Another point of comparison that I would make concerns the post-war role of General George C Marshall, in his role as Secretary of State, and as architect of the Marshall Plan in 1947 which eventually ushered in a freer Europe, and kept Germany (and Berlin) from completely fallen to the Eastern Bloc.
In many ways, I liken Secretary Powell to secretary Marshall.
Both were enlightened, lateral generals, who scaled the heights of military performance.
In Marshall's case, he was Chief of Staff of the Army during WW2. In Powell's case, he was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during Gulf War 1 and beyond.
Marshall, despite a military upbringing, favoured and supported peace, in a style similar to that on offer from Secretary Powell, today.
Both men were drafted into politics by the needs of the nation, as opposed to the pursuit of personal endeavour.
Upon joining high public office, both immediately became Secretary of State.
Both were blessed with immense articulate, diplomatic, strategic and lateral foresight. And both faced off against a military service (DoD) which was hawkish in outlook.
Both men were soldiers of the global stage, and both sought to embrace the global community in the development of strategies for peace. Secretary Powell, in the context of Iraq, Afghanistan and other global troublespots. Secretary Marshall, in the context of Europe, Germany, and the formation of NATO.
Both men were roundly criticised for their efforts by hwakish, right wind members of the civilian administration, and yet both men were able to defy that criticism and provide the foundations for peace, going forward (in Secretary Powell's case, this is still a work in progress).
In the end, however, both men prevailed (or, in the case of Secretary Powell, will prevail).
In many respects, the comparisons you have highlighted are ironic, and yet there to be seen. But so too are the comparisons away fron the battlefront. That's why, the future history of Iraq may still eventually be found in the pages of the Berlin airlift, and the ushering in of a global, united Europe. Now, the question that remains is whether this will eventually also result in a global, united Middle East, moulded on the basis of collective presence, and outlook, coupled with tolerance of individual differences.
