« Happy Birthday to Violet! | Main | Agustin Aguayo vs. the Secretary of the Army »
Ghosts
![2006_11_17t095228_450x310_us_apec[1].jpg](http://www.democracycellproject.net/blog/archives/2006_11_17t095228_450x310_us_apec[1].jpg)
"We'll succeed unless we quit".
Striking words from the former Texas Air National Guardsman, but here we have the irony of ironies, President Bush, comparing Vietnam to Iraq
This brings to mind another President, coincidentally also from Texas, who had a similar approach
AUSTIN, Texas - As American involvement in Vietnam deepened, President Lyndon Johnson railed against "the bunch of commies" running The New York Times and complained about the newspaper's criticism of the war, according to taped phone conversations released Friday...."They want to get out of Vietnam and yield it to them, and I don't think I can quite do that," the president said. At the time, as Defense Secretary Robert McNamara reported, there were 400,000 U.S. troops in Vietnam.
In my research, I came across this article written in May of this year by Charles J. Hanley, AP Special Correspondent which analyzes the difference between the two wars, with a far more subtle approach than either other two Presidents above.
"The two aspects of Vietnam and Iraq that show the most similarities involve an effort at state-building in an alien culture that is poorly understood by the United States, and the attempt to sustain U.S. domestic support for a prolonged war against an irregular enemy," ...As with Vietnam, approval for the Iraq operation has plunged as U.S. casualties mount. "Casualty for casualty, support has declined far more quickly than it did during either the Korean War or the Vietnam War," says political scientist John Mueller of Ohio State University, an expert on wars and U.S. public opinion.
"If history is any indication, there is little the Bush administration can do to reverse this decline," Mueller adds.
What the Americans are trying to do is "Iraqization," training a new Iraqi army to move into the front line against the largely Sunni Arab insurgents, so U.S. troops can pull back.
"As the Iraqi security forces stand up, coalition forces can stand down," Bush says.
It's an eerie refrain of another presidential voice. "As South Vietnamese forces become stronger, the rate of American withdrawal can become greater," Richard M. Nixon said in announcing "Vietnamization" in 1969. Four years later, the American withdrawal was complete, and two years after that, in 1975, so was the failure, as triumphant communist forces rolled into Saigon.
...In the worsening civil conflict among Iraq's Sunni Arabs, Shiites and Kurds, the new army is viewed by Sunni Arabs as a Shiite and Kurdish force and its deployment deepens their hostility.
The United States, more and more, is in a Vietnam-like bind in Iraq, many commentators say. It cannot stay; it cannot go.
"The most tragic comparison is becoming more real: In for a dime, in for a dollar," says Gordon Adams, a veteran defense scholar at George Washington University.U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., who was wounded as an Army sergeant in Vietnam, once favored a further U.S. buildup here. But last year he concluded: "We're locked into a bogged-down problem not dissimilar to where we were in Vietnam. The longer we stay, the more problems we're going to have."
This article, written in 1997 by Ralph Begleitner, provides succinct reporting on the reflections by aging leaders who were part of the Vietnam conflict, who met that year to review and analyze what went wrong.
Whatever becomes of the President's trip to Asia, whatever becomes of our country as we try to come up with a feasible, rational solution to the mess created in Iraq, we know all too well that in the case of both Vietnam and Iraq it has to be more than staying a course regardless its wisdom. That stubborn and hubristic attitude brought down a Presidency in mid 1960's, and has humbled the current President with the 2006 midterm elections providing a national referendum on his handling of the war by a state-by-state slap in the face.
From reform of the military's recruitment practices to national policies, and now the results of the midterms, the ghosts of Vietnam have stayed with us the last forty years. And like many ghosts who come back to take care of unfinished business, they appear now to remind the living the meaning of their lives and deaths.
If these ghosts are saying anything now, isn't it to find a more deeper, more profound and finally more conclusive resolution and end to needless wars? That engaging in remote conflicts to secure political interests in a region are rarely successful? In the end, aren't they all saying that we could have been better than this?
Can anyone remember the first time we heard 'as soon as Iraq's forces are trained, we can withdraw?'
Seems to me it was a couple of years ago now, and there were phrases like 'six months' bandied around, but the latest was an estimated 18 months (isn't that what Abazaid said?) So, how many more months after that will there be another estimate or more time to 'train Iraqi forces' to take over control of their own nation? The freak show that is this current administration just keeps extending estimates, never sets firm deadlines. (Why would they? Corporate oil is involved....)
The Iraq military and police are still not trained, and worse, there's now a civil war going on over there.
At this rate, the Iraq war will drag on longer than Viet Nam. It's already lasted longer than the time we were involved in WWII (at least that one was a "justified war" - which no wars we've been involved in or started since then can legally claim).
For NonnyO:
----------
George W. Bush, September 30, 2004:
"Let me first tell you that the best way for Iraq to be safe and secure is for Iraqi citizens to be trained to do the job. And that's what we're doing. We've got 100,000 trained now, 125,000 by the end of this year, 200,000 by the end of next year… There are 100,000 troops trained, police, guard, special units, border patrol. There's going to be 125,000 trained by the end of this year. Yes, we're getting the job done."
----------
George W. Bush, November 19, 2005:
"As we pursue the terrorists, our military is helping to train Iraqi security forces so they can defend their people, and so they can fight the enemy. And we're making steady progress. With every passing month, more and more Iraqi forces are standing up, and the Iraqi military is gaining new capabilities and new confidence. At the time of our Fallujah operations a year ago, there were only a few Iraqi army battalions in combat. Today there are more than 90 Iraqi army battalions fighting the terrorists, along with our forces. American and Iraqi troops are conducting major assaults to clear out enemy fighters in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq. Iraqi police and security forces are helping clear the terrorists from their strongholds. They're holding onto areas we've cleared and are preventing the enemy from returning."
----------
George W. Bush, January 4, 2006:
"First, we're going to work with the Iraqi government to increase the training Iraqi police recruits receive in human rights and the rule of law, so they understand the role of the police in a democratic society. Second, we're training Iraqi police with a program that has been effective with the Iraqi army. In other words, when we find something that works, we'll do it. And if we find something that's not working, we change -- and that is to embed coalition transition teams inside Iraqi special police units. Embedding our folks inside Iraqi army units has worked. One reason why these Iraqi units are better able to take the lead is because they've worked side-by-side with American specialists and experts, some of our best troops. So we're going to embed these type of soldiers with the Iraqi police forces, as well."
----------
yeah right so how's that workin' out for ya mr. boosh?,
Otter
More neocon jumping ship & ratting on boosh.
Embittered Insiders Turn Against Bush
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/18/AR2006111801076.html
It starts out well, but eventually ends up with lame excuses RE: why things have gone so wrong. The WaPo just isn't what it used to be...
Hersh: CIA Analysis Finds Iran Not Developing Nuclear Weapons
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906Z.shtml
A classifed draft CIA assessment has found no firm evidence of a secret drive by Iran to develop nuclear weapons, as alleged by the White House, according to an advance copy of a report in The New Yorker by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh.
Very good Ted Koppel report (audio) on Iran:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6493938
This will be on the Discovery Channel later today
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/koppel/koppel.html?clik=netmain_feat1
He also stated the obvious but still blasphemous on one broadcast - ie was it foolish to take out Saddam when he was the one thing keeping Iran from dominating the region? It can also be argued that Saddam, with his faults, was initially propped up and given weapons by the US.
Before, the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis lived together in mixed neighborhoods. They intermarried. Now they are dispersing in such a manner as to partition the country, on their own. Autonomy of the Kurds could spell trouble for Turkey. Most of the modern and moderate countries in the middle east are predominantly Sunni.
What we've done in Iraq causes problems for the middle east in general and it seems the neighboring countries should be involved in any solution. Hopefully the Baker report will recommend this and also that Palestinian/Israeli talks resume. Our administration falsely linked 9/11 and Iraq but they failed to recognize that ignoring the Israel/Palestine crisis was a trigger point for extremists everywhere, as was leaving troops in Saudi Arabia long after the first Gulf War.
Last week I heard a five-part series on possible ways out of Iraq. They ranged from six months (guy writing a book with McGovern) to 15 years (retired Colonel). All of them had holes in them, as the "experts" had to answer many questions with essentially "we don't know."
In early 2004, my friend Bert in Mpls (Vietnam Vet) and I started to Google "Iraq" and "quagmire" and watched the number of responses pile up over time.
Kissinger: No Military Victory in Iraq
By TARIQ PANJA
The Associated Press
Sunday, November 19, 2006; 7:05 AM
LONDON -- Military victory is no longer possible in Iraq, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said in a television interview broadcast Sunday.
In a wide ranging interview on British Broadcasting Corp. television, Kissinger presented a bleak vision of Iraq, saying the U.S. government must enter into dialogue with Iraq's regional neighbors _ including Iran _ if any progress is to be made in the region.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/19/AR2006111900287_pf.html
May God Himself watch over our soldiers.
They have all been betrayed.
Christy
Then Kissinger is chiming in with those who have in the last year or so been saying that military victory is impossible and political solutions are the only hope.
That would definitely require the help of other middle eastern countries.
That's the same thing John Kerry's been saying all along, too. In fact, he just reiterated that in an appearance on Faux News Sunday. Wallace kept trying to sandbag him and make it all about the botched joke, but JK insisted on staying on message and getting his points across about what needs to happen now, not continuing to rehash something that happened in the past. It was a good interview. They'll rebroadcast it on Fix cable around this evening, so you might want to catch it then if you can.
you guys do remember that JK fella, right?,
Otter
The Iraq Study Group (Baker-Hamilton Comission) needs to make Bush change course. It was a Republican who got Congress to form the group (Wolf/VA) after his 3rd trip to Iraq. He approached those on both sides of the aisle about the mess in Iraq, then public support also started to collapse, Bush fell in the polls, the military Chiefs began to balk. Baker was afraid if the Democrats won back the Legislative branch, they'd hold a bunch of investigative hearings which could affect the 2008 election. So they were forced into this damage control.
Four-point strategy of the Iraq Study Group:
· Increase US troop levels by up to 20,000 to secure Baghdad and allow redeployments elsewhere in Iraq
· Focus on regional cooperation with international conference and/or direct diplomatic involvement of countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia
· Revive reconciliation process between Sunni, Shia and others
· Increased resources from Congress to fund training and equipment of Iraqi security forces
Simon Tisdall, The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1948748,00.html
I've got Kissinger on the brain now. That also goes back to Vietnam. They're going to listen to him, so want to know what he thinks. Remember that he wanted to go in, but now says he already knew all this. This is from my reading of several articles.
- Democracy is out of reach for Iraq.
- Iraq is not a nation yet - it's three.
- We skipped a step when we supported elections.
- We should have had a military general puppet.
- We should prevent Jihad not hold elections.
- We found out elections sharpen sectarian divisions.
- We stayed the course as neocons told Bush we were winning.
- We need neighbors to help stabilize Iraq.
- We need them to help with sectarian divisions.
- We need Syria (supports Sunnis) and Iran (supports Shiites).
- We need to tell them they don't want a Taleban-type Iraq.
- We are wasting time trying to build democracy.
- He supports the Baker Commission & has been around.
- He supports the President & this is just constructive criticism.
- Democracy there would take several administrations.
"You don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that what we're seeing now would be an odd appearance for a victory," he said.
Interesting stuff from the Simon Tisdall article at The Guardian, who is the antithesis of the armchair commentator - travels all over the world to trouble spots:
To the certain dismay of US neo-cons, initial post-invasion ideas about imposing fully-fledged western democratic standards will be set aside. And the report is expected to warn that de facto tripartite partition within a loose federal system, as advocated by Democratic senator Joe Biden and others would lead not to peaceful power-sharing but a large-scale humanitarian crisis.
Lastly, the sources said the study group recommendations will include a call for increased resources to be allocated by Congress to support additional troop deployments and fund the training and equipment of expanded Iraqi army and police forces. It will also stress the need to counter corruption, improve local government and curtail the power of religious courts.
"You've got to remember, whatever the Democrats say, it's Bush still calling the shots. He believes it's a matter of political will. That's what [Henry] Kissinger told him. And he's going to stick with it," a former senior administration official said. "He [Bush] is in a state of denial about Iraq. Nobody else is any more. But he is. But he knows he's got less than a year, maybe six months, to make it work. If it fails, I expect the withdrawal process to begin next fall."
The "last push" strategy is also intended to give Mr Bush and the Republicans "political time and space" to recover from their election drubbing and prepare for the 2008 presidential campaign, the official said. "The Iraq Study Group buys time for the president to have one last go. If the Democrats are smart, they'll play along, and I think they will. But forget about bipartisanship. It's all about who's going to be in best shape to win the White House.
The official added: "Bush has said 'no' to withdrawal, so what else do you have? The Baker report will be a set of ideas, more realistic than in the past, that can be used as political tools. What they're going to say is: lower the goals, forget about the democracy crap, put more resources in, do it."
Addressing Congress yesterday, General John Abizaid, the top US commander in the Middle East, warned against setting a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, saying it would impede commanders in managing US and Iraqi forces. Gen Abizaid spoke as the Senate armed services committee began re-examining US policy after last week's Democratic election victory. But Gen Abizaid argued against extra troops, saying US divisional commanders believed more pressure needed to be put on the Iraqi army to do its part.
Wow, those comments from Kissinger fly in the face 0f our understanding that Kissinger was advising both Bush and Cheney for the last few years on Iraq. Is Kissinger just plain out lying or were Bush and Cheney just stone deaf?
Did any one of these draft deferment jerks listen to anyone besides themselves? Certainly seems to be so.
Either that, or there's just no honor amongst war criminals.
Kerry says gaffe will not stop him from running in 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061119/pl_afp/usvotepoliticskerry
Fe
I think Kissinger and Baker are now trying to find Bush a face-saving way out.
Also, you won't see Kissinger, Baker or other of Bush I's men as signatories to the Mission Statement in 1997 to for the Project for the New American Century.
Kissinger may have favored going after Saddam as part of an oil grab but I doubt he endorsed the idea as realistic of installing democracies in the middle east.
So conservative though he is, I don't think he is by definition a neocon. There must be some wars going on in those circles! Elliott Abrams, Wolfowitz, even Condi are probably spinning in circles. Even Cheney warned against going into Bagdad the first time, even though his company at the time was partially responsible for the Gulf War (slant drilling into Iraq from Kuwait).
The other thing about Kissinger, he favored "detente" so was disliked by the antiwar left and the rightwing hawks alike. I imagine he's still in somewhat of the same position, favoring sneaky covert operations that will only result in blowback.
Well now it's not as though we have much choice.
Kissinger is also wanted as a war criminal for Operation Condor, which restricts his travels.
This involved kidnapping and murder of security and intelligence officers in South America. The accusation is that the State Department under Kissinger knew all about it. He received a summons about it when he was staying at the Ritz in 2001 but he just split.
It's kind of like Sharon and what happened to refugees in Lebanon - he let it happen and nothing ever happened to him.
Look - Manson didn't kill anyone either but he got others to do it and he knew about it. He's in prison.
The public may turn against Murdoch and Fox because of the controversy about the OJ Simpson project!
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1951765,00.html
Would be nice to see them taken down by their own audience.
O'Reilly and Rivera are even urging boycott.
Frank Rich nails it in his op-ed today:
~snip~
But the one truly serious story to come out of the election — far more significant than the Washington chatter about “divided Democrats” — is that the president has no intention of changing his policy on Iraq or anything else one iota.
Already we are seeing conclusive evidence that the White House’s post-thumpin’ blather about bipartisanship is worth as little as the “uniter, not a divider” bunk of the past. The tip-off came last week when Mr. Bush renominated a roster of choices for the federal appeals court that he knew faced certain rejection by Democrats. Why? To deliver a message to the entire Senate consonant with the unprintable greeting Dick Cheney once bestowed on Patrick Leahy, the senator from Vermont. That message was seconded by Tony Snow on Monday when David Gregory of NBC News asked him for a response to the Democrats’ Iraq proposals. The press secretary belittled them as “nonspecific” and then tried to deflect the matter entirely by snickering at Mr. Gregory’s follow-up questions.
Don Imus has been rerunning the video ever since, and with good reason. The laughing-while-Baghdad-burns intransigence of the White House makes your blood run cold. The day after Mr. Snow ridiculed alternative policies for Iraq, six American soldiers were killed. It was on that day as well that militia assailants stormed the education ministry in Baghdad in broad daylight, effortlessly carrying out a mass abduction of as many as 150 government officials in some 15 minutes. Given that those kidnappers were probably in cahoots with a faction of the very government they were terrorizing, it would be hard to come up with a more alarming snapshot of those “conditions on the ground” the president keeps talking about: utter chaos, with American troops in the middle, risking their lives to defend which faction, exactly?
Yet here was what Mr. Snow had to say about the war in this same press briefing: “We are winning, but on the other hand, we have not won” and “Our commitment is to get to the point where we achieve victory.” If that’s the specificity the White House offers to counter the Democrats’ “nonspecific” ideas about Iraq, bring back Donald Rumsfeld.
Mr. Snow’s performance was echoed by the more sober but equally nonsensical testimony of Gen. John Abizaid, our chief commander in the Middle East, before the Senate Armed Services Committee less than 48 hours later. It was déjà stay-the-course all over again. The general is not for withdrawing American troops or, as John McCain would prefer, adding them. (General Abizaid delicately pointed out to Mr. McCain that a sustainable supply of new American troops is in any case "simply not something that we have right now"; the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, doesn’t want them even if we did.) The general’s hope instead is for more Iraqi troops, even though, as he conceded, we still don’t have any such forces operating "completely independently" of their embedded American advisers. In other words: We are still, so many sacrifices later, waiting for the Iraqis to stand up so we can stand down.
An even more telling admission was to follow. "General Abizaid," Jack Reed of Rhode Island asked, "how much time do you think we have to bring down the level of violence in Baghdad before we reach some type of tipping point where it accelerates beyond the control of even the Iraqi government?" After some hemming and hawing came a specific answer: "Four to six months." Thus did our commander in Iraq provide the perfect exit ramp into the Democrats’ exit strategy, whether intentionally or not: the Iraqis must stand up by exactly the same deadline that Mr. Levin proposed for the start of a phased withdrawal.
~snip~
The entire editorial is viewable at the NYTimes Select site
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/11/19/opinion/19rich.html
and other sites such as http://wealthyfrenchman.blogspot.com/2006/11/its-not-democrats-who-are-divided.html for those who don't have NYTimes Select access.
I look forward to seeing the Democratic leaders in Congress demonstrate how to "get serious" in addressing the needs of Iraq and its people.
As for Kissinger, I do believe that I read somewhere recently that he's been a once-a-week (at a minimum) adviser to Bush during the last 6-12 months and that his advice has centered on the stay-the-course, 'we must win' side of the tablet.
So as for his "tell-all" with the Guardian, I would only observe that Kissinger has demonstrated in the past a remarkable capacity to remember history as he wishes it had happened.
dwahzon:
The old feelings I felt as a college student come rushing back. Had these same feelings in 02 before the start of the war. Felt them again while we were protesting in February 2002 in San Francisco, and again all during the 2004 campaign and now this week.
Watching that sot use Vietnam as a background to "stay the course" is beyond delusional. Its a mockery of everything we SHOULD HAVE LEARNED by now but have conveniently forgotten. That's what so incenses me about Bush being in Vietnam.
He doesn't deserve the cred our history with the country warrants. Not in the blood spilt or the hard lessons learned. He skipped reading the textbook and continues merrily believing his way is right. I think applying the term "definition of insanity" fits neatly here.
The Rich article is on the money. These guys are still in a bubble. I wonder how many more times the American people have to slap them until they can't feel it anymore? Do we have to take more drastic steps?
Posted by: DiAnne at November 19, 2006 10:48 AM
Kissinger is brilliant, but he is also diabolically evil.
It will be a cold day in hell before I take foreign-policy advice from him.
I posted that about Kissenger because I am thinking it caught him up in his own lies.
Will have to use The Google to make sure but I am thinking he has been saying quite the opposite.
And let us not forget he made about a billion or more dollars as soon as the Twin Towers were hit and felled.
Literally like a billion.
Reading this and wondering if the noose is tightening around the necks of all the war criminals...and how we can keep the pressure on them.
It's a matter of continual flushing--them out, of course.
Kissinger on down to GWB and all the dirty hands in between. Line 'em up and sock 'em with the truth and the reality of what they created.
And just because I too want to partake in all the natural highs around here lately..
Right before my man left for work a few minutes ago, he handed me the key to our first house.
Wow.
I love that man.
"Kissinger on down to GWB and all the dirty hands in between. Line 'em up and sock 'em with the truth and the reality of what they created."
Hell yes Karen.
Man I love it when you talk like that.
I am all in!
Posted by: karen at November 19, 2006 02:17 PM
Too bad they can't pull some front-line duty in Fallujah.
A great way to come face-to-face with "the truth and reality of what they created".
Gary Trudeau
http://www.uclick.com/client/sea/db/
A great way to come face-to-face with "the truth and reality of what they created".
Posted by: V at November 19, 2006 02:21 PM
Perhaps the 110th COngress should come up with a new Iraq investigative committee called "The Truth and Reality COmmission".
Waxman and Conyers co-chairs.
Congrats Christy!!
Re Kissinger - he may be changing course but I think it's because of the way Iraq has turned out. The whole going-to-daddy thing is about face-saving. The Baker plan will be the last ditch effort for things to work out better before the Lame Duck leaves office, in the hopes that his party can come back in 2oo8.
I think it's a foregone conclusion that Bush will do what ever Daddy, Baker and Kissinger say. Kissinger is a Cold War guy.
Who knows what they'll do besides troops - all sorts of behind the scenes creepiness like went on when we were supposedly having "peace time" just because we weren't always embroiled in a major war.
Condi Rice actually holds Vietnam out as a model for what Iraq should become, arguing that Iraq should remain one state with a central government.
Doesn't she know in Vietnam the radicals drove out the Americans and that's how it achieved national unity?!
Even Tony Blair admitted Iraq is a disaster.
& capitalistic tendencies in Vietnam are recent. The was was more than 35 years ago.
Yes, last time I looked at Vietnam, the Communists won...
Congrats on the house Christy! Make sure you have the phone number for the plumber and the electrician nearby now...
Hey has anyone heard from Ally lately?
All very strange. Going to Vietnam for a few minutes photo-op to prove what?
Probably a reminder to those who always thought we left too soon, and that's why Communists won? Or that successful turning to capitalism happened, albeit decades later?
And sorry, over a decade since Kerry went to do real work to normalize relations! Another comparison with Incourious George.
Came here to muse for a second before returning to getting people to testify at the Board of Elections on Tuesday, starting at 4 pm, or at least support those who speak in favor of paper-ballots, and against electronic voting. 42 Brodaway, Manhattan, 6th floor.
Please NYC, stop this while we can. People in charge, and Mayor Blomberg, are not reality-based on the weakness of e-voting. Eliot Spitzer still not focusing on this issue.
Matt, see you Tuesday?
All I meant to do was say Happy B'Day and Turkey Day, Violet D, but e-voting popped out again like an out of control, involuntary response.
Posted by: Otter at November 19, 2006 08:16 AM
Hmmmm.... I knew I'd heard something similar before. Thanks for posting quotes and reference dates.
Guess my memory is still functioning after all. Georgie tends to repeat himself so often I usually forget the first time I heard him utter something similar to what he's uttered last....
A collection of "stuff" for a day or two.
Democrats Warned Not to Block Bush's Judicial Nominees
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806Z.shtml
The Senate's next Republican leader issued a veiled threat to block action on legislation if Democrats refuse to allow confirmation votes on President Bush's troubled judicial nominations.
{{{In other words, even with a Dem majority, it's still the status quo and Cons are still blackmailing legislators into doing the bidding of the dictator....}}}
US Military Wants War Crimes Compound for Gitmo Detainees
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806Y.shtml
The US military on Friday said it plans to build a $125 million compound at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, where it hopes to hold war-crimes trials for terror suspects by the middle of next year. Amnesty International USA described the compound as "a permanent homage to its failed experiment in second class justice."
{{{Oy. Let me guess: Halilburton or one of its subsidiaries is building this new facility?!? It's my understanding that of the hundreds of prisoners, fewer than 12 have been charged with anything. Of what possible use will a new building to hold trials be? There must already be sufficient courtroom space to hold fewer than 12 trials. I'd rather see Gitmo torn down, obliterated off the face of the earth....}}}
Iraq Is a "Disaster" Admits Blair
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806A.shtml
Blair's most frank admission yet over the war in Iraq came during an interview on the new Al Jazeera English television channel with Sir David Frost. Tony Blair admitted that British intervention in Iraq has been a disaster last night - sending shockwaves through Westminster.
Clear Evidence 2006 Congressional Elections Hacked
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806B.shtml
A major undercount of Democratic votes and an overcount of Republican votes in US House and Senate races across the country is indicated by an analysis of national exit polling data. These findings have led the Election Defense Alliance to issue an urgent call for further investigation into the 2006 election results - and a moratorium on deployment of all electronic election equipment.
Volunteer Force May Be "Severely Degraded" Soon, Retired General Says
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806C.shtml
The all-volunteer military force could be "severely degraded" within two years unless major recruiting and retention reforms are made soon, according to a retired Army four-star general.
Georgia-Based Army Unit to Serve Third Tour in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806X.shtml
The Army's 3rd Infantry Division, which helped lead the charge to Baghdad at the outset of the war, will return next year and become the first Army division to serve three tours in Iraq.
Robert Parry | America: What to Do Next?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806D.shtml
"The November 7 elections took the wind out of the blowhard sails that had been driving the United States toward the shoals of endless war abroad and authoritarianism at home. But the ship of state still finds itself buffeted in very stormy seas, with a safe harbor far beyond the horizon," says Robert Parry. "The question now is what to do next?"
Judge Refuses to Dismiss NSA Surveillance Lawsuits
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806E.shtml
Forty-eight lawsuits against the nation's largest telecommunications companies for alleged participation in a warrantless government surveillance program had their first day all together in court Friday, in a courtroom packed with more than two dozen lawyers for the government, the companies and civil liberties groups.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200611180006?src=clip200611180006
Click on the video.... Jon Stewart....
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/11/17/republicans-just-love-the-filibuster-now/
Republicans just love the filibuster now
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061118/ap_on_re_us/montana_senate_switch
Montana politician changes parties
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/uclickcomics/20061119/cx_nq_uc/nq20061119
Non Sequitur
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/18/AR2006111801076.html
Embittered Insiders Turn Against Bush
The weekend after the statue of Saddam Hussein fell, Kenneth Adelman and a couple of other promoters of the Iraq war gathered at Vice President Cheney's residence to celebrate. The invasion had been the "cakewalk" Adelman predicted. Cheney and his guests raised their glasses, toasting President Bush and victory. "It was a euphoric moment," Adelman recalled.
Forty-three months later, the cakewalk looks more like a death march, and Adelman has broken with the Bush team. He had an angry falling-out with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld this fall. He and Cheney are no longer on speaking terms. And he believes that "the president is ultimately responsible" for what Adelman now calls "the debacle that was Iraq."
{More on link.}
All over Seattle I'm seeing signs someone has put up:
"Don't participate in Illegal War
Thank you Lieutenant Watada"
He is being court-martialed, a political prisoner.
Thanks Marjorie -- The DCP is insidious that way. ;) You start expressing your opinion about one thing and pretty soon you're talking about lots of things.
Madame
I have heard from Ally.
Marjorie G
I would say Bush went to Vietnam mostly to get a Free Trade agreement and do some wheeling and dealing with the other leaders who were there for the APEC - kill many birds with one stone, have to travel less to other points in Asia. He even was wheeling and dealing with France, agreeing to sell them Lucent including classified technolgies. Kind of funny though how Congress did not ok the Free Trade thing he thought was a shoe-in! Kind of embarrassing for him! He arrived there empty-handed.
Marjorie G
Anything on e-voting send to Elizabeth here ok? Thx! xo
FYI Reminder:
A rebroadcast of this morning's interview with Senator Kerry will be shown on the Fox News cable channel at 6 pm EST. Check your local listings for possible other schedulings of the 'Fox News Sunday' program.
news you can use,
Otter
Also, there is video of it on Crooks and Liars at:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/11/19/wallace-torments-kerry-with-botched-joke-interrogation
And a text transcript of the interview is on Fox's website at:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230589,00.html
In all the remarks about Henry Kissinger that've been posted here today, not one of them has mentioned the most bizarre, surreal thing about that evil but amazing political chameleon:
Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1973.
The Nobel PEACE Prize.
Unbuckingfelievable.
I wonder who's kissinger now,
Otter
Posted by: Otter at November 19, 2006 06:00 PM
Faux Snooze: Concentrating on what is irrelevant to avoid talking about what is relevant and far more important.
Seems to be the Faux forte....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_bi_ge/gas_prices
U.S. retail gas prices rise slightly
{{{And gas prices won't go down again, I assume. Election's over with, so it's now okay to quit lying about the economy being so good for anyone but oil corporations.}}}
Hersh: CIA Analysis Finds Iran Not Developing Nuclear Weapons
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906Z.shtml
A classifed draft CIA assessment has found no firm evidence of a secret drive by Iran to develop nuclear weapons, as alleged by the White House, according to an advance copy of a report in The New Yorker by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh.
Seymour Hersh | Iran: The Next Act
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906H.shtml
A month before the November elections, Vice-President Dick Cheney was sitting in on a national-security discussion at the Executive Office Building. The talk took a political turn: what if the Democrats won both the Senate and the House? How would that affect policy toward Iran, which is believed to be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power? The White House's concern was not that the Democrats would cut off funds for the war in Iraq, but that future legislation would prohibit it from financing operations targeted at overthrowing or destabilizing the Iranian government to keep it from getting the bomb. "They're afraid that Congress is going to vote a binding resolution to stop a hit on Iran, a la Nicaragua in the Contra war," said a former senior intelligence official.
Frank Rich | It’s Not the Democrats Who Are Divided
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906C.shtml
"Elections may come and go, but Washington remains incorrigible," writes Frank Rich. "Not even voters delivering a clear message can topple the town's conventional wisdom once it has been set in the stone of punditry."
Democrats Pledge to Scrutinize Justice's Civil Rights Arm
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906D.shtml
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday vowed to impose intense oversight on the Justice Department's civil rights division next year, telling a Bush administration official in charge of the agency that the next Congress will scrutinize whether civil rights laws are being properly enforced.
Skelton to Prioritize Pentagon Oversight
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906E.shtml
A student of military history, Missouri Representative Ike Skelton recently pulled out his latest reading, a 1926 tome about the disastrous allied campaign at Gallipoli during World War I. The title: "The Perils of Amateur Strategy." "This administration seems to be writing its sequel," Skelton says, shaking his head.
Gonzales Blasts Surveillance Critics
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906F.shtml
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales contended Saturday that some critics of the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program were defining freedom in a way that poses a "grave threat" to US security.
Plea Deals Pile Up for Accused Marines
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906G.shtml
In the beginning, there were eight. A squad of seven Marines and a Navy corpsman charged with kidnapping and murdering an Iraqi man, a crime described by a prosecutor as especially brutal. They faced military trials; the death penalty was possible. And now there are four. In the six months the men have been held at the Camp Pendleton brig, the profile of the Hamdania cases has changed dramatically. The death penalty is off the table and four of the defendants have struck plea bargains.
Democrats Aim to Repeal Tax Breaks for Big Oil
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111906X.shtml
As much as I and millions of other students in 1972 protested the V.N. war, demonized LBJ and especially living in LBJ's home town of Austin Texas, there appears to be a significant difference b/w LBJ and Bush's military service. I was not aware of this, but apparently LBJ performed real military service to our country during WW II and reported for active duty rather than the Champaign Corp here at Houston's Ellington Airforce Base Bush used to evade being sent to V.N. where reportedly less than 1% of the reserves were actually sent. Battlebob, I am sure can elaborate in greater detail this disticntion.
"On June 21, 1940, Lyndon Johnson was appointed Lieutenant Commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve (USNR). Reporting for active duty on December 10, 1941, three days after Pearl Harbor, he was ordered to the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Navy Department, Washington, D. C., for instruction. He began working on production and manpower problems that were slowing the production of ships and planes, and he traveled in Texas, California, and Washington, assessing labor needs in war production plants. In May 1942, he proceeded to Headquarters, Twelfth Naval District, San Francisco, California, for inspection duty in the Pacific. Stationed in New Zealand and Australia, he participated as an observer on a number of bomber missions in the South Pacific. He was awarded the Army Silver Star Medal by General Douglas MacArthur and cited as follows:
"For gallantry in action in the vicinity of Port Moresby and Salamaua, New Guinea, on June 9, 1942. While on a mission of obtaining information in the Southwest Pacific area, Lieutenant Commander Johnson, in order to obtain personal knowledge of combat conditions, volunteered as an observer on a hazardous aerial combat mission over hostile positions in New Guinea. As our planes neared the target area they were intercepted by eight hostile fighters. When, at this time, the plane in which Lieutenant Commander Johnson was an observer, developed mechanical trouble and was forced to turn back alone, presenting a favorable target to the enemy fighters, he evidenced marked coolness in spite of the hazards involved. His gallant actions enabled him to obtain and return with valuable information."
In addition to the Army Silver Star Medal, Commander Johnson has the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal and the World War II Victory Medal."
I am curious if others have prepared themselves for what I and Farid Zakaria believe that the Republicans and most likely McCain plan on doing which is blaming Democrats for our failures in Iraq, in the '08 campaign. McCain said as much when he inisted this week that he has always believed that we need to send more troops to Iraq to avoid the inevitable debacle, that he himself today acknowledged will most likey happen. Call me a cynic, I just think that that is what Cheney and Rove plan on doing to attack the 110th Congress.
Posted by: Otter at November 19, 2006 06:00 PM
Faux Snooze never seems to bring up the past snafus and fubars of Georgie, Dickie, Rummy, Condisleazy, Gonzilla, et al....
Gee, I wonder why no one concentrates on the "irrelevancies" of the administration?!?
Could it be because everything they could bring up could lead to discussions of war crimes, high crimes and misdemeanors and the war that can't possibly have 'victory' connected with it for the simple reason the invasion of Iraq was a war crime to begin with? That holding prisoners and torturing prisoners at Gitmo and elsewhere is also a war crime? That they can't explain what 'job' is supposed to be 'accomplished' in Iraq so at least our guard and reserve troops can come home where they belong so we're not left vulnerable here at home, and the regular military redeployed elsewhere?
Funny how those little irrelevancies just escape the attention of the anchors at Faux Snooze....
Bubba, I agree. That they can manipulate the vote so completely, makes me wonder.
Suspiciously close results, just enough to prevent results.
Kerry kept insisting today on Fox how Dems have reached out, and not resorting to retribution like 'they' did. How we want to govern and provide moral, and serious leadership.
Yes, Bubba, blame us for not fixing Iraq, since people barely know how our government really operates, what has or hasn't been done these last years.
Also, then rail how bad it would be to have single party rule.
Marjorie: I suspect that they will try and blame Dems for actually losing Iraq and then try and scare voters into believing that they should fear terrorist b/c of what will happen in Iraq when we leave. I raise this point so that we will be prepared to respond to such scurilous attacks when they come, but I suspect that has much more importance than whether we, as Dems were able to 'fix' the Iraq problem as you referenced in your post. I also suspect that as Linda Enterkin referenced the other night, with southerners', especially those in the Jacksonville area's perceptions, that Republicans will again link us, like Bush began while in Hanoi, to failed military actions and as being disloyal to the troops. I don't believe it was true in 1972 anymore than it is true today, but I truly suspect that that was what Bush was clumsily attemting to do in his Hanoi linkage speech. Hopefully JK and Clark will be able to respond that those like him that actually wore the military uniform will not be lectured by draft evaders like the ones running this Administration.
Bush Gets Grounded
By Andy Borowitz
In yet another setback for President George W. Bush, his father, former President George H.W. Bush, appeared in the Oval Office today and demanded that his son give back the keys to the White House at once.
For the elder Mr. Bush, who has largely taken a hands-off approach during his son’s first six years in office, the decision to demand the keys to his erstwhile residence was regarded as extraordinary.
But according to witnesses to the unprecedented confrontation, the senior Mr. Bush also demanded the keys to Air Force One and informed his son that he was “grounded for life.”
After the 41st president reprimanded the 43rd president for invading Iraq, the younger Mr. Bush attempted to offer a defense for his unilateral action, telling his father, “All of my friends said that it was a good idea.”
“Oh, and if all your friends told you to go AWOL from the Alabama National Guard, would you do that, too?” his father thundered. “OK, well maybe that wasn’t the best example, but you get the point.”
Speaking to reporters later, the 41st president said that he forbade his son from spending time with Vice President Dick Cheney, calling him “a bad influence.”
“I told George to spend the weekend mowing that big lawn in front of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,” he said. “I want him to think long and hard about what he’s done.”
Elsewhere, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group issued recommendations for winning the war in Iraq, including putting former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in charge of the insurgents.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20061119_satire_bushs_dad_asks_for_keys_to_white_house_back/
"A month before the November elections, Vice-President Dick Cheney was sitting in on a national-security discussion at the Executive Office Building. The talk took a political turn: what if the Democrats won both the Senate and the House? How would that affect policy toward Iran, which is believed to be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power? At that point, according to someone familiar with the discussion, Cheney began reminiscing about his job as a lineman, in the early nineteen-sixties, for a power company in Wyoming. Copper wire was expensive, and the linemen were instructed to return all unused pieces three feet or longer. No one wanted to deal with the paperwork that resulted, Cheney said, so he and his colleagues found a solution: putting “shorteners” on the wire—that is, cutting it into short pieces and tossing the leftovers at the end of the workday. If the Democrats won on November 7th, the Vice-President said, that victory would not stop the Administration from pursuing a military option with Iran. The White House would put “shorteners” on any legislative restrictions, Cheney said, and thus stop Congress from getting in its way."
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/061127fa_fact?page=1
Bubba
That's true about LBJ. My dad was stationed in Australia and New Guinea at the same time, US Army. He trained in Little Rock Arkansas.
Elsewhere, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group issued recommendations for winning the war in Iraq, including putting former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in charge of the insurgents.
Posted by: madame defarge at November 19, 2006 08:36 PM
Now why didn't we think of that before???
November 20, 2006
Cycle of Revenge Fuels a Pattern of Iraqi Killings
By SABRINA TAVERNISE
BAGHDAD, Nov. 19 — As Iraq sinks deeper into war, a new pattern of revenge has become the driver of violence in the capital.
In a cycle that has been tracked by the American military since May and June, after months of apparently random sectarian violence the pattern has become one of attack and counterattack, with Sunni militants staging what commanders call “spectacular” strikes and Shiite militias retaliating with abductions and murders of Sunnis.
Militias come to funerals and offer to carry out revenge attacks. Gunmen execute blindfolded people in full public view. Mortars are lobbed between Sunni and Shiite neighborhoods. Sometimes the killers seem to be seeking specific people who were involved in earlier attacks, but many victims lose their lives simply to even out the sectarian toll.
“The problem is that every time there’s a sensational event, that starts the whole sectarian cycle again,” said Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV, the chief spokesman for the American command in Iraq. “If we could stop the cyclical nature of this in Baghdad, we could really change the dynamics here.”
General Caldwell said that a recent and intensive series of American raids against Al Qaeda cells, as well as against Shiite militias that have struck back at Sunnis, had seriously damaged some of their networks. But American commanders have made similar claims on several occasions in the course of the war only to have the killing resume later at a higher level.
Scores of survivors and witnesses have noted the emerging cycle of revenge in interviews, describing highly personal attacks that involve a bullet in the head far more often than a bomb. In the past eight days, at least 715 Iraqis have been killed or have been found dead, according to The Associated Press. The death toll has reached 1,320 already this month, higher than the 1,216 who died in October, according to The A.P.’s count.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/world/middleeast/20revenge.html
Posted by: Christy at November 19, 2006 08:45 PM
That story certainly puts Cheney's attitude towards duty in the proper light. Back in my days in the music industry, I knew of a certain store manager who did similar things - like solving their overstock problem by simply throwing it into the dumpster - and was later to rise to a V.P. position in the industry.
The Greeks tell us that "character is destiny". Never has this been more true than in the instances of Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. Or as they say in the computer industry, "garbage in, garbage out".
Speaking of Bush and Cheney's character...
http://www.hpleft.com/021503E1.html
Ellen of the Tenth has a brilliant satire piece up. What's scary is how much of it is true...
A Holiday Week Skit: Its a Wonderful Administration and the Wrong Holiday
http://ellenofthetenth.blogspot.com/2006/11/holiday-week-skit-its-wonderful.html#comments
Matt, after reading that, now I feel drunk.
Anyone out there still think McCain is an OK guy?
http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2F2006%2F11%2F19%2Fmccain-abortion%2F
McCain Flip-Flops, Supports Immediate Reversal of Roe v. Wade
In 1999, the “moderate” version of John McCain said that overturning Roe v. Wade would be dangerous for women and he would not support it, even in “the long term.” Here’s McCain in the San Francisco Chronicle:
I’d love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.
This morning on ABC, McCain — now aggressively courting the likes of Jerry Falwell — expressed his unequivocal support for overturning Roe v. Wade. Watch it:
Carol
McCain can inherit Bush's shrinking base. & he'll lose alot of female vote if he runs. Urban-dwellers - forget it. College students - LOL. It'll be a guy thing. So many moderate Republicans were defeated because Independents voted for Moderate Democrats. Alot of those people have liked McCain before and it's the far right who thought he wasn't conservative enough. So maybe he's hoping to get both.
He's too old, looks pasty.
McCain has company. I saw Giuliana on the cover of NewsMax, the ultimate rightwing rag. According to http://www.tpm.electioncentral.com:
In interviews, several of [Rudy's new fundraisers] said the former mayor had discussed his potential liabilities in a Republican primary — perhaps the greatest being his liberal views on social issues like abortion and gay rights.
“Certainly one of the first questions that was asked was how his views on things like gun control and pro-choice and gay marriage would affect the views of the party in terms of nominating him,” Mr. Immergut said.
“He talked specifically about what his views on those issues were, and he said that his own view was that when he was able to engage in conversations with party members who were more on the right, they could understand that his views were not as black and white as they had been painted.”
Mr. Immergut added, “He said that for many important issues, his views would be right in sync with the huge majority of Republicans.”
Translation: Giuliani is laying the groundwork to make the case to social conservatives that he isn't the social liberal he's been made out to be. Maybe he'll blame the liberal media for painting him as a liberal, or something.
Creepy.
From Center for American Progress
IRAN
Stovepiping Intelligence
"Make no mistake, President Bush will need to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities before leaving office," writes Joshua Muravchik, a neoconservative scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. "The global thunder against Bush when he pulls the trigger will be deafening, and it will have many echoes at home." So neoconservatives, Muravchik argued, "need to pave the way intellectually now and be prepared to defend the action when it comes." In that vein, Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, said last August, "We could be in a military confrontation with Iran much sooner than people expect." In a startling new article in the New Yorker, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh writes that, despite the recent bluster over Iran's attempts to build a nuclear bomb, a highly classified draft assessment by the CIA found "no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons program." According to Hersh, the White House has reacted with hostility to the CIA's report and, as it did with Iraq, is bypassing the agency by collecting and compiling its own intelligence for a possible military strike. On CNN yesterday, Hersh said there is an "internecine fight" going on between the CIA and the White House over the intelligence process, "the same fight, by the way, that we had before Iraq."
HIDING THE INTELLIGENCE: At issue between the White House and the CIA is access to secret intelligence on Iran allegedly being provided by the Israelis. According to Hersh's new article, "The Next Act," intelligence from "Israeli spies operating inside Iran claimed that Iran has developed and tested a trigger device for a nuclear bomb." The Israeli report is being used by White House hawks within the administration to refute the CIA and “prove the White House’s theory that the Iranians are on track" to build the bomb. A former senior intelligence officer told Hersh, "The problem is that no one can verify it. We don’t know who the Israeli source is. ... Where is the test site? How often have they done it? How big is the warhead -- a breadbox or a refrigerator? [The CIA doesn't] have that.” Hersh told CNN's Wolf Blitzer yesterday, "That information is being handled pretty much by the White House and various offices in the Pentagon. And the CIA isn't getting a good look at the Israeli intelligence. It's the old word, stovepiping. It's the president and the vice president. It's pretty much being kept in the White House." Hersh's reporting suggests a breakdown in the intelligence process -- similar to the one that occurred prior to the Iraq war -- is now happening with regards to Iran and may open to door to possible intelligence manipulation. Before the Iraq war, the White House set up intelligence stovepipes to “get information they wanted directly to the top leadership.” Cheney and allies inside the Pentagon relied on information provided by the Iraqi National Congress, an exile group headed by Ahmad Chalabi. “Chalabi’s defector reports were…flowing from the Pentagon directly to the Vice-President’s office, and then on to the President, with little prior evaluation by intelligence professionals.” Some of the most inaccurate intelligence about Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction came from a Chalabi operative, known as Curveball.
CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF CHENEY: Worried that the White House may attempt to manipulate the intelligence process again, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) proposed the Iran Intelligence Oversight Act last June, legislation meant to ensure that each of the administration’s claims on Iran would be backed up by the consensus assessments of intelligence analysts. "The White House cherry-picked and politicized intelligence to sell the [Iraq] war," Reid said. "Iran cannot and will not be another Iraq." The Iran oversight legislation was unanimously accepted in the Senate as an amendment to the 2007 Defense Authorization Bill. According to Hersh's new article, Cheney may be planning to ignore the new congressional mandate. Cheney said the White House would circumvent any restrictions imposed by the new Democratic majority "and thus stop Congress from getting in its way" on Iran. Cheney is adamant that whatever a Democratic Congress may do to ensure the President does not overstep his authority, "the Administration would find a way to work around it."
A CONFUSED APPROACH: The White House policy on Iran has been "confused and defensive." While there is broad desire for Iran to stop its nuclear program, hard-liners inside the White House will settle for nothing less than regime change. These ideologues refuse to engage Iran diplomatically and carry a naively false hope that the people of Iran would embrace U.S. military force. As an esteemed group of former military and diplomatic leaders wrote last August, "The current crises must be resolved through diplomacy, not military action. An attack on Iran would have disastrous consequences for security in the region and U.S. forces in Iraq, and it would inflame hatred and violence in the Middle East and among Muslims elsewhere." The Iranians have indicated they would consider talks with the U.S. over regional issues, including Iraq, if requested. There were even reports last September that suggested Iran was "close to an agreement that would include a suspension of uranium enrichment." Yet, the administration's resistance to opening negotiations with Iran has prevented any progress towards a final deal. And Iran, sensing its strengthening position given the administration's difficulties in Iraq, is raising the stakes. Iran now now flouts the international community, issues verbal taunts at its adversaries, and aggressively advances its nuclear program. As evidence, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad today said his nation plans to use 60,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium as part of its nuclear program, disregarding the international community's concerns. Iran so far has built about 300 centrifuges -- and these have operated sporadically, producing only very small quantities of low-enriched uranium.
THE NEW POWELL?: Defense Secretary nominee Robert Gates has engendered bipartisan support, in part because he has advocated direct talks with Iranians in the past. He co-authored a Council on Foreign Relations report in 2004 that stated, “Washington should approach Iran with a readiness to explore areas of common interests while continuing to contest objectionable policy.” The replacement of Rumsfeld with Gates was commonly "seen as an acknowledgment that the Administration was paying a political price for the debacle in Iraq." But Hersh's article notes that, while the Gates appointment may be a conciliatory gesture, it holds little promise of a significant change in policy. "The White House saw Gates as someone who would have the credibility to help it stay the course on Iran and Iraq," writes Hersh. "Gates would also be an asset before Congress. If the Administration needed to make the case that Iran’s weapons program posed an imminent threat, Gates would be a better advocate than someone who had been associated with the flawed intelligence about Iraq." A former intelligence official noted, “He’s not the guy who told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and he’ll be taken seriously by Congress.” Joseph Cirincione, senior vice president for national security at the Center for American Progress, cautioned that Gates could end up being the fresh-faced advocate the White House needs to sell a strategically disastrous war. "The danger is that Gates could be the new Colin Powell -- the one who opposes the policy but ends up briefing the Congress and publicly supporting it,” he said.
McCain's role in covering up Abramhoff scandal so it would be less of a factor in 2004 election:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/19/235337/63
Iran Urges Summit With Iraq and Syria:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6228313,00.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061120/pl_nm/iran_usa_report_dc_2
White House brushes off CIA report on Iran: report
The White House dismissed a classified CIA draft assessment that found no conclusive evidence of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program, the New Yorker reported.
The article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said the CIA's analysis was based on technical intelligence collected by overhead satellites and on other evidence like measurements of the radioactivity of water samples.
"The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency," according to the article.
"A current senior intelligence official confirmed the existence of the CIA analysis, and told me that the White House had been hostile to it," it said.
The United States has accused Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian energy program.
The article, in the current issue of the magazine, discussed how Vice President Dick Cheney believed the Bush administration would deal with Iran if the Republicans lost control of Congress as they did in the November 7 election.
"If the Democrats won on November 7th, the vice president said, that victory would not stop the administration from pursuing a military option with Iran," Hersh wrote, citing an unidentified source familiar with the discussion.
just interesting...
176 Newspapers to Form a Partnership With Yahoo
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/technology/
20yahoo.html
oop
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/technology/20yahoo.html
Judge Sentences GOP Fundraiser to 18 Years in Prison
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/us/politics/21ohiocnd.html?hp&ex=1164085200&en=840eabf604187cb5&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Thomas Noe, a prominent rare-coin dealer and Republican fund raiser who was convicted last week of theft, corrupt activity and forgery, was sentenced today in a Toledo, Ohio, courtroom to 18 years in prison.
The sentenced is to be served in addition to a two-year, three-month sentence imposed in September on federal charges of illegally funneling money to President Bush’s reelection campaign...
Iran/Malaysia ato hold talks - on oil
http://www.playfuls.com/news_10_3613-Malaysia-Iran-To-Hold-Talks-On-Bilateral-Cooperation.html
Just in time for Thanksgiving: Gas prices on rise again
Average up about 5 cents in two weeks to $2.23 a gallon
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15807679/
Sore losers!
Want to help the troops?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/18/203710/39
Notice one need is helmet upgrade kits. We still cannot get the troops proper equipment.
So much for the Pentagon's three choices.
Just bring them home and leave truckloads of cash so they can rebuild.
Great, Aimzz, now newspapers will do even less investigative news, with stories ever more alike.
Today would have been Robert Kennedy's 81st birthday. The world is crying out for a compassionate leader like him.
I wrote something about McCain this morning. I have no idea why or what to do with it.
The Subjugating of Good Men
When all of this recent history is written down somewhere in full, and when decades have removed us from the bitter days we now endure, there will be one story that even then will stand out to define these times.
It will begin something like this, "Once upon a time there was a good man, a republican named John McCain. He was once a Great American Hero."
Even with all the examples of what George W. Bush and his Busheviks have done to their opposition for six long years now, it is in no way more compelling that what they did to their own that stood in their way.
It is true and absolutely not in dispute. John McCain was once one hell of a man. We all know the story of what he sacrificed, and endured. There has never been any doubt of his patriotism or his loyalty to this nation. For years he was accustomed to the status he had rightly earned.
John McCain, a hero to this nation. Even his political opposition would have voted for him. And then came George W. Bush and the dawning of the Busheviks.
Before any challenge came from beyond their party, first opposition within the party had to be eliminated by these Busheviks. They would say and do anything to place George W. Bush into power, and destroy anyone that threatened it.
The republicans fractured for a brief time as the Busheviks were pitted against the real republicans.
At first, McCain seemed to hold his own just fine, and then his absolute subjugation began right before our eyes. A slow descent into madness and hell seemingly started as soon as they attacked John McCain's wife and adopted child. The smears began to escalate. We were told by other republicans that John McCain had somehow lost his mind back in the day he was in a prison camp. He was not to be trusted, they said, because he was crazy.
They caught him in small nuances and blew it up and distorted everything about him until even the real republicans stood ready to also attack his wife and child. Soon enough, McCain subjugated himself to silence.
Something awful happened to John McCain the moment he fell quiet, in the ensuing silence that same awful thing was unleashed onto the rest of us. It is no wonder that John McCain folded, even imploded into himself. He took his beating as best he could and finally just let it go and moved on. History will remember what happened next.
The only place left for him then was at the feet of George W. Bush. The only way he could protect himself or his family was to serve the one who would dare attack them so viciously.
As predicted George W. Bush became drunk and reckless with power. And every time they needed someone to help obscure or support their arguments, they pulled the strings of their new puppet and he mouthed the words they needed him to say. Whenever the Busheviks needed credibility they would steal his and use it all up, over and over again. The long and humiliating subjugation of John McCain has gone on for years. It has been awful to see.
It is now almost impossible to tell John McCain from a Bushevik. In the desperate hopes to stealthily regain back some power, he now tells us he is against Roe vs. Wade as he subjugates himself to those that put George W. Bush in power. He lets' himself be used by the agents of hate and intolerance, all the while pretending he is still the same man we remember.
I think there is no doubt we prefer to remember John McCain as he once was. A beautiful son of this nation heroically facing all odds to come back home again. A young and strong man that would never allow his principles to be determined by circumstance. That man never would have handed more of his brothers over to be butchered for nothing.
There is no doubt indeed that we can all agree on what he was, a hero.
But now all that we are left with is this subjugated old man that fell silent long ago. His own legacy will be that of a slave serving a vile master, in the desperate hopes of not being treated like a broken man.
None of us will ever forget the breaking of John McCain. History will record it as the subjugation of a mighty nation.
Wow, Christy.
You are amazing, as always.
Can anyone say thread header?
Iraqi violence spirals
Reuters link: http://tinyurl.com/y7hl6k
White House brushes off CIA draft on Iran: report
Reuters link: http://tinyurl.com/yyfyd9
To get us in the mood for turkey day, someone sent me this - written last year but mostly still accurate:
HOLIDAY RECIPE FOR LAME DUCK
Choose from the following foul:
Dead or sitting duck, big turkey, or chicken-hawk (Guts will have already been removed from chicken-hawk, so stuffing may proceed immediately)
Remove backbone, but bind the bird with Duck Tape in hostage posture to give structure and an impression of unity.
For an unexpected taste sensation, marinate the bird-brain in alcohol forming it into a pretend head-shape, placing where the head would ordinarily be. Expect brain to shrink further in the heat.
Pluck bird, and feather the nests of the already wealthy and well-connected.
Create a stuffing of Rummy Rice and selected nuts.
Simmer in a cup of extra virgin 10-40 oil.
Then dredge in white phosphorus and bake (if unavailable, substitute napalm).
Line and press stuffing into every open pocket.
Turn heat setting to intolerable.
Place bird on rack and torture out of sight until skin falls off the bone or until
Constitutional lawyers stop you.
Skewer the wings together.
Once bird is done, remove the left wing completely and discard.
For flambe or blackened bird, toss in an I.E.D.
Cover duck, or duck and cover, as you wish.
Offer the bird to members of the press when they start to ask real questions.
Invite lobbyists to dinner first, and save them the most tender flesh.
Serve lying repeatedly on a bed of Saudi sand, and present with straight face and talking points.
When all have gathered, prey over the community.
Follow the same recipe for Cooked Goose, but invite a few grunts on their third military tours for a last supper.
Send carcass and leftovers (if any) to New Orleans for a homeland gumbo or stew.
Copyright Dinah Kudatsky Nov. 2005
TY Carol.
"Once bird is done, remove the left wing completely and discard."
HAHAHAHA!! HAHAHA!!!!!!
That is no turkey!
CNN quick vote:
Do you agree with Rep. Charles Rangel that bringing back the draft would deter politicians from launching wars?
Vote here: http://www.cnn.com/
Two thirds of the way down on the right.
Christy,
This one is for you.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/17/AR2006111701481.html
It shows how we can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Posted by: battlebob at November 20, 2006 03:30 PM
thanks, bb.
I just hope that Nancy Pelosi can stay above the fray. She's got a heavy load on her shoulders, being the first woman speaker. I've no doubt that she's capable. I just hope the likes of Joe Biden don't sabatage her on their quest.
I used to like him, but now I find him smarmy - similar to McCain, although not quite as bad.
I agree with the plan, though. Get the second string to go for the dirt, while the starters focus on the issues at hand. I'd like it better if they didn't put off Iraq, though.
We gotta get our troops the hell out of there.
Posted by: battlebob at November 20, 2006 03:30 PM
Ooops - read that as for me, not Christy. Sorry, C, to intrude on a message for you!
Report: Democrats 'think big' on Bush oversight
RAW STORY
Published: Monday November 20, 2006
Democrats are "thinking big" on Bush oversight, according to a Capitol Hill newspaper.
"Senate Democrats’ plans to significantly beef up the chamber’s oversight of the Bush administration will go well beyond intelligence-gathering activities and President Bush’s prosecution of the Iraq War to include investigations into the Medicare program, alleged censorship of scientists, climate change and potential manipulation of energy markets, according to aides and lobbyists," John Stanton reports for Roll Call.
more: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Report_Democrats_think_big_on_Bush_1120.html
BTW moderators:
The trackback link doesn't work.
Carol,
I agree that getting the troops out is mandatory.
Leave it to Biden to be a showhorse. After all, he is still out making reservations.
I wonder which camp Kerry is in?
There are some good ideas but I don't beleive a lot of heavy hitters like Kerry are going to put their own future political activites before the countries needs.
What is important is the careful ways we need to do both. We just can't rush in and start throwing supenas all over the place. We have to be careful about it so the public supports us.
If we do this right, the evil doers will rot in jail and Dems will be in the majority for a generation. But only if we are smart.
Army gives Rumsfeld Doctrine a rewrite
The '07 manual puts greater value on maintaining stability than on swift action.
LA Times link: http://tinyurl.com/yztofh
~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld may be leaving under a cloud of criticism over his handling of the Iraq war, but his invasion plan — emphasizing speed over massive troop numbers — has consistently been held up as a resounding success.
Yet with Iraq near chaos 3 1/2 years later, a key Army manual now is being rewritten in a way that rejects the Rumsfeld doctrine and counsels against using it again...
Five years after Muslim immigrants were abused in a federal jail here, the guards who beat them and the Washington policymakers who decided to hold them for months without charges are being called to account.
Some 1,200 Middle Eastern men were arrested on suspicion of terrorism after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. No holding place was so notorious as Brooklyn's nine-story Metropolitan Detention Center. In a special unit on the top floor, detainees were smashed into walls, repeatedly stripped and searched, and often denied basic legal rights and religious privileges, according to federal investigations...
~snip
Now the federal Bureau of Prisons, which runs the jail, has revealed for the first time that 13 staff members have been disciplined, two of them fired. The warden has retired and moved to the Midwest...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
9/11 prisoner abuse suit could be landmark
LA Times link: http://tinyurl.com/y9l9am
A new Beatles album called Love, a mashup, produced by Giles Martin, to be released tomorrow.
Obama speaks.
Sen. Obama: Iraq withdrawal should begin in 2007
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/20/obama.iraq/index.html
[snip]
"There have been too many speeches. There have been too many excuses. There have been too many flag-draped coffins, and there have been too many heartbroken families."