Daily Kos

Lost in the News: Pentagon just defied Congress on Iraq!

Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 12:49:29 AM PDT

That's the trouble with big stories like Rove, things like this get lost in the frenzy.

The report to Congress, due yesterday, was required under the $80 billion war spending legislation approved in May. It is intended to help answer one of the most pressing questions hanging over the American-led occupation: when the United States might be able to begin drawing down the estimated 140,000 forces in Iraq.(emphasis mine)

This is the kind of thing that can bring down ruling parties. Not as splashy as outright treason, but just as able to get the job done.

More on the flip.

The fit has hit the shan in the Pentagon.

The Pentagon yesterday maintained that it is still compiling the report, but did not say when it would be complete.

The war spending legislation, approved by both houses of Congress, stipulated that ''the administration must develop and provide to the Congress a more comprehensive set of performance indicators and measures of stability and security in Iraq than is currently available."

It calls for ''detailed descriptions" of how the Pentagon will measure the security environment, political stability, and economic progress and how it will assess the capabilities and readiness of Iraqi security forces, including military and police, to take over the mission now performed by US-led forces. The report must also include ''an assessment of US military requirements, including planned force rotations, through the end of calendar year 2006," according to the instructions from Congress. The Pentagon is providing updates to Congress every three months until Oct. 1, 2006.

The Army, meanwhile, also delayed the scheduled release of a study about the impact of the extended deployment, which officials said raises new questions about its ability to respond to other trouble spots around the world.

Any person with more then two braincells to rub together can figure out why they're stalling on this.

It doesn't take a genius to do the math on the troop levels. Bush dug into the reserves so deeply that he's hit the bottom of the barrel and scraped it clean. There are NOT ENOUGH TROOPS LEFT for further rotation into the combat zones in 2006 under current deployment rules. Almost 9,000 troops have been killed or crippled from both theatres of operations. Coupled with the drop in recruitment and the expected flow out of disgruntled troops sick of stop-loss and being away from their families and regular lives, its a deep hole that's just being dug deeper by Bush and the GOP.

But Bush's Pentagon just crossed a red line when it failed to deliver this critical report to Congress.

Defying the people who control the purse strings is always a bad idea.

The trick is getting the televised media to notice it.

[Edit]

The reason this is so important on the political front is that this effectively is an attack on Congress's powers. If the Pentagon is allowed to successfully defy them on this report, it will have implications that go far beyond this session of the body. Republicans Legislators are in this for the long term, they won't take such an attack by Bush on their own fiefdoms lightly...especially when it offers so many juicy soundbites for the Democrats. If anything can get the Republican Senators up in arms against Bush, its a direct threat to themselves.

[Edit 2]

Additionally there is also the matter of the next time Bush and Rumsfield come running to Congress for the next off the books appropriation for Iraq and Afghanistan. Somehow I get the feeling they're going to have a LOT harder time explaining it to an unsympathetic panel of Senators.

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 125 comments

  •  Excellent point (4.00 / 3)

    Is it or is it not true that Rumsfeld is now technically in contempt of congress?

    The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

    by RedDan on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 12:59:18 AM PDT

    •  Personalization is Key to Framing (4.00 / 4)


      Rummy Defies Congress is a better frame here, whether he is personally in contempt or not.

      The message I'm hearing from Republicans I know is "this team isn't doing the job."

      Making clear in each case the ways in which individual players on the team, as opposed to agencies in the government (i.e. Rummy & Condi, not Defense and State)aren't getting it done heightens this sense that not only is the team not getting it done, the team has been put together by a bad manager.

      "Dese guys are bums, and I say we get 'em outta here!"

      It's a rallying cry pitched at the perfect level for your average NY Post reader or ESPN viewer.

      And that's a lotta votes.

      •  Rummy to Congress: Fuck Off (none / 0)

        You'll get your stinking report when I'm good and ready. Just keep the money coming and keep your unpatriotic pieholes shut.

        The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

        by easong on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 08:11:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Make it "Pentagon Defies" (4.00 / 6)

        I personally think that when we personalize the issue, it allows the wingnuts to re-frame it as "just politics." When we depersonalize it and call it "The Pentagon," I think we do better, IMHO....

        Wars not make one great. - Yoda

        by Volvo Liberal on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 08:16:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hammer Them From All Directions (none / 0)


          I don't really disagree.

          My suggestion was an add-on, not an either/or.

          Since different people respond to different argument frames, ultimately, as long as the core talking point remains, changing up the spin on the point makes it that much more difficult to rebut the point in one clean shot.

          This is an instance in which Democratic tolerance for diverse views works to our advantage, both strategically and tactically.

          Third frame: there are a lot of good people at the Pentagon who want to operate in conformity with the law, but Rummy and the current administration are turning otherwise honest civil servants into scofflaws, destroying the morale and integrity of the bureaucracy, and creating a climate which damages the War on Terror.

          Hammer them high, hammer them low, hammer them on either side, but hammer away!

        •  Agreed! And I'll tell you why...mini rant warning (none / 1)

          Sorry for spewing here, but think of it this way. Personalizing everything is how gambling addicts, crack addicts, alcoholics drain the bank account, devastate families, leave a huge trail of debris for others to clean up, all the while pointing fingers at everyone else.  Think major dysfunctional family.  

          Maybe we should focus on what is being squandered here by a breathtakingly incompent, amoral administration, that wants to reduce the world to a business model.  Lives, our money, our reputation, our moral standing, on and on and on and on....

          In order to hide their embezzlement behind a posse of demented hicks, Republicans' slogans must be short and superstitious. Grand Moff Texan

          by station wagon on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:16:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I Like Going After Rummy Better (none / 0)

          "Rumsfeld Defies Congress" might get the job done for our side, but won't elicit anything but cheers. It's a position of strength.

          Let's ignore the rule of three (words, in this case), and try something that folks on all sides understand the same way.

          <center>Rumsfeld Breaches Duty, Defies Congress"</center>

          It's in keeping with an ongoing frame.

          It highlights failure to perform.

          It de-politicizes the game.

          Which pundit most resembles Ruby Rhod?

          by wystler on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:23:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Republicans Don't Theorize -- They Test (none / 0)

          You go after the player that testing shows gives you the most gain.

          In campaigning the Republicans, not the Democrats, are overwhelmingly the reality-based party.

          We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

          by Gooserock on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 11:03:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  long on ideology, short on competence (none / 0)

        fouls, excesses and immoderate behavior are scored ZERO at Over the Line, Smokey!

        by seesdifferent on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:02:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I like your frame.... (none / 0)

        It can also be extended in other ways to include his "OSP" as vehicle to circumvent Congress' oversite of intelligence.

        This helps demonstrate a pattern of confrontation against the legitimate rights of the Senate, etc. .

        I'll probably get further down the list here and see the same comment... BUT I am in a rush! lol

    •  Dictatorship in the making (4.00 / 2)

      We have been making fun of the way business is done by this administration. But it is getting scarier by the day.

      Disregard for laws, rules, and traditions by this administration is unbelievable. There is no repercussion for them when they break a law. But God save you if you are on the other side.

      I don't mean to sound overly alarmist, but our very freedom is being threatened. US as we know it is being altered to its core. These are the little steps that if allowed will make the larger leap inevitable.

      But it really really scares me when the military begins to disregards the civilian branch so blatantly.

      Are we inching closer to a South American Military Dictatorship?

      "The heart has its reasons that reason knows nothing of." Pascal

      by Avetis on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 08:50:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree. Its not funny (none / 1)

        When oh when is ONE Rethug with stature, a Margaret Chase Smith, or a major news source that cannot be ignored going to call out these crooks liars and traitors for what they are? Unbelievable that they all stick together in one slimmy neofascist mess.

        I am pro-life. Bring our troops home ALIVE!

        by Doc Allen on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:00:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  un quatre pour vous (none / 0)

          a four for conjuring up the lady from maine.  

          agree with previous posts up- and down-thread.  this is not an either/or vis a vis red rove.  this is another glaring example of this administration's selectivity regarding which laws they think ought or ought not apply to them in their aim to do whatever the f*^% they feel like they need to do to further their cause and fatten their pals' accounts.

          dem reps and senators, and ditto the good dr. dean, may find themselves shouting into a vacuum with this (it's not terribly sexy, and there's other fish frying in the current news cycle) but that shouldn't thwart them from at least making the effort to hammer them, and hammer them hard, on this latest bush administration failure.

          Irreverence is the champion of liberty and its only sure defense. -Mark Twain

          by homo neurotic on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:31:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  just kills me (4.00 / 2)

    it's all well and good to see them going after Rove via McClellan, but fer chrissakes, why ignore this story?  I want an avalanche.

    NetrootNews coming soon!

    by ksh01 on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 01:10:47 AM PDT

    •  It's just another example (none / 0)

      of Bush's "look over there" tactics. He has used Karl Rove to distract attention away from the unexplained billions of dollars missing in connection with Iraq and the Downing Street Minutes which nail his ass to the wall. As Karl Rove is used as a device to draw our attention, Rove can stay out of prison with the assistance of a "good" attorney. Also Bush can keep Rove from
      spilling the beans for his(Rove's) own protection by making suicide by Rove more likely. If you know what I mean.

      "Why can't we all... just get along?" -Rodney King

      by Skylor on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 03:24:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I use sticky notes (4.00 / 4)

        Lately I've started a sticky note of all the daily things we're asking for replies/responses/resolutions on by my desk.  I'm as simple as the next guy and if I let them keep distracting me with fun things like roasting Rove I tend to forget about:

        The Downing Street Memo
        WMD's
        Censorbrenner shutting down committees
        Court nominees
        etc etc

        The miscellaneous list of things like gay marriage, balanced budget, separation of church and state, and so on is on a different sticky note that I look to when I need to get fired up for action.

        Republicans are men of narrow vision, who are afraid of the future. - Jimmy Carter

        by kidfury on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 05:57:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Oh please... (none / 0)

        give me a break. Conspiracy theories much? The Rove story has traction and it could finally be a lynchpin in the Republican's control of Congress in 06 and of the White House in 08. The American People don't like corruption or scandal. We all know the press can only focus on one issue at a time and I'm personally pleased as punch that they finally woke up and now have their teeth deeply sunk into analyzing to death the Rove's possible criminal activity.

        Feingold is my hero.

        by Marc in CA on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:14:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Meh - I don't know about using Rove in this case (none / 0)

        I think that the Bushites want it all to go away.

        The Rove angle just happens to be much sexier and immediate for the media...

        That still means this Pentagon stuff should now be brought right into the foreground.

        "Think. It ain't illegal yet." - George Clinton

        by jbeach on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:27:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Recommended (4.00 / 16)

    If we're completely honest, it's nothing new that the Executive branch has nothing but complete contempt for either of the other two branches of government.  The Pentagon "needing more time" (like, until Friday evening after all the journalists have left the briefing room and gotten good and soused) is par for the course.

    However, let's make sure this news is heard loud and clear: Bushco has no plan to get us out of Iraq.  They have no metric by which to measure success.  And they have rapidly running out of troops.  The missed deadline is the cherry on top of the cake, IMHO.

  •  Good catch! (none / 0)

    Recommended.

    levity defies gravity

    by Levity on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 01:14:33 AM PDT

  •  Its hard work (none / 0)

    to cover actual stories...the sharks need coverage too!  

    John McCain: Healthcare for kids? Not in the Bush-McCain America.

    by bosdcla14 on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 01:21:11 AM PDT

  •  Contempt? Over this? (none / 0)

    But Bush's Pentagon just crossed a red line when it failed to deliver this critical report to Congress.

    No. I'd say they crossed a red line when they invaded Iraq for lies.  Nothing happened.

    People are going to get worked up over this?  Please.

    Losing elections matters.  The loss in 2004 was unforgivable for Dems.  We have to focus our efforts on not losing in 2006 and 2008, or we must simply prepare to accept more of the same.

    No more Republican rule.

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 01:22:40 AM PDT

    •  Yes, over this (4.00 / 18)

      Even Republicans can't ignore Bush giving them the finger on Iraq.

      Bush just committed a critical error here, he NEEDS the Republicans in Congress. But this refusal to comply with Congress is a direct challenge to the power of the legislative branch. And if there's one thing that will turn GOP against their own, its a threat to their own personal fiefdoms.

      •  Contact all Reps Now (none / 0)

        Contact your reps on this now.  Aside from bringing it to the attention of the media, we need to push our reps to DO something.  As you've said, this is not a squishy area, it's clear cut Congressional responsibility on oversight.
        •  IIRC the Republicans in congress (none / 0)

          have merely been rubber-stamping White House policy/directives/initiatives/bills since 2001. Why would they be concerned about this? They've already given up their independence and oversight function.

          My interpretation is that we no longer have a tripartite government. The Republican-majority House and Senate do not act independently of the White House. Once the Republicans have packed every court with their bought judges, the game will be over for us.

          The Republican representatives and senators have nothing to lose by taking their marching orders from the White House. The pork is still going to their districts. The only chink I've noticed is the PA lawsuit over the closing of the Willow Grove Naval Air Station.

          I don't think Chuck Hagel's comments mean anything either. I haven't checked his voting record. Has he been voting against the administration?

          •  Deadline (none / 0)

            Yes, yes, we know.  But this is actual, documented proof of the astounding lack of oversight.  It's not squishy, it's concrete and very important. The Republicans will have a helluva time getting around the fact that the Pentagon has played them and is continuing to play them, the troops and the public.

            Since the majority of Americans have lost faith in this war and see that the Administration has no plan, success, exit or otherwise, the Pentagon missing its congressionally mandated deadline for a plan is a might serious thing. It's political dynamite for the rubberstampers to rubberstamp this one.

          •  As 2006 midterm elections (none / 0)

            draw nearer and public opinion on the war in Iraq grows more negative, we'll see them care more and more.
  •  So what happend to the approtiations? (none / 0)

    Does the money simply get locked up?

    What are the ramifications of them missing the deadline?

  •  The idea of Pubs forcing this fight (none / 0)

    is incredible.

    Why would the Pubs punish the military in order to compel the Pentagon to produce a report that will be damaging to the Republican White House?

    Independent legislative branch? I mean, come on.

    It's not like they're Congress or anything. :)

  •  I just heard general mcCafferty on MSNBC (4.00 / 11)

    he said we have 17 combat battalions in Iraq, and our current forces can't support more than 9 or 10 battalions in the summer of 06

    this ain't a draw down of forces, it's a shortage of soldiers

    ooopps George, you broke the fucking Army

  •  Good catch, but please (4.00 / 3)

    credit The Boston Globe,  the only paper -- so far as a google search shows -- to cover the story.

    When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. While it is no excuse for this scandal, it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political, and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm.

    Ooops. That's not a comment on America under Bush-Cheney-Rove. It's Rick Santorum blaming Boston liberalism for priest abuse and Cardinal Law's cover up. As the industrious Globe columnist Brian McGrory learned:

    "It's an open secret that you have Harvard University and MIT that tend to tilt to the left in terms of academic biases," said Robert Traynham, the Santorum aide. ''I think that's what the senator was speaking to."
  •  This is the point (none / 0)

    about the Rove situation.

    We've seen this over and over.  Something REALLY big must be happening right now that they want to keep hidden by the sensation of Rove.  

    What else are we missing?  

    Bush...THE BIGGEST threat to world peace.

    by Ring Freedom on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 03:30:49 AM PDT

    •  maybe (none / 0)

      it will come out that the explosives used in London were from the cache in Iraq that we neglected to protect?

      I just got back from England, when I left yesterday I'd heard stories about the explosives being military grade. Where would a terrorist get military grade explosives? Maybe from a large cache of unguarded high power military grade explosives?

      And that would most certainly mean the end of the Brits in Iraq.

  •  your analysis is mistaken (4.00 / 33)

    Your analysis says the Pentagon's motive is some kind of disrespect or disregard for Congress and the law.  

    I think you're mistaken.

    What I see in this is: the Pentagon simply can't complete the report because they have no good answers to the questions.  

    They realize they're out of soldiers, and there's no way they can make the necessary troop commitments.  They're screwed, they know it, and they're trying to figure out what they can say that won't look like a blueprint for a military defeat.  

    Supporting fact: The Rs control both houses of Congress and the purse strings.  The Administration, including Rumsfeld, wants to keep cozy with its pals in Congress.  If there was any way the Pentagon could produce the report, they'd have done it.  

    I'm your friendly local conservative here, and I'll tell you what's got me really pissed off about the present state of affairs:  it's another sign of defeat, the logical outcome for an Administration that has demonstrated incompetence as supremely as it has demonstrated hubris.  

    They damaged our military, damaged our intel community, snatched defeat (Iraq) from the jaws of victory (Afghanistan), pissed off the rest of the world, and totally squandered the good will we had in the world following 9-11.  

    We could have liberated Afghanistan from not only the Taliban but the last vestiges of medievalism (e.g. women as property under the tribal systems), and helped rebuild the place with democratic institutions that could have been a shining example for the rest of the region.  

    We could have treated our POWs with the same degree of basic decency we did the Japanese and German POWs we captured in WW2, and won their respect as well as getting far better intel on our real enemies.  

    We could have had Bin Laden and Zarqawi in chains before the Hague, spouting their incoherent hatreds and looking to all the world like vile little Hitler-wannabes.  And the comparison between their megalomaniacal vengeances and the demonstrable good done by the Allies, would have spelled the end of their movement the moment the prison doors clanged shut behind them.  

    We could have finished what we started in Afghanistan, and done it right, and the world would have seen us as honorable in the same manner as occurred after the Marshall Plan in Europe.

    And in doing so, we would have set loose democratic memes and a yearning for liberty that would have eroded if not overtly brought down every other despotic regime in the area, which is to say, quite a few.  

    But, no.  Instead, this.  

    •  I don't think your points and the diarist's (4.00 / 4)

      are mutually exclusive. I think both can be true and, in my view, both are true. You express your view of what is happening very well.

      Corporate Media: Republicans are their base.

      by lecsmith on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 04:21:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes and No (none / 1)

      I know they don't have any good answers to give.

      But it still doesn't excuse what the Pentagon did.

      In effect, by not producing the report, no matter what their motive, they've violated the law and challenged the power and importance of the legislative branch.

    •  Never attribute to malice... (4.00 / 3)

      what can reasonably be explained by stupidity.

      If I may be allowed to interpret.

      And if this Administration has a meme, it's incompetence.

      And hey, a conservative that remembers "conservative" doesn't mean "Bush's towel-boy". Excellent synopsis of why real conservatives should be just as pissed at Smirky McChimp as liberals.

      Welcome. You guys are getting rare. You ever make it out to my neck of the woods, latte's on me.

      •  Not even stupidity, at this point. (none / 0)

        As G2geek said, it's more like a complete lack of answers.

        The screw-up is far beyond the usual run of "dog ate my homework" excuses. Teacher is standing right there, hands on hips glaring at them, and they aren't saying anything... because there just isn't anything to say. At this point they have to be thinking more along the lines of the Fifth Amendment: they're silent because the only thing left to say is a confession.

        If the Pentagon was a fourth-grade kid, they'd be able to admit they screwed up and just take their punishment. But this is... um, different. So I have no idea how they're going to try to get out of it.

        Folly is fractal: the closer you look at it, the more of it there is.

        by Canadian Reader on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 06:21:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

          •  perhaps not so far fetched (none / 0)

            My bro-in-law is convinced bin Laden is dead, has been for a while.

            What he says makes perfect sense. Here's his take on it:

            Bin Laden was killed in Afghanistan. However, if it were to get out that he was dead, there would have been no reason for Iraq, no WoT, and Bush would have lost his reason for playing war and feeling like he was better than his Dad.

            So, no hunt for bin Laden. Why hunt for a dead man?

      •  thanks moody (none / 0)

        ...Believe me I could go on about other issues too... not to digress the diary, but (in no particular order):  Tampering with the Constitution for political gain, fiscal imprudence to the tune of hundreds of billions, degradation of comportment in relations among the branches and between the parties, torture, disappearances, obscurantism in a time when scientific literacy is vital, and a degree of bad manners & refusal to admit errors that demonstrates pure hubris and lack of any humility...

        BTW, apologies to RangerShade for my coming in with a contrarian point without at least acknowledging his/her main point, that being that yes, technically the Pentagon has violated the law, and that should be dealt with.  I guess that got under my radar considering what's going on with Rove.  Call it another sign of the times:  "Triage of high crimes and misdemeanors."

  •  Excellent . . . (4.00 / 3)

    Thank you for spotting this and for keeping the discussion alive.  I've attached an excerpt from the May 2005 Conference Report to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2005 which calls for the Pentagon report.

    Keeping the debate alive over U.S. withdrawal is exactly what Congress desired, if not in exactly the way I might wish it were framed.  Nevertheless, it is vital that the asked-for-questions be answered.  

    It's really worth a look to the link to see the specific benchmarks Congress is seeking reports on.

    From the May 3, 2005, H.R. 1268 Conference Report as reported in Congressional Record:

     

    Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq

    In the wake of the recent Iraqi elections, public discourse about the u.S. [sic] occupation of that country has focused on the need for and the advisability of declaring a timetable for U.S. military withdrawal. Instead of focusing on exit strategies, however, the conferees believe there is a need to recast this debate by considering ``strategies for success''. Success in Iraq will be achieved, of course, only to the extent any new Iraqi government can legitimately and effectively rule the country, which in turn largely depends on that government's ability to protect its people and secure its borders.

    The discussion on this issue should not be simply about how many Iraqi forces have been trained and equipped, but about how many can perform to reasonable standards so that they may be expected to successfully conduct their assigned missions. This is the basis for assessing U.S. military readiness, and should serve as the basis for judging the capabilities of Iraqi security forces.

    The conferees believe that the Administration must develop and provide to the Congress a more comprehensive set of performance indicators and measures of stability and security in Iraq than is currently available. This undoubtedly will lead to a more informed debate over how best to allocate U.S. resources to help secure Iraq. As such, the conferees direct the Secretary of Defense (in consultation with other appropriate members of the , National Security Council) to provide a report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Majority Leader of the Senate, and the congressional defense committees that identifies security, economic, and Iraqi security force training performance standards and goals, accompanied by a notional timetable for achieving these goals. At a minimum, the report should include detailed descriptions of the following:


    Thomas.loc links are being contiuously retired.  If the link above becomes "inoperative," simply go to www.thomas.loc.gov, and Search for H.R. 1268 Conference Report.

    Courage

  •  You say that the trick is to get (4.00 / 2)

    the media to pay attention to this-- but the other trick is to get Congress (GOP portion) to pay attention to it.

    If they don't care and don't make a fuss about it, the media sure won't, I'll bet.

  •  Whenever it is finally released (none / 1)

    It will be on a Friday.
  •  It's all the same story (none / 0)

    Don't let them get away with it, all these are connected. Plame, DSM, and now the Pentagon reports. All the same.

    "Keaton always said 'I don't believe in God, but I'm afraid of him.' Well I believe in God, and the only thing that scares me...is Dick Cheney"

    by Crazyj on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 04:38:38 AM PDT

    •  Wow! (none / 0)

      <snip>

      Pentagon investigators decided interrogators' behavior did not reach the level of torture or inhumane treatment, said the aide, who discussed the findings on condition of anonymity because the Defense Department has not released them.

      Investigators determined that interrogators violated the Geneva Conventions and Army regulations three times. It was unclear from the aide's description what those instances were.

      They also recommended that Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller be reprimanded for failing to oversee the interrogation of a high-value detainee, which was found to have been abusive, the aide said.

      </snip>

  •  its piling up (4.00 / 2)

    the mantra the Dems need to use is "you cant trust them"

    this from the same article....
    "The emerging GOP strategy -- devised by Mehlman and other Rove loyalists outside of the White House -- is to try to undermine those Democrats calling for Rove's ouster, play down Rove's role and wait for President Bush's forthcoming Supreme Court selection to drown out the controversy, according to several high-level Republicans."

    they are hoping that with the Rove scandal we wont notice the war scandal and they are hoping that the supreme court pick (soon to be a scandal/ideology battle) will make us all forget the Rove scandal...  and that the two put together will make us forget the lies scandal, which will hopefully make us forget the tax break scandal, which will...  well we are getting the picture here...

    "you cant trust them"  ...  the frame needs to be said over and over...  they lied to get us into a bad war, the outted an agent fighting against WMD's, they falied to plan for the war, they are pissing our future away...  you cant trust them...   do you REALLY want them choosing a lifetime appointed post WITHOUT complete bipartisan support

    •  Next Democratic Campaign Theme? (none / 1)

      RESTORE PUBLIC TRUST

      or something like that.  After clinton, they used the "restore honor and integrity to the white house."

      Perhaps this positive message of "Restore Trust" would get thru to Joe Public and isolate the wingnuts.  Highlight the dispicable idealogical manipulative slime of the right wingnuts, and promise to restore public trust in our government.  The Democrats stand for "Common Ground, Unity, Resolve, and Solutions" not "Division, Irresponsiblity,  Excess, and Recklessness."      

      "Yes we are at a time of war.  But if we can't trust our leaders to use good judgement and act in our best interests, then how can we expect effectively address the real threats that we face.  Our current administration has divided us and played on our fears.  We need to come together.  Yes, we can have disagreements, even deep ones, but the minute we wage war between ourselves is the minute the enemy has won.  Not only has OSB not been caught, but we played into his hands by succumbing to fear" and so forth....    

      I donno.  Just thinking out loud here.  Christ, any old centrist pragmatic message ought to do.  

       

      •  It's really too bad that (none / 0)

        this great campaign slogan was already used in 2000:

        Bringing Honesty and Integrity Back to the White House

        Bush/Cheney Campaign 2000
        (and 2004 according to The Onion)

  •  I heard a seasoned (4.00 / 2)

    military man, say that the study of regime change in Iraq done years ago, estimated the cost would be around  60 billion. So far we are 11 billion into it. Hmmmm.....

    Overthrow the Government ~Vote~

    by missliberties on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 05:25:26 AM PDT

    •  Was that the cost to Halliburton alone? (none / 0)

      The U.S. has spent hundreds of billions already on this thing. But the army has apparently given Halliburton about 14 billion, so that would be close to the number you mention. . .

      "Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful or believe to be beautiful." -William Morris

      by Robespierrette on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 08:37:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  several possible explanations (4.00 / 4)

    The Bush administration has a "human resources" policy that values reflexive political loyalty above other "qualifications" such as competence. They have applied this to the Pentagon as they have to every other organization over which they have control or influence. Nevertheless, it is important to understand that it is not actually "Bush's Pentagon." These are professional officers who entered the military long before Bush took office. Their codes of conduct severely limit their freedom to publically criticize their chain of command on any matters pertaining to defense policy or the conduct of war.

    These officers have now, in effect, first been ordered to "square the circle" and then to write regular reports explaining how they're going about it. There are several possible explanations for why they have not produced a report on schedule: (1) These military officers think they can simply ignore Congress, so they haven't bothered to write the report. (2) Since they don't actually know how to "square the circle," these military officers are still trying to figure out what to say in the report. (3) These military officers have drafted a report that says they don't know how to "square the circle," but it's been sent back by their civillian leadership as unacceptable. (4) These military officers understand that if they are called to account before Congress they will have a Constitutional duty to answer honestly any direct questions put to them.

    Homeland: as in Bantustan, or as in home of the brave and land of the free?

    by homeland observer on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 06:17:59 AM PDT

    •  Actually the most likely military reason (none / 0)

      I'm in the military so I'd know. Chances are that the pentagon delegated it down, and delegated it down, and the entirety of the report became the responsibility of a Private in a back office somewhere deep underneath the Pentagon. He keeps trying to get the information he needs, but Army manual 10-34-89-1-2-85 (revised) "Lying to Congress about a war, Middle Eastern edition" is very confusing and he lost the training course that would explain the manual. Not only that, but his email was down for three weeks while they took the server with his email account on it offline for maintenance, the printer ran out of toner, and there was a random anti-terrorism drill to further slow things down.

      Really, once you understand the military, a little delay like this is completely understandable.

      OEF/OIF vet
      I've been called a left-wing extremist because I absolutely oppose torture. I can live with that.

      by jabbausaf on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 03:04:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  not a scandal yet (none / 0)

    They are stalling, I'm sure, but they probably also don't have the manpower to complete the reports.

    Someone tell me why this won't play out this way:

    The Pentagon tells Congress they need more time, they want and extension.

    Congress grumbles, there are some sound bites from people like Biden, and then the story goes away for three or four months.

    Isn't that bureaucracy in action, business as usual in DC?

    We are not "compassionate conservatives." We are "fighting liberals." And we'll kick your ass.

    by Pachacutec on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 06:41:03 AM PDT

  •  Photos (none / 0)

    And what has happened to the additional horrendous photos of prisoner abuse which the Pentagon was due to release on June, 29? Oh, I was so looking forward to them.
  •  more framing (none / 1)

    The problem with Rumsfeld's Pentagon failing to deliver congressionally-mandated reports on troop readiness is that the GOP Congress doesn't care.  They're demonstrably willing to put short-term partisan politics ahead of not only the nation, but even the long-term interests of their own party - see the Nuclear Option for a good example.

    This isn't just a Pentagon problem, or a Rumsfeld or Bush problem - it's a REPUBLICAN problem.  The fact that the report can't be produced can and should be pinned on Rumsfeld/Bush.  But the fact that it's going to disappear into the black hole of "problems the Democrats will have to fix for us later" is the work of the Republican congress.

    America can't sustain troop levels for Iraq, or our commitments throughout the world. And the Republicans don't care, and don't want you to know.

    I trust Obama's judgment more than I trust my own. Why are YOU telling him what to do?

    by Leggy Starlitz on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 07:45:27 AM PDT

  •  Not enough troops? Please break it down. (none / 0)

    There are NOT ENOUGH TROOPS LEFT for further rotation into the combat zones in 2006 under current deployment rules.

    Can someone prove this with actual numbers?  I've seen about as much evidence to the contrary as I've seen evidence for it.  Some straight answers to this would be nice since I've heard, "We don't have enough troops left!" since 2003.  I have a feeling that unless we can talk about actual numbers and how many troops short we'll be, no one will really take that issue seriously who wasn't already a big opponent of the current administration and the Iraq war.

    •  They've been obfuscating. (none / 0)

      Part of the Administration's strategy is to hide troop shortages by abusing "stop-loss" orders, and changing long-standing policies about time between deployments and acceptable readiness levels.

      I would love to see some hard numbers, but it may be hard to tease them out.

      Case in point, that recent month when they "made" their recruitment target . . . after lowering the target!.

      "Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful or believe to be beautiful." -William Morris

      by Robespierrette on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 08:41:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  you're.absolutely.right (none / 0)

        but.i.don't.understand.why...or.rather,how.they.can.get
        away.with.the.charade.for.so.long.

        the.war.party.sure.seems.to.suck.at.war...
        sending.suburban.kids.into.the.desert...oh
        what.do.you.know...a.recruiting.ad.just.came.on.tv
        a.really.emotional.one.with.father.and.son.(maybe.18-.
        20ish).

        ugh.

        i.didn't.think.they'd.made.their.recruitment.target.any
        month.this.year...this.administration.really.makes.my
        head.spin.

        Hey, wait a minute, there's one guy holding both puppets!

        by mediaprisoner on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 12:18:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  This is not unique ... (4.00 / 2)

    The Department of Defense has, in multiple cases, not fulfilled legal requirements.  And, in many others, done so in a rather shallow and insulting (to taxpayers and Congress) way.

    For example, there is Congressional legislation requiring the Navy to provide to Congress an annual 30-year shipbuilding plan.  The Navy sent one to Congress in 2003. None in 2004 -- with no repercussions from Congress.  In 2005, the Navy sent an "interim" plan that did NOT provide the required information with a promise to provide the final report by summer (which has not yet happened).

    Thus, here is another example of part of DOD blowing off a legal requirement (2004) and not fulfilling a legal requirement (2005) requirement for a 30-year shipbuilding plan.

    The problem has been that the Republican Congress has done little -- to nothing -- to defend perogatives and make DOD/the services / the Administration pay for not fulfilling legal requirements.

    What is interesting is that this is not necessarily the case elsewhere in the government.  The Coast Guard Deepwater program was heavily slashed in the House of Representatives because a legally required report had not been provided to Congress.  The Committee Chair was angered.  The fault for not delivering the report lay with the White House (OMB) because, when it comes down to it, the White House is not interested in funding the requirements for a post 9/11 Coast Guard and the Deepwater Program to get there.  

    Thus, the Department of Defense is able to get away with murder (sometimes literally) but not necessarily others.

  •  For another perspective... (none / 0)

    Please check out the Armchair Generalist's (who is pretty damn liberal and who has some inside experience with this type of thing) insightful view of this "controversy".
    [G]uys! calm down. First, for Congress to ask the President or DOD for a special report and/or reocurring report is amazingly normal. DOD prepares hundreds, if not more than a thousand, annual reports to Congress on all kinds of topics.
    ...
    So when you read about this extensive report required by DOD to go to Congress and that DOD missed the report date (especially a report due in 60 days), is this a major issue? Nope. Happens all the time. DOD would be lucky to have a DRAFT report in 60 days, let alone the final report. In my limited experience, DOD's usually late with reports to Congress, and Congresspeople isn't as upset about missed deadlines as they are about not getting reports. They're happy as long as DOD assures them that the report is indeed coming.
    I definitely think that Congress needs to assert itself more in regards the Iraq War, but let's try and keep things in proper perspective...
    •  Followed Link: (none / 0)

      and it sounds like a bunch of crap to me!

      "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayana

      by Street Kid on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 12:37:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ok... (none / 0)

        Care to say why- or is this just a hit and run smear?
        •  No hit and run. (none / 0)

          Read through link entirely and noticed the following:

          "...for Congress to ask for a special report is amazingly normal..."

          then falls back on 7 (seven) procedural requirements.

          Then asks:

          "...is this a major issue?"

          and answers own question:

          "...it happens all the time...Congresspeople are happy as long as the DOD assures them the report is coming..."

          Then further attempts to rationalize answer:

          "We need to wait as well and see what the report says instead of wasting out energy on criticism of the normal bureaucratic process."

          To which my first thought was:

          What about the substance?

           

          "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayana

          by Street Kid on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 02:38:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Write to Congress about it (none / 0)

    rattle their cage!
  •  Biden on Congress: Derelict of duty (none / 0)

    Joe Biden just said on Matthews that the GOP Congress is not doing its job and holding hearings/investigations on MANY issues. He says the current Congress effectively works for the White House right now instead of doing its Constitutional duties

    The Permanent Republican Majority lasted about as long as The Thousand Year Reich

    by lawnorder on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:35:16 AM PDT

  •  First blood for oil, now blood for money (none / 1)

    The situation in Iraq is so desperate that many people are selling their blood to survive. Meanwhile a group of rightwing talking heads is on a "Truth Tour" in Iraq looking for happy news. More info here.


  •  Also required under War Powers Resolution (none / 0)

    Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

    c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS. --

        (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. -- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

        (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. -- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

        SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS

        (a) The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 2 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of Public Law 105-338 (the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998).

        (b) To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of Public Law 93-148 (the War Powers Resolution), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.

        (c) To the extent that the information required by section 3 of Public Law 102-1 is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of Public Law 102-1.

    The Permanent Republican Majority lasted about as long as The Thousand Year Reich

    by lawnorder on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:39:03 AM PDT

    •  Does this mean Congress can stop the war ? (none / 0)

      IANAL but if reporting is part of the War Powers Resolution, can't Congress declare their authorization to go to war got null and void when Pentagon and Bush didn't file said report ?

      At least, can't they put a fire under Rummie's behind and give him 3 days to comply or else withdraw the troops as the war is now illegal ?

      The Permanent Republican Majority lasted about as long as The Thousand Year Reich

      by lawnorder on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:43:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Someone oughta remmind Rummie (none / 0)

    He works for Congress, not the other way around

    The Permanent Republican Majority lasted about as long as The Thousand Year Reich

    by lawnorder on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 10:48:40 AM PDT

  •  Great Diary (none / 0)

    Thanks for bringing this very important issue to our attention.  This is a huge deal, because we cannot let Bush circumvent the authority of Congress, especially when we are dealing with an issue of such importance as the war on Iraq.  As you point out, we can't be consumed by Rove, we have to keep our eyes and ears open so we can catch important stories like this.
  •  Reccommended! (none / 0)

    Don't want to see this one swept away/ignored!

    "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayana

    by Street Kid on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 12:10:18 PM PDT

  •  Maybe they're just late? (none / 0)

    Ever handed in a report late? Just how late is this  report?
  •  The Perfect Set Up (none / 0)

    OBL is still winning. BushCo knows this but of course can't admit it and the American people are for the most part too stupid to figure it out or even care.

    the London attack proves the extremists can't be stopped by conventional means. it's prudent to assume we are next.

    the next attack on U.S. interests whether here or abroad will likely be worse than 9/11. why? simply because the terrorists view us as the worst offenders in the middle east.

    the next time they hit us BushCo will have their "rationale" for bringing back the draft and thus their recruitment problems will be over.

    "Cigna cannot decide who is going to live and who is going to die." -- Nataline's mother

    by Superpole on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 01:48:29 PM PDT

    •  Unless (none / 1)

      by then the American people are just ready to puke, ready to as Jefferson said, put things right again.

      "We must become the change we want to see." -Gandhi    PublicChristian.com

      by larryrant on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 01:59:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  IMHO (none / 1)

        numerous Americans already ARE ready to barf profusely. they're just not ready yet to get pissed at the Congress and tell them they are a bunch of hopeless idiots for allowing BushCo to lead us down the garden path to endless war.

        as long as we're dumb enough to sit back and take the abuse, BushCo will continue to dish it out.

        "Cigna cannot decide who is going to live and who is going to die." -- Nataline's mother

        by Superpole on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 02:02:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed! (none / 0)

          But I have to wonder about why.

          Is there a matter of ego involved?  Specifically, if the number is as high as you (and I) feel, are those who still support dubya too bull-headed to admit they were duped?

          "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayana

          by Street Kid on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 02:53:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, It's Mostly Ego (none / 1)

            -in more ways than one.

            first off, fifty percent of eligible voters have opted out of the system for one reason or another. that means they either expect politicians at the federal level to be corrupt, or they just don't care.

            with that as the overall context, I'd say our democratic republic will be short lived.

            Chimpy supporters come in all stripes, frankly IMHO most are flat out greedy racists who seriously believe it's THEIR God given right to dominate the world's natural resources so they can burn it all up in a matter of years. this of course means kicking the ass of brown and black skinned people living in the nations where "our" needed natural resources are.

            don't forget: the U.S. was started with the labor of slaves and indentured servants. the South went to war with the North because they thought it was their right to continue to have slaves.

            "Cigna cannot decide who is going to live and who is going to die." -- Nataline's mother

            by Superpole on Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 05:40:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Amazing! Great Diary! (none / 0)

    Just curious where you got your casualty data.  I thought the casualties were much higher than 9,000.  I thought 9,000 was a number we passed during the first year.  Just asking for a link or clarification.  Good stuff!

Permalink | 125 comments