« Allegations of Recruiters Kidnapping Children | Main | Congress Shoots Big Bird »
Former CIA Director Calls For US Withdrawal
From the Harvard University Gazette:
Former CIA Director John M. Deutch, institute professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), said that the United States is not making progress toward key objectives in Iraq and called for American troops to pull out "as soon as possible" during a speech Tuesday (June 7) at Harvard's Sanders Theatre.
Deutch, who delivered the Phi Beta Kappa oration at the honor society's annual Literary Exercises, served as CIA director under President Bill Clinton from May 1995 until December 1996. In his 20-minute speech, he challenged the views of both Republicans and Democrats who say that the United States must stay the course to stabilize the country before disengaging.
That position, Deutch said, is based on the assumption that the United States will leave a stable nation behind. But it is also possible, he said, that the United States will fail in its Iraq objectives and lose international credibility by staying the course, even as its ability to deal with other crises, such as North Korea, Iran, and the fight against international terrorism, is compromised.
"I believe that we are not making progress on our key objectives in Iraq," Deutch said. "There may be days when security seems somewhat improved and when the Iraqi government appears to be functioning better, but the underlying destabilizing forces of a robust insurgency and warring factions supported by outside governments is undiminished."
Deutch, who has been a member of the MIT faculty since 1970, has served as chairman of MIT's chemistry department, as the school's dean of science, and as its provost. In addition to his academic positions, Deutch has held numerous high-level positions in the U.S. government, serving in the Energy Department and the Defense Department, including a stint from March 1994 to May 1995 as deputy secretary of defense.
[...]
Deutch's talk reviewed the arguments surrounding the Iraq war's start and he said he accepts the Bush administration's contention that officials thought Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. But he also said that he believes there was a deeper reason behind the military action: the belief that intervention would result in "a near-spontaneous conversion of Iraq, and with luck, the entire Middle East, to a democratic society."
The problem with that vision, Deutch said, is that it is beyond the power of our military forces to bring about such change.
The United States does have tools to foster change in other countries, including diplomacy and economic assistance and trade, but the military is suited to fighting wars, he said, not to providing police services and establishing a civil society.
[...]
Deutch supported the five steps to disengagement in Iraq outlined by U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in January, including letting Iraqis make their own political decisions, adopting a clear exit strategy and timetable, beginning the military withdrawal, establishing regional diplomacy to discourage external intervention in Iraq, and continued training of Iraqi forces.
"Such measures cannot guarantee a secure and democratic Iraq free of external domination," Deutch said. "But they are first steps toward adopting a posture that will permit the United States to pursue successfully its long-term interests in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf."
Deputy Secretary of Defense, Director of CIA, Served in the Energy Department, Chairman of the Chemistry Department at MIT...gee, sounds like a guy who might know something, huh?
No, I'm sure that it's time for Scott McClellan to dismiss him as just another well-educated genius with real Middle East foreign policy experience who hates America.
Oh, and I bet he hates freedom, too.
(Hat tip to Quentin Compson)
And the onslaught continues--people--check out today's Five Minutes a Day on the front page for a relatively simple action we can take to let voices be heard. Pass it along too--the complex interplay between foreign and domestic policy muddle continues.
Are you all feeling the stress? The ante has been raised, and the blitz of the "mandate" is relentless.
I do not believe, as many would have it, that the progressive left is in disarray. I think we are embattled, and angry, and we need to take care of ourselves along the way--but we all agree that this administration needs to be questioned, watched, and responded to as needed.
Every day, we must wake up to fight. Together.
Well, because of the incompetence of the Bush Administration, it's almost impossible to even devise a plan now...
This gentleman makes the point that sending more troops makes the assumption that we CAN stabilize the country. It's a good point. Maybe it's not possible.
So, to summarize the Iraq situation according to recent expert opinions:
1) We can't immediately withdraw completely, as that would "embolden the insurgents," and throw the country into complete chaos.
2) We can't send MORE troops, because that would enflame the already simmering resentment of our presence, and
3) From our own government, we can't start gradually reducing troop levels until the situation is more stable and a larger number of Iraqi troops are fully trained...
SO... We can't leave, we can't send more troops, and we can't start gradually start pulling out.
Is it just me, or have we officially arrived at quagmire...
Karen --
On the contrary. It is the Right that is in disarray... their party has become, in the words of one of their own, "the political arm of the Christian church," leaving all the normal humans out in the cold.
Let them think we are in disarray. That will prove false, just like their assumption that the Republican party wouldn't mind being taken over by a bunch of radical religious extremists.
C'mon 2006.
Karen---
The neocon, far right, military complex, fundamentalist majority would like to continue to throw everything, and the kitchen sink at us, in the hope that we will miss something, be unable to stop something, let things slide under the radar, or make fools of ourselves over something.
It really isn't easy. There are new things to delpore and be outraged about everyday. This thread is as good as any for us to examine just how much our stress has affected our ability not to become disarrayed. Not every progressive is able to take on every issue, and we do prioritize differently.
How organized is the progressive mind and what can we do to be good at keeping each other up to speed, and outraged at a managable pace? Are we wasting any energy that we should be applying elsewhere? We can spend all our time talking about the 'blitz of bull' coming from THEM. We can decide on an action to take.
We need to discuss stress management, too. I'm tired of people like us being told we can't get our act together. We are doing it. Let them keep thinking that progressives are lousy, then they can be surpried at just what we really do when we do it. Still, I'm bugged by the perception that all the work people are doing won't amount to a hill of beans. I worry about that outrage fatigue. So, yeah, we have to take care of ourselves, along with taking care of business.
Breathe everbody!!!
Tutter,
So true. Yet, we have been left to be the investigators, media and activists to protest the daily mistakes of our President and his minions. That is our calling. However, when leaders of the opposition make rhetorical missteps our challenges are even greater. I think that Howard Dean's comments did little to advance our cause. As I posted yesterday, STAY ON MESSAGE. By staying on message, our challenges will be less difficult to overcome. The Republicans have taught us all too well that particular point.
Posted by: oncall at June 10, 2005 10:46 AM
MSM is going to go after everything Howard Dean does, to portray us all as radical raving maniacs. They took his comments last week and played them over and over, followed by the "media enhanced" scream. The Republicans campaign every single day in the MSM.
This in from the Washington Post:
Building Iraq's Army: Mission Improbable
Project in North Reveals Deep Divide Between U.S. and Iraqi Forces
~ snip ~
"We don't want to take responsibility; we don't want it," said Amar Mana, 27, an Iraqi private whose forehead was grazed by a bullet during an insurgent attack in November. "Here, no way. The way the situation is, we wouldn't be ready to take responsibility for a thousand years."
~ snip ~
more.... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/09/AR2005060902245.html?referrer=email&referrer=email
Posted by: Truth Shall Prevail at June 10, 2005 11:25 AM
=====================
It's true that the MSM is assisting the Neocons in there quest to make Howard look like a nut.
However, Howard could help by not giving them ammunition.
I'm all for Howard going after the Neocons, but let him do it on issues that will get us someplace:
1) Disastrous foreign policy, landing us firmly in endless Iraq quagmire
2) LYING repeatedly to the American people
3) Destroying the middle class to enrich the wealthy
4) Ethics that make Nixon look like a schoolboy
THOSE are the things that people care about. Announcing that Neocons are largely made up of white christians deosn't help us.
oncall---
our problem with our message is that we have so many different groups who want their message to be the TOP message. Pro-choice, anti war, environmentalism, equal rights, it doesn't matter what YOUR issue is, or MY issue, its that we agree that everyting is OUR issue. We still have so many single issue people, that unlike the rethugs who all look at their favorite single issue and get themselves together and decide that they can all walk in lock step and duplicate speak, and STILL talk about their issue, we have people who can't come of their individual issue for fear that their issue will lose some of the spotlight.
and then we have party leaders who want to be nice along with being correct. they want to share and continue to try to advance the myth that the majority are not power grabbing pushy louts who would rubber stamp attila the hun if bush proposed him for some position. (my apologies to Huns and anyone named attila)
Tut --
You're right about everybody wanting their issue to be #1... I think that's one of the things that holds us up.
How many times did you hear this in during the campaign? "Yeah, but he voted once to support _________ in 1992." That's the stuff that makes me nuts. And that's what people need to get over... I've said it before and I'll say it again. The problem Democrats have is not with our candidates, not with our agenda, not with our campaigns, it's with the rank and file of the party membership.
To get back to Howard Dean for a moment, having said that I wish he would change his attacks a bit, it REALLY ticks me off to see other Democrats going after the party chair.
No matter how you slice that, it doesn't help us, and in fact has allowed the media to talk about Howard Dean all week, instead of the Preznit's tanking poll numbers. Dumb.
I'll tell you what. If Howie took out an ad and bought television time to make a statement that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, and the (former) MSM talked about how audacious that statement was, there would be Democratic leaders falling all over themselves to disagree with him.
We've been talking about coming up with a message. A word that many of us have used here this week is "enough". We've all had enough of BushCo and their brand of government.
Maybe a part of our message could be "enough is enough!".
There are a million things we've had enough of. Easy soundbites.
There IS a national non-profit focused on fighting sexual predators that has the same title, but that might not matter.
Tut, Vic,
What bothers me about what is starting to happen already, and this is June '05, is that "they" (MSM, Rove Co.) appear to be laying in wait for Dean. They know he speaks his mind, and he is also in a position as party chair to be taken seriously by some who would have written him off a year ago. In reading material on how Rove Co. works, any one who presents a threat is dealt with early on, by going for their jugular, and doing whatever is necessary to discredit them. (I realize I'm not telling anyone anything you don't already know.) On the other hand, Dean does speak loudly and tells it like it is. He can be a great asset and/or liability. They know he is some threat, but they also know our vulnerabilities. I don't know what the answer is, but to me it is troublesome.
Nice site!
http://barbara-5.info/ymra01/scholarships.html | http://betty-5.info/ymra01/monitors.html | http://austin-5.info/ymra01/motorola.html | http://cahuna.info/ymra01/travel.html | http://all-from-minsk.info/ymra01/lighting.html | http://angie-5.info/ymra01/education.html | http://biroga.info/ymra01/printers.html | http://buratina.info/ymra01/mats.html | http://carolca.info/ymra01/parts.html | http://buratina.info/ymra01/smoking.html