Talk:Colin Powell/archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

A question for American Wikipedians - is the pronounciation of "Colin" in "Colin Powell" the typical American pronounciation of the name? In Australia, the typical pronounciation of that first name is "Col-in" with the first syllable rhyming with "doll", and I'm wondering whether Mr. Powell's version is just the typical US pronounciation or something idiosyncratic to him. --Robert Merkel

I can't speak for all Americans but the only time I have heard "Colin" (koh'lin) or its spelling variants pronounced the way Powell does, is in relation to Powell. The other pronunciations I've heard are variants of kah'len or kah'lin (very similar to your example). This choice of common pronunciation might have something to do with the similarity of our pronunciation of the former general's first name and colon (koh'lon). I know I wouldn't want to have a name that sounded like a part of the digestive system -- but then, that's just me. --maveric149

I believe that Colin Powell's name is pronounced like "colon" because one of his parents is Jamaican, and that may be the Jamaican pronounciation. Ordinarily, "Colin" is pronunced as you both state.

-Ben

My understanding is that Powell changed the pronunciation of his first name to "colon" when he was a youth out of admiration for a famous World War II pilot, but I can't seem to find a source for that. - Walkiped 23:15, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Per the Center for Responsive Politics:
As a civilian, Colin Powell served on two corporate boards: Gulfstream Aerospace and America Online. Gulfstream Aerospace makes specialty jets for Hollywood movie stars and for foreign governments, like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia--two countries Powell got to know well in his role as chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War. The company was bought out by defense contractor General Dynamics in 1999. The former general also earned a nice windfall when AOL finally merged with Time Warner earlier this year. His stock in the company reportedly increased in value by $4 million. Powell's son, Michael, was the only commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission who advocated letting the AOL-Time Warner deal go through without scrutiny. President Bush recently named Michael Powell chairman of the FCC. The agency will soon consider whether to allow AOL to keep its monopoly on the "instant messaging" technology it developed for the Internet.

This bit was added. The Center for Responsive Politics has this to say as a copyright notice:

"Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics."

This is ambiguous as to whether it qualifies for GFDL re-distributability. For example, they may not wish their content to be redistributed in modified form, which would mean we would have to make it an invariant clause; something which violates our copyright statement (that we have no invariant clauses). I am contacting the Center to get a clarification of their copyright. DanKeshet

Thanks for checking up on this. I added this after reviewing the copyright notice on the Center for Responsive Politics, but didn't think about the issues of invariance. I'm glad to see that you didn't just remove the information without comment; this information was important to me. Bobby Martin

I don't object to inclusion of the info on My Lai etc., but at least write it decently, and give some thought as to where in the article it belongs, instead of just tacking it on at the end. -- John Owens 07:42 Apr 3, 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm tired and lagged to woe-be-gone. Yes it was badly written. But if that's the case why not re-write it, or redact it while mentioning it? Where would you put it?
Ie: Wikipedia:Our_Replies_to_Our_Critics "However, this does not mean that idiosyncratic points of view are silenced or deleted;"... ummm, maybe not? :)
~ender
Ahem, what part of "I don't object to..." and "at least write it decently" don't you understand? But not having the sources you presumably do, I don't know just how to write it correctly. And if there's not a general consensus on whether or not he was involved in Iran/Contra, for example (I'm not saying I know whether or not there is), use "Some detractors say..." kind of phrasing, to keep NPOV. -- John Owens
I understand both of those. However, stylistically, I like to take crap and make it better. Not just delete things. Maybe it should be moved to talk, so people get a chance to look at it and make it better - if you don't want it cluttering up your article. Yeah, not able to dig up some primary sources (military stuff for quotes on My Lai), or I would. Maybe I'll get a chance to go to Uni w/free time on my hands. Just saying that I think deleting facts is bad personal policy. ~ender

Actually, the 23rd Infantry Division *IS* called Americal: http://www.americal.org/

Here's the rest of the information you deleted.

Powell secretly transferred missiles from the Army to the CIA, to enable Iran-Contra affair.

And during the Second Gulf War, Powell targeted for destruction Iraq's water systems, power supplies, civilian factories, and other non-military targets like bus stations, bridges, marketplaces and mosques. http://www.newsreview.com/issues/reno/2002-10-10/news.asp

~ender 2003-04-13 01:34:MST

OK, heh, I feel pretty silly about the "Americal" thing now. In the paragraph directly above, by "Second Gulf War", are you counting the Iran-Iraq War, and meaning the '90-'91 affair, or this year's events? The newsreview.com link above is giving me a 404. Also, is the missile transfer something established during the hearings, a widely accepted belief, or a claim by a few? And I would suggest calling that section something other than "Some Career Highlights"; it comes off a bit too ironically that way to be NPOV. Overall, a much better addition this time, thank you. :) -- John Owens 09:50 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
  • Was wondering why you'd redacted that little statement :)
  • Yeah, counting like this, so if there's one that can be #1, then the second should be preferentially treated as #2, we shouldn't start counting only US involvement.
  • Hrmm, I was *JUST* at the newsreview site. Luckily I archived it, and it should still be google cached.
  • I do not have good sources for the missile transfer at this time, that's why it's on talk, so people can see it, and hopefully come up with some better documentation for it. Otherwise nobody knows it needs doing.
  • I don't care what the section is called. I'm not sure it should even *BE* a section, but you didn't like it tacked on the end, and it doesn't merge nicely into the other stuff above (too much detail in one area, and not enough in another). So like I said, dunno what to do about it. I just want to get it shoehorned in there somehow...
~ender 2003-04-13 03:08 MST
OK, newsreview.com is working again now, whyever that was. I'll look it over, then. -- John Owens
Having read that, I don't see how it really bears on that. It doesn't even make claims that Powell designated those as targets, that they were designated targets at all (vs. being a side-effect of less-than-pinpoint accuracy, a la the Chinese embassy, etc.), or even that much of the above was damaged. It only mentions in passing "...bombed but reconstructed government factories and ministries as well as restored power and water plants.... flattened houses and apartment buildings.... (Iraqi neighbours) recall incidents of bombed bridges, marketplaces, bus stations, factories and mosques where civilians died", and gives no evidence for how she can tell a bombed and reconstructed building from an unbombed constructed building (i.e., just about any other building). I suppose "government factories" could be technically called civilian factories, but even that's a bit of a stretch; calling them civilian implies that they're privately held, to the casual reader. (On third or fourth re-reading, I'm thinking you may have gotten that term from the "where civilians died" part.) And then, when she talks about the "Highway of Death", she's only claiming that these things happened, with little evidence, and not even speculation as to how, why, or who ordered it. So, I can't really take that as supporting the above paragraph in a meaningful way.
As for a section title, what would you say to something like "Controversial acts" or some such? And the "Probably because the US military... had accompanied the Israeli military on its attack on Jenin" part is rather speculative and POV as well. -- John Owens 11:35 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
Yea, I don't have documents in my hot little hands where Powell sayd, "Bomb me a mosque!" - however in order to get to that assertation, we need to build up some evidence, for example the fact that mosques were hit. That's one of the reasons that info is not out there on the main page. Highway of Death is supported in other places. Hey, change the title on the paragraph, intergrate it into the main text (which is what I'd like, but I'm lacking in how to do it right now). Well, if USMC claims they were there, that's good enough for me. As for the attribution as to why he covered it up - this is true, I don't know that that is THE reason why. However, I can't think of a better reason to come out so contrary to other people's observations. And US military attacking Jenin does have bearing on US officials talking about Jenin doesn't it? So yeah, that section can be reworded - feel free to take a stab at it. We don't bite.

~ender 2003-04-14 11:53 MST

If someone is gonna make a section entitled "Career Highlights" I think it should include some "highlights" other than simply the two most damning possible ancedotes you can possibly find. If you ask me, akwardly adding "damning" bits to the end of politician bios is too widespread in Wikipedia. user:J.J. 11:30, May 5, 2003

I agree. Moving it here for now, until someone writes up a more balanced "career highlights" that actually includes some of his highlights. If someone wnats to write up these controversial issues, they should go somewhere else, like possibly under Jenin massacre or My Lai massacre, maybe with a link from here noting Powell had some involvement in their investigation. I don't think he had any major roles though; he was more of a PR guy. Delirium 03:52 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Here's the stuff that was moved (-Delirium):

Contents

Some Career Highlights

In April 2002 as Secretary of State, Colin Powell testified to Congress on the Jenin Massacre, "I've seen no evidence of mass graves ... no evidence that would suggest a massacre took place ... Clearly people died in Jenin - people who were terrorists died in Jenin - and in the prosecution of that battle innocent lives may well have been lost." Probably because the US military, under the auspices of learning about urban warfare, had accompanied the Israeli military on its attack on Jenin (Marine Corps Times, 5-31-2002).

Major Colin Powell, as deputy assistant chief of staff at the Americal, or 23rd Infantry Division, was charged with investigating a detailed letter by Tom Glen (a soldier from the 11th Light Infantry Brigade), which backed up rumored allegations of the My Lai massacre. Powell became the author of a cover-up of My Lai when he wrote: "In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between American soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent."

I have substantially reworked the piece, along the lines of the suggestions above. I re-included

  • My Lai
  • Jenin

added

  • AOL
  • WMDs

I commented out the stuff on awards. If anyone feels strongly that it should be included, they can uncomment it. Also, still no mention of race, like highest ranking Black in Army, first Black SoS. Necessary? I'll let someone else tackle this though...

 -- 
 Viajero 11:13 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)


I replaced the photo of Powell as JCS chair with one taken since he became SoS...I thought the other pict was out of place.

hoshie


African-American

In regards to the first sentence: ...highest ranking African-American government official in the United States.

Is it correct to refer to Colin Powell as African-American since his parent's are Jamaican? Would it be culturally insensitive to change this to "black government official?" Does Colin Powell refer to himself as an African-American? - Jaybuffington

British usage would probably have said he is "Afro-Caribbean" by descent, but this causes problems too. But why mention highest ranking at all? He is only temporarily Secretary of State, but no-one can deny his being the first black man to have challenged the traditionally all-white preserves in the State Department and Joint Chiefs of Staff. And of course Powell may quite rightly regard himself as simply American --garryq 13:47, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
I say mention he's black, and perhaps add an explanation as to why he shouldn't be labelled African American. I changed the first mention of it to see how it goes over; I have not touched the later mention yet, because I wanted to see if it would be reverted or not. Perhaps someone should ask Colin himself how he feels? --Golbez 15:16, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
I'm not sure "black" is appropriate either, given that his skin is about the same color as Bush's. Is there any other term we can use? Pterodactyler 15:03, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Resignation

According to today's New York Times, he submitted his resignation on Friday (11/12), not today (11/15). --Feitclub 15:15, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, but nobody noticed till today. He seemed so fit! 129.10.68.232 15:18, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I changed "not selected yet" to "Condoleeza Rice" in the "sucessor" category, okay? --NoPetrol 03:34, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

She has to be confirmed by congress yet. It's OKAY if we don't put her immediately in the secretary seat; there is a progress, and until them, he is STILL the secretary of state. --Golbez 03:35, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Place of Birth

I just noticed that it says in the column that he was born in Atlanta but in the text that he was born in New York City! Can someone do an exhaustive Google search to figure out which is correct and change. That's a pretty big discrepencacy. Thanks! Moncrief 08:14, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)


Bolton

I wasn't sure where to put the section on Powell's opposition to John Bolton's nomination, so I included it in the civilian life section. Is that fine, or should I create a new section about his life after resigning from the SOS position? --JamesB3 22:45, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • I think he does need a post-SOS section. He'll be doing much more before he dies, so why not add it in? I'll do it now. --Harro5 23:52, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

edit - apologies for previous (now removed) post, based on a couple of searches it appears possible -anon

Actually, I have a question about the Bolton section - Sidney Blumenthal has, in at least one unrelated instance, misrepresented some facts: http://powerlineblog.com/archives/010635.php

It might be worth double-checking to see if anyone else has reported that Secretary Powell is trying to sink that nomination. -- HaroldHutchison 16:22 EDT, 28 June 2005

POV?

In the early 1980s, Powell served at Fort Carson, Colorado. It was there that he had a major clash with General John Hudachek his commander. Hudachek was a dour, prickly man who disliked Powell.

Well, did Powell say so in his book? -- Toytoy 03:36, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Critisism section

I'd like to add an explicit section in the article on the critisism Powell has accummulated during his course in politics, specifically from harry belafonte. can i?

Project2501a 01:24, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Balloonfoot?

Anyobody know the origin/meaning of the "Balloonfoot" nickname? Is it a reference to Powell's foot injury in Vietnam? Pterodactyler 14:57, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


Powell Aide Regrets Lying to UN

I always admired CP as the dove general, despite personal dismay at his halting the US Army at the outskirts of Baghdad in the Gulf War.

I would very much like to see a confession for lying about the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) speech to the UN.

Along w/ the Schwarzkopf speech denouncing the Viet Nam War as a war crime, I think this could be one of the most significant statements by a US general.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/ "I wish I had not been involved in it," says Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a longtime Powell adviser who served as his chief of staff from 2002 through 2005. "I look back on it, and I still say it was the lowest point in my life."

In a recent 20/20 interview with Barabara Walters (early September '05), Powell speaks to the case of WMDs and to the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Video from the broadcast is available here: http://movies.crooksandliars.com/20-20-Colin-Powell.mov I suggest the main entry be updated with information from this interview.