Back to Main
September 30, 2005
WB: Going Backwards
Comments
Sure this could be just a slip of words
Asked whether the insurgency has worsened, Casey said it has not expanded geographically or numerically, “to the extent we can know that.” But he noted that current “levels of violence are above norms,” exceeding 500 attacks a week. “I’ll tell you that levels of violence are a lagging indicator of success,” he added.
But if the success is to increase the trouble in Iraq the statement is absolutly correct.
Two days ago the US army nightraided the houses of two Sunni leaders without knowledge of the local Iraqi authority. Both had called to vote against the constitution.
Like Helena Cobban I do think this is a conscience plan to keep Sunnis away from a vote just as Fallujah kept them away from voting the last time.
WASHINGTON — The invasion of Iraq was the “greatest strategic disaster in United States history,” a retired Army general said yesterday, strengthening an effort in Congress to force an American withdrawal beginning next year., Retired Army Lt. Gen. William Odom, a Vietnam veteran, said the invasion of Iraq alienated America’s Middle East allies, making it harder to prosecute a war against terrorists.
The U.S. should withdraw from Iraq, he said, and reposition its military forces along the Afghan-Pakistani border to capture Osama bin Laden and crush al Qaeda cells.
“The invasion of Iraq I believe will turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history,” said Odom, now a scholar with the Hudson Institute.
http://www.lowellsun.com/ci_3072005
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Sep 30 2005 16:04 utc | 2
So I guess we can expect those suicide bombings in Detroit to kick off any day now. Whatever medication Rumsfeld is taking, it ain’t working.
Oh his meds are working all right… working JUST fine. We only wish he’d share them… then we could all listen to Sgt. Pepper’s backward and know where he is getting his strategy from.
Posted by: dry fly | Sep 30 2005 16:46 utc | 3
I watched a good part of that hearing before the Armed Services Committee on C-span. (I almost never watch the toob but made an exception.)
Rummy, Casey, Abizaid and the other top general (name-blank) were there to testify that the war is going spendidly, that we just need a little more time to train the Iraqis to take over, etc etc. It was startlingly transparent that their job was to perpetuate war no matter the absence of logic or reason.
Sen Warner the chairman posed a few questions intended to show that he was concerned. Ted Kennedy, never so bright to begin with, mumbled and grumbled a bit, lost his train of thought, gave up before he had started. (He is getting really old.) McCain actually raised some challenging points strongly, but being a dyed-in-the-wool warrior and republican, he would never question the rationale for invasion or anything like that.
This one was the killer of the evening: In response to a question on infiltration of Iraqi forces with insurgents, Rummy blurted out that our own police forces are infiltrated with criminals but we deal with it, so what’s the big deal? A bit later he reiterated this point to drive it home.
So here is SecDef, one of our top reptiles-in-charge, openly stating for the record on national TV, that crime within the system is the norm. That is what I saw and heard. It says to me that he is tired of playing this game of goody two shoes, that he and his have us in a stranglehold anyway, so we might as well admit now that the law has nothing to do with policy or his behavior.
All the others in the room were playing the same game, with various levels of fear and/or resignation, but NOBODY stood up and called foul.
I knew it was bad but I had to see it to believe it.
Posted by: rapt | Sep 30 2005 17:04 utc | 4
the number of boots on the ground has risen from about 110,000 times 2 in early 2004 (before the April uprisings) to 149,000 times 2 now.
Those numbers do not include some 20-25,000 mercs and do not include special operations forces which may be around to 5,000.
The departure of Meyers is a welcome event, he became attached-at-the-hip to Rumsfeld and the ‘civilian side’ of the Pentagon thinking. Gen. Peter Pace has been ‘totally’ involved in the Iraq/Afghanistan expeditions, because of that I don’t anticipate any substantial changes in the Rumsfeld-factor, but I welcome Meyers’ departure.
Soandso
Posted by: Soandso | Sep 30 2005 17:32 utc | 7
Rep. Jane Harman (Dem) is in Baghdad to visit the Kool Aid factory and is “blogging” at TPM Cafe. What she is writing is just as stupit as what comes out of any Republican Rep. mouth. Some commentators take her by the (symbolic) balls.
With such Reps. the US is certain to stay in Baghdad until it is definitly defeated.
Here is a very bizarre piece of news from Stratfor:
U.S.: New JCS Chairman
September 30, 2005 14 47 GMT
U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace replaced Gen. Richard Myers on Sept. 30 as the 16th chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. armed forces. Nominated by U.S. President George W. Bush in April, Pace will address issues over reintroducing the draft, allocating resources within the U.S. military and military involvement in Iraq.
Posted by: Greco | Sep 30 2005 18:14 utc | 10
Well, the draft has been out of fashion for some time. I was impressed because when stratfor says something about Bush’s policies you will read it in the papers after some months.
Posted by: Greco | Sep 30 2005 18:51 utc | 12
i saw the pace story @ the top of google news this morn w/an exclusion of any mention a draft. found this on an international site
Some the issues Pace will have to deal with include the debate over reintroducing the draft, the allocation of resources within the US military, and the situation in Iraq.
Posted by: annie | Sep 30 2005 19:13 utc | 13
@Greco – to me it is obvious for about two years that the US will reintroduce the draft. I was confirmed when they started to refit the Selected Service System that will decide who will have to go.
Tin foil hat theory following:
Those in power (and that includes most Dem’s in congress and their money sources) want to fight a World War IV about energy resources and “superiority”. The prime objective is to keep American “superiority” over “foes” like China and India (and continental Europe). The Middle East and its energy resources are a tool for that. To own that tool, so they hope, will allow to pressure anyone who tries to not go their way.
To own that ME tool one or two or more million foor on the ground are needed. To hire mercs at that size is too expensive. The allies will not help out here. So what is left but a draft?
The strategy is not one of Dems vs. Reps. The strategy is not one of a few years between elections. The strategy is for decades and both sides of the ailes have signed off to it.
/tin foil hat
BTW – if I get this right:
In 1992, Pace was appointed commander of the Marine Corps School at Quantico, Virginia. He was deputy commander of the Marine detachment in Somalia, and later of the US joint task force in the African country, from December 1992 to March 1994.
Black Hawk down happened on Oct. 3, 1993. That guy was in command when the shit hit the fan and the UN troops had to come in to save a bungled US action.
Nice resumee.
in july, the pentagon was trying to get the draft age ceiling upped to age 42. anything ever happen w/ that?
Posted by: b real | Sep 30 2005 19:42 utc | 16
@annie
Interesting. Why a swiss site could possibly think that there is a debate about the draft?
Stratfor probably copy-pasted from them.
Posted by: Greco | Sep 30 2005 19:50 utc | 17
“Commenting on this testimony, Anthony H. Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, one of America’s most respected military analysts, said, “If only one battalion has the highest level of readiness, doesn’t this mean that after some two and a half years of Coalition effort, less than 1 percent of the 86,900 men in the (Iraqi) Army have the highest level of readiness?”
Iraq has more bombs but no trained army
Posted by: Rumsfeld’s metrics | Sep 30 2005 19:56 utc | 18
This image keeps running through my head of all those generals lined up at the hearings spewing out these military-speak answers to bureaucratic double-talk questions, all skirting around why the worlds most sophisticated military/intellegence complex cannot, for all its worth, deal with a few thousand guys in tee-shirts with AK47s. It seems they all are lost in an eddy of prima-facie question and answer dance with death played to an eternally skipping record — I cannot see why they bother — it’ s as if the wheels of government have concluded we be best hypnotized by mixing the look of creditability and credulity into a real life government sponsered remake of Last Year at Marenbad we are all then forced to watch and endlessly ponder, year after fucking year. And its not as if this is some new and novel quandry, we have history here, 15 years of history in Vietnam, millions dead, and all justified by the same parade of gasbag clowns just as oblivious to the trail of death and destruction left behind like some back ally abortion left in a trash can. I’m really sorry for those that have to endure this mind-bending pantamine, either in real fact or mental distress, enduring, until the trickle of awarness finally, and blindly filters down into the dark recesses of dolthood toddling atop a fat beer fart somewhere in some pickup truck somewhere, or as a reborn thunderstruck revelation stroke of brilliance moment by some geek as he helicopters into a very important meeting at some think-tank somehere. Man….Oh Man.
Posted by: anna missed | Sep 30 2005 19:58 utc | 19
@ greco, i wondered about that also. i read alot about the implementation of a ‘skills draft’ last year. the registration, requiring yearly update of all men and women between the ages of 18 and 36. along w/the reasons b mentions it seems fairly obvious there is a distrust of the choices being made and you’re not going to get people to join the military is they don’t trust the direcytion the country is heading. the idea of a long drawn out mess in the ME. imperialism,,,, the whole 9 yrds. i don’t think the public is ready.
Posted by: annie | Sep 30 2005 20:02 utc | 20
The government is taking the first steps toward a targeted military draft of Americans with special skills in computers and foreign languages.
The Selective Service System has begun the process of creating the procedures and policies to conduct such a targeted draft in case military officials ask Congress to authorize it and the lawmakers agree to such a request.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said he would not ask Congress to authorize a draft, and officials at the Selective Service System, the independent federal agency that would organize any conscription, stress that the possibility of a so-called “special skills draft” is likely far off.
A targeted registration and draft is “is strictly in the planning stage,” said Flahavan, adding that “the whole thing is driven by what appears to be the more pressing and relevant need today” — the deficit in language and computer experts.
Posted by: annie | Sep 30 2005 20:06 utc | 21
Some folks seem to go off on a tangent (duh!), and such is the case with the reference to the 2004 “Special Skills” Draft topic. Back then (2004), there was a ‘hot rumor’ that the draft was gunna be cranking up and its my belief that the article referenced was just one of those reaches for supporting info. Lets flash forward a year and pick it up from here- a draft may become necessary but we ain’t there yet, and when the time is right we’ll hear it in unencrypted detail.
FWIW, I support a draft, or some form of service.
Soandso
Posted by: Soandso | Sep 30 2005 20:29 utc | 22
Re Gen. Pace: That guy was in command when the shit hit the fan and the UN troops had to come in to save a bungled US action.
Well then, he should fit right in, no?
Posted by: Billmon | Sep 30 2005 20:35 utc | 23
Rumsfeld touts Iraqi troops, downplays setback
“There are an awful lot of people chasing the wrong rabbit here, it seems to me,” Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon, when asked about the number of Iraqi battalions that can operate independently.
Yeah, only you know where the right rabbits are, Donald. We know you know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat, right?
Why can’t someone take him out on a rabbit hunt? You know what I mean? For the good of the family, of course. It wouldn’t be personal, it would be a great pleasure.
Posted by: Luca Brasi | Sep 30 2005 20:39 utc | 24
@ soandso
my son is 18 and i do not support a draft. when you’ve got an administration ready to line up our youth to go out there and drum up business for their corporations exploiting and oppressing people all over the globe…. talk to me about the draft when our offense department becomes a defense department. until then, canada, mexico, i really don’t care , i’ll be out of here dragging my son come hell or high water.
Posted by: annie | Sep 30 2005 21:49 utc | 25
@Soandso
OFFICIAL ENLISTMENT FORM FOR THE US ARMED FORCES..
Put your money where your mouth is…
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Sep 30 2005 22:03 utc | 27
Sam…. don’t be so elementary. I’ve done that… so did my brother, father, grandfather… and civil war family. Shut up!
Soandso
Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 30 2005 22:07 utc | 28
I’m pleased to hear you’ve done it Soandso but don’t be forcing your choices on others.
Apart from the dedicated and committed pacifists you won’t find many people hanging around here that would refuse to jump into line if their country/community was under direct threat from outside forces. That said that situation has arisen rarely if ever in the US.
It has certainly never been the case with the limited resources aligned against it in the “War on Terra”. But what’s that?
Ahh! we see the same faces who will have considerable personal gain from an expanded military, advocating the recruitment of their nation’s youth over and over again.
Just a coincidence eh!
Posted by: Debs is dead | Sep 30 2005 22:28 utc | 29
Deb… I’ve a wee bit of an advantage because I’ve read this (and Billmon) for a couple years. Don’t be too quick to judge. There are many things-in-common that I find attractive on this site and I’ll hang here until I’ve decided to move on.
Soandso
Posted by: Soandso | Sep 30 2005 22:36 utc | 30
@Soandso
I think a hair-trigger desire to huffily leap on whatever high horse of righteous indignation is currently tethered in the stable of your tiny wit was the true motivating factor for your unconvincing and impotent screed. So you have served,like generations of your family. So what. So you risked your life, but what else have you ever risked? Have you ever risked a belief? I see nothing particularly courageous in risking one’s life. So you lose it, you go to your hero’s heaven and everything is milk and honey ’til the end of time. Right? You get your reward and suffer no earthly consequences. That’s not courage. Real courage is risking something you have to keep on living with, real courage is risking something that might force you to rethink your thoughts and suffer change and stretch consciousness. Real courage is risking one’s clichés.
Go back and reread your copy of Fourth Turning (1996)
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Sep 30 2005 23:10 utc | 31
Uncle Scam, yer the one who ventured the smart ass “Application”!!! This response, your 2nd one, is fairly typicalof what I’ve read over the many months. You gotta elevate your game… I get bored easily and after your first few words I was dozing off! In fact, your kinda that way most of the time. Get it together!
Soandso
Posted by: Soandso | Sep 30 2005 23:19 utc | 32
Annie, from the sounds of things today, I hope you are planning. Since elite planning to merge w/both the countries you mentioned, those might not cut it. And unfortunately w/the computer control the bastards have now, it’d be best to leave well ahead of time. Have you considered Central America, NZ, or say Greece or a Thai Island? (Spoke to someone today – a French guy, who has lived here since ~70’s, co-owned a business. He’s retiring & moving to a Thai island where he owns a bar, and has family. I think Thailand is going to be the recreation spot of Asia. If you can stand the climate, the people are super & prosperity should only increase – plus Yummy Food!!) Once they impose a draft, it may be hard for draft age kids to escape.
Posted by: jj | Oct 1 2005 3:05 utc | 33
Flashing back…Sundance is playing “Coming Home” tonight!! Worlds Apart…like back when we had a country..
Posted by: jj | Oct 1 2005 4:09 utc | 35
A targeted registration and draft is “is strictly in the planning stage,” said Flahavan, adding that “the whole thing is driven by what appears to be the more pressing and relevant need today” — the deficit in language and computer experts.
In other words, a shortage of people with intellectual abilities. Funny that. The original (Carlin) oxymoron – military intelligence.
Are computing knowledge and linguistics going to be driven underground? That should do wonders for US competitiveness. On the other hand, you keep liquidating the top 10% of the SAT curve and there are a lot less arguments at “election” time.
Posted by: PeeDee | Oct 1 2005 5:54 utc | 36
Damn, thats depressing peedee…
Oh, well bartender “round for the house, and turn that jukebox up!
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 1 2005 6:41 utc | 37
@ Billmon — “fit right in”
and how — recall that Gens. (I Saw Satan Over Mogadishu) Boykin and (Army Chief of Staff) Schoomaker were both involved in the “failed” Iranian rescue misssion AND the “bungled” Waco siege.
http://tinyurl.com/bbkjh
http://tinyurl.com/a23la
If I recall correctly a Navy captain who runs his ship aground has pretty much finished his career.
Today’s Army — where failure is an option!
Posted by: 4-fingers | Oct 1 2005 14:11 utc | 38
in july, the pentagon was trying to get the draft age ceiling upped to age 42. anything ever happen w/ that?
The draft age?
I think that you had mistaken that for the initiative to raise the maximum age limit at first voluntary enlistment. Which did in fact go through: tell your nearest 40-year-old noisy chickenhawk to get his ass on down to the Army recruiting station. They will take him up to to age 42 now.
Drafting men in their forties hasn’t happened since the Second World War, if memory serves. The demographic cohort of twentysomethings is more than large enough to quintuple the combat strength of the Army, should a draft be reinstated.
Posted by: marquer | Oct 1 2005 19:52 utc | 39
The demographic cohort of twentysomethings is more than large enough to quintuple the combat strength of the Army, should a draft be reinstated.
And I had intended to append this editorial comment:
It’s not that there’s a desperate shortage of physically fit young adults in their 20s. There is a desperate shortage of physically fit young adults in their 20s who are willing to go to war.
That includes a pretty impressive number of Bush supporters. If even a quarter of the people in the 18-35 age range who voted for Dubya last year were to voluntarily enlist, there would be troop strength to spare.
Of course, I would want to see the Young Pundits at the head of any induction queue. Ben Shapiro, your country needs you!
Posted by: marquer | Oct 1 2005 19:58 utc | 40
This is an interesting topic (least to me its interesting)- military service/draft and age. Is the argument a simple issue of anti-war, or is it more complex than that? Break it down for me.
Soandso
Posted by: Soandso | Oct 1 2005 20:05 utc | 41
The recuiting pitch for the yellow elephants: if they enlist early and become commissioned, they will be in charge of the soon-to-be draftees who are opposed to the war. It would like the kids who were told they would have their choice of specialites and schools.
Posted by: eftsoons | Oct 1 2005 20:32 utc | 42
marquer- thanks for the clarification/context on the max age upgrade
Posted by: b real | Oct 2 2005 3:46 utc | 43