Fire the Neocons, Fight the Warby Jed BabbinThe Iraq debate is all about the success or failure of the neocon’s nation-building exercise. We need to change the debate and decide how to win the war.

DOMESTIC USE OF SPY SATELLITES QUESTIONED

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee scolded Homeland
Security Secretary Michael Chertoff last week for failing to notify him
of plans to expand the use of intelligence satellites for homeland
security applications.

"Unfortunately, I have had to rely on media reports to gain information
about this endeavor because neither I nor my staff was briefed on the
decision to create this new office prior to the public disclosure of
this effort," wrote Rep. Bennie Thompson in an August 22 letter to
Secretary Chertoff (who has been mentioned as a possible nominee to
replace Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General).

"I need you to provide me with an immediate assurance that upon its
October 1st roll out, this program will be operating within the
confines of the Constitution and all applicable laws and regulations,"
Chairman Thompson wrote.

"Additionally, because I have not been informed of the existence of
this program for over a two year period, I am requesting that for the
next six weeks, you provide me with bi-weekly briefings on the progress
of the [National Applications Office] working groups."

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2007_cr/thompson082207.pdf

The Thompson letter as well as the new homeland security initiative
were first reported in the Wall Street Journal.

A Washington Post editorial said that any use of spy satellites for
domestic monitoring "must be accompanied... by robust protections for
privacy and civil liberties." The failure to properly advise Congress
was "not a comforting start for a landmark change."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7082401838.html

http://harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90000995


<h2 class="content">The Next War Draws Nearer</h2> DEPARTMENT No Comment BY Scott Horton PUBLISHED August 23, 2007 Hardly a week passes in which I don’t get a message from someone within the great bureaucratic wasteland on the Potomac about the Bush Administration’s latest schemes relating to war against Iran. Now we’re going through another one of those periods in which the pace is quickening and the pitch is becoming more intense. I continue to put the prospects for a major military operation targeting Iran down as “likely,” and the time frame drawing nearer. When will Bush give the go ahead? I think late this year or early next would be the most congenial time frame from the perspective of the war party. Some of the developments that go into my call:

• Labeling the Revolutionary Guards as ‘Terrorists.’ Last week the Bush Administration floated the idea that it would schedule Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (an official part of the Iranian government) as a terrorist organization. This is related to the Administration’s propaganda drive to portray the Revolutionary Guard as deeply engaged in training terrorists in Iraq. (Iran is deeply engaged in outfitting and supporting factions loyal to it in Iraq, as is Saudi Arabia and other states.) Of course, the Revolutionary Guards answer directly to Supreme Leader Khamenei, so in taking this position, the Bush Administration is essentially saying that it has decided to ditch an initiative that focuses on skirting Ahmadinejad by going directly to Khamenei—that is, it is limiting its diplomatic options, yet again. No real surprise there, since it’s clear—notwithstanding statements from Condoleezza Rice about the exhaustion of diplomatic approaches—that the White House (read: Dick Cheney) places no store whatsoever in a diplomatic effort for Iran.
• Preparation for a ‘Dirty War’? The branding of the Revolutionary Guard as terrorists raises troubling prospects with respect to targeting and military operations in Iran. Based on prior Bush Administration postures (adopted with respect to the Taliban, and units of Saddam Hussein’s military), it would mean that they are denied Geneva Convention protections in the coming war and could be treated to “highly coercive interrogation techniques” (i.e., torture) if captured. In sum, it looks like the Bush Administration is busily preparing for another “dirty war.”
• Costing for Ground Operations in Iran. In the last two weeks the Department of Defense has begun pushing regular contractors very aggressively for “unit costs” to be used for logistical preparations for reconstruction and ground operations in a certain country of West Asia. In the last week, the requests have gotten increasingly harried. And what, exactly, is the country in question? Iran.
• ‘There Will Be an Attack on Iran.’ Former senior CIA analyst Bob Baer has a piece in the current Time Magazine called “Prelude to an Attack on Iran.” Baer also sees a quickening pace and an increasing likelihood of a sustained military assault on Iran, driven by the Neocons. Baer develops the scenario, showing how the Revolutionary Guards will be portrayed as terrorists, they will be linked to armor-penetrating projectiles used in Iraq, and this will be taken as a pretext to wage a war against Iran. He quotes an Administration official who says these explosive devices “are a casus belli for this Administration. There will be an attack on Iran.”
• Bolton Wants Bombs in Six Months. John Bolton appeared on Fox News and was asked a question based on Bob Baer’s report. Bolton “absolutely hopes” it is true that bombs will start falling on Iran within six months.
• The Predictable Role of Fox News. Fox News is intimately intertwined with the Administration’s propaganda machine, as a study of its coverage of the run-up to the Iraq War shows (and similarly, its decision to all but pull the plug on more recent coverage of the dismal situation in Iraq). Producer Robert Greenwald has done a terrific summary of how Fox News continues a propaganda build-up to support military action against Iran which closely parallels what it did for its masters in the run-up to the Iraq War. Catch the video here.

Exporting Instability by William D. Hartung, 8/25/2007

Bush Takes on the Iraq War With a Vietnam Flip-Flop by Clarence Page, 8/25/2007

Iraq and Vietnam: The View From Hanoi by Kay Johnson, 8/24/2007

The Last Days of Democracy
Truthdig speaks with Elliot Cohen, author of “The Last Days of Democracy,” who argues that the United States is in political and cultural decline, with media and telecommunications giants engaged in “a well-organized effort to hijack America.”

Hasta Luego, Alberto
<h6 class="date">Posted on Aug 27, 2007</h6> AP Photo / Charles Dharapak Gonzales’ resignation takes effect Sept. 17. Said Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York: “Thank God.”


After months of intense scrutiny from the press, public and the Senate Judiciary Committee, beleaguered Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has followed in Karl Rove’s footsteps, becoming the second major member of President Bush’s inner circle to resign in this last phase of Bush’s presidency. Gonzales called it quits on Monday, sparking a flurry of reactions on Capitol Hill.

The Politico:

In a brief statement before cameras at the Justice Department, Gonzales said he had met with Bush on Sunday and informed him of his decision to resign, effective Sept. 17. He made no references to the controversies that hounded him from office.

“Let me say that it’s been one of my greatest privileges to lead the Department of Justice,” Gonzales said. “I have great admiration and respect for the men and women who work here. I have made a point as attorney general to personally meet as many of them as possible, and today I want to again thank them for their service to our nation. ... I am profoundly grateful to President Bush for his friendship and for the many opportunities he has given me to serve the American people.”

Read more

<h3 class="entry-header">Allawi lobbying</h3> I've been enjoying the exposure of Iyad Allawi's contracts with DC consultants, which Iraqslogger uncovered and got into the mainstream media. It really shouldn't be all that surprising - Allawi has always been about foreign support, not a domestic political base. The idea that the road to power in Baghdad lies through DC lobbyists is not a particularly strange one, especially given the experience of Iraqi exile politicians in 2002-2003. It's also worth noting that Allawi's bid for a return to power is nothing new - his candidacy has been pushed by the Saudis and other Arab states, and by some Americans since last fall. I warned about this Allawi gambit back in March:

Will Iyad Allawi, the rotund one-time Iraqi Prime Minister and current London resident, [email="http://www.popmatters.com/pm/news/article/31580/allawi-leads-drive-to-replace-current-iraq-administration/"]be the next[/email] Prime Minister of Iraq? He certainly seems to want the job, and he suits the Bush administration's agenda suspiciously well. But his return to power would not only fail to end the civil war - it would also signal a decisive end to democratic aspirations in Iraq and the Arab world, increase America's role at a time when most Americans would prefer to leave, and pave the way to a confrontation with Iran.

I think that analysis from the spring holds up pretty well, for better or for worse. Allawi would not solve any of America's problems in Iraq, and - as several people have pointed out - he'd have a rough time getting a change of government through Parliament or taking control of an Iraqi state thoroughly penetrated and controlled by pro-Iranian Shia factions. But he represents an easy out for those who want to blame Maliki for problems which really flow from the nature of the Iraqi state, and an excuse to kick the can down the road for another year. What makes Allawi plausible is the absence of any other serious contenders to rule Iraq - which is, perhaps, the real indictment of the Iraqi political system.

Posted on August 27, 2007 at 10:17 AM | Permalink |

http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/

In the Twilight of His Deployment

I just came across this blog of an American military guy that the Pentagon has not yet shut down called "Army of Dude."

Here are some choice entries:

Stupid Shit of The Deployment Awards!

Working with 1920s -- A Sunni insurgent group we've been battling for months, responsible for the death of my friend and numerous attacks, agreed to fight Al Qaeda alongside us. Since then, they've grown into a much more organized, lethal force. They use this organization to steal cars and intimidate and torture the local population, or anyone they accuse of being linked to Al Qaeda. The Gestapo of the 21st century, sanctioned by the United States Army.

The Surge -- The beefing up of ground forces in Iraq at the beginning of the year, started by the 82nd Airborne. Unit deployments were moved up several months to maintain a higher level of boots on the ground to quell the Baghdad situation. What most don't realize is the amount of actual fighting troops in a brigade, something in the area of 2,000 soldiers in a brigade of 5,000 depending on what unit it is. So for every 2,000 fighters, there are 3,000 pencil pushers sucking up resources in every brigade that was surged. A logistical nightmare that, surprise, failed miserably. The increase of troops in Baghdad pushed the insurgents to rural areas (like Diyala), hence our move here in March. The surge was nothing more than a thorn in the side of nomadic fighters having to move thirty five miles while the generals watched Baghdad with stubborn eyes.

I Can Taste It

This occupation, this money pit, this smorgasbord of superfluous
aggression is getting more hopeless and dismal by the second. It's
maddening to think that more than a year's worth of blood, sweat and
tears will lead to little more than a pat on the back and a hideously
redundant speech from someone who did none of the bleeding, sweating or
crying.

Despite being in a meaningless situation, my life has never had this much meaning. I watch the backs of my friends and they do the same for me. I've killed to protect them, and they've killed to protect me. For friends and family, being deployed is like being pregnant or surviving a car wreck; everyone is nice to you all of a sudden. People I don't even know send me kind words and packages from all over. They came out of the woodwork knowing my plight and shared with me heartfelt hope and luck.

The fact that you're reading this now, dear reader, is a testament to that. Would you have cared about what I thought, felt or did two years ago? This position I'm in, shared by less than one percent of the U.S. population, has given me the distinct privilege of sharing my experiences and ruminations of this war, observations undiluted by perpetually delirious officials like General Petreaus and mainstream media sirens. I have felt every extreme of the human condition, physically, morally and emotionally. I've never laughed so hard, cried so long or felt more ashamed of myself in all of my life. In a matter of weeks it'll be over, and I'll have just the memories of enduring 130 degree heat, and poker games lasting well into the night.

I'll look back on the hysterical laughter during fifteen hour Baghdad clears, the terror of being pinned down by machine gun fire, the sight of a Stryker on its side and the unfolding of a body bag under the flames of a nearby school, unzipped tenderly to fit the body of Chevy as RPGs screamed overhead. Soon this place will all be in the past.

The Enemy of My Enemy of My Enemy of My Enemy...

Fourteen months into this deployment and things are taking a turn for the surreal.

Throughout Mosul and Baghdad, we were fighting what could best described as an insurgent cocktail: parts of Islamic State of Iraq, Al Sadr's Mahdi Army, 1920 Revolution Brigade and simple, pissed off farmers. Shia and Sunni. Organized militias and rag tags. All they had in common was a shared goal: a total withdraw of occupational forces.

This seems like a blogger in the field that The New Republic should have hired -- or at least added to its team.
09:12 AM | Permalink

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/

Attorney general resigns
By Jon Ward
DEVELOPING STORY:
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales today stepped down after several months of battling calls from many in Congress, including some Republicans, for him to resign over the firing of eight federal prosecutors last year.
Photo Gallery
VIDEO: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resigns


Bloggers, readers react / Hatch says 'No thanks'

Washington Fear Mongering





Trying to sound tough and responsible, President Bush and aspiring Republican and Democratic politicians have gotten themselves into a hot lather over the prospect of Iran's sharing its - assumed - future nuclear weapons with terrorists to attack the United States. Straus Military Reform Project Adviser Charles Pena deconstructs their logic in a commentary originally published Aug. 16, 2007, by United Press International.

"Nuclear Fear Factor" by Straus Military Reform Project Adviser Charles Pena was originally published on Aug. 16, 2007 by United Press International.

Even as the International Atomic Energy Agency is meeting with Iranian officials to discuss increasing the openness of Iran's nuclear program, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remains defiant about Tehran’s right to pursue such a program -- including uranium enrichment, which would give Iran de facto nuclear weapon capability.

This raises the specter of one of the greatest fears in the post-Sept. 11 world: nuclear terrorism.

Indeed, this was the prospect brandished by President Bush to help gain public support for invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein. "If the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy, or steal an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year,” he said. “And Saddam Hussein would be in a position to pass nuclear technology to terrorists."

But how likely is it that a regime with ties to terrorist groups would give them a nuclear weapon?

The conventional wisdom is that if a regime such as Iran acquired a nuclear weapon it could give that weapon to a terrorist group it supports (such as Hezbollah) and that the group would use the weapon against a common foe of the group and the regime (presumably the United States.)

This is the logic of the enemy of my friend is my enemy, which is emotionally appealing and based on the assumption that regimes and terrorist groups hate us for who we are.

But it is deeply flawed.

First and foremost, there is no history of hostile regimes supplying terrorist groups with chemical or biological weapons they have access to, let alone a nuclear weapon.

Saddam was known to support anti-Israeli Palestinian terrorist groups (including Hamas) for years, but he never gave chemical or biological weapons to those groups to use against Israel, a country he hated as much as he hated the United States. The same is true for the mullahs in Tehran.

It is also important to understand that terrorist groups aided by hostile regimes are not completely controlled by those regimes. There is an assumption that a terrorist group would use a nuclear weapon to attack the United States -- and that this is the only plausible scenario.

But a nuclear weapon would also give the terrorist group the ability to topple the regime that supplied it, and the regime would have no way to prevent that from happening once the weapon was out of its control.

Moreover, it would be logistically easier for the terrorists to attack the regime that supplied it -- rather than trying to clandestinely transfer the weapon to a foreign target like the United States.

Two other factors would affect a regime's decision to transfer a nuclear weapon to terrorists. First, the cost to develop such weapons is significant -- several billions of dollars. One has to question whether any regime would make that kind of investment simply to give a weapon away.

Second, once a weapon is in the hands of terrorists, they could use it against any target of their choosing. If that target is not the one approved by the regime, nuclear forensics could be used to trace the weapon back to its source (even without nuclear forensics, the list of suspects will be relatively short).

As a result, the regime would have to worry that a terrorist group would commit an act that would endanger its own survival -- especially if U.S. policy is to reserve the right to retaliate against the suspect regime using its vastly superior nuclear arsenal.

Indeed, if deterring U.S.-imposed regime change is one of the primary incentives for certain countries to pursue nuclear weapons, giving them away to terrorists would be counter-productive and more likely to invite the very action the regime seeks to avert.

Overall, a regime would have to have suicidal tendencies to engage in such risky behavior -- yet while individual fanatics may sometimes be willing to commit suicide for a cause, prominent political leaders rarely display that characteristic.

So while the logic of the enemy of my friend is my enemy has popular appeal, the reality is that there are clear and significant disincentives for any regime to simply give away a nuclear weapon to a terrorist group.

Thus, although we must be concerned about the prospect of nuclear terrorism, we should also not be mesmerized by rhetoric of smoking guns in the form of mushroom clouds and live in dire fear of it.

(Charles Pena is an adviser to the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, a senior fellow with George Washington University's Homeland Security Policy Institute and author of Potomac Books’ “Winning the Un-War: A New Strategy for the War on Terrorism.”)







Winslow T. Wheeler

Director

Straus Military Reform Project

Center for Defense Information

202 797-5271 in DC

301 840-8992 in MD

winslowwheeler@msn.com

Shouting Underwater
by Walter Mosley, The Nation
Katrina's lessons must not be forgotten: We are all victims of a failed government.

Bush's Vietnam Illiteracy
by Larry Beinhart, AlterNet
Bush's use of the Cambodian genocide to justify staying in Iraq ignores key facts.

Is 'Productivity Miracle' Ending?
by Jared Bernstein, TPM Cafe
There are troubling signs that even rougher times are ahead for the economy.

Withdrawal Follies
by Tom Engelhardt, TomDispatch.com
Be careful: Then they favor "withdrawing" from Iraq, they may not be mean what you think.
--

Middle East Turmoil Could Cause World War: U.S. Envoy By Reuters Zalmay Khalilzad told the daily Die Presse the Middle East was now so disordered that it had the potential to inflame the world as Europe did during the first half of the 20th century.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18260.htm

Troops Cheer Call For Iraq Withdrawal By AP Governor's Call For U.S. Withdrawal From Iraq Greeted With Standing Ovation At National Guard Conference.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18258.htm

The Great Iraq Swindle By Rolling Stone Magazine How Bush Allowed an Army of For-Profit Contractors to Invade the U.S. Treasury.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18261.htm =

Options On The Table By Noam Chomsky The sabre-rattling rhetoric about "containing Iran" has escalated to the point where both political parties and practically the whole US Press corps accept it as legitimate and, in fact, honourable, that "all options are on the table," to quote the leading presidential candidates - possibly even nuclear weapons.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18263.htm

Former CIA Officer Says US Ready To Strike Iran Within 6 Months
Washington DC (RIA Novosti) Aug 28, 2007 - The United States could deliver a military strike against Iran within the next six months, a former CIA officer told Fox News. In an interview Tuesday the U.S. TV channel asked Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, whether the U.S. was preparing for military action against Iran, citing Baer's column for Time Magazine on August 18, where he suggested that Washington ... more

Military Matters: Waiting for Petraeus
Washington (UPI) Aug 27, 2007 - September approaches, and with it the supposed watershed in the Iraq war that Gen. David Petraeus' report to the U.S. Congress will represent. In reality, the report will make little difference in what the Democrat-controlled Congress does, because it has already decided what it will do, namely pretend to try to end the war while actually ensuring its continuation through the 2008 ... more

China's CNPC To Fund Cross-Country Gas Pipeline From Central Asia
Beijing (RIA Novosti) Aug 28, 2007 - The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) will finance the construction of a pipeline across the country, to supply Central Asian gas to China's south and east, the company said Monday. The state-owned giant, China's largest oil and gas producer, said the Second West-East Pipeline Project had been approved by the Chinese government, and that CNPC would be the sole investor ... more

China blames design for Mattel recalls
Beijing (AFP) Aug 27, 2007 - A design fault was mostly to blame for US toy giant Mattel's recall of millions of products, not the Chinese manufacturers, China's chief safety watchdog said Monday. Li Changjiang also said Chinese factories were in the clear over the alleged discovery of the dangerous formaldehyde chemical in clothing sold in New Zealand, as he sought to reassure the world over the "Made-in-China" label.

Carnegie Mellon Researchers Look At Fossil Fuel Impacts
Pittsburgh PA (SPX) Aug 27, 2007 - A team of Carnegie Mellon University researchers report that the choices U.S. officials make today could limit how the nation's future energy needs are met and could cost consumers billions in idle power plants and associated infrastructure systems. In the upcoming Sept. 1 edition of the journal Environmental Science and Technology, Carnegie Mellon researchers Paulina Jaramillo, W. Michael ... more

China to kick off construction on second West-East gas pipeline in 2008
Beijing (AFP) Aug 27, 2007 - China will start building its second West-East natural gas pipeline in 2008, with gas transmission to come on stream in 2010, China National Petroleum Corporation, builder of the pipeline, said Monday. The company, China's largest oil producer and the parent of PetroChina, also announced the preliminary route plan of the pipeline, which is expected to deliver 30 billion cubic metres (1,050 b ... more

India's 'Red Czar': plotting to end US nuclear deal
New Delhi (AFP) Aug 24, 2007 - India's Prakash Karat, the Communist Party leader who wants to halt an Indo-US nuclear deal, is an old school Marxist but his methods have so far proven highly effective, plunging the government into crisis. Amiable but dogmatic, Karat -- nicknamed the "Red Czar" for his opinions -- has caught the government of Manmohan Singh off-guard with his anti-US stance on the landmark agreement. ... more

Gonzales' legacy of controversy
By Josh Meyer and Tom Hamburger
Questions linger about limits on civil liberties and influence of politics on
justice.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBW...Io30G2B0Isq20Ej

For Bush, opportunity in loss
By Maura Reynolds and James Gerstenzang
Gonzales' departure may give Bush a shot at reviving his presidency because his
Texas inner circle is gone, analysts say.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBW...Io30G2B0IsrC0E2

Gonzales' career
Some significant dates in the Washington career of Alberto R. Gonzales, the
nation's 80th U.S. attorney general, who announced his resignation Monday.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBW...Io30G2B0IsrD0E3

Clement is expected to follow policies of Gonzales, Ashcroft
By Richard A. Serrano
The acting attorney general, a longtime Republican, vigorously defends Bush's
war on terrorism and limitations on due process.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBW...Io30G2B0IsrE0E4

Afghanistan Opi

Who's Killing US Soldiers in Iraq?: Philip Giraldi

Too Much War, or Not Enough?: A Debate

Has Bush Boxed Himself In?: Patrick Buchanan

Bush Drops Another Crony: Jim Lobe


Yazidi Attacks a Setback to North: Mohd. Salih

Americans Split on Vietnam-Iraq Comparison



Pentagon Official Is Under Investigation



Justice Dept. Sponsors Islamic Convention



Personal Data for 35,000 Vets Stolen



Police Feeling Wartime Pinch on Ammunition



After Two-Week Tour of Duty in Iraq, Graham Backs 'Surge'




Not a Game: Simulation to Lessen War Trauma

Why Gonzales' Resignation Won't Restore Justice

Aziz Huq, The Nation

Rights and Liberties: The resignation of Alberto Gonzales has brought a smile to the faces of many Bush Administration critics, but will it bring real change?


Pentagon Denies Increase in Troops' Suicides a Result of War

Penny Coleman, AlterNet

War on Iraq: The military says that there's no connection between the stress of combat and spiraling suicide rates. But the widow of a vet who took his own life knows differently.

<h3 class="entry-header">Allawi lobbying</h3> I've been enjoying the exposure of Iyad Allawi's contracts with DC consultants, which Iraqslogger uncovered and got into the mainstream media. It really shouldn't be all that surprising - Allawi has always been about foreign support, not a domestic political base. The idea that the road to power in Baghdad lies through DC lobbyists is not a particularly strange one, especially given the experience of Iraqi exile politicians in 2002-2003. It's also worth noting that Allawi's bid for a return to power is nothing new - his candidacy has been pushed by the Saudis and other Arab states, and by some Americans since last fall. I warned about this Allawi gambit back in March:

Will Iyad Allawi, the rotund one-time Iraqi Prime Minister and current London resident, [email="http://www.popmatters.com/pm/news/article/31580/allawi-leads-drive-to-replace-current-iraq-administration/"]be the next[/email] Prime Minister of Iraq? He certainly seems to want the job, and he suits the Bush administration's agenda suspiciously well. But his return to power would not only fail to end the civil war - it would also signal a decisive end to democratic aspirations in Iraq and the Arab world, increase America's role at a time when most Americans would prefer to leave, and pave the way to a confrontation with Iran.

I think that analysis from the spring holds up pretty well, for better or for worse. Allawi would not solve any of America's problems in Iraq, and - as several people have pointed out - he'd have a rough time getting a change of government through Parliament or taking control of an Iraqi state thoroughly penetrated and controlled by pro-Iranian Shia factions. But he represents an easy out for those who want to blame Maliki for problems which really flow from the nature of the Iraqi state, and an excuse to kick the can down the road for another year. What makes Allawi plausible is the absence of any other serious contenders to rule Iraq - which is, perhaps, the real indictment of the Iraqi political system.

Posted on August 27, 2007 at 10:17 AM | Permalink |
http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/

Gonzales Resigns
ROBERT H. BORK: It could get worse. “Senate to Go Gonzo?” 08/27 5:40 PM

THE EDITORS: The next attorney general should be a respected, competent conservative who can serve the president well: something Gonzales could not do, and some of his critics do not want anyone to do. “Gonzales, Gone” 08/27 2:10 PM

AN NRO SYMPOSIUM: Jonathan Adler, Robert Alt, Roger Clegg, Todd Gaziano, Mark Levin, and Wendy Long on the next attorney general. “The Next AG” 08/27 11:25 AM

ANDY MCCARTHY: Resignation was overdue, and it's unfortunate that it is being tied so publicly to the U.S. attorneys firings since they were the least of the problem. “Gonzales Resignation”

RICH LOWRY: Insiders say it was the AG's decision. “Why Now?”

KATE O'BEIRNE: How about Jim Talent? “Speaking of Senators”

RAMESH PONNURU: Orrin Hatch for AG! “Hatch”

KATHRYN LOPEZ: A Chertoff nomination would translate into replacing incompetence with perceived incompetence. “Next Up”

NEWS VIDEO: Watch the resignation. “The Announcement” Watch the president. “The Reaction”

RICH LOWRY: There is no real middle way on Iraq. “When ‘Thoughtful’ Is Unthoughtful”

THE EDITORS: Nothing in the Iraq-war debate is quite as unimpressive as the proposals of Republicans seeking middle ground. “Disgraceful Nonsense” 08/27 7:00 AM

MICHAEL BARONE: There is something we can do. “Divest Iran” 08/27 12:00 AM

STEPHEN SPRUIELL: Democratic Congressman Brian Baird calls Iraq as he sees it. “He’s No Dick Cheney” 08/25 8:00 AM

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY JR.: It is time for the mother of parliaments to look unruly, unassimilable creeds in the face and say: No more. “British Openings” 08/25 8:00 AM

The World's Weakest States
Foreign Policy and the Fund For Peace prove the rule that distant conflict threatens immediate security, in the third annual Failed States Index. Two members of the nuclear club end up in the top 15 of this year’s most unstable countries, and Sudan is number one.Read Article

<h4 class="triplecol"> August 27, 2007 Atlantic Journalists </h4>
Olympic Games Force China To Listen
Erich Follath of German magazine Der Spiegel claims in this exclusive contribution that now is the best time for the rest of the world to press China on human rights issues. As a biographer of the Dalai Lama, Follath knows how important this chance is for Tibet—and for the international community.Read Article

Playing politics with (and in) Iraq

US politicians, including President George W Bush and Senator Hillary Clinton, are giving Nuri al-Maliki a hard time, pointing out what for many is already obvious - the Iraqi premier is simply not up to the job of stabilizing Iraq. Maliki has hit back sharply at his American critics, while on the domestic front he is trying to score points with disenchanted Sunnis over the death of former president Abdul-Rahman Aref. Meanwhile, record numbers of Iraqis are dying. - Sami Moubayed (Aug 27, '07)

'Critics' give Bush a 'surge'
The US mainstream media have wasted no time in hyping the opinions of two so-called "critics" of the White House's Iraq strategy who say the war in that country "just might" be won. But the two opinion makers have a long track record of supporting the war, and a less optimistic point of view by seven GIs in Iraq also published in the New York Times has been received by silence. (Aug 27, '07)

Violence stalks Iraq's minorities
The recent massive suicide attacks in northern Iraq on the Yazidi minority, most of them ethnic Kurds, shows that people with "pro-Kurdish tendencies", especially those without protective patrons, are increasingly vulnerable to being targeted. (Aug 27, '07)

Bomb attacks raise new Indian fears
India is never short of culprits to blame after it suffers a terror attack. The latest bomb blasts, in Hyderabad, killing 43 people, have been ascribed to militants from both Pakistan and Bangladesh. But security officials also talk of a new front of terror infiltration via Maldives that makes other technology and manufacturing hubs particularly vulnerable. - Siddharth Srivastava (Aug 27, '07)

India finds unity in terror
India's long struggle against terrorism has helped to unify a country that is otherwise often hopelessly divided when it comes to languages, religions and castes. Sorrow, loss and sympathy are universal feelings that are binding the nation together as surely as sports and Bollywood, though unifying methods to prevent future bloodshed remain difficult to achieve. - Sreeram Chaulia (Aug 27, '07)

CIA: The perils of being a 'good citizen'
The real point behind the recent release of classified documents is that they show that the US Central Intelligence Agency functions in the same manner as the majority of US institutions. In many of them, results are of little, if any, importance. Playing bureaucratic games and being "a good citizen" are often a key to survival and promotion. - Dmitry Shlapentokh

A Requiem for Alberto The good news is Gonzales is gone. The bad news is Gonzales is gone. I’m going to miss Alberto. Call me a sentimental old fool, but I had hoped he would hang from Bush’s neck for the next 511 days, putrefying slowly in the nostrils of all mankind.

And in fact there is strong literary precedent for such just such a punishment. Let us turn, then, to Samuel Taylor Coleridge:

Sympathetic pundits cry in chorus:

“God save thee, Court-crowned president!
From the fiends, that plague thee thus! —
Why look’st thou so?” —’With my crossbow
I shot the Albertross…”

Relieved, the pundits opine thusly:

Then all averred, I had killed the bird
That brought the fog and mist.
‘Twas right, said they, such birds to slay,
That bring the fog and mist.

But the hot and copper sky returns apace, causing the Ship of State to stick, nor breath nor motion, as idle as a painted ship upon a painted ocean. The pundit chorus turns like so many lapdogs on its now-disgraced emperor, who laments:

Ah! well-a-day! what evil looks
Had I from old and young!
Instead of the cross, the Albertross
About my neck was hung.

Anon, remembering the fallen Rumsfeld, Rove and good old Brownie with sorrow, yet relieved that Cheney and so many other brave hearts still survive, the Impostor Prince sings this bittersweet tribute:

The many men, so beautiful!
And they all dead did lie:
And a thousand thousand slimy things
Lived on; and so did I.

Until, after an interminable wait made bearable only by Jenna’s story-book wedding to a Karl Rove aide, Inaugural Day at long last dawns. The father of the bride sings:

…And from my neck so free
The Albertross fell off, and sank
Like lead into the sea.

http://badattitudes.com/MT/

Observations on the Candidates’ Iraq Positions One of the things that struck me surveying the Democratic candidates’ websites for positions on the war was the variety of views, plans, and level of detail. Stated positions ranged from a couple of paragraphs to two or three pages. Preliminary indications are that with respect to health care the differences will only increase.

Another aspect in which a lot of variation was evident was the relationship between the visibility of an issue in the candidate’s rhetoric and the amount of detail provided on the website about that issue.

Obama, Brzezinski, and Powell A significant part of Senator Obama’s appeal, for example, is his early and vocal opposition to attacking Iraq. The appeal is easy to understand, given the complicity of most of the other candidates in initiating the war, with the noble exceptions of Kucinich and Gravel.

Obama’s website has, as far as I can tell, a total of three paragraphs that directly address the situation (one noting his original position, the other two I quoted). As of this post Obama’s site does not seem to mention either Brzezinski’s endorsement or Powell’s contribution of advice. As the inimitable Robert Parry says:

His decision to seek the counsel of Colin Powell — a move leaked by the Obama campaign and confirmed by Powell on NBC’s “Meet the Press” — suggests that the Illinois senator is hoping Powell’s “gravitas” inside Washington might rub off. Powell also retains popularity with many centrist Americans despite his Iraq War role. But the Obama-Powell alliance may mean, too, that Obama won’t press very hard for an end of the Iraq War since Powell’s current position is that the United States can’t afford to withdraw despite the many errors in implementing the war strategy.

The last time I remember hearing the communicable-gravitas meme was when Chick Deney and Ronald Dumsfeld were gonna hold President Shrub up by his armpits. Of course, Obama’s not an impressionable, faith-based addict personality. Exactly. He’s got a bit of each of those, but they seem to contribute a level of understanding to the final sum.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Compared to Senator Obama, Senator Clinton has an extensive discussion of issues relating to Iraq. She advocates deauthorizing the war and refusing to pass another authorization unless the bill began removing troops from the “sectarian civil war”. She has also proposed capping the troop levels.

…Read on

Posted by Chuck Dupree at 3:14 AM | Permalink

http://badattitudes.com/MT/

Jorge Mariscal
The General Reports

Bill Christison
Why the US and Israel Should Lose Middle East Wars

Manuel Garcia, Jr.
911 Emergency! Calling Robert Fisk!: You are Now Entering a Black Hole

Anthony DiMaggio
Chronicle of a Coup Foretold?: Bush, al-Maliki and the Press

Bruce A. Roth
India and the New Nuclear Era

After Gonzalesby Jed BabbinThe departure of Alberto Gonzales signals the end of a term apparently dominated by fear of the media. Will the next AG do a better job of protecting America's secrets?

Let's hear from someone besides the neoconservatives about Iran
COMMENTARY
Reporters should be seeking out experts who actually understand the Middle East -- because the vast majority of them think that attacking Iran would be a huge mistake. Here's an annotated list of some excellent possible sources.

A reporter speaks out about the Iraq war and news coverage
COMMENTARY
Sig Christenson of the San Antonio Express-News ridicules comments by politicians, laments the lack of reporters covering the war, and cites ground rules that are crippling for photojournalists. He says the media aren’t pressing for answers to vital and obvious questions, such as what plans the Pentagon has for an exit strategy.

US/IRAQ: Vietnam pullout may offer lessons on Iraq

President George Bush today will deliver the second in a series of public speeches urging the US public and Congress to resist the 'allure of retreat' from Iraq. The White House faces growing opposition, not least from within the congressional Republican caucus, to the continuing US military commitment in Iraq. As the policy debate has intensified, both the president and his critics have invoked the spectre of the Vietnam War -- in Bush's case, as a warning against the consequences of withdrawal. The Vietnam experience suggests that the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq could have very negative short-term humanitarian consequences, and in terms of national and regional stability. However, the long-term strategic fallout of defeat may be less severe than feared; stepping back militarily could be an important step towards rehabilitating Washington's international standing.

The Sack of Washington
The most ominous parallel between America 2007 and the crumbling Roman Empire is the outsourcing of public responsibilities to private contractors. An excerpt from Cullen Murphy's new book, Are We Rome?

US Ambassador to UN Warns: Middle East turmoil could cause world war - "Middle East was now so disordered that it had the potential to inflame the world as Europe did during the first half of the 20th century"

Bush Knows No History: When he compared Vietnam War to Iraq War

Bush raises stakes in Iraq with spectre of Saigon

French President Sarkozy is first Western leader to speak out loud about US plan to bomb Iran: Sarkozy thus became the first important Western leader to declare with brutal frankness that Iran stands in peril of an attack on its nuclear installations

France's Sarkozy raises prospect of Iran airstrikes

New Arabian Gulf Oil Pipeline Network Will Detour Straits of Hormuz

New rallying cry of U.S. policy: Contain Iran

Jerusalem worried by Iranian owned anti-ship missile: Recent delivery of an advanced Russian-made anti-ship missile to Iran has defense officials concerned it will be transferred to Syria and Hizbullah

Iran vows to use ’smart’ bomb on enemies

Ahmadinejad's gov't temporary, Minister of Strategic Affairs Lieberman says: Opposition groups being supported which could overthrow him from within

Palestine: a policy of deliberate blindness
How The World Backed Itself Into A Corner

by Régis Debray; Le Monde diplomatique; August 08, 2007 Last year President Jacques Chirac asked Régis Debray to study the situation in the Middle East. On 15 January 2007 Debray sent the French authorities the following document on Palestine. It is an important key to understanding a long policy drift whose results are now obvious.







Dennis Ross, formerly the United States envoy to the Middle East, admitted back in 2000 that mistakes had been made in the 1978 Camp David accords: the diplomatic process had not taken enough account of developments on the ground, especially the settlements. The number of Jewish settlers in the Palestinian territories doubled from 1994 to 2000. As many Israelis have settled in the West Bank since the Oslo accords of 1993 as in the previous 25 years. With an international conference again being discussed, it would be a mistake to continue to ignore the real state of affairs. There is no need for a committee of inquiry. The report has already been drawn up, many times over. No conflict in the world is as well documented, mapped and recorded.



The OCHA (Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), a United Nations agency, keeps up-to-date, detailed maps of the disputed territories, with photographs, population counts and graphs. It takes an hour to look at them, but doing so might forestall some of the never-ending statements of good intentions.



The maps show that the physical, economic and human basis for a viable Palestinian state is disappearing. The two-state solution and Israeli writer Amos Oz's "fair divorce" (a territory shared between two national homes, one smaller than the other and demilitarised but sovereign, viable and continuous) are now empty phrases belonging to the realm of might-have-been. Some might argue that we have not yet reached the point of no return and that the Israelis may have won the territorial battle (with only 22% of British mandate Palestine now outside their control) but the Palestinians are sure to win the demographic battle. They invoke the resilience of the local population in the face of the steam roller that is slowly but surely implementing the 1968 Allon Plan and the 1984 "Road Plan 50".



It is clear from developments on the ground that:



o the purpose of the security wall is not, as is believed, to trace a border that, however illegal (since it encloses over 10% of the West Bank), will at least serve as the dotted line for a future international frontier;



o it is true (as Ehud Omert said on Israeli army radio on 20 March 2006) that Israel's strategic border lies on the Jordan: the whole valley has been declared a forbidden area and the intervening area has been nibbled away (cross-river transit is only possible at certain points);



o the new east-west bypass roads built at the expense of the old north-south axis clearly chart a territory in the process of annexation, with space for three or four Arab bantustans (Jenin, Ramallah and Jericho). The exhaustion of natural resources in these overcrowded enclaves will eventually lead to massive emigration (much of the elite, especially Christian, has already left); and



o with the construction of the separation wall, the ongoing judaisation of East Jerusalem and reconfiguration of the Jerusalem municipality, the UN's repeated but purely formal condemnations have no effect on Israel's grip on the whole city (1).



There is a huge gap between what is said because we want to hear it (local withdrawals, easing of travel restrictions, removal of one checkpoint out of 20, a change of tone) and what is being done on the ground, which we don't want to see (interlinking of settlements, construction of bridges and tunnels, encirclement of Palestinian towns, expropriation of land, destruction of houses). Some would describe that gap as duplicity, others as ambiguity. The gradual encroachment happens out of sight of the cameras, without causing a stir and without an explicit colonial diktat. Nobody makes a formal complaint, even supposing they can find out what's going on - difficult if you haven't grown up locally. Israeli maps and school textbooks refer to the West Bank as Judea and Samaria and, following the Knesset's recent rejection of a proposal from a Labour education minister, obliteration of the 1967 green line is now a legal fait accompli.



This is not just a gap between the de facto and de jure situations. It reflects a method and tradition going back to the earliest days of the Yishuv (2): the strategy of fait accompli. That strategy has always paid off: the Jewish state was there before it was declared and recognised in 1948, as was the army. What we have is a theatre with two stages: on the international stage we hear repeated vague and encouraging speeches concerning withdrawal, coexistence and a Palestinian state, but the things that count (settlements, roads, tunnels, water tables) happen on the operational stage next door, where the outcome is decided out of public view.



Understanding how public opinion works in a democracy, successive Israeli governments of the left and right take care to administer regular painkillers, plans for unilateral withdrawal or the partial dismantlement of settlements and encouraging announcements that are always conditional and come to nothing. The media live from day to day, with no attempt to remember. Who now recalls that the road map (3) was supposed to be "a final and comprehensive settlement of the Israel-Palestinian conflict by 2005"?



The Oslo process did not just remain a dead letter: with the military reoccupation of Zones A and B (4) in April 2002, it went into reverse.



Territorial fragmentation cuts off local authorities from any possible central Palestinian administration and from each other, while the systematic physical destruction of national institutions, Palestinian infrastructure and political leaders by the Israeli army ensures internal anarchy and the spread of clans and gang violence: bottomless chaos. Clearly the path that has been taken is not that of nation building but the deconstruction of all possible governance beyond the separation wall. It is the logical counterpart of a 30-year annexation process that will be endorsed, when the time comes, "in view of the new reality on the ground".



In these circumstances, constant invocation of the road map by all parties has more to do with autosuggestion than a sober look at the consistent transformation of reality. That reality may not be visible from Geneva, Paris or New York, but it is immediately apparent to anyone travelling throughout the country after a few years' absence. It is a land carved up by military force, where the Israeli settlements are no longer shapes on a Palestinian background - instead the Palestinian areas appear as shapes on a solidly-infrastructured Israeli background: a land where water reserves are confiscated and a temporary travel restriction is very close to a permanent ban.



Some may take comfort in these ideas: