
America, we've got a problem. Take a look at the list of people picked for the ISG.
James Baker - US Secretary of State, 1989-92
James F. Dobbins - US Ambassador to the EU, 1991-93
Charles W. Freeman, Jr. - US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, 1989-92
Lawrence Eagleburger - Secretary of State, 1992-1993 (replacing Robert M. Gates, nominee for SecDef)
Lee H. Hamilton - 9-11 Commission vice chairman
Vernon Jordan - Advisor to Bill Clinton
Ed Meese - Attorney General under Reagan, 1985-88
Sandra Day O'Connor - US Supreme Court Justice, 1981-2006
Leon Panetta - Bill Clinton' Chief of Staff, 1994-96
William J. Perry - US Secretary of Defense, 1994-97
Chuck Robb - US Senator from Virginia, 1989-2001
Alan Simpson - US Senator from Wyoming, 1979-1997
Leon Panetta?
James F. Dobbins?
Sandra Day O'Connor? I guess I should be grateful there was at least one woman included, but what the hell does she know about sectarian violence in Iraq or any other Middle Eastern country, for that matter?
Nobody, not one person on the Iraq Study Group, has any indepth Middle East experience or expertise.
Vernon Jordan?
Is this some kind of a joke?
Yes, Baker is an Arabist, and Freeman was an ambassador to Saudi Arabia, but that's not exactly expert territory given that Shia are abducting Sunnis by the dozens.
I'm worried. I was before, but now I am seriously worried and the more I hear the larger my concerns grow.
Then the other day we heard Senator Harry Reid say something to the effect that we're not going to force anything on Bush. Reid wants to work out some nice bipartisan agreement. Of course it has to be bipartisan, but holy Bullhead City, we won the election on IRAQ. Now MAJORITY LEADER Reid is going to placate Bush and wait for his lead? Excuse me, but Iraq is falling apart. Or hasn't Harry heard?
We already know St. John wants more troops.
Everyone is waiting for the Iraq Study Group findings, but given the group what can we really expect? The answer scares the crap out of me, especially with Reid taking a wait and see, go slow stance on Iraq, which isn't exactly what the voters went to the polls for, now is it?
This is leading one place and it isn't redeployment. The fix is in.
- Taylor Marsh LIVE! airs Mon-Thur from 6-7 pm eastern - 3-4 pm pacific, with podcasts also available.
Hiya Taylor!
Taylor!
OT
Wolf Blitzer: “Now some are saying the D in Democrat stands for defiant.”
He’s been doing this Bush routine pretty regularly lately. Barf
Hey Bustednuckles, marksb!
ISG should be GOB.*
Buncha recycled old politicos with no new ideas.
* Good Ol Boy’s
Taylor:
Drive-by grammar check:
Then the other day we heard Senator Harry Reid say something to the
affecteffect that we’re not going to force anything on Bush.Always lurking
:-)
hi, Taylor.
Hey, who put the Fridge on the panel?
“don’t know anything”
That’s why they have ta study.
Ed fucking Meese?!
What possible expertise is he bringing to the table? Old and white and male and conservative….’cause I don’t see much else.
Wiki:
roots! Taylor!
Caught that after the upload, Dr. Bong, but always appreciate a heads up.
Hiya, punaise.
what the frig is meese doing there?
this epu’d post is Jermain here to be sure;
perris, formerly known as me to me, @ 138
combined with this one;
perris, formerly known as me to me, @ 138
perris, formerly known as me to me, @ 137
Scrabble in the sand:
mISGuided
dISGusting
(unfair swipe, perhaps)
Analysis:
“The war has gotten so bad that you can’t get a decent bottle of red wine anywhere in the country- let alone a proper martini.”
ISG
No martinis?! That would cause a panic.
That list. Good Christ!
Dr. Bong @ 1:08 pm (#6)
And occasionally pouncing. Hey Dr. Bong, someone was asking about you in a thread from a couple days ago. Hope all is well.
You would have preferred Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Cliff May, Bill Kristol, etc?
Whoa, for a second there I had James Dobbins confused with Dr. James Dobson, whose advice would be to escalate into WWIII and sit back and wait for the Rapture.
And won’t Steny Hoyer make sure there is a go slow approach in the House? Can Hoyer short circuit the investigations in the House?
I see no good coming from this — none. Although with a dem Congress we can directly go after some of them.
‘This is the end…My only friend, the end…’
Gosh darn it Taylor, there you go with those pesky facts again.
;>)
The war won’t end until we cut off the funds for the warmongers. period.
So, until we get a congress that’s serious about doing their jobs, we will be shoving money down the Iraq hole, and the Iran hole and anywhere else Pretzeldent Codpiece wants to make like a cowboy.
RWCole @ 15 - You’ve pegged it.
Jon H @ 1:14 pm (#19)
As I mentioned on Taylor’s site, I can’t recall one of these commissions that was anything other than a political exercise. Even in the case of the 9/11 commision, which was pretty independent, political considerations seem to have played a part in the recommendations.
Gee thanks—no one was guardin me so I just dribbled in and scored.
Operation “Stay the Course” is in full effect now.
We’re never leaving Iraq. In fact we’re sending more troops.
If you people get upitty again we’ll pull some of those troops back and say “see! We reduced troop levels! Give us 6 more months…”
Look at those bright shiny keys…hmm…purty.
Cujo: And occasionally pouncing. Hey Dr. Bong, someone was asking about you in a thread from a couple days ago. Hope all is well.
Been on a BIG high since last Wednesday *g*
All is well in Bongland now… Karma is a bitch, innit?
:-)
Jon H @ 19
With Eagleburger, Meese and Simpson, who could tell the difference?
All are founding members of “The World is Full of Suckers, so Let’s Take ‘em to the Cleaners” club.
Screw Jim Baker — and the old man, too!
Bush answers to a higher father — Henry Kissinger.
[Cue scene from Dr. Strangelove — “Ve must haf ze VILL!”]
I heard it said, it seems like a forever ago, that the election was a referendum on the failed Bush Iraq war. The Baker boys and girl. This what I voted for? Why not put Hillary and Lieberman on the Baker team? And really make it complete. This whole day (Steny baby) has been one of disgust. I’m pissed.
Voodoo Practitioner Tries to Jinx Bush
By Associated Press
Published November 16, 2006, 9:44 AM CST
BOGOR, Indonesia — A renowned black magic practitioner performed a voodoo ritual Thursday to jinx President George W. Bush and his entourage while he was on a brief visit to Indonesia.
Ki Gendeng Pamungkas slit the throat of a goat, a small snake and stabbed a black crow in the chest, stirred their blood with spice and broccoli before drank the “potion” and smeared some on his face.
“I don’t hate Americans, but I don’t like Bush,” said Pamungkas, who believed the ritual would succeed as, “the devil is with me today.”
The broccoli is a nice touch.
Politicians speak in grave tones in order to get sex, meat, and good wine.
In no particular order…
Taylor,
Yet another brilliant analysis from our gal Taylor.
Why not put a group together of university professors? How about Juan Cole and a few who speak arabic?
Why do they recycle the same bots for these blue ribbon whitewash commissions?
Let’s predict their finding.
Iraq is messed up…
We didn’t throw enough troups in when we shoulda
Even if we did, it was only a matter of time before civil war would break out as well as insurgents wanting our ass outta there
We can’t back down because our name will be shit in the world.. even worse than it already is having attacked Iraq.
We can’t go out without securing our strategic interests… I mean our oil.
Let’s just humker down on some mega bases, set up security around our strategic interests and withdraw from the provinces where there is no fighting… and pray that they mostly kill each other and not lob mortars into the shrinking green zone and our enduring bases.
Fortify the Iran border.. as we cant have them walking away with what we fought and paid for.
Withdraw to enduring bases over 12 months and re examine the situation.
Keep 15 battle groups in the region to show we have no intention of cutting and running.
Declare victory and establish a media blackout on the country… expell all journalists.
Wanna bet?
darkblack @22 - Fitting graphic link. Yep, facts are such a pain, aren’t they?
This gang, who wont go away, are not about to start exit strategy 101 now. Wine is the flashy object the corkscrew fix is still in.
The voters have spoken and nobody is listening.
recommendations have ta have lots of made up words that no one understands. Otherwise it isn’t a real report.
I’m less concerned about the lack of Islamic world knowledge and experience at the mentioned level.
The Expert Working Groups have a pretty deep and diverse set of members with a lot of expertise with Islamic world and Persian Gulf history, economy, politics, and religion.
The real issue for me is that the ISG is heavily stacked with corporatists who are more interested in protecting the financial interests of their clients than the interests of Iraq and the Iraqi people.
Hi Taylor, all.
This thread is too good and important to hijack, but you might want to stuff this in another tab for perusal later. Off topic, but from the same playbook. It’s about the House passing the Animal Enterprise Act (animal rightsers as terrists). It was a voice vote so no record of who was for or against — cute!
as was pointed out in the prvious thread, 20,000 troops actually translates into 5,000 at any one time if you consider shifts, eating, etc.
so once again, there is no way anyone wants these troops except to do something personal
this is definate…there is something they need to do, it has nothing to do with Iraq’s security or succes, it’s personal, it’s to acccomplish something for profit and they can’t take 20,000 troops that are already engaged
this needs some kind of investigation
While I’m pessimistic about some of the “options” we’re hearing rumors about, I’m not especially pessimistict about the makeup of the group. Blue-ribbon commissions always have only one purpose, to put together a plan that’s politically palatable to the people who appointed them. It doesn’t matter that there are few or no Middle East experts in the group, that’s what staff are for. There are no “solutions” to the Iraq quagmire, so the only thing for them to do is device a face-saving way for Junior to get us out while not admitting that’s what he’s doing.
As much as I’d like to see W take the full blame for his colossal blunder, I’m not willing to sacrifice extra lives to do it. He’ll be blamed regardless, and if he gets to pretend for a while that he won’t be, that’s a small price to pay.
I raqwar
S till
G oing
Thanks, Taylor, let’s delve some more.
Leon Panetta was Bill Clinton’s White House Chief of Staff, so presumably that gives him some foreign policy expertise, although clearly his primary brief was the budget (from his wikipedia entry):
Charles Robb is newer to the ME “scene”, although he’s loved being co-opted since LBJ chose him from the White House palace guard as the alternative to his daughter’s then-suitor George Hamilton. (also wiki):
William Perry (wiki again):
Mad Dogs @ 29
Correct.
This is so obviously not about fixing the situation in Iraq, but fixing the political situation here at home.
Therefore, there is no need for experts on the Middle East, but for experts on political fixing in Washington. Hence this group of — political fixers.
This needs to be drummed home to the unsuspecting public who may be under the misunderstanding that the ISG is actually trying to solve the problems in Iraq, not the problem of Iraq.
Experience and expertise. Jesus. Just pull out now. No more American GI deaths.
Did anyone else interpret McCain’s argument with Abizaid yesterday as a full-on cynical embrace of “stab in the back”? As I see it, McCain was calling for additional troops he knows we don’t have, and which he probably knows wouldn’t do any more good than the ones we have there already. He burnishes his hawk/wingnut credentials, and when the troops don’t get sent, he gets to say “not my fault — it would have worked if you’d done it my way!”
So, TeddySanFran and firepups, what does all this spell? Wait for it… ESCALATION, if Democrats don’t act.
“As I mentioned on Taylor’s site, I can’t recall one of these commissions that was anything other than a political exercise. Even in the case of the 9/11 commision, which was pretty independent, political considerations seem to have played a part in the recommendations.”
Well, yes they are always political.
But the members aren’t really *supposed* to be subject matter experts, anyway. Chances are, any subject matter expert on Iraq who could be chosen to sit on the ISG is an involved party and thus *not* who you want making the decision.
The panel talks to the experts, who bring their knowledge and their biases. The panel just has to be able to weigh the testimony and evidence, accounting for biases in any direction, and come to some recommendations based on them. Sure, they have political connections and biases, that’s why it’s a bipartisan panel. But more importantly they don’t personally have anything at stake in the war the way a Kristol or a Feith would.
Personally, I figure the membership of the ISG is relatively good, considering the Bush administration’s history. (Remember when they wanted Kissinger to run the 9/11 panel?)
Where I question them is in their selection of people to talk to: Tom Friedman!??!?!?!?!
Oklahome kiddo - I am pissed too and find it difficult to sing ‘let’s all get together’ when Hoyer is not a guy to trust — especially to protect Pelosi’s back - NOT.
Stay the course, being now run by Reid and Pelosi with Hoyer pushing, with Rahm on deck, is sickening. I am not going to get over this for awhile. And if, as we suspect, stay the course, or even ‘one more big push’ is the new policy and it fails, as it will, how are the dems going to be seen then. Oh let me guess - weak.
But time will tell, just as it did when I had this same feeling with the start of the Iraq war.
Taylor Marsh @ 36
I’ve heard it said that they’re stupid things….Something that several members of the ISG may know all too well.
;>)
William Perry
Shufflin’ on down…
GrandmaJ @ 21
Hoyer can’t do a whole lot. The power rests with the Speaker and the relevant Committee Chairmen.
Taylor Marsh @ 48
O peration
I raqi Enduring
L iberation
Everything’s going according to plan.
This is exactly what they want; it’s a planned failure. Iraq is a money pit and a mass transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy. You have to remember that Paul Bremer was a deputy of Henry Kissinger: he of the quote …
(google it)
The grand scheme is not to win the war (btw it’s an occupation), but to steal our money. They don’t want to win: that would end the sucking dry of the treasury.
If the purpose was to win they would listen to people whose jobs are to actually define ways to win wars, understand your opposition, and hold peace - they would listen to people like Dr. Steven Biddle of the US Army War College where he basically says that “staying the course” is a quagmire (my interpretation) or Jessica Stern writing about The Protean Enemy in Foreign Affairs.
We either need at least 500,000 troops (according to the 20 troops to 1,000 residents ratio) which we don’t have, or we redeploy. But both of these solutions are untenable to them because that would end the transfer of wealth.
Anyway, have a good day, gotta run along now
from EPU:
Taylor, Swopa — If I understand the “one last push” approach, its essence is to both allow the Shiites to commit genocide/ethnic cleansing on the Sunnis and, worse, to help them do it. Or if that seems too extreme, then to crush them so thoroughly that they simply give up — for which there are almost no successful examples. Am I missing something?
There is a powerful post by Glenn Greenwald earlier today (”Afghanistan and alQaeda: Together Again”), in which he argues, among other things, that there is no rational discussion of realistic options going on at any level. Glenn concludes with this:
MayDaze @ 52
Thank God
Yes. Hot Tub Tommy set up his boy Denny as speaker so he could run amok behind the scenes, but traditionally the Speaker has all the power.
I’m not sure exactly what Reid can do about the decisions made by Bush. Certainly the Dems can make their displeasure made known concerning his decisions, but he is the Executive - Bush owns Iraq and is fully responsible for changing direction (until we elect a non-Republican President). Um, and I don’t expect him to listen to any group that would be actually qualified to render an accurate course of action in Iraq any time soon.
What Congress & the Senate CAN do is end no-bid government contracts & hold contractors responsible when they fail to provide our troops what they require. Oh, and they can start opening investigations into handling of intelligence by the White House. We’re in this mess because the Executive Branch didn’t think there would be consequences for misleading the country.
scarecrow @ 55
that’s it, that’s what 20,000 new soldiers can do…I think you’ve hit it on the head
OT, but in case no one has linked to this fine set of promises to our vanquished conservative friends:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/wo.....2006-11-14
GrandmaJ @ 50
Am in sympathy with your sentiments.
All of the financial burden of Iraq should be paid for directly from a gasoline tax, with absolutely no borrowing or hidden extended costs. A surcharge on those taxes should be included to pay for costs previously incurred.
While we are at it lets add a sales tax on walmart customers equal to the amount of money borrowed from China.
Taylor:
[EPUd]
Notice that once again, there is a major crisis going on in the United States, that cries out for Presidential leadership, and the President is nowhere to be found.
In the meantime, he leaves a nation bogged down in an unnecessary and grossly mismanaged war, that is spinning into chaos and wide-spread sectarian kidnapping, torture, murder and neighborhood-by-neighborhood “cleansing,” with no credible scenario for resolution or even graceful exit.
I don’t understand why the entire nation is not demanding that the Bush/Cheney administration leave office, immediately. The only “last push” that makes any sense is to drop-kick these criminals out of office. Than, perhaps, we can have a grown up discussion about what to do next. But the notion that we should be force to even talk with the current clowns, let along convince them to do anything (if there is a solution) is absurd.
It’s time to call for their removal from office. Everything else depends on that.
Wait a minute! You mean I actually have to go and work???
How could this be?
Bye now, firepups.
What we really need to hear about is the makeup of the staff. It’s a given that the named partners aren’t going “study” anything. It’s not what they know, but whom they know. They’re just window dressing. They’re in place to censor and sell the report, not write it.
“ISG meeting tonight—BULLSHIT– I’ve got tickets for the knicks and a late dinner with a 25 year old blonde with the world’s greatest ass….Look- just tell em I vote “YES”–yeah- on everything!”
Mad Dogs wrote: “All are founding members of “The World is Full of Suckers, so Let’s Take ‘em to the Cleaners” club.”
Um, yes. That pretty much covers the entire GOP. So if they’re going to participate, their side of a bipartisan comittee is going to look like that.
Do you really expect the GOP to appoint Dennis Kucinich, Warren Beatty, Ani Difranco, and Deepak Chopra to represent the Republicans on a bipartisan committee?
It’s rather silly to complain that a bipartisan committee has Republicans on it. If they weren’t there, it wouldn’t be bipartisan, and it wouldn’t be happening at all.
The GOP have a rather limited and unpleasant bench to choose from. In the international relations area, if they aren’t involved with the Bush Iraq War, they’re probably involved with Iran-Contra. As I alluded earlier, it’s a small blessing that they didn’t pick their side from the PNAC signatories.
MayDaze @ 53
“Hoyer can’t do a whole lot.” I admit I might be quite naive. But if Hoyer exists to do nothing then why didn’t they give the Speaker who she wanted? Are we saying Steny was just PR? I don’t get it.
All I can say, reading more and more about these Baker3Bots, is “Thank goodness the Bush national security team met last weekend in secret to develop an alternative.”
Which is purposely counterproductive to the goal of the B/H-ISG. JB3’s goal is:
One page
One paragraph
One checkbox
One signature line
JB3 knows Junja is confused enough to pick EXACTLY the wrong options if any are presented, thus B/H-ISG will present only ONE. Cheney’s NeoConInsurance Policy is the new, shinier, not-Poppy’s “alternative” homegrown option, just as easily formatted but featuring:
More death
More destruction
More hate
More chaos
Confronted, as he will be on the exact same day (watch it happen!!) with two competing proposals, equally simply presented, will W choose the proposal of Team Poppy or Team Darth?
Scarecrow @ 56 - A couple of thoughts. First, the “last push” is about another very obvious thing: Bush legacy. The goal for Mr. Bush is to push this redeployment talk into the presidential election cycle of ‘08 so nothing gets done. That way he can walk out of Washington claiming he didn’t lose Iraq, according to his… er… thinking.
In addition, the U.S. military is in a horrific position. The leaders, especially the top brass, remember well what happened after the loss of Vietnam. Morale for soldiers was terrible, absolutely awful. There are times when the military on the ground, regardless of their HEROIC efforts, can’t let go of the fight, even though they aren’t the ones that screwed the pooch. Soldiers often have to clean up for politicians, and in doing so take on the brunt of the blame themselves, whether they deserve it or not. They do not deserve the blame in Iraq. Abizaid and our forces want a “victory” in Iraq. Defining it down so they can claim some part of that is likely job one right now.
““Hoyer can’t do a whole lot.” I admit I might be quite naive. But if Hoyer exists to do nothing then why didn’t they give the Speaker who she wanted? Are we saying Steny was just PR? I don’t get it.”
Presumably there are things Hoyer has influence on, and things he does not.
Career military types know that you’ve got ta have a war- even a shitty one- ta get ahead in the military.
Jon H @ 72
What are these “things”?
cloud7 @ 58
I agree with you. It makes no sense to raise a lot of expectations that the Dems can now get us out of Iraq; the Executive Branch has all the control here. The threat of investigation may give Bush some pause, but I don’t see the Congress cutting off funding - besides the political implications, practically the majority is way short of being veto-proof.
WASHINGTON - About 2,200 Marines are headed from their ships in the Persian Gulf to an undisclosed location in Iraq’s western Anbar province to help shore up U.S. combat power in an area riddled with insurgent violence.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....military_1
EPU’d so, sorry, will post this link again. About a 48 min (BBC?) report on
the death squads
being run out of the Shia controlled Ministry of Interior (though I believe that particular minister has been moved).
This is the side that Bush will join.
Doesn’t matter if there aren’t any military/Mideast area experts on the ISG. Their role is strictly political, to give Georgie cover until the Dems take over in January. After that, everything Iraqi can be blamed on the Congress.
W. has his own personal “study group” going now as well, and they will (surprise, surprise) recommend the “big push.” He won’t even read the Executive Summary (comic book edition) of the ISG report.
MayDaze @ 75 - You’re right, Bush is still the commander in chief, and the Senate is tight. That said, showing anything less than absolute resolve on a methodical redeployment gives Bush too much room, because any room is too much.
If this past election was about the Iraq war and the majority of the American public agree we went there on gross false pretenses and do not support this fiasco, are the Demos who now control Congress going to cut off financing this horror? After January.
Two Friedmans from now, when Bush is contemplating Baker II after The One Last Push bullshit, the Democrats will be entangled deeper into his Iraq quagmire, just like the Emanuels and the Clintons want.
My guess would be that the voters will not be as kind to the Democrats in 2008 as they were last week. At best, they’ll stay home.
What’s a few hundred thousand more dead Iraqis to the Democratic neocons, after all.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 68
The Majority Leader is an important post for rallying the “troops” and keeping them in line, but has no real independent authority (except in the absence of the Speaker). This is why the position should be filled by someone who shares the values of the Speaker, which, I fear, is not the case now.
Oh good god. Death squads and ethnic cleansing is the plan? Great,jumpstart some of the old Iran/Contra guys,back the Shia while they rid Iraq of Sunni,crap,this sounds WAY too familiar,an odd deja vu. Damn it. WTF is WRONG with these people?
when bush says “one last push”, I think what he really means is;
“to get us into a war so he can declare marshal law”
An Angry Old Broad @ 82
They lack souls.
“What are these “things”?”
He’s the whip, which is just about keeping track of who’s voting yea or nay, and convincing people to flip their votes if they aren’t going to vote his way.
I’m not familiar with how things work in Congress, but that might only come into play after the committees do their thing, if at all. For all I know the whip mainly has a role in passing legislation, not in running hearings and whatnot.
Then the other day we heard Senator Harry Reid say something to the effect that we’re not going to force anything on Bush.
Harry Reid needs to start leading an opposition party–with or without the deck chairs arranged in the WH— or he can retire.
Seems like McCain is banging on his crazy drum about Iraq. & Since the country elected Dems to fix the problem we really don’t have the option of sitting back and playing nice. That goes for HoJoe/McCain/Chimpy. If the solution is redeployment, sorry chimpy.
An Angry Old Broad @ 82
alternatively, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.....-515h.html
Michael Markman @ 66
What he said. It’s the staff that matters.
MayDaze @ 82
I’ll buy that. I like it!
An Angry Old Broad @ 83
Very alarming and bad case of deja vu. And you know, no “side” is going to be nice after a death squad. Which makes death squads not just murderous and inhumane, but stupid.
Howard Kurtz thinks McCain asking for more troops is courageous and principled:
In a way it’s kind of fitting Since Baker was the one who lobbied the Supreme Court and O’Conner cast the deciding vote that brought started this nightmare. You’re right though, it’s like having Kissinger investigate 9/11.
salon.com War Room:
Jon H @ 85
In the current 109th Congress, Steny is now the MinWhip, but was today elected Majority Leader by the next Democratic Caucus of next year’s 110th. Their new Majority Whip is Congressman Jim Clyburn (SC-6):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clyburn
In this particular case I want a majority leader who is in tune with Speaker Pelosi. I do not think the election of Steny sends the right message to the right. These guys (GOP)might look at this as disarray and equate that with Demo weakness. I’m angry.
Everythingseemssoneat @
93
Which was Plan A, right?
“In the current 109th Congress, Steny is now the MinWhip, but was today elected Majority Leader by the next Democratic Caucus of next year’s 110th. Their new Majority Whip is Congressman Jim Clyburn (SC-6):”
Doh! Sorry, Google-checked but it failed me.