NationStates Jolt Archive

Does the US President really think that Wolfowitz has a chance to gain the post? As US Deputy Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz was one of the main "architects" of the globally unpopular Iraq War, and he is one of the big neocons in Washington DC.

Do you think he has a chance to get the presidency of the World Bank?

I think that Bush nominated him to provoke and annoy. Why would he do that?

For power consolidation maybe?

The White House single handedly circumvented the UN and eliminated any chance of it being a stable, respectable body. Maybe he is trying a power grab on the World Bank, too.

It would be a major power play over China and Middle Eastern nations. It would also give the US a trump card over most of South America and Russia as well.

I like him as a politician, but I think that he may not be good, as he has no eperience in finance. That being said, I think that this may be a great oppritunitiy for the White House's vision to gain a new platform easily.

I think that Bush nominated him to provoke and annoy. Why would he do that?
He appointed Wolfiwitz, a man with virtually no banking experience to head the World Bank for the exact same reason Laura is in charge of a gang violence task force: He is fucking retarded.

I think Bush decides he trusts certain people and then uses them as much as possible rather than risk new, possibly untrustworthy faces. He strikes me as the kind of person who puts personal loyalty above most all else.

People who stuck with Bush:
- Kept Cheney in election
- Shifted Condi to State
- Shifted Negroponte to intel czar
- Shifted Wolfowitz to World Bank

People who split ways publicly on some issue:
- Christie Todd Whitman lost the EPA
- Colin Powell's losing State

I think Bush decides he trusts certain people and then uses them as much as possible rather than risk new, possibly untrustworthy faces. He strikes me as the kind of person who puts personal loyalty above most all else.

People who split ways publicly on some issue:
- Christie Todd Whitman lost the EPA
- Colin Powell's losing State

Powell said after the 2000 election was set that he would be a one term member of the cabinet. So that was no surprise when he finally said I am leaving. Whitman said in 2003 that 2004 would be it and would not stay on. So again not a surprise that both of them stepped down as they said they would years before. How hard is it to remember these things?

the other that were moved, well it would be stupid to put people in those position that you didn't trust. Every President prior did the same thing, you always reward loyalty above all else. Look at Clinton and Janet Reno, she is possible the stupidest person ever to hold that position. But Clinton trusted her and he even put Girrleic ( spelling) in there to watch over the idiot Reno to make sure she didn't make to many mistakes. There were many more over the years just have to look and pay attention during the time of that President to know who he trusts. This is something else that is funny to listen to concerning Bush. As if he is somehow doing something that no other President has ever done.

Does the US President really think that Wolfowitz has a chance to gain the post? As US Deputy Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz was one of the main "architects" of the globally unpopular Iraq War, and he is one of the big neocons in Washington DC.

Do you think he has a chance to get the presidency of the World Bank?

I think that Bush nominated him to provoke and annoy. Why would he do that?


Yes, your president does think he as a good chance to win the post, mainly because the gentleman's agreement between Europe and the USA that basically says that the USA picks the world bank boss, and Europe picks the International Monetary Fund boss. He didnt nominated him to provoke and annoy anyone, thought that is what he is doing (there goes the ass kissing efforts he tried to do in Europe), he nominated him because by being the world bank leader, Wolfwitz will be able to control the lending of that institution.. and he will make sure that the World Bank agenda matches Bush's agenda, that is, the world bank is going to start focusing in Arab countries, forgetting African and South American countries. This because bush offcourse, needs every help he can get in controling Arab countries, either militarely or economicaly. Since the USA got its hands full in Iraq in military terms, they must focus in more "soft" tools to control that area, and that area's vast oil resources.


EDIT: International Monetary fund, not world monetary fund duhhh

Does the US President really think that Wolfowitz has a chance to gain the post? As US Deputy Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz was one of the main "architects" of the globally unpopular Iraq War, and he is one of the big neocons in Washington DC.

Do you think he has a chance to get the presidency of the World Bank?

I think that Bush nominated him to provoke and annoy. Why would he do that?


Wickedness, the bush administration naturally rewards what is worst.

The BBC has a good article on it here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4358045.stm

I don't think Wolfowitz's involvement with an unpopular war is relevant to the post of head of the World Bank. What is more relevant is his lack of involvement in finance and and his spotty record on humanitarian work.

What I mean about the humanitarian bit is just that his predictions about reconstruction in Iraq - indeed, post-war Iraq in it's entirety - were completely off. This kind of foresight is not what I would desire of the World Bank.

Unfortunately, Bush is, as has been accurately described, very concerned with personal loyalty and trustworthiness [he looked in Putins' eyes, remember?]. If he feels that Wolfowitz can handle it, he'll do it.

I would also note that Wolfowitz is a terrible politician. Look into his record as a public servant prior to his post in the White House.