At the end of another day

The House passed a $696 billion defense bill that gives a 3.5% pay raise to troops retroactively. Doesn't sounds like much, still, hoo-rah! The Asshat-in-Chief threatened to veto the previous bill version until Bush got what he wanted -- a provision that would allow him to "grant Iraq immunity" nullifying any "guarantees that U.S. victims of state-sponsored abuse can sue foreign governments in court." Uh-oh.

Go Cheney yourself: Madam Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) held a press conference on an economic stimulus program. Boehner addressed House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) -- "As soon as they put those cameras away, I'm going to flip you the bird." Transcript. CQ Politics on the stimulus plan.

Tomorrow... Oversight & Government Reform Committee hearing: Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) will convene "Assessing Veteran’s Charities – Part Two” that will "focus on orgs operated by Roger Chapin, who failed to comply with a subpoena compelling his testimony" in December. Chapin will appear to respond to questionable activities of 20 organizations "including a number of veterans’ and military-oriented charities." Previous hearing and transcript here.

Pentagon kerfuffle: SecDef Gates pissed off Britain and other allies "accusing Nato countries fighting in southern Afghanistan of lacking experience in counter-insurgency warfare." Times UK

Tsk, tsk. Those Ungrateful Saudis. OBL and Ahmadinejad scored higher favorability than Bush in a poll conducted in Saudi Arabia last month. Read Robert Scheer at The Nation. With friends like these...

Missing WH emails gone forever -- A new court filing disclosed that the WH "effectively erased e-mail related to some of the biggest controversies of the Bush administration, including the leak of a CIA officer's name, the start of the Iraq war and the CIA's destruction of interrogation videotapes." Who's to blame? The tape recycling system. CREW has more.

In the Noise -- Karl Rove revealed GOP strategies for attacking Hillary and Obama in '08. Details at the link. Bottom-line: "[T]he Republican candidate must show the electorate 'that they understand the surge is working.' Rove said the candidate should get firmly behind the war effort, painting the Democratic nominee as 'defeatist.'" SSDE.

Terror fundraising ring: In Kansas City, MO, a 42-count indictment will keep former Reagan appointee and Michigan Repub Mark Deli Siljander busy. And how! Counts include "money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists." AQ and the Taliban. Jeepers! TPM.

"Just how trivial can the media make the presidential race?" Matt Taibbi of The Rolling Stone offers some answers and Greg Sargent analyzes the John Edwards media blackout .

[That's all...no more after the jump.]

There's more: "At the end of another day" >>

This round goes to Gates

The Department of Defense and the State Department agreed on Tuesday that the DoD would assume a greater role in the oversight and management of armed security personnel operating in Iraq.

The DoD has wanted greater control over the mercenaries who run in and out of the battle space wreaking havoc since the earliest days of the occupation. Blackwater alone has been involved in over 190 incidents in which they discharged their weapons since 2005, and have earned a reputation as trigger-happy thugs who undermine the mission (whatever it is this week). The most recent incident, on September 16, left 17 Iraqis dead and started a deluge of bad publicity for Blackwater, including charges of weapons smuggling, theft of military aircraft, and tax evasion.

The rate of Blackwater violence is at least twice that of DynCorp International and Triple Canopy, the other security companies operating in Iraq. Blackwater’s hired guns are just that, discharging weapons, on average, twice every convoy. (The other companies frequently escort convoys completely without incident.)

“You can find any number of people, particularly in uniform, who will tell you that they do see Blackwater as a company that promotes a much more aggressive response to things than other main contractors do,” a senior American official said. “Is it the operating environment or something specific about Blackwater?” asked one government official. “My best guess is that it is both.”

While the bloody rampage at the Nissour traffic roundabout was the most shocking in the level of wanton killing, the modern-day Pinkerton's of Blackwater are under investigation in six other episodes that left ten people dead and at least 15 wounded.

Slowly, American officials are accepting the position that Blackwater's behavior in Iraq is counterproductive to the stated 'mission' by fueling resentment among the local population.

“They’re repeat offenders, and yet they continue to prosper in Iraq,” said Representative Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat who has been broadly critical of the role of contractors in Iraq. “It’s really affecting attitudes toward the United States when you have these cowboy guys out there. These guys represent the U.S. to them and there are no rules of the game for them.”

[keep reading]

Currently, there are approximately 10,000 armed mercenaries running around Iraq, under contract to various branches of the United States government and NGOs. I know it sounds bizarre, but there is no central oversight authority to which they must answer.

Pragmatically, it just makes sense to bring all armed civilians who are under contract to American government agencies and NGOs, as well as the American military under one authority. It would mean, effectively, that those armed civilians would no longer have multiple bosses at multiple levels and a disparate set of rules. Pentagon officials say it would allow for better coordination and communications between the American military and the private security personnel.

When contractors get in trouble, they call on the US military to bail them out. Fully 30% of the incidents in which the military was called on to save mercenary bacon involved movements and convoys that the military was not even aware had mobilized.

American commanders often perceive the private security personnel in an adversarial light. Civilian casualties, victims of mercenary gunfire, infuriate the Iraqi government and damage the American perception and image among the locals. This frustrates military officers who say the heavy-handed, shoot-first-and-don’t-even-bother-to-ask-questions-later tactics by mercenaries undermine the broader mission.

Also on Tuesday, the Iraqi parliament hammered out draft legislation that would repeal Order 17, the imperialistic, extraterritorial immunity granted to mercenaries by Paul Bremmer on his way out of town when the CPA turned over authority to the Iraqi government. Order 17 exempts mercenaries who commit wanton murder of Iraqi civilians (and any other crimes) from prosecution in Iraqi courts.

It was already a given that State was not going to be of much help to their hired guns. Indeed, it has been known for a while now that Blackwater is on it's way out of Iraq, and State will not be renewing their contracts. But the constant barrage of evidence pointing up the incompetence and fecklessness of the State Department under Condi Rice, including the revelation less than 24 hours before the agreement was made that State Department investigators had sanctioned Blackwater lawlessness by routinely issuing immunity to mercenaries involved in shooting incidents, Gates got less resistance from State than was expected.

There's more: "This round goes to Gates" >>

Losing the Cold War after the fact

Image courtesy McClatchy - click to enlarge

Not content with mismanaging a war and an occupation to the point that America stands to end up with not just one, but two hash-marks in the "L" column, the chump in charge has reached back into the recesses of time and managed to give it a go at reversing the outcome of the freakin’ Cold War, too.

Seriously – didn't anyone else cringe when the Connecticut cowboy was selected by the Supremes to parry with Putin? I sure as hell did. Panic at the prospect of the little idiot in negotiations with Russia was one of my first reactions.

C’mon – on the one hand you have a moronic, coke-addled, intellectually incurious, sociopathic, amoral, inept and hapless doofus who failed upwards his whole life…and on the other a former KGB case officer – decisive, derisive, stridently nationalistic, cold, calculating and competent. There was simply no way in hell this was going to work out well for United States interests, but not enough of us “got it” and of those of us who did, not enough were speaking up; so those of us who did voice our concerns were viewed askance, like we needed a shiny jacket to go with our pretty tinfoil hats.

When the affable moron met the spy in Slovenia in the summer of 2001, and claimed he had “looked into his soul” and saw a good guy, I guffawed, and the mockery in my household was overt and palpable. The entire family got weeks of mileage out of “looking into souls.” Our oldest was leaving for college that summer, and we looked into the soul of the laptop salesman, the residence hall coordinator, the university bookstore clerk, the financial aid officer that administered his scholarship…pretty much everyone we came in contact with for weeks got a good soul-peering.

We aren’t laughing any more, though, because the fallout of aWol’s inept foreign policy is no laughing matter.

[keep reading]

Bush and his circle of bubble-supporting yes-men, lackeys and corporate good-ole-boy cronies grossly misjudged the Russian leader, just blithely assuming he was “a good guy” and “one of us.” (In their jingoistic worldview, it is just assumed that everyone wants to be “like us” or they simply aren’t worth bothering with). The ethnocentric, swaggering, bloviating asshats just couldn’t see it coming, but our emic was bound to crash into theirs.

It did, and the results of this prolonged foreign policy train wreck have been painful to watch, especially for those with an awareness and understanding of the historical relationship between the two superpowers. In the wake of the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, there was unprecedented cooperation between the two nations. The Russians shared intelligence, and the U.S. government turned a blind eye to the dirty war raging in Chechnya.

Now, there is not even a pretext of cooperation and common goals.

Secretary of State Rice and Secretary of Defense Gates (two so-called “experts” on the former Soviet Union, both of whom failed to read the handwriting on that crumbling wall) went to Moscow to meet with the Russian president last week.

First Putin kept them waiting for over a half hour. Then he openly mocked their mission in front of the press and the T.V. cameras.

On Saturday, Defense Secretary Gates said that he isn’t sure Russia is even interested in cooperating with the United States to defend Europe against Iranian missiles or whether Moscow “simply wants to stop the U.S. from building missile defenses in Eastern Europe.” (emphasis mine).

Gates, speaking with reporters on his trip home, showed us some of that prescience he is famous for (remember, he was the CIA’s expert who insisted the Soviet Union was reemerging as it was crumbling) saying he believes Russia is reasserting it’s presence on the world stage. "I think President Putin is coming back and saying you know you have to take us into account on all these things. In essence: 'We are back. We've got a lot of money. And we are a key player.' " Then he quickly added "I'm putting words into his mouth. He didn't say these things. This is my interpretation of perhaps his thinking: 'And you will need our help to solve problems. And if you won't seek our help, we can prevent problems from being solved,' " Gates said.

Of course Russia is reasserting dominance and flexing muscles, and has been for some time! I dunno about the SecDef, but I have been paying attention. In April, it went largely unnoticed when it became official Russian policy to refer to the United States in an adversarial manner in official reports and press releases. In May, they tested a new MRV-ICBM. In July, they laid claim to the North Pole, an International Zone. In August, their pilots started buzzing Guam for the first time since the cold war. In October, the Russian President mocked and humiliated two cabinet secretaries.

And I haven’t even brought up the energy issue. Not directly, anyway. But that is what it all boils down too. Russia has Energy, the west needs that energy, and Russia is not a country we can just invade, commence “kickin’ ass” and take it away from.

This administration has destroyed American credibility, negotiating power and economic stature. A solid victory in the Cold War, after a half-century of ideological brinksmanship and reams of hard-fought treaties, has been cast aside.

If there is one person on the face of the earth who is more pleased than Osama bin Laden to see the United States mired down in Iraq, bleeding away blood and treasure, and destroying the finest Army the world has even seen, it is Vladimir Putin.

What scares me even more than the damage that will be done to this country by another year of fighting in Iraq is the long-range damage being done to our foreign policy by another year of Bush incompetence. The destruction of the relationship with Russia is arguably the greatest threat to long-range security that the United States will face for the next 50-100 years.

There's more: "Losing the Cold War after the fact" >>

Real Leadership at the Pentagon, and the *mission* comes under scrutiny

There is a sea change occurring at the Pentagon, as the last of the ideologues skulk away, having created a no-good-options situation through fecklessness, incompetence and blind fealty to ideology that the United States will have a hell of a time disengaging from.

Competent managers who view Iraq as a problem to be solved have replaced the ideologues, and not a moment too soon.

[Secretary of Defense] Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Michael Mullen, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, Undersecretary for Intelligence Gen. James Clapper and other top officials also are concerned that the war may be crippling the military's ability to respond to other crises. They have allies in the congressional Democratic leadership — particularly House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri — who've been speaking out about that for months.

"I'm convinced we are in serious trouble readiness-wise," Skelton said this week in an interview with McClatchy Newspapers. "Am I worried? I'm worried to death." "The parallels are alarming," Skelton said. "We cannot risk breaking the Army again. My real worry is that we have a choice between two losses or one loss. We're not putting enough effort into Afghanistan, and I'm deeply concerned about that."

As frustration has mounted as the Democrats, with a slight majority in the House and a razor-thin majority in the Senate, have been unable to influence American war policy in Iraq, reality has reared it’s ugly head again, and presented a series of developments that demand attention and mean that Bush’s “Stay the Course” bleating is the nothing more than the ranting of a dishonest, delusional and deranged halfwit.

· The choice of the competent Robert Gates to replace the demented, dismissed and criminally inept Donald Rumsfeld – one of the mental midgets who conceived of the glorious fuck-up in Iraq – in an of itself set a new course. Gates resigned a spot on the Iraq Study Group when he was nominated for the Sec Def position. The ISG emphasized the need to reach out to neighboring countries, and "strongly urged" a drawdown of American forces in Iraq.

· The people at the top now are more concerned about the overall health of the U.S. military organization, which is showing signs of severe strain; than with coddling the delusional outlook of Commander Codpiece.

· A whole slew of official reports have been released in recent weeks that paint a grim picture. The Iraqi security forces will not be ready to take over security for the country for at least a year, and the Iraqis have made little progress toward political reconciliation. "Barring that, no amount of troops and no amount of time will make much of a difference," Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

· The release of a United Nations report that finds the Taliban and al Qaeda are resurgent in Afghanistan. More forces are needed in Afghanistan, and they simply aren’t there to we can't send them because we're bogged down" in an "intractable civil war" in Iraq, Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said Wednesday

· Bush has historic low approval ratings, and he is a lame duck facing hostile Democratic majorities in both chambers of congress. Those congressional representatives are facing hostile, angry constituents, and the constituents are in no mood for appeasement.

It remains to be seen if Gates and the new uniformed leadership can check the commander guy, and hopefully prevent another ill-advised shooting war with Iran. Here is wishin’ ‘em luck…

There's more: "Real Leadership at the Pentagon, and the *mission* comes under scrutiny" >>

Lots of stuff you wanted to know about Blackwater, but couldn't bring yourself to ask...

The fallout continues from the deadly rampage by Blackwater mercenaries against Iraqi civilians on September 16 that left at least 11 Iraqis dead. Blackwater insists that their employees fired in response to coming under attack. The Iraqis claim the Blackwater personnel were unprovoked when they opened fire on civilians at a busy traffic circle while escorting a State Department convoy through Baghdad.

The September 16 incident set off a firestorm and at one point the government of Iraq said all Blackwater personnel had to leave the country and the company had to cease operating inside Iraq. This edict did not stand and Blackwater is once again roaming the streets, terrifying the populace with their mere presence and undermining whatever the hell it is the mission is supposed to be, and sowing seeds of hostility with the populace that prompt attacks against all Americans, thereby putting American G.I.’s at heightened risk.

The DoD on Wednesday announced that the Pentagon has sent a team of investigators to Iraq to probe security contractors and their operations in Iraq. In addition, a memo was sent to the commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan reminding them that they have the prerogative to court martial mercenaries working under contract with the U.S. military if/when those mercenaries violate the Rules of Engagement that govern the U.S. military. Gates wanted to make sure that the mercenaries and commanders all understood that the military can prosecute their contractors. Gates, testifying before the Senate Appropriations Committee, on Wednesday said he also wanted to know whether the military has the resources to investigate private security personnel under contract with the DoD for alleged crimes. "My concern is whether there has been sufficient accountability and oversight," Gates said.

In the memo, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England told military commanders that they're responsible for monitoring contractors under their control and charging those who violate rules of engagement.

"Commanders have UCMJ (Uniformed Code of Military Justice) authority to disarm, apprehend, and detain DoD contractors suspected of having committed a felony offense in violation of the RUF (Rules on the Use of Force)," Gordon wrote. The memo was dated Tuesday.

England said commanders should review contractors' standard operating procedures and make any necessary changes to the way they authorize force to "minimize the risk of innocent civilian causalities or unnecessary destruction of civilian property."

The State Department hasn't distributed a similar memo, and it is unclear what, if any, U.S. law applies to the actions of its contractors.

So far, no Defense Department contractor has been charged under U.S. law, and no security contracts have been suspended for violations, Morrell said.

Yeah. It really is as thoroughly and completely fucked up as it sounds.

Four and a half years into Iraq, and six years into Afghanistan, they have decided it’s time to determine what, exactly, to do with mercenaries who attack and murder civilians without provocation, or otherwise commit actions that undermine the efforts of the United States to salvage something – anything – from this clusterfuck so we can claim some sort of semblance of a shadow of a specter of a pale imitation of victory™ and get the hell out of there.

(Keep Reading)

The Iraqi Interior Ministry has sent the investigation of the incident to a magistrate and is looking at possible criminal charges, although they may be hamstrung by the ghost of Paul Bremer and the CPA, in the form of Order 17, which essentially gave mercenaries immunity to run amok, unencumbered by the rule of law. Under Order 17, mercenaries can kill at will, with little or no fear of legal, or even civil, repercussions.

This week, Iraqi lawmakers began considering a proposal that would withdraw the provisions of Order 17 from Iraqi law and make security contractors/mercenaries accountable under the Iraqi system of justice. Iraqis have complained bitterly for years that the mercenary army is unnecessarily aggressive and damages property with impunity and mistreats and kills Iraqis with reckless abandon.

Point of Clarification: The mercenaries involved in the September 16 violence were under contract to the State Department, and that incident is under joint Iraqi – State Department investigation. DoD has no authority to investigate or try the Blackwater mercenaries involved. Gates, being competent, and not beholden to nor under the sway of Cheney or Bush, is looking for problems before someone else finds them and uses them against him. (I don't like the man, but I can not help but respect the talent). At State, on the other hand, the inept and outpaced Condi is still carrying her bosses water, overtly and contemptuously stonewalling congressional oversight into the incident. While the DoD does have contracts with Blackwater, the State Department outspends the DoD on Blackwater contracts at a rate of approximately 8:1.

The private-army aspect of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has been controversial since the first days in Afghanistan, and there has been no shortage of animosity between the professional military and the mercenary army. To date, no personnel under DoD contract have been charged under U.S. law, and no contracts have been suspended for violations. The military has been taken to task though. Two Air Force officers were brought up on charges of assault and conduct unbecoming following a run-in between the officers and Blackwater personnel on a road outside Kabul in September 2006. The charges were later dismissed.

***************

The bloodletting two weeks ago has set up a clash between the Pentagon and the State Department. The tensions have been long-simmering, and the events of September 16 turned up the heat. "The military is very sensitive to its relationship that they've built with the Iraqis being altered or even severely degraded by actions such as this event," said one senior military official in Iraq. "This is a nightmare. We had guys who saw the aftermath, and it was very bad. This is going to hurt us badly. It may be worse than Abu Ghraib, and it comes at a time when we're trying to have an impact for the long term."

In interviews involving a dozen U.S. military and government officials, many expressed anger and concern over the shootings in Nisoor Square, in Baghdad's Mansour neighborhood. Some worried it could undermine the military's efforts to stabilize Iraq this year with an offensive involving thousands of reinforcements.

"This is a big mess that I don't think anyone has their hands around yet," said another U.S. military official. "It's not necessarily a bad thing these guys are being held accountable. Iraqis hate them, the troops don't particularly care for them, and they tend to have a know-it-all attitude, which means they rarely listen to anyone -- even the folks that patrol the ground on a daily basis."

Most officials spoke on condition of anonymity because there are at least three ongoing investigations of Blackwater's role in the shootings. There are also sensitive discussions between various U.S. agencies and the Iraqi government over the future of Blackwater and other private security firms in Iraq.

Teddy Spain, a retired Army Colonel was willing to speak on the record. “I personally was concerned about any of the civilians running around on the battlefield during my time there. My main concern was their lack of accountability when things went wrong.”

Several commanding officers spoke frankly on condition of anonymity.

…"Given their record of recklessness," said the senior U.S. commander, "I'm not sure any senior military officer here would want responsibility for them."

…"They are immature shooters and have very quick trigger fingers. Their tendency is shoot first and ask questions later," said an Army lieutenant colonel serving in Iraq. Referring to the Sept. 16 shootings, the officer added, "None of us believe they were engaged, but we are all carrying their black eyes."

…"Many of my peers think Blackwater is oftentimes out of control," said a senior U.S. commander serving in Iraq. "They often act like cowboys over here . . . not seeming to play by the same rules everyone else tries to play by."

…"Many of us feel that when Blackwater and other groups conduct military missions, they should be subject to the same controls under which the Army operates," said Marc Lindemann, who served in Iraq with the 4th Infantry Division and is now an officer in the New York National Guard and a state prosecutor.

…"The deaths of contractors from Blackwater helped precipitate the debacle in Fallujah in 2004 and now the loss of Blackwater is causing disruptions in the war effort in 2007," a military intelligence officer said, speaking on condition of anonymity. "Why are we creating new vulnerabilities by relying on what are essentially mercenary forces?"

The lousy reputation Blackwater has among members of the U.S. military has led to renewed debate over whether the DoD should handle State’s security contracts. The Department of Defense (understanding what security protocols should involve) has a more strident procedure for licensing and oversight of personnel under contract to their agency, the DoD also has more detailed incident reporting procedures when weapons are discharged. In addition, the military investigates promptly when incidents occur or allegations are made against mercenaries in their employ.

A Pentagon source insisted that "We are really making State respond, conduct an investigation and come up with recommendations." The source said that in Washington the atmosphere surrounding the confrontation between State and the pentagon is calm and professional but, referring to Iraq, said, "There is probably a bit more emotion going on in theater."

***************

As if Blackwater needed another revelation (they are also under investigation for smuggling weapons into Iraq that ultimately ended up pointed at American G.I.’s) the New York Times reported Thursday that mercenaries from Blackwater USA have been involved in a far higher rate of shootings while guarding and escorting American diplomats than other companies providing comparable services.

The rate of Blackwater violence is at least twice that of DynCorp International and Triple Canopy, the other security companies operating in Iraq. Blackwater’s hired guns are just that, discharging weapons, on average, twice every convoy. (The other companies frequently escort convoys completely without incident.)

“You can find any number of people, particularly in uniform, who will tell you that they do see Blackwater as a company that promotes a much more aggressive response to things than other main contractors do,” a senior American official said. “Is it the operating environment or something specific about Blackwater?” asked one government official. “My best guess is that it is both.”

While the bloody rampage at the Nisour traffic roundabout was the most shocking in the level of wanton killing, the modern-day Pinkerton's of Blackwater are under investigation in six other episodes that left ten people dead and at least 15 wounded.

Slowly, American officials are accepting the position that Blackwater's behavior in Iraq is counterproductive to the stated 'mission' by fueling resentment among the local population.

“They’re repeat offenders, and yet they continue to prosper in Iraq,” said Representative Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat who has been broadly critical of the role of contractors in Iraq. “It’s really affecting attitudes toward the United States when you have these cowboy guys out there. These guys represent the U.S. to them and there are no rules of the game for them.”

***************

Secretary of Defense Gates was in front of Congress asking for $190 Billion for the war effort for FY 2008. Congress is hammering out the budget now.

While the American public may not yet be ready to cut off funding to the U.S. military for the occupation of Iraq, I seriously doubt that there would be great wailing and bleating and rending of cloth and gnashing of teeth if, just for starters, the monies in the budget allotted to Blackwater fell victim to Congresses one true power.

There's more: "Lots of stuff you wanted to know about Blackwater, but couldn't bring yourself to ask..." >>

I think Dick Cheney must be referring to some other “Surge™”

Last week on CNN, Dick Cheney was adamant that “The Surge ™” was working – if you will.

He is optimistic that the report to Congress by Petraeus and Crocker next month will be positive. (We’re winning!!!) "The reports I'm hearing from people whose views I respect indicate that the Petraeus plan is in fact producing results," insisted Cheney, employing the same shift-the-blame meme that has been peddled furiously of late. Of course this is not Petraeus’s plan. The “Surge™” was actually dreamed up by some fatassed armchair generals at the AEI, and everyone who has been paying attention knows it. (Emphasis on paying attention…given the state of awareness we currently realize, the mendacious pricks will likely get away with everything to date, and more into the future.)

It is going so swimmingly that the very next day, the appeal for help attempting to unscrew the pooch was made to the United Nations.

Two days after Mr. Cheney and his Midas delusions were singing paeans to Iraq, and freedom, and independence delivered at the barrel of a gun; Secretary of Defense Robert Gates continued dialing back expectations and admitting that the political process that the Surge™ was supposed to enable had not moved forward, and now the parliament is off on holiday until September.

Not only had stalemate and squabbling set in before the recess, but the Sunni al-Tawafuq bloc withdrew from the government of Nouri Kemal al-Maliki. They vacated five of the six ministry posts held by them in Maliki’s cabinet.

Secretary Gates admitted the lack of political progress. "In some ways we probably all underestimated the depth of the mistrust and how difficult it would be for these guys to come together on legislation," Mr Gates said. (Speak for yourself, Bob. This is exactly what *We* said was going to happen.)

Adding insult to injury, the electric grid is so decrepit that it can’t keep the water pumping, and it is 120º in Iraq this time of year. Some areas have been without water for a week.

Much hay has been made of the reduced American body count for the bloodiest July yet – violence adhered to the established pattern. It abated in July, but it has already ticked back upward the first week of August.

And if all that wasn’t enough…approximately half of all light weapons supplied by American forces - 190,000 AK-47’s and handguns – have gone missing. That is a lot of firepower unaccounted for. The BBC reports on the World Service that the weapons are certainly being used against coalition and Iraqi forces. In October of last year, it was revealed in a GAO report that 1 in 25, or 14,000 weapons had gone missing, and there was great hue and cry about it. And guess who was in charge when those weapons went missing?

Yep.

Dave Petraeus.

I wonder what lesson they took from last falls weapons scandal? If I were a betting woman, I would wager that the lesson they seized on has nothing to do with securing the weapons caches. Instead, I would wager that the lesson they learned was to keep the lost weapons out of the media, which is preternaturally willing to comply with this craven administration.

There's more: "I think Dick Cheney must be referring to some other “Surge™”" >>

Rice and Gates are off to the Middle East on a Salvage Operation

On Monday, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will leave on a highly unusual joint mission to the Middle East. They leave with three objectives, and low expectations.

They need to persuade Iraq’s neighboring states to do more to help stabilize the country, they need to counter the growing influence of Iran in the region, and they hope to get some significant motion going on the development of a peace plan between the Palestinians and Israelis.

Lofty goals, but not likely to be very successful. The United States has little or no credibility in the region. The U.S. has caused massive death and instability in Iraq, and strengthened al Qaeda; they have also failed to calm the strife in Lebanon, bolster the Palestinian Authority, or bring pressure to bear on Syria.

Quite the contrary – U.S. policies have fanned the flames of Sunni extremism, and strengthened Iran. Those are the two things that cause the greatest consternation among the moderate Arab countries, because those are the two entities that threaten their grip on power.

Also not playing well to the locals is U.S. support for the ill-fated Israeli war against Hezbollah last summer. Continued attempts to undermine the popularly-elected Hamas in the Gaza strip. "The strategy is based on the assumption that you could isolate, weaken ... Hamas," while strengthening Abbas and his Fatah faction, said Shibley Telhami, a Middle East expert at the University of Maryland. "It cannot succeed. ... Everybody agrees that you can't simply isolate Hamas." Couple that failed strategy with United States’ continued support for Mubarak in Egypt, it pretty much puts the lie to claims that the United States “fosters Muslim democracy.”

The leaders of friendly states have lost faith in the Bush administration and do not believe he will deliver on his promises. Therefore, they are reluctant to risk anything for Bush. “Our credibility is in tatters. They are not going to commit because they don’t trust us. That doesn’t mean they are not concerned about Iran. It just means they just don’t know what we are going to do,” said one senior State Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak to reporters.

One needn’t read Runes to see other signs of discord in the administration.

On the eve of the trip, unnamed U.S. officials told The New York Times that Washington believes Saudi Arabia has been unhelpful in Iraq by not supporting Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's government. The administration publicly disavowed the report, but said that Saudi Arabia could do more to help. The leaked complaint seems unlikely to make life easier for Rice and Gates when they arrive in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, early in the trip.

Pentagon and State Department officials said the trip is intended to reassure Arab leaders that the U.S. will uphold its security commitments in the region, and meanwhile, Arab diplomats in Washington resolutely maintain that they need more than reassurances. They have heard a lot of proposals and reassurances, but they have not seen a clear plan for peace or security in the region. The U.S. promises a more active role, but consistently fails to deliver. Arab diplomats in Washington voiced skepticism – anonymously – that the trip would be fruitful.

More than what Rice and Gates say on the trip, “[P]eople will be monitoring the debate in Washington. Everybody is watching that very closely and then will draw their own conclusions.” said one anonymous diplomat.

“There is no clarity,” another diplomat said on condition of anonymity, because he didn't want to disagree publicly with the administration. “The trip in and of itself is not important. What’s important is that the administration commit to dealing with the substantive issues.”

Rice and Gates have their work cut out for them. With 18 months left in office, it will be difficult to reshape the way the region sees the United States, said William Quandt, a professor of international relations at the University of Virginia, who as an aide to President Jimmy Carter helped craft the 1978 Camp David accords between Israel and Egypt.

“I don’t think they have a real strategy that has much chance of working,” Quandt said. Gates, who joined the administration in December, “may be able to calm things down a little. But that won’t change the course.”

The two Secretaries will attend meetings together in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, then they will part company. Gates will visit “other gulf states” and Rice will head for Israel and the Palestinain territories to meet with Mahmood Abbas and Israeli leaders. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other U.S. allies in the region want the United States to reach out to the popularly-elected Hamas, which now controls Gaza, but Rice has steadfastly maintained that there will be no dealing with the Hamas, which is the U.S. classifies as a terrorist organization.

There's more: "Rice and Gates are off to the Middle East on a Salvage Operation" >>

The apology was nice and all, now make with firing Edelman already

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates sent a nice letter to Hillary Clinton on Wednesday, apologizing for the accusation by Eric Edelman that “Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.” by asking about Pentagon plans to withdraw from Iraq.

Gates' letter, dated Wednesday, insisted that was not the point of Edelman's missive.

"I emphatically assure you that we do not claim, suggest, or otherwise believe that congressional oversight emboldens our enemies, nor do we question anyone's motives in this regard," Gates wrote.

The Defense secretary both agreed with Clinton that congressional oversight of military planning is needed and at the same time defended Edelman.

"I truly regret that this important discussion went astray and I also regret any misunderstanding of intention," Gates wrote.

"I agree with you that planning concerning the future of U.S. forces in Iraq — including the drawdown of those forces at the right time — is not only appropriate but essential," Gates wrote, adding that Edelman also agrees with that point.

"You may rest assured that such planning is indeed taking place with my active involvement," he wrote in the letter.

Of course, the apology was rather blunted by the bit about Edelman being "a valued member” who provides "wise counsel and years of experience (that) are critically important to the many pressing policy issues facing the military."

He is not irreplaceable, and Gates should fire him. His bio, afterall, is not impressive in the least. He is perceived by the Turks to have been the worst ambassador to Turkey ever, in fact, the Turks practically threw a tickertape parade when the feckless fool left the post.

Oh – and lest anyone forget - he was installed as Undersecretary of Defense by a recess appointment. He was such a poor nominee that his nomination stalled in the Republican Rubber Stamp Senate in the 109^th Congress.

There's more: "The apology was nice and all, now make with firing Edelman already" >>

Too Little, Too Late

[This entry was updated @ 8:35 a.m. 19 July. The excerpt from the archive post was incomplete.]

You know, two years ago, when I wrote this:

Sunday, June 26, 2005

There is a topic I have been raging about intermittently over on Kevin Drum's site, Political Animal, for a week or so now. You know, just because I'm liberal does not mean I don't support the troops...I do. I'm actually willing to pay more taxes so they can have armor and healthcare and pay-raises. More than I can say for the chicken-hawks. Then I opened this mornings New York Times, and there it was on the front page. Vindication! Little did I know that actually reading the article would make me even more angry than I already was.

What I have been screaming about is the fact that we are going to war in jeeps - small j. Humvee's are utility vehicles. They are not battle vehicles. They were designed for use in the cold war, not for combat. They have a flat bottom that absorbs impact, rather than deflects. Combat vehicles have an angled chassis to deflect impact. Utility vehicles are made to scramble across terrain quickly. When they are armored, they lose their ability to be quick and nimble. And the chassis is light, so when they are armored, they out of necessity leave the rear more exposed. (Where are gas tanks located again?) But don't just take my word for it. Let me quote former Army secretary Les Brownlee for you on this subject: "We never intended to up-armor all of the Humvees. The Humvee is a carrier and derives it's advantage from having cross-country mobility, and when you load it down with armor plating, you lose that."

Well this morning, the top-of-the page headline of the "paper of record" read "Safer Vehicles for Soldiers: A Tale of Delays and Glitches." Michael Moss does one of the finest pieces of reporting that I have read lately. I encourage everyone to read the whole thing, but that isn't going to stop me from telling you what's in it - and going ballistic anyway.

The first time I raised questions about this issue was when 18 soldiers got pinned down and killed in Mogadishu. I have not forgotten and have asked the question repeatedly. But I have been screaming at the top of my lungs about this issue since Rumsfeld got asked "the question" by that part-time soldier from Tennessee, you remember, he was basically told that he was expendable by the Secretary of Defense. You remember his glib dismissal: "You go to war with the Army you have." Let it be noted that when Rumsfeld visits Iraq, he does not ride in a Humvee, not outside the green zone anyway, no, he rides in an Israeli-manufactured and Halliburton-owned Rhino Runner. The Rhino Runner, coincidentally is what they transport Saddam in when he makes court appearances. Why is the safety of the guy we were duped into going to war against more important than our kids? If he got blown up, he couldn't tell any of the secrets he knows that have a lot of Washington nut-sacks shrivelling.

Let me start by telling you the surreal way an armored Humvee eventually finds it's way to Iraq. It starts in a plant owned by AM General, headquartered in South Bend, Indiana. They are manufactured eight miles away in Mishawa, Indiana. AM general is pretty good at assembling Hummers, and they come together pretty fast. Without any armor. Then they get trucked four and a half hours to a small shop in Fairfield, Ohio owned by O'Gara-Hess& Eisenhardt, where they are partially disassembled so the armoring can be added.

O'Gara is a small company, but they have big greed, and they are willing to sacrifice your sons and daughters to protect their bottom-line. When the war started, they had only 94 employees, and they armored one vehicle per day. Not much of a war effort, huh? Now they employ approximately 250 people, and turn out a couple more, but still, not much of a war effort.

O'Gara is fighting tooth and nail to keep their exclusive contract - again at the cost of our children's lives - even though they are too small to do the job alone. They have profits to consider damnit! If I question their right to make money then I must not be patriotic!

In January of 2005, the DoD tried to buy the legal rights to the armor design in an effort to step up delivery of armored humvees. O'Gara declined, saying that the efforts of the DoD amounted to a threat to it's "current and future competitive position." I screamed out loud when I read this! Their profits are more important than my nephew who is in uniform even as I type? Um, not to me, and not to my husband, and not to my sister- and brother-in-law. Ruthless bastards. This is your business friendly Rethuglican administration folks. They don't just want you votes, they want your flesh and blood too. Literally. I don't know about you, but I'm contacting my senators and my congressman Monday morning. O'Gara's greed is inexcusable. It's evil. It's (unfortunately not) un-American!

Let's just accept that the administration knew, possibly before the 2000 election, that if George W. Bush won the election, they were going to war. They certainly knew that we were going to war after 9/11 happened. But in 2002, the administration cut the M1117 A.S.V. fighting vehicle from the budget, despite that fact that it had the support of both senators from Louisiana, where it is manufactured. Whereas an armored Humvee can withstand 7.62 mm ammunition fire, the M1117 can stand up to .50 caliber armor-piercing ammunition. The Humvee and the M1117 are both built to take 155-mm artillery airbursts. The big difference comes in the back axle. While the armored Hummer is improvised, an afterthought even, with a chassis too light to handle full armor, the M1117 does not have this front-back disparity. The back end of a Hummer is vulnerable to a 4-pound land-mine. The M1117, built for combat, can withstand a 12-pound blast to any wheel. This is the smallest, lightest, quickest fighting vehicle in our armament. Why it was more important to give tax-cuts to a few than to build these vehicles for our troops, who we had already committed to battle in Afghanistan by that point eludes my comprehension.

Preferable to the M1117, however is the Cougar H.E.V. It has a V-shaped chassis to deflect blasts, and can really take a punch. The axles can take the blast of a 30-pound land mine and protect the passengers.

But the mayor of trucktown, so to speak, is the Rhino Runner, manufactured in Israel by Labock Technologies. This rolling fortress of steel can withstand unspecified overhead airbursts and explosives devices up to 1,000 pounds. A Rhino Runner came up against a bomb on the Baghdad Airport Road that left a six-foot crater, and the occupants walked away unscathed. Now that is testimony! The picture of Rummy kicked back and holding court on page 8-A of the Times this morning looks like the Rhino Runner offers a pretty comfy ride, too. And also represents the best value. While a Hummer "fully" armored costs about $140,000 and the M1117 costs $700,000; the Rhino Runner costs a mere $250,000. I'm willing to pay taxes to put the troops in them, if they are determined to "slog it out" over there.

Back then, I would have considered this good news. Now, it pisses me off. Instead of doing at this late stage something that should have been done at the outset if they were going to do this stupid, stupid thing; they should be bringing the troops home.

People, doing this now means they are not just thinking Korea-type occupation, but with overt hostilities and live rounds. They are moving forward, setting up a fifty year occupation of a hostile country. They are planning for your still-unborn grandchildren to be patrolling the same streets that are being patrolled today. The same neighborhoods will be dangerous for Americans for generations to come if these people have their way.

There's more: "Too Little, Too Late" >>

So much for 12-months “Dwell Time”

Stars & Stripes reported Thursday that the Army is rotating a combat company back to Iraq a mere nine months after they left. Members of the 1^st Armored Division, 1^st Battalion, 6^th Infantry, Company A were informed on Tuesday that they will return to Iraq in November, for a 15 month deployment. They just finished a 13-month deployment to Iraq in February.

On April 11, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that tours would be extended to 15 months for all active duty Army personnel currently deployed or with orders to the theatre of operations. At the time the extended tours were announced, the SecDef also stressed that soldiers would be guaranteed a full year at home.

When asked about the situation late Wednesday, Mr. Gates said he could not explain why the Army was sending the company back to battle a mere nine months after it’s last deployment finished. “I’ll be very interested to find out more about that. We just need to find out about that, because I made it clear that people would have 12 months at home.” (emphasis added)

Apparently the SecDef needs to have a chat with Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman about just what, exactly the Secretary meant when he said those words, because he got something entirely different out of the SecDef’s proclamation..

“[T]here are some people, just by the nature of transferring units and things like that may not end up with the full 12 months.”

“The United States military is not a static organization,” Whitman said.

The Army, Whitman said, is “managing intensely” “individuals in units, and assignment policies, and rotations and things like that.”

“But it’s not going to be 100 percent, or you would have to basically, you know, lock down the Army, and nobody would transfer from one combat unit to another combat unit,” Whitman said.

Rather than a guarantee, Whitman said, the 12-month dwell time between deployments “is a goal, to have units and individuals to have an appropriate amount of time for recovery and for stability purposes at home station and to be able to be with their families.”

So…a promise made to the services by the Secretary of Defense is a goal, eh?

The fact remains, we have asked too much of our services, especially of the Army. It is simply unsustainable. We have a reckoning in store, and it will not be pleasant to deal with. It would behoove us to start that process now.

[Cross-posted from Blue Girl, Red State]

There's more: "So much for 12-months “Dwell Time”" >>

Harvey didn't jump; he was pushed

The Air Force Times is reporting that Army Secretary Francis Harvey's resignation was requested before it was offered. In fact, Harvey was at Ft. Benning in Georgia and was summoned back to the Pentagon to meet with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on Friday afternoon, in time for his exit to make the evening news.

After the meeting with Harvey, Gates issued the following statement:

Gates was unhappy with the Army’s response to revelations, reported by Army Times and The Washington Post, that wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington were consigned to squalid quarters and mired in administrative red tape while awaiting care and evaluation for benefits.

“I am disappointed that some in the Army have not adequately appreciated the seriousness of the situation pertaining to outpatient care at Walter Reed,” Gates said in the Pentagon briefing room.

“Some have shown too much defensiveness and have not shown enough focus on digging into and addressing the problems,” Gates said.

“Also, I am concerned that some do not properly understand the need to communicate to the wounded and their families that we have no higher priority than their care, and that addressing their concerns about the quality of their outpatient experience is critically important.

“Our wounded soldiers and their families have sacrificed much and they deserve the best we can offer.”

Secretary Gates took no questions from reporters, but if he had, certainly the press corps would have clamored to know if Kiley is next.

None the less, my Magic 8-Ball says Kiley will be gone by the evening news Wednesday - at the latest. (And if I'm wrong, which I'm not, well I'm due to miss. I've been on a roll lately with the predictions...)

There's more: "Harvey didn't jump; he was pushed" >>

An End to Stop-Loss?

The Air Force Times reported today that Secretary of Defense Bob Gates has instructed the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Peter Pace, the Secretaries of the respective branches and other top defense officials that he wants plans on his desk by 28 February to find their manpower elsewhere. Stop-loss authority allows the services to extend people on active-duty at will by delaying planned separations, retirements and demobilizations.

“Use of stop loss will be minimized for both active and Reserve component forces,” Gates wrote in a Jan. 19 memo. This will affect the Army more than any other branch of service. The Air Force has not employed the stop-loss policy since 2003. The Marines have all but abandoned the practice and the Navy has only employed the controversial tactic twice - in the wake of the terror attacks of September 11, a total of 301 Navy were retained until December 2002. In the spring of 2003, 179 Corpsmen were retained in service beyond their scheduled dates of separation.

When American men and women enter into service, a bargain is struck. That bargain amounts to a sacred trust. Those who agree to serve are betrayed when they are held in service beyond their exit date against their wishes.

By stopping the reliance on stop-loss, Gates is doing the right thing.

There's more: "An End to Stop-Loss?" >>