Perle is unflappable. He is not the least deterred by setbacks in Iraq. He claims credit for the quick initial "victory" in 2003, but eschews blame for anything that followed. Evidently, his signature idea for the occupation was to have none at all. The US was to register Chalabi in the presidential palace and exit fast. There is no need for him to defend what never happpened and (he knows this) never would have happened.

Perle is brilliant in accusing Iraq in passive voice. The approach is "Bush knows" or "Bush should know" followed by some malignant allegation. This is much easier than offer proof (or to take blame if it turns out false). It also plays on Bush's insecurity or fear of not being up to task on a topic. If Bush ought to know something, better to pretend he does so that no one thinks him a dummy.

Perle says he supports hard lined diplomacy, but does not appear convinced about where this will lead. He thinks an air strike will set back Iran's nuclear programs. He does not say how much larger this strike might have to be than the Desert Fox strikes against Iraq in 1998. But, oh, those are just dirty details for grunts.

Perle's job is to start wars, not fight them. Invisible in war, invincible in peace.

The real question is why the Washington Post published Richard Pearle's commnetary. Does any nitwit get to use this powerful newspaper's editorial column to stump for war.

Richard Perle: try looking him up at wikipedia.com, or google his name. You will find:

1) SEC investigations into his plunder of Hollinger Digital, of which he was a board member.
2) allegations of corruption at Global Crossing.
3) Loral Space, his company, transferred rocket technology to China, perhaps illegally.
4) serious and substantial accusations about his spying for Israel in the 1970s.
5) his connection to Trireme Partners, which profited from the war in Iraq.
6) his push, while working for the government, for the Army to buy an armaments system from an Israeli company that for which he had been a consultant.

Okay, so he was the neocon leader of the Defense Policy Board. Okay, so he was a primary architect of the Iraq war. Okay, so he is a big neocon heavyweight. But after his duious ideas about Iraq, his love for Chalabi, and his completely sordid business and political history, can we relegate him to the dustbin of history, like his old archenemy The Soviet Union? Stop giving this man - the co-chair of the Jerusalem Post - a voice to speak to our nation. Want to get a conservative view for your paper? Fine. But this man is a war profiteer. This man's priorities are twofold: Israel's future and his own bank account. Just because he is a catch at Beltway cocktail parties and arch-conservative thinktanks doesn't mean his ideas are worth merit, nor does it mean they are not.

But what he says is best for America - when you look at his track record - must immediately be called into question, as must his patriotism.

Do not do yourself - and your readers - a disservice, Washington Post. No more Perle editorials.

Perle should be relegated to the dustbin along with all the neocons who pushed for the invasion of Iraq. They are despicable-casuing the deaths of so many people and the destruction of a country. Yes, Saddam was terrible; but, going to war without any serious planning showed a lack of concern for human beings. All the neocons and their friends profitted from the Iraq war. I hope they all go to hell.

...a cynic might dismiss R.PERLE out of
hand on his views as they surely are not
being fleshed out well in iraq.
...a closer looking cynic might conclude
that these guys who signed off on the
NAC[NEW AMERICAN CENTURY]treatise...guys
like DICK CHENEY...are likely just itching
for a war-runup with Iran...it is not
unlikely that the vaderish cheney is even
now pulling levers and pushing buttons to
derail any peaceful outcome over atomic
issues with Iran...
...this Bush WH has displayed little review
and rethink on the current state it finds
itself in Iraq...essentially the take has
been to attack anyone who disagrees with
smears,character slams or implied lack
of patriotic fervor...and it seems often
enought to get away with doing so...
...it certainly remains to be seen how
iraq will be stitched back together...any
cynic would have long ago concluded that
if it were not for the oil or perhaps some
Israeli position of preference the USA
would never have toppled Saddam...africa
and parts of the former soviet union have
known guys as bad calling the shots...make
that literal in many cases...
...sadly men like perle and cheney seem
zealous enough to desire for others to go
die for how they view the world...
...perhaps it would be an improvement on
current events in the world if those who
advocate sending people into strife and
dances with death had to decamp and go
spend the days and nights right along
with those doing the killing and dying...
...perhaps as with the apostle paul there
would be a change of heart and thinking
on the way or while there...if not...death
is an equal agent...they might not return
as they went...happens to lots of people
these days in iraq...

Somebody should tell Perle that Bush administration will definitely not be drawn in a military conflict with Iran. US got involved in Iraqi because Cheney thought it "doable".

Iran is not doable.

I'm still quite disturbed that a few VERY dangerous, self-serving, conscienceless men have gotten so much control and there is SOOOO little we can do to get it back.

Alas.

Perle doesn't like Condi Rice and the diplomacy-loving state department types? Just what does he think the state department is for. Of course, his pal Rumsfeld said even before 9/11 that the defense department was going to be responsible for foreign policy. Much to the surprise of Colin Powell.
Guys like Perle, Rumsfeld, and Cheney would rather see the last resort, military intervention, used first and not use diplomacy at all.

Mr. Perle seemed a little "defensive" today. In a classic case of insecurity, he responded to questions with questions. Why is that?

This gentleman's credibility is now in a spiderhole somewhere, and judging by his defiant, anti-historical worldview, he won't be screwing up our foreign policy any more because nobody could possibly believe a word he is saying. Right?

God Save the USA.

thank you all you bloggers for telling the sad truth about warmonger perle who is a crook to boot. I agree that the Washington Post erred in giving him a forum . Too bad we won't have a nuremberg trial for all those who waged war and plunged the world into misery once again.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.