Category: Iraq

Is Harry Reid ready to fight for those who fight for us? Is Harry Reid ready to fight for the Iraqi people? Is Harry Reid ready to fight for what’s best for the United States and the world? The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein seems to think so:

For the past few weeks, a cadre of close consultants advising Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, was split over how to approach the looming legislative battles on Iraq.

Those in favor of giving Republicans an opening for compromise outnumbered those who believed such a deal would fail politically. The former argued that “progress” on Iraq – in this case passing drawdown legislation even without a firm exit date – was preferable to passing nothing at all.

And we’ve all been expressing our feelings about that, just a bit.

Those in favor of giving Republicans an opening for compromise outnumbered those who believed such a deal would fail politically. The former argued that “progress” on Iraq – in this case passing drawdown legislation even without a firm exit date – was preferable to passing nothing at all.

Reid’s been holding regular meetings with:

-former advisers to President Clinton, Paul Begala and Stan Greenberg
-adviser to Senator Dodd, Doug Sosnick
-adviser to Senator Obama, Jim Margolis
-his own pollster, Mark Mellman
-his own advisers, Stephanie Cutter and Susan McCue

Their advice?

According to several sources, the majority of these consultants were touting the efficacy of a compromise with Republicans on Iraq legislation as recently as last week.

And Reid made a serious effort to recruit Republicans. We know how that worked out. How many times do Democratic leaders need to be told to ignore the advisers and follow their instincts?

This past Monday, Reid’s tactics changed.

Let me repeat that:

This past Monday, Reid’s tactics changed.

We’ve all been desperately waiting for that. And this:

According to party insiders who spoke to the Huffington Post, there is now almost complete unanimity among Reid’s circle that this is the best way forward.

Update 7:37pm EST 9/20/07 by LithiumCola]: The article is available at LATimes, again, here.

[Update 7:36pm EST 9/19/07 by LithiumCola]: In the comments at Kos, silence says that according to Ned Parker the apparent deletion is a technical glitch.  The information in the article is important enough for an essay, in any event.

[Update 7:54pm EST 9/19/07 by LithiumCola]: I can confirm that the original story is still on Lexis Nexis.  This isn’t as big a deal as I thought.  However, the story is hard to find on the net anywhere, so it’s good to have reference to it here, so I’m keeping the diary up.  My apologies to readers, to Ned Parker, and to the LA Times about any mistakes or confusion on my part.

A search at the LA Times website for articles by staff writer Ned Parker shows that he filed two stories on September 19th (“Maliki insists U.S. replace Blackwater”, “U.S. limits diplomats’ travel in Iraq”), one on the 17th (“Suspect arrested in Iraqi sheik’s death”), and one on the 16th (“Iraq’s war makes intimate enemies”).

But Ned Parker also filed a story on September 18th; this story doesn’t appear on the search.  It appears not to be on the LA Times site at all.  It’s hard to find.  This September 18th story is about Blackwater, and contains some startling claims made by employees of other contract security companies.

While all the rage are primary diaries, OJ back in jail, Stars who will be dancing once again and the Patriots who seemed to have cheated, we just passed 1,000,000 dead Iraqi civilians.

This blood is on your, mine and every other American’s hands until we stop this war. We are the barbarians at their gate, their new Khan knocking on their door. More Iraqis have now died than during the Rwanda genocide. What will history call this? We should be beyond ashamed, we should be hiding our face in horror from international view until we stop this war.

Below, each O represents 20 dead Iraqi civilians.

Each O represents just one of these, JUST ONE:

Look at it below. LOOK AT IT.

LOOK AT IT NOW AND SEE WHAT OUR COUNTRY HAS WROUGHT.

End the damn war, or accept our place in the annuals of time as the harbringers of doom. HISTORY WILL NOT ABSOLVE US. LOOK AT IT.

EACH O IS 20 DEAD IRAQIS. LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT IT NOW.

In which some of the week’s top stories are given theme songs.

Democrats are impressed with General Petraeus’s shiny medals, before he proceeds, as expected, to catapult the propaganda about the war.

Washington Post:

Even Democrats who despise the war policy were deferential in the face of the general’s even-keeled demeanor and his shiny silver stars, four to a shoulder. “He’s one of the best,” said Democratic Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, who ran proceedings in the ornate hearing room and ordered a succession of protesters ejected when they shouted their anger at the war.

Bush speaks to the nation, to catapult the propaganda about the war.

Hey, everyone: just a short hello from Washington D.C., where I and a few other thousand people marched from the White House to the Capitol building.  Later tonight or tomorrow people will be around to post pictures from the demonstration, including a few of your favorite bloggers.  And not-so-favorite, I guess.  Don’t worry: my feelings aren’t hurt.

A quick impression: lots of people, and especially lots of young people.  Crowds that have no business hanging out together, in other circumstances.  Libertarians marching side-by-side with militant socialists.  A thin and pathetic line of conservatives along the street, warning us that we’re all traitors.  Some expected musical accompaniment (guitars, bongo drums) and some quite unexpected (solo horn, a family quartet backed by accordion).  Students groups, feminist groups, civil rights groups, 9-11 truthers, proletarian newspaper distributors, the good, the bad, and the nutty, all moving in a mass towards the Capitol, at least for once under the banner of a common goal. 

It’s a start, at least.  I hope y’all have plans for the 21st, as well.

Maybe, just maybe, George W. Bush is more clever than we realize.  Let’s start with how we got into the so-called “war on terror.”  Protected by the Taliban in Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden and his associates promised and plotted to attack America.  After receiving an ominous Presidential Daily Briefing (“bin Laden determined to attack in the U.S.”) on August 6, 2001, Bush went on vacation.  On September 11, four passenger jets were hijacked and used as guided missiles, bringing down both towers of the World Trade Center and punching a hole in the Pentagon.  During the attack, Bush sat comfortably in a planned photo opportunity, reading “My Pet Goat” to grade school children in Florida.  The destruction and loss of life took the breath out of every American.  On September 20, Bush appeared before a joint session of Congress to deliver an ultimatum to the Taliban and request military authorization to attack Afghanistan if certain conditions were not met.  On Oct 7, airstrikes on Afghanistan began in an effort to dislodge the Taliban and al Qaeda from Afghanistan.  I assume nothing in this thumbnail history is news to anyone. 

The Netroots has this year focused its fire on Iraq on “moderate” Republicans and what they term Bush Dog Democrats. Move On’s Tom Matzzie “masterminded” a brilliant plan that Move On has implemented this spring and summer of running ads against “moderate” Republicans like Jim Walsh and it worked, Walsh will now favor a toothless “change the course” strategy that Democrats will offer as a “bipartisan” plan. Move On and the Dems have concocted a political position that will give “moderate” Republicans cover on the Iraq issue in 2008 while doing nothing to change the course of the Debacle. Brilliant!

Similarly, the Bush Dog Democrat plan, which threatens to run Netroots-inspired primaries against people like Mississippi Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS) (because I am sure Mississippi Democrats will rise up once some Mississippi progressive is anointed as the Netroots candidate in such a primary), will no doubt make a big dent in Bush’s Iraq policy. Not.

Meanwhile, erstwhile Netroots Dem Joe Sestak (D-PA), once a supporter of a date certain for withdrawal, no longer supports a firm timeline:

Sestak said, Democratic leaders should set aside their demands for immediate withdrawal “and begin to help author a comprehensive regional security plan that accepts the necessity for a deliberate redeployment.” . . . Sestak has been among those Democrats who think that setting a “date certain” for withdrawal is the best way to force Iraqis to assume more responsibility. But he now believes the length of time needed to redeploy, and the potential for the entire Army to “unravel” unless troops are redeployed, require a compromise. . . .

This is indicative of all that was wrong with the progressive activist strategy on Iraq in 2007. Instead of concentrating on growing and holding the group of Dems, once 171 strong in the House, in favor of no funding without timelines, some decided they could pressure Republicans and conservative Dems like Gene Taylor. And we are where we are today in no small measure because of these miscalculations. I repeat, one more time, that it will take pressure on Dems, MAINSTREAM and PROGRESSIVE Dems, to hold the line on no funding without timelines. We need to work for more pledges like this one:

Dear Mr. President:
We are writing to inform you that we will only support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of all our troops out of Iraq before you leave office.

More than 3,600 of our brave soldiers have died in Iraq. More than 26,000 have been seriously wounded. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed or injured in the hostilities and more than 4 million have been displaced from their homes. Furthermore, this conflict has degenerated into a sectarian civil war and U.S. taxpayers have paid more than $500 billion, despite assurances that you and your key advisors gave our nation at the time you ordered the invasion in March, 2003 that this military intervention would cost far less and be paid from Iraqi oil revenues.

We agree with a clear and growing majority of the American people who are opposed to continued, open-ended U.S. military operations in Iraq, and believe it is unwise and unacceptable for you to continue to unilaterally impose these staggering costs and the soaring debt on Americans currently and for generations to come. . .

The pledge made in this letter should have been the focal point of our activism. Sadly, it was not.

And our plan to nuke Iran is shaping up nicely too.

At the outset I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has not been cleared by nor shared with anyone in the Pentagon, the White House or the Congress until it was just handed out.

— General David Petraeus, 9/10/07

General Petraeus employed thirteen slides in his opening remarks to the joint hearing of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees, yesterday.  A PDF of them can be found here.

Many people have noted that the slides concerning the frequency of insurgent attacks and “ethno-sectarian violence” were misleading.  However, it seems to me that the very first slide, a map of the region labeled “Major Threats to Iraq”, is more revealing of the limits of General Petraeus’s independence, the decidely pragmatic nature of the hearings, and the meaning of the occupation of Iraq itself, than any other.