Clausewitz, Sun Tzu and Napoleon better watch out — they may have to make some room in the pantheon for der Field Marshal . . .
Back to Main
June 11, 2005
The Flytrap
Comments
The U.S. Special Operations Command has hired three firms to produce newspaper stories, television broadcasts and Web sites to spread American propaganda overseas.
The Tampa-based military headquarters, which oversees commandos and psychological warfare, may spend up to $100 million for the media campaign in the next five years.
Why don’t they just give away Marvel comics?
Posted by: Lupin | Jun 11 2005 10:12 utc | 2
madison ave. ad agency(s) will reap the windfall with ads that convince us that we’re right, which they’ll give back a portion to insure another check in the mail. war on drugs=war on terror=money in the bank=re-election=consolidation of capital=misery.
Posted by: anna missed | Jun 11 2005 10:29 utc | 3
Former CIA director calls for Immediate Iraq withdrawal
Former CIA Director John M. Deutch, institute professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), said that the United States is not making progress toward key objectives in Iraq and called for American troops to pull out “as soon as possible” during a speech Tuesday (June 7) at Harvard’s Sanders Theatre.
Deutch, who delivered the Phi Beta Kappa oration at the honor society’s annual Literary Exercises, served as CIA director under President Bill Clinton from May 1995 until December 1996. In his 20-minute speech, he challenged the views of both Republicans and Democrats who say that the United States must stay the course to stabilize the country before disengaging …
Posted by: Outraged | Jun 11 2005 10:34 utc | 4
Canonized rightwing think tank pundit and Edward Said’s arch-enemy:
From Syracuse, a lecture by Samuel P. Huntington
Restoring Free Speech and Liberty on Campus :
“”Who Are We?”” Playback “Who are We? : Lecture by Samuel (clash of Civ’s) Huntington, April 29, 2005.
And rebuttals … (look to the right of the page to watch this streaming media lecture Note also, for some reason, it doesn’t start until three min twenty something seconds in)
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 11 2005 10:41 utc | 5
Outraged, your link to Harvard and Deutch is probably the most encouraging thing I have seen in the last 5 years. Going right into the belly of the elite…
Posted by: dan of steele | Jun 11 2005 10:51 utc | 6
The US strategy in Iraq seems to have resulted from careful and brilliant study of the last century of guerilla war because nobody could create such a massive fuck-up on sheer talent alone.
By the way: if anyone is in Paris, you must walk along Rue Vaugirard and see the photos from the reporters without borders, although it will make you weep.
Posted by: citizen k | Jun 11 2005 11:34 utc | 7
Yeah, well, I’m not so encouraged with Harvard, or America’s ability to even begin to really to face reality.
Deutch’s talk reviewed the arguments surrounding the Iraq war’s start and he said he accepts the Bush administration’s contention that officials thought Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. But he also said that he believes there was a deeper reason behind the military action: the belief that intervention would result in “a near-spontaneous conversion of Iraq, and with luck, the entire Middle East, to a democratic society.”
Harvard Professor, CIA Director, Phi Beta Kappa .. how come a taxi driver in Manila knew more than this schmuck ? Or, as he’s smart enough to know that it’s time to get out – maybe he’s smarter than he lets on – so how come he can’t be honest enough to tell the whole truth.
Posted by: DM | Jun 11 2005 12:02 utc | 8
DM I don’t think you are placing blame where it is deserved. Deutch said…
The problem with that vision, Deutch said, is that it is beyond the power of our military forces to bring about such change.
The United States does have tools to foster change in other countries, including diplomacy and economic assistance and trade, but the military is suited to fighting wars, he said, not to providing police services and establishing a civil society.
“Our nation embarks on an especially perilous course when it proactively engages in some regions of the world with the intention of achieving a government based on our values,” Deutch said. “It is one matter to adopt a foreign policy that encourages democratic values and institutions in other parts of the world. It is quite another matter to believe it just or practical to achieve such results on the ground with U.S. military forces.”
I read this as him laying the blame on the PNAC goal of empire. I don’t see where this could be taken as Deutch’s goal. From what I understand of this fiasco, the CIA has never been in favor of the course of action taken by the PNAC bastards and has tried to go against it as much as it can without coming out and actually overthrowing the government.
For him to say this at Harvard is very welcome to me. I am not all that crazy about the old way of doing business either but it is at least a bit more discreet and a lot less costly to all. Perhaps the lesser of two evils…
Posted by: dan of steele | Jun 11 2005 12:26 utc | 9
As to the flytrap, the best debunking I have read (sorry, cannot remember where) is as follows:
In the fight against disease and especially against bacteria and viruses, let’s make one hospital really dirty and non-hygienic. Bacteria and viruses will come over and we will fight them on the ground of our choosing.
To me, this is the most accurate description of what has been done on Iraq.
Posted by: Jérôme | Jun 11 2005 14:18 utc | 10
The Flytrap Theory has sickened me since I first detected it. What more evidence should one need that (many) Americans have zero regard for others’ lives?
Say Mike and Ted are enemies. Mike doesn’t want to fight at his house — his wife and kids could get hurt. And Ted won’t tell Mike where he lives.
Mike recalls a woman named Sally who has an abusive husband, Dick. He resolves to kill Dick, occupy the house, and fight Ted there, whether Sally likes it or not.
Ted is happy to fight at Sally’s house. Like Mike, he couldn’t care less whether the place gets trashed, whether they maim or kill Sally’s kids as they battle from room to room.
Mike tortures Sally for news about Ted; they both demand “gratitude” for bringing the fight to Sally’s house; etc.
If these were your neighbors, would it be so hard to see that Mike and Ted are both wrong? That neither cares a whit for Sally?
Posted by: Peeperkorn | Jun 11 2005 18:39 utc | 11
I think someone should remind Rumsfeld and other Bushies about this the next time they complain about Syria failing to stop foreign fighters from crossing the border. I mean, even if it’s true, they’re just trying to help us with our clever strategy, right?
Posted by: Redshift | Jun 11 2005 18:58 utc | 12