Late last week and through the weekend we heard more of the same self contradicting war rhetoric from the administration, the Pentagon, and the usual gang of echo chamberlains.
The constitution is vital to success in Iraq, but if it isn't ratified that might be okay, because that might make the insurgency even worse. If it doesn't pass and things do get worse, that's okay too because we anticipated it.
Only Iraqis can defeat the insurgency. As occupiers, our presence actually contributes to the strength of the insurgency.
Iraqi forces are making progress toward being able to handle the insurgency themselves, even though they've gone from having three ready battalions to only having one.
Until Iraqi forces are ready to handle the insurgency, we can't make plans to draw down our presence in the country, even though our presence in the country contributes to the strength of the insurgency.
And the pro-war pundits! They refuse to compare Iraq to Vietnam, but they're happy to equate it with the American Revolution, our Civil War, and World War II whenever the mood strikes them.
---
We're stuck in a generational quagmire, and all our "leaders" have to offer us by way of explanation is the standard menu of memes, catch phrases, and double talking points. Lamentably, old military beat hands in the mainstream media can't call the Pentagon's bull manure what it is because they're "reporter," not columnists. And the mainstream columnists are either in the administration's pocket or they're afraid to take on the Pentagon because they're completely out of their depth when it comes to military matters.
Our political and military leaders are stringing us along. The Iraq excursion has been a dishonest, immoral, and incompetently run fiasco from the outset. This has to change, and it's high time to debunk the right wing mantra that "real" Americans support their president and the military in time of war.
"Real" Americans are not loyal subjects. They are citizens. The president is not America's commander in chief. He is commander in chief of America's military. And America does not exist to support its military. The military exists to support America.
By committing our military to a bad war in pursuit his neocon cronies' agenda, Mister Bush has mis-served our country and the troops we have placed under his command.
By continuing to support Mister Bush, our generals are not only placing political loyalty above their oath to uphold the constitution, they are betraying the trust of the troops who serve under them.
They should resign.
And real Americans should demand an accounting from Mister Bush and his minions/puppet masters.
Monday, October 03, 2005
Days of Future Past
As little as a year ago, I might have considered this futuristic fantasy by Chelicera a total piece of paranoid bunk. Now, I think it's time to pay very close attention to these sorts of concerns.
Just because you're paranoid…
The decline of the United States was due to several factors which are obvious from the perspective of the 22nd century. However, even at the time, the weaknesses were well known; political and financial leaders chose to ignore the warning signs.
Just because you're paranoid…
Yee Hah!
An NYT story today features a book by former Army chaplain James Yee. Yee, you may recall, was the Muslim chaplain at Guantanamo Bay who was arrested on charges of espionage that later proved groundless.
Yee has a new book out that talks about the atmosphere at GITMO, and how Major General Geoffrey Miller encouraged abuse and punishment of prisoners.
It was Miller who pressed the espionage charges against Yee.
---
Draw your own conclusions, but mine are that this was a classic example of the standard neocon "smear the whistle blower" tactic. Miller, hand picked by Donald Rumsfeld to carry out his "new kind of war" interrogation tactics, epitomizes the phenomenon by which the administration has tainted the military with its above-the-law practices.
Yee left the Army with an honorable discharge and is studying toward a PhD in international relationships. Miller is assigned to the Pentagon.
Yee has a new book out that talks about the atmosphere at GITMO, and how Major General Geoffrey Miller encouraged abuse and punishment of prisoners.
It was Miller who pressed the espionage charges against Yee.
---
Draw your own conclusions, but mine are that this was a classic example of the standard neocon "smear the whistle blower" tactic. Miller, hand picked by Donald Rumsfeld to carry out his "new kind of war" interrogation tactics, epitomizes the phenomenon by which the administration has tainted the military with its above-the-law practices.
Yee left the Army with an honorable discharge and is studying toward a PhD in international relationships. Miller is assigned to the Pentagon.
Sunday, October 02, 2005
Abizaid's Sunday Drive By
I just caught General Abizaid, head of Central Command, on Russert and Schieffer. I didn't hear anything that changed my opinion that these guys are "making it up as they go" and hoping for the best.
Abizaid's rhetoric sounded like the same waffling we've grown used to hearing from Pentagon sources. Yes, numbers of trained Iraqi forces look bad, but you can't really tell anything from the numbers.
Yes, there are more attacks, but they're not on military targets (as if attacks on civilian targets is a good thing.)
What concerns me most is Abizaid's statement to the effect that every commander he talks to on the ground "sounds confident."
That's not surprising. If a commander on the ground didn't sound confident, he wouldn't be in command. He'd be replaced by somebody who knows how to sound confident when he talks to Abizaid.
---
…Something, something, "Iraqi Army soldiers are fighting and dying."
That kind of talk doesn't make me all warm and fuzzy. As General George Patton once admonished, nobody every won a war by dying for his country.
---
Challenged by Tom Friedman on Face the Nation to explain what the strategy is to bring the Sunnis into the political process, Abizaid came back and said the real question is "what is the Sunnis' strategy?"
So it's the Sunnis' fault that Abizaid doesn't have a strategy.
Abizaid makes another delusional comparison between the Iraq situation and the American Revolution.
Syria needs to do more. The rest of the Arab world needs to do more.
Good God.
If bull manure could win wars, we'd be in great shape.
And if side stepping the truth made for good generalship, Abizaid would be another Alexander the Great.
Abizaid's rhetoric sounded like the same waffling we've grown used to hearing from Pentagon sources. Yes, numbers of trained Iraqi forces look bad, but you can't really tell anything from the numbers.
Yes, there are more attacks, but they're not on military targets (as if attacks on civilian targets is a good thing.)
What concerns me most is Abizaid's statement to the effect that every commander he talks to on the ground "sounds confident."
That's not surprising. If a commander on the ground didn't sound confident, he wouldn't be in command. He'd be replaced by somebody who knows how to sound confident when he talks to Abizaid.
---
…Something, something, "Iraqi Army soldiers are fighting and dying."
That kind of talk doesn't make me all warm and fuzzy. As General George Patton once admonished, nobody every won a war by dying for his country.
---
Challenged by Tom Friedman on Face the Nation to explain what the strategy is to bring the Sunnis into the political process, Abizaid came back and said the real question is "what is the Sunnis' strategy?"
So it's the Sunnis' fault that Abizaid doesn't have a strategy.
Abizaid makes another delusional comparison between the Iraq situation and the American Revolution.
Syria needs to do more. The rest of the Arab world needs to do more.
Good God.
If bull manure could win wars, we'd be in great shape.
And if side stepping the truth made for good generalship, Abizaid would be another Alexander the Great.
Friday, September 30, 2005
For Something Completely Different...
Over at Knits End, the always witty and charming Kerstin decries how awful she looks in her latest creation.
I suspect that the vast majority of her admirers will think otherwise.
Have a great weekend, everybody!
Jeff
I suspect that the vast majority of her admirers will think otherwise.
Have a great weekend, everybody!
Jeff
Smoking Crack About Iraq
If you thought Mike Brown was a buffoon, how do you like the Abbott and Costello routines Donald Rumsfeld and the Not Ready for Wartime Players have been staging lately?
Intelligence analysis supports the Bush administration's predictions? That joke's getting a little stale, isn't it, General?
It looks like a private polling company agrees with the intelligence, although according to the NYT…
How many US tax dollars did we pay for these complicated calculations that back up our intelligence but really don't?
---
It looks like I'm not the only one who's leery of the intelligence and the polls.
---
Once it's established that the intelligence and polls might be cooked, the story flip-flops.
So, either way, things could be bad?
Dirdle, dirdle, dirdle. The constitution will probably pass because the intelligence says is will, but if it doesn't, that's all right, because things will be difficult either way, because the constitution we thought would be a national compact probably won't turn out to be the national compact we hoped it would be?
---
It gets worse. From Mister Rumsfeld himself:
But no word on when the indigenous people will be ready to defeat the insurgency in that country.
And how is the growth of capable Iraqi units coming?
But…
Let's do some quick math. If it took two years to make one Iraqi Army battalion that's capable of fighting without help, how long will it take to make eight or ten of them?
In the meantime, it looks like we'll have to fight the insurgency with an outside occupation force that will add to the growth of the insurgency.
ABBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTT!
Watching Rummy and his stooges buck and wing their way around Iraq reminds me of something I think whenever I see a major leaguer bobble a routine fly ball: I could play that bad for half the money this guy's making.
In testimony before Congress on Thursday, the senior American military commander in Iraq, Gen. George W. Casey Jr. of the Army, said the most recent analysis of intelligence from across the country supported the Bush administration's optimistic predictions that the referendum would pass.
Intelligence analysis supports the Bush administration's predictions? That joke's getting a little stale, isn't it, General?
It looks like a private polling company agrees with the intelligence, although according to the NYT…
Their calculations are complicated, because by law the constitution will fail if it is rejected by two-thirds of the voters in any three of Iraq's 18 provinces, even if a majority of voters nationwide approve it… In regions dominated by Sunni Arabs, opinion polls have shown sentiment running just about two to one against it.
How many US tax dollars did we pay for these complicated calculations that back up our intelligence but really don't?
---
It looks like I'm not the only one who's leery of the intelligence and the polls.
Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, asked General Casey in a pointed exchange during the hearing on Thursday, "If there's a strong majority of Sunnis, which is very possible, that vote against that constitution, could that not possibly lead to a worsening political situation rather than a better one?"
"I think that's entirely possible," the general replied. "I mean, as we've looked at this, we've looked for the constitution to be a national compact, and the perception now is that it's not, particularly among the Sunnis."
---
Once it's established that the intelligence and polls might be cooked, the story flip-flops.
Officials say that if the constitution is defeated, insurgents will most likely believe that they have won a significant victory and be encouraged to fight on. Conversely, it is said, the insurgency will grow stronger if the voters approve the constitution, because that will anger Sunnis who opposed it and empower Sunni insurgents who can claim that their views were ignored.
So, either way, things could be bad?
"A vote for the constitution doesn't mean we're headed for peace and prosperity," Gen. John P. Abizaid, head of the Central Command, said in an interview this month. "Iraq is going to be a pretty difficult security environment for a while."
Dirdle, dirdle, dirdle. The constitution will probably pass because the intelligence says is will, but if it doesn't, that's all right, because things will be difficult either way, because the constitution we thought would be a national compact probably won't turn out to be the national compact we hoped it would be?
---
It gets worse. From Mister Rumsfeld himself:
"Insurgencies ultimately are defeated by the indigenous people in that country, not by outside forces, because outside forces can in fact contribute to the growth of an insurgency if they are seen as an occupation force."
But no word on when the indigenous people will be ready to defeat the insurgency in that country.
Mr. Rumsfeld and the panel of military officers resisted setting any date for reductions of American forces in Iraq, saying those decisions will depend on the growth of capable Iraqi security units and the level of security throughout the country.
And how is the growth of capable Iraqi units coming?
(General Casey said that) growing numbers of Iraqi police and Army forces are increasingly able to provide security in their country.
But…
…only one Iraqi Army battalion (is) capable of fighting without help from United States armed forces.
Let's do some quick math. If it took two years to make one Iraqi Army battalion that's capable of fighting without help, how long will it take to make eight or ten of them?
In the meantime, it looks like we'll have to fight the insurgency with an outside occupation force that will add to the growth of the insurgency.
ABBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTT!
Watching Rummy and his stooges buck and wing their way around Iraq reminds me of something I think whenever I see a major leaguer bobble a routine fly ball: I could play that bad for half the money this guy's making.
Uncle Karl Made Him Do It?
Do you think Bill Bennett was trying to draw the heat away from Tom Delay? And if he was, who do you reckon came up with the idea?
Thursday, September 29, 2005
More Next New World Order
Regarding global military spending, I recommend you take a look at the CIA World Fact Book page on the subject.
The U.S is number one, of course, and the number posted (370$ billion) is from 2003. Number two is China at $67.5 billion (2004). Next in order come Japan, France, England, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, India, and Australia, ranging from $17 to $46 billion. Russia is not included because there's no way of knowing what they really spend, but it's a safe assumption that the vast majority of what's left of its Cold War arsenal is either burning in Chechnya or caked in rust.
Of that list, China is the only country one can reasonably argue we might have to fight a conventional, symmetrical war with in the next 10 to 20 years, and that would be a naval/air war in which we would interdict an invasion of Taiwan (which is extremely unlikely to occur).
I have yet to hear a compelling argument as to why America continues to pursue an arms race with itself.
The U.S is number one, of course, and the number posted (370$ billion) is from 2003. Number two is China at $67.5 billion (2004). Next in order come Japan, France, England, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, India, and Australia, ranging from $17 to $46 billion. Russia is not included because there's no way of knowing what they really spend, but it's a safe assumption that the vast majority of what's left of its Cold War arsenal is either burning in Chechnya or caked in rust.
Of that list, China is the only country one can reasonably argue we might have to fight a conventional, symmetrical war with in the next 10 to 20 years, and that would be a naval/air war in which we would interdict an invasion of Taiwan (which is extremely unlikely to occur).
I have yet to hear a compelling argument as to why America continues to pursue an arms race with itself.
Corrupts Absolutely
"'Berto, how 'bout you write me up one of them things… What do you call 'em?"
"A memorandum, Mister President?"
"Yeah, one of them."
"What do you want the memorandum to say, sir?"
"I want to be able to do what I want, you know, without any of that treaty and convention and constitution stuff getting in the way."
"You want me to write a memo that grants you absolute power?"
"Yeah. Absolute power. I like that sound of that."
"Have it for you by noon, boss."
---
Today in Iraq has the letter that Captain Ian Fishback wrote to Senator John McCain regarding prisoner abuse committed by members of the 82nd Airborne Division in Iraq and Afghanistan.
My strong sense is that this Captain Fishback is an intelligent, mature man and that he isn't coming forward now for the sake of calling attention to himself. And he sure as heck isn't doing it to enhance his military career (um, his military career is over). So it sounds to me like he knows what he's talking about and, more importantly, that he's telling the truth.
And what he's telling is just another symptom of what seems to be an encompassing break down in the military chain of command, a breakdown caused by an "optional" war initiated on fuzzy pretexts and conducted in a manner outside the accepted laws of armed conflict, and a breakdown that began at the very top with the Commander in Chief.
---
Snippets on the "torture memo" from the Center for American Progress:
"Laws don't apply to the President." Doesn't that make you all warm and safe?
And why don't they apply? According to Gonzalez:
The "new kind of war" meme is one of the most disingenuous notions that the administration and its echo chamberlains have palmed off on the American public. They have told us this war is "new" because it involves terrorism, asymmetric forces, propaganda, intelligence, law enforcement, non-state political entities, religion, and a host of other factors that have been integral factors of war throughout recorded history. There is nothing about our war on terrorism that Greek military historian Thucydides didn't write about in 400 B.C., and none of it was new then either.
---
The trail goes from Mister Bush to Donald Rumsfeld to General Geoffrey Miller who goes to Guantanamo then Iraq and then Afghanistan. The top echelons of command, including Army Chief of Staff and Rumsfeld crony General Peter Shoomaker continue to insist that the torture incidents have been "the actions of a few."
So it's little wonder that Captain Fishback got so little response from his superiors in the chain of command. Fishback's superiors know that culpability goes all the way up to "the actions of a few" at the very top of the food chain, and nobody has enough clout to take on those characters. They have absolute power.
Remember? 'Berto gave it to them.
"A memorandum, Mister President?"
"Yeah, one of them."
"What do you want the memorandum to say, sir?"
"I want to be able to do what I want, you know, without any of that treaty and convention and constitution stuff getting in the way."
"You want me to write a memo that grants you absolute power?"
"Yeah. Absolute power. I like that sound of that."
"Have it for you by noon, boss."
---
Today in Iraq has the letter that Captain Ian Fishback wrote to Senator John McCain regarding prisoner abuse committed by members of the 82nd Airborne Division in Iraq and Afghanistan.
…While I served in the Global War on Terror, the actions and statements of my leadership led me to believe that United States policy did not require application of the Geneva Conventions in Afghanistan or Iraq. On 7 May 2004, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's testimony that the United States followed the Geneva Conventions in Iraq and the "spirit" of the Geneva Conventions in Afghanistan prompted me to begin an approach for clarification. For 17 months, I tried to determine what specific standards governed the treatment of detainees by consulting my chain of command…
Despite my efforts, I have been unable to get clear, consistent answers from my leadership about what constitutes lawful and humane treatment of detainees. I am certain that this confusion contributed to a wide range of abuses including death threats, beatings, broken bones, murder, exposure to elements, extreme forced physical exertion, hostage-taking, stripping, sleep deprivation and degrading treatment. I and troops under my command witnessed some of these abuses in both Afghanistan and Iraq…
My strong sense is that this Captain Fishback is an intelligent, mature man and that he isn't coming forward now for the sake of calling attention to himself. And he sure as heck isn't doing it to enhance his military career (um, his military career is over). So it sounds to me like he knows what he's talking about and, more importantly, that he's telling the truth.
And what he's telling is just another symptom of what seems to be an encompassing break down in the military chain of command, a breakdown caused by an "optional" war initiated on fuzzy pretexts and conducted in a manner outside the accepted laws of armed conflict, and a breakdown that began at the very top with the Commander in Chief.
---
Snippets on the "torture memo" from the Center for American Progress:
According to Newsweek, the memo "was drafted after White House meetings convened by George W. Bush's chief counsel, Alberto Gonzales, along with Defense Department general counsel William Haynes and [Cheney counsel] David Addington." The memo included the opinion that laws prohibiting torture do "not apply to the President's detention and interrogation of enemy combatants." Further, the memo puts forth the opinion that the pain caused by an interrogation must include "injury such as death, organ failure, or serious impairment of body functions—in order to constitute torture."
"Laws don't apply to the President." Doesn't that make you all warm and safe?
And why don't they apply? According to Gonzalez:
the war against terrorism is a new kind of war…this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."
The "new kind of war" meme is one of the most disingenuous notions that the administration and its echo chamberlains have palmed off on the American public. They have told us this war is "new" because it involves terrorism, asymmetric forces, propaganda, intelligence, law enforcement, non-state political entities, religion, and a host of other factors that have been integral factors of war throughout recorded history. There is nothing about our war on terrorism that Greek military historian Thucydides didn't write about in 400 B.C., and none of it was new then either.
---
The trail goes from Mister Bush to Donald Rumsfeld to General Geoffrey Miller who goes to Guantanamo then Iraq and then Afghanistan. The top echelons of command, including Army Chief of Staff and Rumsfeld crony General Peter Shoomaker continue to insist that the torture incidents have been "the actions of a few."
So it's little wonder that Captain Fishback got so little response from his superiors in the chain of command. Fishback's superiors know that culpability goes all the way up to "the actions of a few" at the very top of the food chain, and nobody has enough clout to take on those characters. They have absolute power.
Remember? 'Berto gave it to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)