Haunting the Web Since 1999
“We can’t win this militarily. It can only be won politically; it can only be won diplomatically and internationally…And you’ve got to listen to realism and what the public wants in the United States.” Hopefully (but not likely) heeding John Murtha’s words, Dubya’s Iraq team retreats to Camp David for a strategy pow-wow. By the way, is it just me or does the “Interagency Team on Iraq” look suspiciously like the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants?
“I do think she is so into this that she sees it from the inside out…And I’m not sure she adequately grasps all the mistakes we have made.” The NYT profiles Meghan O’Sullivan, the deputy national security adviser for Iraq and Afghanistan. “In Baghdad, American Embassy officials sometimes use the phrase, ‘Let’s not Meghan-ize the problem,’ meaning, let’s not try to impose order on the chaos of Iraq with one of her five-point presentations.” But, to be fair to O’Sullivan, the fellow she’s briefing every day hasn’t shown a propensity for understandiing anything more complex. In fact, five points may be stretching the limits of the presidential curiosity.
I was traveling yesterday during the big news: With the aid of cellphone surveillance and an Al Qaeda informer who suggested tracking “spiritual adviser” Sheikh Abd al-Rahman, the US military dropped two 500-lb bombs on Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leading Iraq insurgent (and Al Qaeda poster boy for the administration.) Undoubtedly good news for our efforts in Iraq (and, lord knows, Dubya needed some good news in the worst way, particularly in the wake of Haditha.) Still, this big kill obviously doesn’t answer the big questions about Iraq’s stability, or our continued involvement in the region: “‘The immediate aftermath of this will probably be an upsurge of violence’ as Sunni insurgents hurry to show that Zarqawi’s killing has not broken the resistance, said Michael Clarke, an expert on terrorism at the International Policy Institute of King’s College London. ‘In the medium term, in the next month or two, it will probably help to downgrade sectarianism,’ Clarke said by telephone. ‘But the dynamic of sectarian violence is probably past the point of no return.’” And, of course, while this strike will hopefully be a stunning blow to Al Qaeda in Iraq, what of the original Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and around the world? We’re nearing five years since 9/11, and Osama’s still out there…
“‘I was sorry for staying in the bathroom. I should have died like them,’ recalls Safa, who now lives with a cousin. ‘The Americans are murderers, criminals. They have no mercy.'” So much for hearts and minds. Obviously, the big news over the past week has been the nightmarish revelations of the atrocities at Haditha, which have moved the Senate to hearings (and some moderate Senators to consternation with Rumsfeld), re-fueled anti-American sentiment around the world, demonstrated once again the corrosive consequences of this administration’s pathetic lack of planning and leadership in Iraq, and forced us all to wonder anew exactly what the hell is going on over there that’s led to the deaths of approximately 40,000 Iraqi civilians. “‘People were taking steroids, Valium, hooked on painkillers, drinking. They’d go on raids and patrols totally stoned.’ Hicks, who volunteered at the age of 17, said, ‘We’re killing the wrong people all the time, and mostly by accident. One guy in my squadron ran over a family with his tank.‘”
“Saying, ‘Bring it on’; kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people. I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner, you know. ‘Wanted, dead or alive’; that kind of talk. I think in certain parts of the world it was misinterpreted. And so I learned from that.” In a joint press conference, Dubya and Tony Blair own up to some mistakes in Iraq, including Abu Ghraib — “the biggest mistake“, according to Dubya — and de-Baathification, according to Blair. “The prime minister’s examples appeared to be a direct rebuke of both the Pentagon’s insistence that a detailed “nation-building” plan was unnecessary before the invasion and the push by key members of Bush’s administration for broad de-Baathification.“
“It’s ironic that President Bush is now endorsing a diplomatic stance toward Iran so similar to the stance that President Clinton took toward North Korea. When he first took office, Bush so feverishly opposed the Agreed Framework with North Korea in large part because Clinton had produced it.” Slate‘s Fred Kaplan wonders whether President Clinton’s Agreed Framework with North Korea might help to contain Iran. The verdict? Possibly maybe, particularly given that we have no real alternatives.
“In short, [the letter] provides a perfect opportunity for Bush to do what he should have been doing for the last few years — to lay out what America stands for, what we have in common with Muslim nations, and how our differences can be tolerated or settled without conflict.” Also in Slate, Fred Kaplan offers some sage advice on how to respond to Admadinejad’s recent letter. “Bush and Ahmadinejad — two of the world’s most stubborn, self-righteous leaders. It’s at once hopeful and pathetic that the next step in their confrontation — whether it intensifies or slackens — could be determined by whether Bush answers or brushes off a goofy letter.“
“‘This administration may be over,’ Lance Tarrance, a chief architect of the Republicans’ 1960s and ’70s Southern strategy, told a gathering of journalists and political wonks last week. ‘By and large, if you want to be tough about it, the relevancy of this administration on policy may be over.‘” Are we at the turn of the tide? As even committed conservatives and right-leaning observers start sticking a fork in the Dubya administration, newly confident Dems begin to prepare for a return of the House. Foremost in their plans is “a legislative blitz during their first week in power that would raise the minimum wage, roll back parts of the Republican prescription drug law, implement homeland security measures and reinstate lapsed budget deficit controls…a Democratic House would [also] launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House’s first-term energy task force and probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.”
“Battered by accusations of a liberal bias and determined to prove their conservative critics wrong, the press during the run-up to the war — timid, deferential, unsure, cautious, and often intentionally unthinking — came as close as possible to abdicating its reason for existing in the first place, which is to accurately inform citizens, particularly during times of great national interest.” In very related news (as Dan Froomkin pointed out), Salon publishes an extended excerpt from Eric Boehlert’s Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over For Bush.
“‘The president’s military advisers felt that the size of the force was adequate; they may still feel that years later. Some of us don’t. I don’t,’ Powell said. ‘In my perspective, I would have preferred more troops, but you know, this conflict is not over.‘” In a slap at Rumsfeld, Cheney, and his other one-time nemeses in the Dubya White House, former Secretary of State Colin Powell airs some of his grievances with the build-up to war in Iraq. “‘At the time, the president was listening to those who were supposed to be providing him with military advice,’ Powell said. ‘They were anticipating a different kind of immediate aftermath of the fall of Baghdad; it turned out to be not exactly as they had anticipated.’”