of war, and since war hasn't been formally declared, the best you are going to get is a 4-star.
    • Asianwaste, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21War Czar, I support it only because that title is too awesome. Anyone bestowed that title should be given a complimentary spiked club with decorative skull.
    • cherrick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+32War Czar? More like Scapegoat Czar.
    • rhawk301, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5You really have to appoint and war priest because the president is too busy playing golf, and dealing with all the schedules required to make as much money off the united states before the elections take hold in Jan of 2009. I mean in order to properly make decisions for war you can't travel and actually enjoy yourself, come on guys.

      It is also important to note that keeping these decisions away from the president means deny ability. USA World Police.
    • VinceNoir, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15It's more of "Attack of the Middlemen". It seems to me that the lunatic-wing that currently inhabits most of the U.S., State and many local governments is enamoured with the concept of inserting middlemen everywhere. They hire on, or nominate the most incompetent boobs for the positions that were originally in charge of these sorts of things. Then when the flunkies can't properly handle things, they begin creating new positions that really don't need to exist.

      You see it everywhere in society. For instance, where I live, I now see some "Homeland Security Police" vehicles roaming the streets. Whatever happened to the federal government working with local police and the FBI to handle "state security"? I'll tell you what. They weren't giving these ***** goons the "right answers" or generally telling the Bush dorks that they were "n00bs" and needed to ***** the hell of. So, in comes the Homeland Security Police to do an end run around REAL law enforcement (and the bill of rights). Screw you Bush! Screw you Cheney! You and all your appointed lackeys can all bite my crank.

      Beyond that, you are also seeing it in every sector of America. And do you know why? Because a large majority of the population of the United States is either too ***** lazy to educate themselves into competence, or just plain ignorant. This is why you're seeing middle managers in business who barely do anything. This is why you're seeing agency upon agency being created that duplicate the efforts of pre-existing agencies that, rightly, refuse to change their practices and policies. Don't like the answer you're getting from some organization or individual? No problem... just do an end-run around them by coming up with a new middle man position, organization or agency. Does the new guy have a ***** clue how to do his job? No? Well it doesn't matter because he, she, it, they are telling you what you want to hear. That's one big gaping reason that America sucks so bad at everything right now. We have so much dead wood in government, business and even non-profits.

      If the British are really good about bringing order and procedure to government and business, the U.S. sucks at it big time. If the Japanese are really good at inserting efficiency and high productivity (albeit at the expense of the quality of life of the employees), we suck at it because we don't even know how to spell efficiency and we've handed the task to a Bush clone middle man. The ONLY "skill" that America has today is the ability to insert itself into any situation and attempt to find ways to siphon money from it. In other words, we're a nation of worthless, slimy, and cunning middle men. We no longer place value in actually working for our money and producing. In fact, most of us are being taught that it is better to consume than produce. Bottom line: America sucks ass for the most part. So to all you talentless, unskilled middle men out there: ***** you very much. You took the soul out of America in your rise to power in less than a decade.
    • littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6"Bush is like, so dumb, and me and my friends are like, so cool, and stuff."

      ** Opens Window **

      YOU KIDS GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN !!!!!
    • audiowizard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Lock 'em up!!!! http://www.apfn.org/LEAK-GATE/arrestedRove.jpg
    • EvolvedAnt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Screw the war in Iraq! How about a new Technology Czar? We need someone who can make decisions about the troubles we have in the technological development of our nation. Someone who can concentrate 100% on fixing problems that the FCC, USPTO, RIAA, MPAA, etc all screw up on an almost daily basis! Times have changed and in this digital age we need someone intelligent who can overrule nonsense decisions made by noob judges and senators who probably think the internet is a series of tubes! Someone who is unphased by the countless big corporate lobbyists who want nothing more than make new laws while bending old ones regardless of the social and economic impact it has on America and its citizens if it means their employers make an extra buck!

      I wish there was a Technology General type position. I'd pay whatever fee's are required to run for that position, and I'd do a damn good job to boot!
    • Asianwaste, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not going to defend the war, but to accommodate your comment, a lot of technology is bred from the necessities of war.
    • EvolvedAnt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Not going to defend the war, but to accommodate your comment, a lot of technology is bred from the necessities of war."

      While true, even more technology is held back from the bloat of impractical regulations and unnecessary abuse and misuse of copyright / trademark laws.

      We need someone to fix this who is independant of the organizations that have financial gains or ties to the systems inherent to the problem.
    • financialmedia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0'Frederick W. Kagan, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, said, "It's a real problem that we don't have a single individual back here who is really capable of coordinating the effort."'

      NeoCon (leninist) behind this idea......Shocker!!
    • epsilona01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Screw the war in Iraq! How about a new Technology Czar? We need someone who can make decisions about the troubles we have in the technological development of our nation. Someone who can concentrate 100% on fixing problems that the FCC, USPTO, RIAA, MPAA, etc all screw up on an almost daily basis!"

      Keep in mind who would be appointing such a position. It's likely that you'd get someone from the RIAA, MPAA, etc, in there, and then we'd all be officially screwed. (instead of the facade they put on now)
    • Asianwaste, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Let's be progressive. Let's have a War Czarina
  • kenvsryu, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6I hear he also is looking for a y2k bug czar.
  • trevbork, on 10/12/2007, -1/+62What the ***** does Bush do all day? Apparently we have a president who sits at his desk all day rubbing his nipples and reading fantasy graphic novels on the old Czars of Russia.
    • okaroleo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Stop being unpatriotic! He's doing a fine job memorizing lines Chaney gives him.
  • tsoldrin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+41Yeah, add bureaucracy, that'll fix everything.


    It actually sounds like they want to revive the War Department... perhaps they forgot that it just got renamed the Defense Department and still exists.

    • mikelieman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+30Adding in someone else is the M.O. of the Third-Rate Corporate Executive.

      If they don't deliver, you can subsequently blame them for the failure. Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

  • DaWolfman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24"The Defense and State departments have long struggled over their roles and responsibilities in Iraq, with the White House often forced to referee."

    Yeah, God forbid that the government actually, you know, GOVERN.
    • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I think Bush plans on outsourcing government to KBR on a no-bid contract so he can get back to Crawford and clear some more underbrush.
  • southfield, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I thought we were gradually trying to get out of the Middle East, not establish a permanent watch/chokehold and a commission for enforcing it?
    • tepidpond, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No, that's the democrats that want to STOP LOSING the war in Iraq.
      Bush wants to keep killing American soldiers so that his good friends over at Halliburton will give him a nice fat check.
  • pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+40they should change the job title to what it really is, executive scapegoat
  • mage1129, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14I don't know what everyone is up in arms about whenever America identifies a losing battle they elect a Czar to be in control of it so that we can blame it on the Russians. Case and point we have a drug czar.
  • roberto_deneero, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19They should change the title of President to Dictator for the remainder of Bush's term to accurately describe his position. Obvisouly, America wants no part in this war, never did, and he's just ignoring our wishes. The idea of government by the people is that our elected officials are to carry out OUR wishes, not their own. Why has this dolt not been impeached yet?!?!
  • namelessuno, on 10/12/2007, -27/+8Americans deserve the government they have.
    • warmonger48, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27I didn't vote for him. Twice. One time the majority didn't vote for him.
    • jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9"Americans deserve the government they have. "

      Corporatism?
    • 3tcp, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Big government isn't corporate government it's authoritarian government. The government doesn't spend a lot as a hand out to corporations it spends a lot because it wants the power of a nanny-state
    • okaroleo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21I hate to say but we do deserve him. We LET special interests control our lives because we choose to not dig past the tip of that mountain. I stopped being a Republican the moment he became a nominee in 99. How the Reps didn't see that disaster coming is just beyond me.
    • diggmaddy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9To be frank, I agree with namelessuno. For those of you who come out with lame ass excuses that "we didn't vote for him", "majority didn't vote for him".... You LET HIM STEAL the elections and HE DID. It's sad that everybody likes to deny taking responsibility for something bad.

      But unfortunately, harm is not just limited to America. It's spreading to the entire world very quickly!

      Edit: Just noticed okaroleo's comment. Good to see someone here who has a sense of responsibility.
    • jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"Big government isn't corporate government it's authoritarian government. The government doesn't spend a lot as a hand out to corporations it spends a lot because it wants the power of a nanny-state"

      That's funny...then why the massive tax breaks, ex-execs in office and government positions. I guess those billions in corporate lobbies get nothing. You don't know ***** about your government.
    • sigmaman2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Agreed.

      In a country where more people care about voting for Sanjaya Malakar than George W. Bush, you shouldn't necessarily complain about the results.
    • burke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'd like to say I've no problem with America electing whatever government it (doesn't?) want, but it just affects the rest of the world so damn much. Case in point: War in Iraq, oh and the RIAA, who are practically a branch of government by this point.
  • jeffreyrowland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+32Guys it is almost springtime and the president really needs to spend time on his ranch or the brush is going to get out of control.
    • okaroleo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17I also noticed his golf swing is a little off.
  • porcupus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I think this administration is running out of people to take the blame. Smart move to create a new position to blame for failures.

    How many fall-guys must we have until we start blaming the ones in charge?
  • coldcoffee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+29My God, George Bush is one scary as dude.

    ...and all of you European haters, get a grip. All of us did NOT vote for this no talent ass clown - we dislike him as much as the rest of the world.
    • laserblazer, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6In America, we call people that hate Europeans 'provincial jackasses' or 'Klansmen' depending on the situation. The better part of us, at any rate.
  • yelow, on 10/12/2007, -18/+3"Obvisouly, America wants no part in this war, never did, and he's just ignoring our wishes."

    Obviously, you're really out of ***** touch with the majority of the country. The blue states flanking the majority of this continent don't constitute 'the majority', they're just louder.

    -Tim
    • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I guess all of those polls showing that the majority of Americans either a) wants out of Iraq now, b) want a phased withdrawal, or c) want a timetable for full withdrawal are just a lot of "blue state" lunatics and they are completely ignoring conservative *****, Indiana.
    • draculthemad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah! just because they have more people doesn't mean they have a majority or anything!

      Here is a map of the last election by actual percentage instead of result-by-state.
      http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/countymaplinear.png

      Try visiting some of the older states sometime. You will find that there is a huge difference in population density.
    • 3tcp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10On a side note, only douche bags feel the need to sign their name at the end of a forum post.

      - Some Cockfag
    • VinceNoir, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Wrong you retarded *****... The Blue states represented 49% of the voting population. In reality, the people who would have voted blue, had we not brought up side issues like gay marriage, abortion, or other unimportant claptrap would have dwarfed the idiot Red voters. Anyone who is still supporting Bush now has mental issues. You're likely paranoid and live in fear of some kind of bogeyman every day. Whether it's terrorists or brown skinned people or gays and lesbians, you're just scared little idiots unwilling to step into the 21st century. I challenge anyone who still supports Bush to tell me why you aren't mentally disturbed or possibly insane.
    • amoirae, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Vince, you forgot greed as a motive.
  • strabes, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Grow that government.... It's such a shame Bush is abandoning the ideals of Reagan conservatism.
    • jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"abandoning the ideals of Reagan conservatism"

      He would have had to embrace them first...though creating wickermen and then destroying them really is like Raygun.
    • fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Ah... Regan increased the size of the gov't more than any president before him.
  • warmonger48, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8You mean Rumsfeld is coming back!?!?
  • Arch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Borat called Bush a Warlord, isn't that enough?
  • warmonger48, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8...and that drug Czar is doing such a good job....
  • orbit1979, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"retired Marine Gen. John J. "Jack" Sheehan, a former top NATO commander who was among those rejecting the job"......"So rather than go over there, develop an ulcer and eventually leave, I said, 'No, thanks,' - Sheehan.

    Sheehan is an astute commander and has good foresight.

    "I've never agreed on the basis of the war, and I'm still skeptical," Sheehan said. "Not only did we not plan properly for the war, we grossly underestimated the effect of sanctions and Saddam Hussein on the Iraqi people."

    It's about dam time people, and more importantly those with credible backgrounds in the profession of strategy and war, to speak out against this administration and it's foreign policy.
    • newsheatdotcom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4foreign policy...... where? *runs and hides*
    • Caffeinate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The voices of intelligent, competent people have been drowned out by the PR shills the Bush Administration paid $1.4 billion to doctor the news. It looks like they have finally run out of gullible, though. I think we are beginning to see the lightbulb go off over the collective heads of the American public. It's saying "Wow, they really are that incompetent and corrupt - I wasn't the only one thinking it but not rocking the boat by being silent"!

      I honestly believe that the American people, in positions high and low, are a lot smarter than what we have currently been behaving. We've just been cowed into not speaking our opinions because most of us are neither liberals or conservatives, just Americans. The partisan political mouthpieces have lead us to believe that we can only approach issues from positions of Left or Right, rather than actually discussing Right and Wrong.
  • eraofk00l, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8lol funny how bush wants Iraq to go back to dictatorship... just change couple of words here and there, call it a democracy led by a czar. and the czar is appointed by someone outside of country... a genius idea to bring democracy to Iraq.
    • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The Czar is not in charge of Iraq....the Czar is in charge of overseeing the pentagon and state department's efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. This craptastic position has nothing to do with the actual governing of Iraq.
    • orbit1979, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"This craptastic position has nothing to do with the actual governing of Iraq."

      Given the fact that the US backed Iraqi government cannot and will not stand on its own, the US military is the only force maintaining US-backed authority in Iraq, as tenuous as it is. Therefore, this position in reality has everything to do with the actual governing of Iraq.
  • jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Give unto Cesar what is due Cesar. George the Decider has spoken.
  • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Czar - noun - Position created to oversee the previously top tier of a government department or departments so that the head(s) of said departments no longer has reason to fear their job performance negatively affecting their job security. Aforementioned Czar now assumes all negative feedback from here on out.
    • jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Nice...one guy will get the blame. Dodge the bullet. Kinda like how it was only Hitler and no one else was responsible. Same with Slobadon (spelling?) in Serbia. Blame one guy...not all the people who are involved. No wonder no one wants the job.
  • dupswapdrop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So one of Bush's friends that gave him a lot of money needs a job?
    Support our troops trim a bush today!

    • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Well it's not like we can just make every Bush donor an Ambassador to Belgium...I mean...there are only so many Belgiums in the world.
  • kodat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4LOL war czar..what an idiot..hes the one with all the decisions i guess he wants to take all the blame off his shoulders
  • Alchemist5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10What we need is another war on an idea. The War on Sin sounds perfect.
    • laserblazer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8War on Pessimism
      War on Flatulence
      War on Aggression
      War on Speaking Through Movies
      War on Running Out of Things to Make War On
    • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I would love to have a War on War. After that I think we should start to pursue operations/campaigns which feature recursive acronyms.

      Kind of like OIL.....which just stands for OIL Iran Liberation
    • 3tcp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8War on Freedom? Is that war over yet?

      I think we won... well, the government won, we lost.
  • edgeoforever, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6war tzar= scape goat for bush's blunders. Bo wonder everyone refuses the job!
  • trer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I can't believe this country is being led by such incompetent people.
    • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I can't believe it's not butter.
    • Suzilla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I can't believe I ate the whole thing.
  • pcghost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I'm all for the War Czar position being filled, as long as the person filling it is replacing the person (or demon) currently holding the reigns to this abortion of a war. That would be you George, in case you weren't sure what your actual job is.......
  • HsoKinees, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If Bush can get his hands on the Czar from Supreme Commander ( http://www.supremecommander-alliance.com/uploads/RTEmagicC_Aeon_CZAR.jpg.jpg ), then he won't be getting any ***** from any other countries lol
  • z0ltar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4How about a Decision Czar ?
  • daleok, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What's next? New Orleans/Katrina Czar? Immigration Czar? Walter Reed Hospital Czar? And on and on and on........
    • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I believe Bush will eventually want to appoint someone to the position of overseeing all of these Czar appointments (since the President is not to be expected to oversee his own appointees). Therefore we will soon usher in the position of Czar Czar. I for one nominate Zsa Zsa Gabor.
  • Cyberen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5WANTED: War Czar for the Iraq War.
    You will be expected to act as a scapegoat.
    No Exp. Necessary. Apply at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
  • harleyfrog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"We have always been at war with Oceania." Man, it's getting more and more like 1984 every day. Let's face it, America is now under a dictatorship, not a democracy. (Although some would say an idiocracy http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/ ) It's time for the citizens of this country to grow a backbone and DEMAND accountability from this administration.
  • trer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What qualified person would take a job that's set up to fail? These generals don't need the money nor the attention that such a position would put on them. I'm not surprised that no one wants this job.

    Great execution of government. Let's create ANOTHER tax-payer funded position that will accomplish nothing.
    • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6You are assuming that qualifications and competency are up there on the list of necessary traits for political appointments in the Bush administration. Apparently you've not been paying much attention :)
    • trer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@truextremicon

      True. That probably explains why Karl Rove is allowed to walk around inside the white house. I'm still not sure exactly what I'm paying him to do...
  • justice7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4who wants to sign up to be the next scapegoat?

    oh please pick me pick me .... right.
  • stepnw1f, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ja, Javul!!!!!
  • jeepndave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I thought these were the job qualification of the Commander and Chief??
  • thrallie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I was hoping we would get rid of the drug czar..and now this. More tax money down the hole.
  • bigbreasts, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1in related news, bush also placed an advertisement for a find ya own ass in the shower czar, becoz bush apparently has difficulty locating his ass from his cranium and that is why the country is screwed.

    the only good news is today is the euros have been paying 80c to call home from within their own union, apparently all those 5 cent a minute calls the us takes for granted are completely unknown to them, so we thrilled they just found out ya can call home for cheap and that cheapskate indians have been calling home for the us for less than 20 c a minute, i cant remember exactly, but i think they said like 7 cents.

    but bush cant find his ass with both hands in the shower.

    unfortunately the 2 great people, the iraqis and the palestinians are inflicted with 2 idiotic bat rat weasel vampire suckasses who get our people blown up, one is billy caldwell, who is a moronic suck ass from the 7 th circle of hell and the other is mohd dahlan who is a *****, who used to be sane but has fallen off the cliff of sanity.

    the cia knows both of them and is complicit in the stupidity of at least dahlan.

    it is so damn gross, that we wouldnt cross the street to help either mcconnell or hayden, they both such damn idiots.

    dont even get me started on faithful servitor gates who is still ***** our troops extending their tours.

    on the other hands, the euros pay like 80 c for their calls home.
    we pay 5 c.
    something must be good about us.
    at least thas what my imaginary boyfriend peter dolle from deutsche welle says, he says something must be good about us.
    then he falls on the floor laughing himself silly as the euros crush our asses.
    we dont hold it against him, but he thinks we asses

    http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,199995_4,00.jpg
    this is a photo of my handsome imaginary boyfriend peter dolle
    please call deutsche welle and say he is a powerful force for world peace while billy caldwell and mohd dahlan are rat weasel vampire suckasses who ***** their own people.
    malachai constant.
    someone up there loves us.
    adios kurt, we miss ya already.

    also, david letterman, happy birthday and make sure ya tell folks billy caldwell eats babies and drinks blood, just like mohd dahlan, thanks.
  • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I remember there being a "scapegoat" at this petting zoo I went to as a kid. Little bearded thing with a Houdini complex.
  • Ninnux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Isn't this responsibility already covered by the Secretary of Defense? Maybe he should create a new cabinet position called the "Secretary of Offense."
  • sKizZz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They should make a secretary of science.
    Bill Nye.
  • abatch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Give the idea a chance. Things worked out well for the last country that used czars right?
    • FearlessFreep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1well we have a Drug Czar and we see how well that's working out
  • jlebrech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Send in Master Chief or Chuck Norris.
  • dagamer34, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's called "spread the blame" game. Bush and Co. are pretty good at it. Already blemished Col. Powell's career and now they're looking for fresh meat!
  • iupetre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Did the politicians actually use the word "Czar?" Or, was that inserted by the WP? Either way, I don't like this idea.
  • SirGunslinger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0He could always make it the "Warchief" instead of the "War Czar". I'm sure a WoW fanboy could fit the position quite well... I mean even a stopped clock works twice a day right?
  • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Eisenhower was Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in WWII, so this position isn't completely wack. I wonder what the reaction would have been if Bush had been seeking to fill a Supreme Commander position?
    • IckyChris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Eisenhower was still under General Marshall and the Sec of War and the President.
    • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So why not make a General of the Army?

      We never had all these Czars before Richard Nixon's "Drug Czar". People called his term in office the Imperial Presidency. George Bush makes Richard Nixon look like a Libertarian.
  • masterkenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I nominate this guy:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jafar_(Aladdin)
  • StarWarsFan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"The very fundamental issue is, they don't know where the hell they're going," said retired Marine Gen. John J. "Jack" Sheehan.

    What a great quote.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.