Letters to the Editor
-
cheney
Cheney just gave a speech to graduates of West Point telling them to ignore the Geneva Conventions. He is scum. A rotten dirtbag. When American soldiers get caught breaking the Geneva Conventions will Cheney step up and take responsibility? No, hell no. He will say, like the admininstration did with Abu Ghraib, that it's the fault of a "few bad apples".
Mr. Miyagi told Daniel-son that there are no bad students, just bad teachers. If there are bad apples in the military, Cheney is the tree they fell from.
He is actively encouraging the abandonment of American principles of justice and human rights. He is actively working to make the world a more dangerous world for our troops .. a world where it is less likely that they themselves will be treated humanely and decently.
He should be impeached. He is a power mad zealot. Tenets book and Woodwards' book suggest that Cheney was already involved in covert efforts to create some new kind of Iran-contra esque scandal without the knowledge of the Cia and there is now rumors circulating that Cheney is trying to work around the president to achieve a war with Iran.
They must go.
-
snap out of it
I agree completely with both Glenn Greenwald and Atrios, but it isn't in Congress' power to really end our involvement in Iraq and bring the troops home. Only the incompetent, conniving Bush administration can actually do that, even if the funds were cut off tomorrow.
I've noticed a significant uptick of these sorts of sentiments recently. It's as if, when the Democrats abandoned their efforts to attach mandatory timelines to the recent appropriation, some people took this as an indictment on the institutional power of the Congress itself. I want to disabuse all of these people of their rather depressing beliefs. If the Congress chose to (a separate question), it could put into its next military appropriation or "supplemental" a clause declaring that none of the moneys appropriated could be used for the conflict in Iraq beyond a date certain (perhaps with an exception for completing withdrawal of any remaining troops).
This provision would, of course, have to survive the inevitable Bush veto, so it would need a 2/3 majority in both houses. Nevertheless, if the provision passed, and if Bush were to redirect funds in some way around such a restriction, this would amount to a usurpation of Article I power of a scale and type thus far unseen in this administration. With the war being as unpopular as it is, to think that the administration could continue on that path without serious consequences (impeachment or threat of impeachment) is to ascribe omnipotent power to the administration that I hope we would all agree was significantly belied by the last midterm elections.
Really, there is acknowledging "reality" as we see it, and being honest about challenges we face, and then there is simple, unmitigated defeatism. I wish more people would choose the former.
...the slavering attack dogs of right-wing punditocracy as "proof" that Democrats hate our military and cannot be trusted on national defense? We should know that there is no level below which they are willing to sink to destroy the Democratic Party.
This is the type of thinking that caused the weak-kneed Democrats in Congress recently to fold on their mandatory timelines -- the reflexive belief that whatever disgusting and utterly dishonest attack with which the Republicans respond will surely win over anything the Democrats say. Look, if people want to continue thinking Karl Rove controls the movement of the firmament and directs the thoughts of the public with a crystal ball clutched in his hands, so be it. But just know that this is a convenient pretext for throwing in the towel when there is still a significant amount of fight left to be had, and the opponent is most likely weaker than he seems.
We need more Russ Feingolds. Every time he speaks, I find myself struck by amazement that more Democrats cannot bring themselves to understand how genuine, simple, and direct their principles and arguments could be.
-
Washington Note Article
Someone in my dailyKos diary linked to this:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002145.php
I don't know this source very well and I don't know how the author purports to know what is going on here exactly.
Some insight from anyone knowledgeable about the veracity of this would be appreciated, however it seems quite believable - that Cheney is trying to foster a war with iran and is prepared to do an end run around Bush to get it, if he can't convince Bush to do it willingly.
-
for the sentimental
http://dailydoubt.blogspot.com/2007/05/video-of-day_9440.html
-
forensics 101
springy==pedant
-
The risk: neoconservatism
Perhaps we could have something more nuanced than "you can't read!" this time round. My problem with your article, Glenn, is that you don't bother with any discussion of the real risks. I'll repeat again. There is no discussion of historical processes in Iraq, merely the baiting of neoconservatives. Democrats shouldn't advocate withdrawal from Iraq in order to score points against Kristol. They should do so after thinking carefully about what will happen if the US does withdraw. Whether it will turn into a bloodbath should probably be part of their calculations. As Said pointed out, Western discussions of the East are usually ordered by the processes of Western power. Your article is no different. Democrats need to hammer the Republicans. The electorate doesn't like the war. So the Democrats calculate that withdrawal will help them win next year. Perhaps you should make up your mind by thinking about the conditions on the ground?
-
Scientician
Steve Clemons (Washington Note) is a credible source... He get's bad tips from time to time. Col. Lang has linked to most of those posts approvingly...
Odom's past posts at Neiman. No one listened.
What’s Wrong With Cutting and Running? (8/2005)
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=129
Odom: Want stability in the Middle East? Get out of Iraq! (November 11/2005)
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=background.view&backgroundid=63
A reverse domino theory may be playing out in the Middle East ( 7/2006)
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=background.view&backgroundid=00103
6 Brutal Truths About Iraq (12/2006)
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=background.view&backgroundid=00146
(4/2006) Former National Security Agency Director Lt. General William Odom dissected the strategic folly of the Iraq invasion and Bush Administration policies in a major policy speech- America’s Strategic Paralysis, at Brown University for the Watson Institute for International Studies. "The Iraq War may turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in American history. In a mere 18 months we went from unprecedented levels of support after 9-11..to being one of the most hated countries…Turkey used to be one of strongest pro-US regimes, now we’re so unpopular, there’s a movie playing there- Metal Storm, about a war between US and Turkey. In addition to producing faulty intel and ties to Al Qaida, Bush made preposterous claim that toppling Saddam would open the way for liberal democracy in a very short time... Misunderstanding the character of American power, he dismissed the allies as a nuisance and failed to get the UN Security Council’s sanction… We must reinforce international law, not reject and ridicule it.”
http://hammernews.com/odomspeech.htm