Action is needed. This non-binding stuff is frustrating. Democrats. Get with it now. Stop wasting time.

Expansion of war is now the only game in town.

Pincus Lit the Fuse on the Plamegate Bomb

by
Larry C Johnson

Until the start of the Libby trial, most folks and chroniclers assumed that the Nick Kristof piece in May of 2003 spurred the White House to go after Joe and Valerie Wilson. But based on the timeline emerging from the Libby trial the real culprit is Walter Pincus, the legendary warhorse reporter at the Washington Post, whose work on an article that appeared on June 12, 2003 set in motion the events that eventually produced the “outing” of Valerie Plame, the wife of Ambassador Joe Wilson and an undercover CIA officer.

…

The Walter Pincus piece appeared on 12 June 2003. But articles like this just don’t materialize overnight. They usually start a week or two in advance. Thanks to the trial of Scooter Libby we can fill in the blanks on the timeline of Pincus’ work. The first witnesses called–Marc Grossman, Robert Grenier, and Cathie Martin–each provided critical testimony about events covering the period 29 May 2003 to 12 June 2003.

http://noquarter.typepad.com/m….._the_.html

I wonder if that is one of the stories that Woodward had to push the editors to allow in the paper?
-

Ben to George: Go fly a kite.

Christy, did Feingold have specific suggestions for us [and our contacting of Congress-critters]?

I am contemplating becoming upset. My party (Demos) is letting me down.

Once we have ’started’ on Iran. It’ll be too late.

Checks and balances Congress. Do the job. No funding for Iran.

Oklahoma kiddo @
6

I am contemplating becoming upset. My party (Demos) is letting me down.

Go ahead and go for it. Maybe you could give them a little “pick me up”.

Mauimom at 5 — Sen. Feingold said to be concise and specific and to say things like “I would like the troops home now. And the Sen/Cong. needs to do whatever it takes to make that happen.” Or something like that. You know, tell them you are unhappy and that you expect them to do their job, stop being wishy-washy and actually grow a spine (but not quite that way…).

epu’d below…Can someone help me figure out how to donate via credit card, not paypal? I would prefer not to send it snailmail from NZ but I don’t want to use Paypal. Thanks

Oklahoma kiddo..EPU’d..re Hillary and Iran..She stated her position at the recent A*PAC meeting in NY. She used dog-whistle and said Iran is major threat to Isr*el and nothing is off the table (I’ll nuke them if you ask me to) I think early on she took some very bad advice from Lieberman, Schumer and others and it is going to cost her the presidency.

Lovely piece Peterr. You could have also added that a lengthy Canadian investigation into the kidnap and torture of their citizen, Maher Arar, as well as other citizens who were also detained and tortured in Syria, has resulted in the Canadian judge investigating the matter to caution Canada on how it shares intelligence with State sponsors of torture like the US. US Senators who have been belatedly briefed on the torture transaction also remain mystified as to just how the US justifies its torture shipment.

It’s not just the lost art of diplomacy; it’s a long lost respect for law of any kind. Elitism in its worst fashion – an Executive that polices itself can and does opt out of law and diplomacy at a whim and without regard to the impact on those whose lives are ravaged, or lost, to its whims.

Law enforcement as a branch of the privileged lawbreakers; diplomacy as a branch of the privileged liars. What a sad state of affairs.

Any statistics on what the actual bad guys have been up to?

I am close ot tears as I think about what we have let our country become. The things that we have allowed to be done in our name sickens me.

And I’m afraid. Very afraid. I think Perle, Wolfowitz et. al. are actively TRYING to kick start Armageddon. Cheney thinks they’re nuts but he’s interested in the same actions as them. There’s been a fair bit of written about these people, some IIRC at TPM, some elsewhere.

I’ve e-mailed my congress critters, sent snail mail to them, called them, sent emails and letters to several of the mor impotant committee chairs (judiciary, Armed services, foreign relations…)

The time to speak is NOW. We may never have another chance.

I feel so radical lately. ;0)

I used my computer connection to call the Kansas senators (where I am still registered to vote). I used words like “heartsick about our troops being exposed to this” and “responsibility to the military.”

I also added to Brownback’s office that, with the majority of the citizens wanting to end the occupation of Iraq, he would have the majority on his side in his actions. Not that I would want that to translate into anything in his long-term favor.

Robert’s is a lost cause, but someone has to keep talking to lost causes. As I told another Kansas friend, one never knows when the last drop will be the one that finally breaks through the stone.

Instead of a Marshall plan we have a Martial plan.

And allies like who “help” us like this:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/821634.html

Mossad Killed Iranian Nuclear Physicist

(We have started on Iran.)

Glenn Kessler at the WaPo gave a brief rundown on how the State Department fared in Bush’s new budget proposal:

Spending for the State Department and key international affairs programs would climb by $3.7 billion to $33.9 billion. Reflecting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s interest in public diplomacy, the proposal would boost spending on educational and cultural programs by 11 percent, to $474 million, with an emphasis on Muslim countries. The budget reserves $115 million to foster training in foreign languages such as Arabic and Urdu by Americans. At the same time, Voice of America would eliminate radio service in Russian and other languages.

A big chunk of the money is $3 billion for the Millennium Challenge Corp., a relatively new foreign aid tool that would tie aid to a country’s meeting certain criteria.

The budget would reduce aid in such areas as development assistance and child survival and health. It would expand a new office devoted to reconstruction and stabilization in post-conflict countries, and would create a $75 million fund to quickly deploy civilian personnel to unstable regions.

Or, Bush could simply punt the $33 billion for a year’s worth of worldwide diplomacy, and use it to fund another couple of weeks of the Iraq war quagmire.

Peterr, Mary, NZ Expat and others in the same thread… This place is where I find my American Idols. (thank goodness we don’t have to sing)

NZ Expat @ 11

epu’d below…Can someone help me figure out how to donate via credit card, not paypal? I would prefer not to send it snailmail from NZ but I don’t want to use Paypal. Thanks

Click through the link on the right side for MC/Visa/Paypal, which takes you to a single site for electronic contributions. There you have a choice between putting it on your credit card directly or logging into Paypal and doing it through them.

And thanks for your support!

Depressing article in todays Globe and Mail about Afghani detainees being handed over to th e Americans by Canadian forces.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com…..tory/Front

Ottawa silent on fate of captured terror suspects
No accounting for scores of detainees that have been handed to Americans, Afghans

PAUL KORING

From Tuesday’s Globe and Mail

WASHINGTON — Scores of terrorist suspects captured by Canadians have disappeared into the murky netherworld of Afghan and American prisons, but Ottawa refuses to say what has happened to them or even if it knows whether any have been tried, charged, or released, or how they are treated.

I’d settle for Ben Bradlee!

Tangentially related. Don’t know if anyone’s seen this, but Juan cole has a post and link to an Arabic pop singer’s video (definitely worth watching). Song lyrics apparently go “Hi Hello, I never want to see you again. ” She means Bush & the U.S. What can I say? Her criticism is more than justified.

Well 209 years ago, on July 7 1798 your Congress had rescinded the treaties with France and was at war with them.

So, no… actually things haven’t changed much.

And we have arrested Iranian envoy in Iraq today. I think I read. Did anyone else see this?

Iran? Done deal.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 25

And we have arrested Iranian envoy in Iraq today. I think I read. Did anyone else see this?

U.S. denies hand in Iran envoy’s capture

I want my daughter to live. I want her to survive George Bush. I want her to get married and have babies. If that’s what she wants.

Peterr @ 19

Glenn Kessler at the WaPo gave a brief rundown on how the State Department fared in Bush’s new budget proposal:

Spending for the State Department and key international affairs programs would climb by $3.7 billion to $33.9 billion. Reflecting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s interest in public diplomacy, the proposal would boost spending on educational and cultural programs by 11 percent, to $474 million, with an emphasis on Muslim countries. The budget reserves $115 million to foster training in foreign languages such as Arabic and Urdu by Americans. At the same time, Voice of America would eliminate radio service in Russian and other languages.

A big chunk of the money is $3 billion for the Millennium Challenge Corp., a relatively new foreign aid tool that would tie aid to a country’s meeting certain criteria.

The budget would reduce aid in such areas as development assistance and child survival and health. It would expand a new office devoted to reconstruction and stabilization in post-conflict countries, and would create a $75 million fund to quickly deploy civilian personnel to unstable regions.

How interesting. The help for children would be largely done by NGOs. That’s being cut. The reconstruction would be done by, umm, bigger corps… like Halliburton, Parsons, Bechtel, etc.

And “deploy civilian personnel to unstable regions… now, who might that be? Wouldn’t be any of our mercenary friends in NC with altogther too-strong connections to both the WH and Talibangelicals, would it?

Jeepers, these guys are so friggin’ transparent, it’s actually humorous. Sort of. Well, not really….

Sigh.

And the Marshall Plan was mostly about manipulating the European democracies by attacking communist parties.

Same old same old…..

(from Wikipedia)

the power and popularity of indigenous communist parties in several Western European states was worrisome. In both France and Italy, the poverty of the postwar era had provided fuel for their communist parties, which had also played central roles in the resistance movements of the war. These parties had seen significant electoral success in the postwar elections, with the Communists becoming the largest single party in France. Though today most historians feel the threat of France and Italy falling to the communists was remote,[5] it was regarded as a very real possibility by American policy makers at the time.

DavidByron @ 25

Well 209 years ago, on July 7 1798 your Congress had rescinded the treaties with France and was at war with them.

So, no… actually things haven’t changed much.

The treaties you refer to were rescinded by a public act of Congress, following public debate and discussion. The departures from the Geneva Convention were the unilateral acts of a petulant executive, made in secret, behind closed doors, and without public discussion — let alone public approval.

There’s a big difference.

Democrats. I am really thinking of becoming agitated. You need to do something. I am not here talking of non-binding things. I am speaking of binding-stuff.

Operation Bomb Iran will, as Arthur Silber has noted, turn the US into a pariah nation.

If it happens, I’m on the next plane out of Dodge. And I’d advise Americans abroad — even though the fact they’re abroad implies that they’re less likely to be Bush true believers — to file their amnesty claims or head home.

It’s times like this when the constitutional downside of the Senate’s structure come through. It’s the chamber which considers itself aloof from public opinion. It’s the ‘reflective’ chamber. It’s also the chamber most likely to be up its own arse and living under a rock. Feingold’s forthrightness is an attempt to jump-start the place.

Oh and the General has a link to this horrible video, presented without comment.

I am adamant. I will keep the feet of my party to the fire.

Thanks Peterr for the help. It worked. Sorry it isn’t more. NZ dollars are worth about two thirds of an American one. And we’re trying to support two American tuitions off of the money from here.

OT — Breaking News: Guiliani’s wife #3 thinks he’s hot.

Meme o’the day: stay ignorant, rightwingnuts/Rethuglicans…Rupert and Rush like you that way. Ka-ching!

pseudonymous in nc @
34

Operation Bomb Iran will, as Arthur Silber has noted, turn the US into a pariah nation.

If it happens, I’m on the next plane out of Dodge. And I’d advise Americans abroad — even though the fact they’re abroad implies that they’re less likely to be Bush true believers — to file their amnesty claims or head home.

It’s times like this when the constitutional downside of the Senate’s structure come through. It’s the chamber which considers itself aloof from public opinion. It’s the ‘reflective’ chamber. It’s also the chamber most likely to be up its own arse and living under a rock. Feingold’s forthrightness is an attempt to jump-start the place.

Please look at this: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/06/iran-study/

19 – a little more about the Millenium Challenge pet of Rice – getting the 3 Billion

http://www.globalpolicy.org/so…..usfake.htm

In a pattern that has become a hallmark of the administration, however, Bush’s aid initiative — the Millennium Challenge Corporation — has become an object lesson in dramatic ideas followed by disastrous action. Over the past three months, Rolling Stone has reviewed the MCC’s “compacts” with foreign countries, compared the work of similar agencies and spoken with a wide range of supporters and critics — including many of the conservative insiders responsible for creating the program. Instead of hiring aid experts, the administration at first staffed the MCC with conservative ideologues. Rather than partnering with other countries, the White House operated on its own, disconnected from the rest of the world. And when experts criticized the new agency, the administration responded with a bunker mentality, refusing to talk to detractors and learn from its mistakes.

…

Building an entire program from the ground up inevitably meant delays: It took the MCC more than a year to establish guidelines for handing out aid. Worse, say experts familiar with the process, creating a new organization simply created more hurdles for recipient nations, making an already complicated process even more cumbersome. “There’s evidence that receiving countries are being overwhelmed by the number of different aid programs,” says Lex Rieffel, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution who has studied the MCC.

In line with the conservative disdain for big government, the administration decided to keep the program small. Originally, Rolling Stone has learned, the officials who created the MCC wanted to limit its staff to no more than 100 — making it effectively impossible to distribute $5 billion in aid. By comparison, MCC expert Steve Radelet has found, Britain’s Department for International Development, which disburses some $3.3 billion a year in aid, has a staff of 2,200. Today the MCC has a staff of fewer than 200 — not nearly enough to do the job. According to the GAO, the program lacks the “critical skills needed to carry out its mission.”

Those charged with setting up the MCC were drawn not from the world of international aid but from the Treasury Department and the White House budget office. Robin Cleveland, a budget staffer who played a key role in creating the program, “had no idea of what development was,” according to one of the MCC’s early architects, who asked not to be identified. The first CEO of the program, Paul Applegarth, was a Republican campaign contributor with limited experience in international aid, having spent his career at financial institutions such as the Bank of America, American Express and Lehman Brothers. “Applegarth wasn’t qualified to do the job,” says a former official involved in the MCC’s creation. “Folks that do development for a living, it’s a skill — it takes a lot of hands-on work.”

Applegarth, in fact, had a different kind of work in mind. In a report he authored for a think tank, Applegarth outlined ways to “establish financial-sector development as an explicit objective of U.S. development assistance efforts in sub-Saharan Africa” — in short, how to assist banks in the world’s poorest countries. To do so, Applegarth recommended “bringing more people with capital market skills and experience into government by, for example, establishing a separate salary scale within the government for financial-markets experts” — in other words, paying Wall Street honchos extra to aid the poor.

…
Rather than funding projects that directly aid the poor — building schools and hospitals, providing electricity and clean water to rural villages — the MCC takes a trickledown approach. Help private companies prosper, the reasoning goes, and jobs for the poor will follow. Or as Applegarth told a forum on aid to Madagascar, the MCC can “create opportunities for rural Malagasy by unleashing domestic investment.”

The six compacts signed by the MCC reflect this pro-business ideology. In Cape Verde, the agency plans to spend almost $86 million to mobilize investment and build the infrastructure needed to move goods to market — nearly all of the $110 million in aid to the impoverished country. In Nicaragua, another $92 million in aid will be spent on infrastructure. In Georgia, the MCC will spend $32.5 million to establish a Wall Street-style investment for “enterprise development.” Other projects under consideration have included an industrial park in Senegal and a tourist resort in Central America. “The early compacts don’t reflect a broad swath of needs, like health and education,” says David Gootnick, director of international affairs and trade at the GAO.

In some cases, the MCC appears to be using aid to reward countries that support the president’s war on terror — even though it is not supposed to base assistance on political favoritism. Georgia, which has served as a base for U.S. military operations, received $295.3 million from the MCC — despite corruption and human-rights abuses that should make it ineligible for assistance under the MCC’s own guidelines. “I see an awful lot of politics in this,” says Fiona Hill, an expert on the former Soviet states at the Brookings Institution. “Georgia has taken steps back in terms of rights and freedoms.” Testifying before Congress, even Applegarth acknowledged that the aid to Georgia involved what he discreetly referred to as an “element of judgment.”

Whole article is worth the read – it’s originally from Rolling Stone – a mag without a Tim Russert to “control” its message.

Boggles my mind a bit when I have to give up Time and Newsweek and take up reading Harpers and The New Yorker and Vanity Fair and Rolling Stone to get any real news.

wow peterr!
beautifully put!
’smooth read’ and hit deep…..
you all at ((((fdl)))) blow me away……
am catching up on reading the info from today, mind-blowing…..
am now going back to posts to read comments…….

i learn something new here every day from your posts. and a h/t to the insightful comments section, you all inspire me…….

every post as a matter of fact……..

and would like to suggest that you include info about the .07 donations and the different kind of donation possible at the paypal portion of the posts…….
am sending money per snail mail to support you wonderful people, can’t do much, but we can always do a little, contribute something, each in our own way.

I support the troops. And the best way I know is to bring our soldiers home. Those in my family who are serving in Iraq do not disagree.

Emailed Boxer, DiFi, and Henry W.

Told them to get the troops out, to not fund anything like an attack on Iran, and told them that attacking Iran is a Really Bad Idea. (As in China gets its oil from Iran, and is holding many many dollars of IOUs from us, and it really isn’t a good idea.) Made repeated references to unelected President-for-life Cheney – probably not diplomatic, but it’s being used as a two-by-four to their heads.

I hope they get the idea that some of their constituents are Really Unhappy.

P J Evans @ 43

Emailed Boxer, DiFi, and Henry W.

Told them to get the troops out, to not fund anything like an attack on Iran, and told them that attacking Iran is a Really Bad Idea. (As in China gets its oil from Iran, and is holding many many dollars of IOUs from us, and it really isn’t a good idea.) Made repeated references to unelected President-for-life Cheney – probably not diplomatic, but it’s being used as a two-by-four to their heads.

I hope they get the idea that some of their constituents are Really Unhappy.

;0)

Realpolitic: We don’t have the votes to cut off a filbuster or to override a veto. So any resolution and legislation is going to have to be bipartisan or it isn’t going to pass.

To get some perverse satisfaction out of slapping Bush isn’t governance. Either we’re the grownups or we’re not. And if we’re not, then we should be thrown out of power. Governance requires compromise. So stop thinking we, the Democrats, aren’t doing enough, and start helping the people in power find compromises that will actually accomplish something.

Hillary… it’s not too late to lose.

Don’t get me wrong, I love Russ Feingold, but why should I have to call my Congressman and Senators and tell them to have a debate? That’s their job. You would think that they got that message last November.

Mary is correct about the magazines. Harpers, New Yorker, Vanity Fair, Rolling Stone are more newsworthy than the sycophantic mags that are supposed to represent the news. Time, Newsweek, etc. are warmongering enablers like Senate Democrats (other than Feingold and few others).

If I were Dem ‘running’ for prez, I’d get out in front of the curve on Iran.

OT, back to Libby: I don’t understand why Team Libby thinks that it should get to introduce documentary evidence about Libby’s state of mind without putting Libby himself on the stand. This is not a Fifth Amendment violation. This is just saying: You can’t testify without taking the stand and facing cross-examination, which is what your document dump would be. Hell, you could probably get all of those documents in anyway by using another witness. Such as Libby’s boss, the Vice President. But now they want to dump all of those greymail documents into evidence without calling either Libby or the Shooter to the stand. I don’t think Walton’s going to buy it. What do the lawyers think?

hackworth @48 I don’t expect you to answer this :) but I’m fantasizing that you are David Hackworth.

Democrats, do not give us much more verbiage. It’s the bottom-line we require.

FDL, thanks for everything always; will send some money today. Oklahoma Kiddo—you’re running short comments are beginning to feel like the old Burmashave ads along the highway, ah, information highway.

“Where’s Ben Franklin?” Isn’t HIS face the one on the US 100$ bill? In that case, he’s all over Iraq. Hundreds of millions of $ worth. Thanks, Ambassador Bremer. Or should I say Viceroy. Or mayhap, Dork.

S.O.S. from MA @ 53

“Where’s Ben Franklin?” Isn’t HIS face the one on the US 100$ bill? In that case, he’s all over Iraq. Hundreds of millions of $ worth. Thanks, Ambassador Bremer. Or should I say Viceroy. Or mayhap, Dork.

Didn’t they say it was $12 billion in $100s that was lost? Or did I hear Mr. Blitzer incorrectly.

My letter to Joe LIEberman was brief, alittle vague, I’ll admit, and not as pissed-off as I really am right now, but I decided to go the [ironic quotes go here]diplomatic route [and here].

FWIW, here it is:
Dear Senator Lieberman:

I am not a “letter writer” and have only written you once a few years ago. I did not receive a response from you back then.

Nevertheless, today, I decided to write again. I am very concerned about the escalation of the situation in the Middle East and cannot go another day without voicing my concern.

I am humbly asking you to please speak out and vote for peaceful and diplomatic solutions to these current and any anticipated challenges.

Your recent public statements supporting this administration’s policies do not sit well with me. I implore you to use your voice and your vote wisely.

Please ask as many questions as possible of this administration and demand full accounting from as many valid sources of information as possible before making any decisions to use further military force, whether it be in Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other country.

I am confident that you will be my representative in Washington on these matters and that you will continue to look at the long-term implications of each decision you make and each opportunity you have to speak.

Thank you for your leadership.

Our president is responsible for almost a million deaths in the last few years. And he’d have us believe he okay’d killing them in the name of the Lord.

Thank you for your leadership.

Antithesis indeed.

OT
My congressman, Zack Space, will be on the Colbert Report tonight.
;-)

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety

Attributed to Franklin and pretty much the story of our times.

Christy Hardin Smith @
10

Mauimom at 5 — Sen. Feingold said to be concise and specific and to say things like “I would like the troops home now. And the Sen/Cong. needs to do whatever it takes to make that happen.” Or something like that. You know, tell them you are unhappy and that you expect them to do their job, stop being wishy-washy and actually grow a spine (but not quite that way…).

A little updated 60s protest music to go w/that thought. Music to call & fax Congress by:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4m4uSLE9K0

S.O.S. from MA @ 54

“Where’s Ben Franklin?” Isn’t HIS face the one on the US 100$ bill? In that case, he’s all over Iraq. Hundreds of millions of $ worth. Thanks, Ambassador Bremer. Or should I say Viceroy. Or mayhap, Dork.

C&L -Bremer in the Hot Seat with Waxman:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/…..practices/

those $12 billion? gone with the wind. Bush: “Franklin, dear, I don’t give a damn”

twolf1 @ 55

Didn’t they say it was $12 billion in $100s that was lost? Or did I hear Mr. Blitzer incorrectly.

That’s about right. They showed pix of some pallets of $100 bills, each pallet worth a large fraction of, or several million$. Amazing. It’s so great that this story’s finally getting some play in the MSM.

Benjamin Franklin (from Poor Richard’s Almanack)

If you would not be forgotten
as soon as you are dead and rotten,
either write things worth reading
or do things worth the writing.

Christy Hardin-Smith

I have come to the conclusion that we get the government we expect and that we tolerate, and frankly, a whole lot of whiny doomsayers have been running around saying “there’s nothing we can do, nothing’s ever going to change, blah, blah, blah” for as long as I can remember. Well, crowd of Eeyores, here’s what I say: you whined that the Democrats would never be able to take back Congress in November, and yet they did. Why? Because a whole host of people got off their butts all across this great nations of ours and did the work necessary to make that happen, every day, for weeks and weeks on end.

Here’s a thought: how about we do that again? This time, let’s make our project getting the hell out of the Republican mess in Iraq.

Sounds like something worth both the doing and the writing.

the antithesis @ 56

I am confident that you will be my representative in Washington on these matters and that you will continue to look at the long-term implications of each decision you make and each opportunity you have to speak.

Thank you for your leadership.

Far too nice, given the recipient…. I would have found his misleading, disingenuous and meretricious campaign quotes about wanting to end the war and thrown them back at him. Which of his two faces they would hit, I do not know.

SubwaySerenade @
58

Thank you for your leadership.

Antithesis indeed.

I deleted the ironic quotes.
I wonder what Ned Lamont is doing right now?

For those who are interested in(and are able to) doing more to stop this war (and possibly prevent another) here is a link to a project that has people in each state protesting at their reps offices to give them a taste of what an occupation feels like.

Ten of them were arrested at McCain’s office on his orders for peacefully protesting. Go figure.

http://www.vcnv.org/project/the-occupation-project

the antithesis @ 67

SubwaySerenade @
58

Thank you for your leadership.

Antithesis indeed.

I deleted the ironic quotes.
I wonder what Ned Lamont is doing right now?

Got an email from him, he’s working with local and regional groups, I think he’s trying to keep hope alive.

I would like to remind everyone that before the 1754 Albany Plan of Union, Mr. Franklin spent nearly two decades monitoring meetings with the Iroquois Confederacy. The indians showed him what real democracy was all about. When Franklin brought an English gent to america, named Thomas Paine, he recommended that Paine learn some Mohawk, so he could directly understand some of the freedom-based discussion.

I’m paraphrasing here, but Franklin said, ” “It would be a strange thing if six nations of ignorant savages should be capable of forming a scheme for such a union and be able to execute it in such a manner as that it has subsisted ages and appears insoluble; and yet that a like union should be impractical for ten or a dozen English colonies.”

He also had a few comment about why the kidnapped colonist women, when rescued, choose to stay with the iroquois.

There is a huge debt that this nation owes for the version of democracy we developed, to the real guardians of free spirit and freedom in america… the native americans.

montag @ 66

the antithesis @ 56

I am confident that you will be my representative in Washington on these matters and that you will continue to look at the long-term implications of each decision you make and each opportunity you have to speak.

Thank you for your leadership.

Far too nice, given the recipient…. I would have found his misleading, disingenuous and meretricious campaign quotes about wanting to end the war and thrown them back at him. Which of his two faces they would hit, I do not know.

oh that was the same bs I had in each of the three letters I wrote. No use insulting him or presenting him with the facts. He ignored the last letter I sent him, so I went out of my way to tell everyone I know to ignore him on election day.

btw, this is why I left that other website [newshounds.us] thank you for helping me improve my vocabulary –”meretricious”–

just heard on the radio that each member of the house of representatives will have two minutes to state their views on the war in iraq next week…..marathon of 2 minute speeches……man, i wish i had cable…..but i’m on a budget……maybe i’ll get it for a month, can’t stand all of the stuff going on on cspan that i can’t get!!!!!!!!!

thanks to those of you that update on what is going on on the talk shows and cspan!!!!!!!!

anyone willing to tape it for me????????????????
will send goodies………..good coffee from dawn chorus, homemade cookies of your choice, bread, etc,……..you choose…….

i’ll find someone that can tape it…….wow, can’t wait to hear it…..

FUEL FOR THE FODDER.

now going back to other posts to catch up on comments.
those of you with blogs, i click on them and read……those of you that provide links-i read them……..and i have dial-up so takes a while, is worth it..thanks for doing it….takes me forever, but took you time to do it in the first place, that’s how i look at it……

donate money ((((fdl))))

On January 29th, the German newsweekly Der Spiegel published an interview with Tyler Drummheller, the CIA’s former chief in Europe. Among the highlights:

SPIEGEL: The renditions program saw the kidnapping of suspected Islamist extremists to third countries. Were you involved in the program?

Drumheller: I would be lying if I said no. I have very complicated feelings about the whole issue. I do see the purpose of renditions, if they are carried out properly. Guys sitting around talking about carrying out attacks as they smoke their pipes in the comfort of a European capital tend to get put off the idea if they learn that a like-minded individual has been plucked out of safety and sent elsewhere to pay for his crimes.

SPIEGEL: We disagree. At the very least, you need to be certain that the targets of those renditions aren’t innocent people.

Drumheller: It was Vice President Dick Cheney who talked about the “dark side” we have to turn on. When he spoke those words, he was articulating a policy that amounted to “go out and get them.” His remarks were evidence of the underlying approach of the administration, which was basically to turn the military and the agency loose and let them pay for the consequences of any unfortunate — or illegal — occurences.

SPIEGEL: So there was no clear guidance of what is allowed in the so called “war on terrorism”?

Drumheller: Every responsible chief in the CIA knows that the more covert the action, the greater the need for a clear policy and a defined target. I once had to brief Condoleezza Rice on a rendition operation, and her chief concern was not whether it was the right thing to do, but what the president would think about it. I would have expected a big meeting, a debate about whether to proceed with the plan, a couple of hours of consideration of the pros and cons. We should have been talking about the value of the target, whether the threat he presented warranted such a potentially controversial intervention. This is no way to run a covert policy. If the White House wants to take extraordinary measures to win, it can’t just let things go through without any discussion about their value and morality.

The whole thing is worth a read (link is to Der Speigel’s English translation, not their original German) – check it out.

(h/t and apologies to the FDL commenter who posted this link last week when it first came out – sorry I can’t remember who that was!)

Peterr @
32

DavidByron @ 25

Well 209 years ago, on July 7 1798 your Congress had rescinded the treaties with France and was at war with them.

So, no… actually things haven’t changed much.

The treaties you refer to were rescinded by a public act of Congress, following public debate and discussion. The departures from the Geneva Convention were the unilateral acts of a petulant executive, made in secret, behind closed doors, and without public discussion — let alone public approval.

There’s a big difference.

Gee I thought Bush acted in everything he did with the full backing of the Republican Congress (and/or the Democratic held Senate in some cases).

Ian @ 45

Realpolitic: We don’t have the votes to cut off a filbuster or to override a veto. So any resolution and legislation is going to have to be bipartisan or it isn’t going to pass.

To get some perverse satisfaction out of slapping Bush isn’t governance. Either we’re the grownups or we’re not. And if we’re not, then we should be thrown out of power. Governance requires compromise. So stop thinking we, the Democrats, aren’t doing enough, and start helping the people in power find compromises that will actually accomplish something.

And by what logic do you presume that I am pushing hard to stop this war “to get some perverse satisfaction out of slapping Bush”? I am doing it because the administration’s actions are incredibly destructive to this country, to its reputation, and to the lives people around the world. I think it’s far more “grown up” to work as hard as I can to end this, rather than not worrying my pretty little head because some compromise is going to be involved.

It’s Congress’ job to fashion a compromise, to be sure. It is not our job to compromise, but to pressure our representatives to do what we want, so that the compromise does not end up being halfway between the sensible majority and the uncompromising wingnut position. They are now involved in negotiating just to keep things from getting worse, because the administration’s approach to “compromise” is to push the facts on the ground as far as possible in their direction before they begin to talk. If we do not likewise push our representatives to stake out a position as far as possible in the other direction, they will keep doing this because it keeps working.

Any compromise that does not put us on a path to ending this war is worse than useless. It will only serve to make Democrats as well as Republicans “owners” of this war. If we are not going to end the war, better it be on a party-line Republican (&Lieberman) vote. Then at least we continue to build strength for ending it in the next election, because it’s clear who to vote out.

They just filibustered their own senator’s non-binding resolution. Compromise takes two. Negotiating with the uncompromising is a sucker’s game.

That is realpolitik.

imperfect analogy:

speaking of kites, W is playing the role of the priveleged kid in “The Kite Runner” who hides in the alley and slinks away after watching his servant friend (The Constitution) be gang-raped.

By the way, the concept of impeachment comes from the Great Law of the Iroquois Confederacy. But only the women had the right of impeachment, and removal from office.

Even if it must come from men (and on this blog, it might come from elsewhere), it’s long past time that we bring these criminals to account. Revmove the Antlers! Empower the Women! (Not counting hillary)

FIREDOG Danger Alert!!
DANGERSTEIN on MSNBC Tucker!!

It might be useful, if we are to reference the Marshall Plan, approved by Congress in March, 1948, to understand how, exactly it worked, and why it was designed as it was.

The whole point of the plan was to kick start the economies of Western Europe by re-capitalizing the Banking and Finance institutions of participating countries, under very specific conditions. The US promised low interest long term loans, but only to projects approved by the economic ministers of participating countries, and these had to be projects that produced both jobs and W. Europe wide trade. This meant the participating economic ministers had to establish a participating country wide institutional framework to review all proposals, establish priorities, and conform national banking and finance institutions to the demands of the plan. Essentially, individual countries selected the economic sector that could use a capital infusion to rebuild both Europe wide and national trade based economies. For example, the Danes decided to rehabilitate their Agriculture and Food Processing sector as first priority (Butter, cheese, Beer, Chicken, Eggs and Bacon) by using loans to purchase needed farm machinery, fertilizer, and cold storage equiptment — whereas W. Germany bought from Gary Indiana giant stamping equiptment, so as to build out the Volkswagan production. Profits from trade had to be re-invested, currency value was controlled, Subsequent re-investment was also subject to approval by the Economic Ministers Commission. Participation led to the emergence of the Iron and Coal agreements of 1949, and over time to the Rome Treaty of 1956, which was the core of today’s European Union. The Europeans, on their own, put making national labor law a parallel part of the process, leading to a similar commission of Labor Ministers planning manpower regulations, wages and benefits.

Once the first projects were selected and financed in 1948, this made US private investment in a Recovering Europe a profitable and secure proposition, and beginning in 49 and 50, private investment massively increased, though for a period of years profits could not easily be repatriated. In fact one reason the VW came to the US in the 50’s was because it was a means to repatrate profit. Marshall Plan was by no means anything like charity — it was targeted investment designed to rehabilitate economies along Western Capitalist Lines, and it sat atop a complicated political/economic planning system designed to restructure and then integrate national economies.

Why did the US sponsor the Marshall Plan? Why did a Republican Congress approve the plan? — because Western European Voters were turning to their Domestic Communist Parties, and electing their members to office — France, Italy, and yes, even in Denmark. The Cold War was a comprehended new reality, and the decision was deeply influence by the need to compete.

One thing that always bugs me is when people look at a crisis and propose a “Marshall Plan” without any evident knowledge of what the plan was about or how it worked. I was glad to hear that Harlan Cleveland was invited back to the State Department to revisit all this — but I would be much happier if more people knew what it was all about, and would start calling Politicians, Journalists and others on it when the hear the Marshall Plan name called for inappropriate or vastly different sorts of problems. Personally I think if more ordinary Americans had just a little familarity with this history, there would be a lot less tolerance for the slap dash approach to both Afghanistan and Iraq.

already posted?:

Time for a “war on terror” tax?

George W. Bush loves to quote Joe Lieberman as some kind of evidence of bipartisan support for his war in Iraq. Well, at least he used to. While Lieberman still stands by his man on Iraq — he voted with the GOP Monday to prevent consideration of the John Warner-Carl Levin anti-escalation resolution — he hinted today that he might break with Bush on how the country should go about paying for the war.

As Reuters reports, Lieberman floated the idea today of a “war on terrorism” tax so that the money he’s helping Bush spend on Iraq won’t come out of social programs he’d like to protect. …

Tucker and Dangerstein, BFF

Redshift #75,

Agreed. There seems to be a double standard going. What’s OK for Republicans in a bad cause is supposed to be anathema for Democrats in a good one. And while filibusters are possible in isolated bills, they become a lot harder if language is inserted in a large and necessary appropriations bill, which should be the next step in the Senate barring a “bipartisan” deal. And while I am at it, it is important to realize that the Senate Iraq resolutions already represent not one but two attempts at compromise, first with the toothless Biden, Hagel, Levin one and then with the truly invidious Levin, Warner version. Compromise with the Republicans and they will compromise you right out of existence.

Oh, and when you’re calling/writing your Senators, be sure to mention how important it is not to give up the option to use the power of the purse. I was reading on TPM about the wrangling over the resolutions yesterday, and how much of that mess was because the only one that could get sixty votes was the Gregg resolution, which stated that Congress has a duty to fund whatever mission the president decides to send the military on.

WTF?! Sixty votes?! Why would any Democrat (or tough-talkers like Hagel) vote for that crap? It’s blatantly contrary to the Constitution, and you might as well start wearing a t-shirt that says “I don’t like the way the war is going, but I’m too scared to do anything about it.”

So be sure to let your reps know that a resolution like that would be just as much a sellout as voting for the surge.

I’m hoping that the Lake pundits are running to their google expertise, to find the connections between Franklin, the Iroquois (Haudenausaunee), and the birth of this former democracy which is now in such peril.

Seems we have but weeks to stop the next war, and Mr Hersh is, so far, missing in action. I expect him to reappear with gusto, but if not, and if the left military doesn’t make a coup d’etat, it’s up to us.

Franklin’s too busy rolling over in his grave to be of any use to us now.

I wonder what Ned Lamont is doing right now?

Ned has joined the Board of Directors of the Progressive States Network which is organizing opposition to the Iraq escalation. So far, 20 states have introduced resolutions opposing Bush’s “surge” .

Redshift @
83

Oh, and when you’re calling/writing your Senators, be sure to mention how important it is not to give up the option to use the power of the purse. I was reading on TPM about the wrangling over the resolutions yesterday, and how much of that mess was because the only one that could get sixty votes was the Gregg resolution, which stated that Congress has a duty to fund whatever mission the president decides to send the military on.

WTF?! Sixty votes?! Why would any Democrat (or tough-talkers like Hagel) vote for that crap? It’s blatantly contrary to the Constitution, and you might as well start wearing a t-shirt that says “I don’t like the way the war is going, but I’m too scared to do anything about it.”

So be sure to let your reps know that a resolution like that would be just as much a sellout as voting for the surge.

I was shocked at that as well. Almost as shocked as I was when I heard the Chimp asked for the line-item veto. Yep, that’s the ticket for this Unitary Executive: more budget powers and more war powers!

Hugh @ 82

Redshift #75,

Agreed. There seems to be a double standard going. What’s OK for Republicans in a bad cause is supposed to be anathema for Democrats in a good one. And while filibusters are possible in isolated bills, they become a lot harder if language is inserted in a large and necessary appropriations bill, which should be the next step in the Senate barring a “bipartisan” deal. And while I am at it, it is important to realize that the Senate Iraq resolutions already represent not one but two attempts at compromise, first with the toothless Biden, Hagel, Levin one and then with the truly invidious Levin, Warner version. Compromise with the Republicans and they will compromise you right out of existence.

I agree. In my message to Webb today, I urged attaching language to end the war to every must-pass bill.

I think the biggest skill lacking in our Democratic congress is haggling. There’s parliamentary skill in some quarters (Reid, for example), but more than ten years after the Gingrich radicals came in, they don’t seem to grasp the simple concept of starting a negotiation by asking for more than you expect to get.

Exhibits A and B are Rahm’s and Schumer’s books, which are basically extended variations on the theme of “here’s what we really want, but we can’t get that, so here’s the half-or-less that we’d be willing to settle for.”

I woke up this morning with this thought: all this debate about the escalation in Iraq – is it a smokescreen to obscure the real issue? Which is an initiation of War with Iran?

new thread

e-mail from Ned:

Dear jeffreyw,

When I said that the end of the campaign would not bring an end to our fight – our fight for an end to the disastrous occupation in Iraq; our fight for new, innovative solutions to the problems our country faces; and our fight for basic rights and equality of opportunity – I meant it.

Since the campaign, I have become more convinced that the biggest changes in America will not begin in Washington, D.C., but in the same ways that our campaign worked – at the local level, among the grassroots, in the places where optimism and hope still outperform cynicism and anger.

Even on the critical issue of Iraq – a federal issue if there ever was one – state governments have been taking the lead. The Progressive States Network and a number of partner organizations have launched a campaign, with encouraging success, to get state legislatures to speak out against President Bush’s disastrous proposal to escalate the war.

You can help this campaign succeed by contacting your state legislators today and asking them to sign on:

http://www.progressivestates.org/stoptheescalation

And it isn’t just Iraq where states are leading. On issue after issue, states are in the vanguard:

• Health care for all. While Congress debates whether to tinker with our broken system, state governments from Vermont to Oregon to Wisconsin to Massachusetts to California are eyeing new approaches for universal coverage – and an end to our health care crisis.

• Clean and fair elections. Connecticut recently joined Maine and Arizona as a “clean elections” state – a place where our public officials can run for office without begging for money from special interests.

• Global warming. State governments across the country are taking real steps, from promotion of energy efficiency and renewables to caps on carbon output, to address the greatest environmental challenge of our lifetimes.

I am excited to announce that I am joining the Board of Directors of the Progressive States Network as we seek to provide solid analysis and background to help state legislators take the lead on many of these important issues.

Finally, I want to thank all of you again for all of your time, energy, and help during and since the campaign. We accomplished so much during the campaign. Together, I know we can accomplish so much more.

Sincerely,

Ned Lamont

carolyn urban @ 89

I woke up this morning with this thought: all this debate about the escalation in Iraq – is it a smokescreen to obscure the real issue? Which is an initiation of War with Iran?

It’s not an unrealistic presumption, given that Bush effectively started the war against Iraq months before the IWR.

But, if there were anything overt done, we’d be hearing about it from Iran. If they’ve been able to interfere with covert actions against them, we might not hear much about that, and certainly not in near-real time.

jeffreyw @ 91

e-mail from Ned:

Dear jeffreyw,

When I said that the end of the campaign would not bring an end to our fight – our fight for an end to the disastrous occupation in Iraq; our fight for new, innovative solutions to the problems our country faces; and our fight for basic rights and equality of opportunity – I meant it.

Since the campaign, I have become more convinced that the biggest changes in America will not begin in Washington, D.C., but in the same ways that our campaign worked – at the local level, among the grassroots, in the places where optimism and hope still outperform cynicism and anger.

Even on the critical issue of Iraq – a federal issue if there ever was one – state governments have been taking the lead. The Progressive States Network and a number of partner organizations have launched a campaign, with encouraging success, to get state legislatures to speak out against President Bush’s disastrous proposal to escalate the war.

You can help this campaign succeed by contacting your state legislators today and asking them to sign on:

http://www.progressivestates.org/stoptheescalation

And it isn’t just Iraq where states are leading. On issue after issue, states are in the vanguard:

• Health care for all. While Congress debates whether to tinker with our broken system, state governments from Vermont to Oregon to Wisconsin to Massachusetts to California are eyeing new approaches for universal coverage – and an end to our health care crisis.

• Clean and fair elections. Connecticut recently joined Maine and Arizona as a “clean elections” state – a place where our public officials can run for office without begging for money from special interests.

• Global warming. State governments across the country are taking real steps, from promotion of energy efficiency and renewables to caps on carbon output, to address the greatest environmental challenge of our lifetimes.

I am excited to announce that I am joining the Board of Directors of the Progressive States Network as we seek to provide solid analysis and background to help state legislators take the lead on many of these important issues.

Finally, I want to thank all of you again for all of your time, energy, and help during and since the campaign. We accomplished so much during the campaign. Together, I know we can accomplish so much more.

Sincerely,

Ned Lamont

He’s right. Howard Dean needs to be given some credit for seeing the need for this.

Good thoughts, excellent letter. Thank you for sharing.

sara @79

this hits upon something i have wondered about and don’t know if i can put it into words—-

back when we first invaded iraq-before the government was set up, when things were still crazy, museums being pillaged, etc., when we first sent negotiators over there……i heard an interview with someone who was helping ’set-up’ things there……..one of the first things talked about were trade deals, as i remember it was THE FIRST thing negotiated, it shocked me….business came first…….similar to how we control what seeds a country can import, etc., that kind of thing…….that was the first thing we did, who they could do business with and how……….i have tried to find information on this, but don’t even know where to start looking or what it is called……but it was there in the interview in black and white–she was talking off the cuff but what she said had great implications on later control of commerce and agriculture—–these are the companies you can deal with and these are the rules that you live by in order to form an agreement, was not an option for them……do you know anything about that kind of thing? has always nagged at the back of my brain, was never mentioned again anywhere that i could find…..

from your post:
For example, the Danes decided to rehabilitate their Agriculture and Food Processing sector as first priority (Butter, cheese, Beer, Chicken, Eggs and Bacon) by using loans to purchase needed farm machinery, fertilizer, and cold storage equiptment — whereas W. Germany bought from Gary Indiana giant stamping equiptment, so as to build out the Volkswagan production. Profits from trade had to be re-invested, currency value was controlled, Subsequent re-investment was also subject to approval by the Economic Ministers Commission.

(snip)

Once the first projects were selected and financed in 1948, this made US private investment in a Recovering Europe a profitable and secure proposition, and beginning in 49 and 50, private investment massively increased, though for a period of years profits could not easily be repatriated. In fact one reason the VW came to the US in the 50’s was because it was a means to repatrate profit.

(snip)

Personally I think if more ordinary Americans had just a little familarity with this history, there would be a lot less tolerance for the slap dash approach to both Afghanistan and Iraq.

(snip)

Eureka Springs, AR >

“…(thank goodness we don’t have to sing)”

Sometimes singing gets the job done (if you do it w/others); I understand there are a few of these groups in existance.

Maybe there should be one organized for Yearly Kos…

“…it’s the ideas that count, not the number of trees you kill to print them.” – Phil Carter@Intel-dump.com

S.O.S. from MA @
64

twolf1 @ 55

Didn’t they say it was $12 billion in $100s that was lost? Or did I hear Mr. Blitzer incorrectly.

That’s about right. They showed pix of some pallets of $100 bills, each pallet worth a large fraction of, or several million$. Amazing. It’s so great that this story’s finally getting some play in the MSM.

The few minutes I’ve been able to catch have the MSM/TMs sounding like “we” just now found this out. Is that the general portrayal?

I think the rest of “we” who bitched about these problems as they happened, should remind the MSM/TM whenever this happens.

Published: 19 September 2005

What has happened to Iraq’s missing $1bn?

One billion dollars has been plundered from Iraq’s defence ministry in one of the largest thefts in history, The Independent can reveal, leaving the country’s army to fight a savage insurgency with museum-piece weapons.

The money, intended to train and equip an Iraqi army capable of bringing security to a country shattered by the US-led invasion and prolonged rebellion, was instead siphoned abroad in cash and has disappeared.

“It is possibly one of the largest thefts in history,” Ali Allawi, Iraq’s Finance Minister, told The Independent.

“Huge amounts of money have disappeared. In return we got nothing but scraps of metal.”

The carefully planned theft has so weakened the army that it cannot hold Baghdad against insurgent attack without American military support, Iraqi officials say, making it difficult for the US to withdraw its 135,000- strong army from Iraq, as Washington says it wishes to do.
[…]
The fraud took place between 28 June 2004 and 28 February this year under the government of Iyad Allawi, who was interim prime minister. His ministers were appointed by the US envoy Robert Blackwell and his UN counterpart, Lakhdar Brahimi.
[…]
————————-
( Vol. 27 No. 13 dated 7 July 2005 )
Where has all the money gone?

On 12 April 2004, the Coalition Provisional Authority in Erbil in northern Iraq handed over $1.5 billion in cash to a local courier. The money, fresh $100 bills shrink-wrapped on pallets, which filled three Blackhawk helicopters, came from oil sales under the UN’s Oil for Food Programme, and had been entrusted by the UN Security Council to the Americans to be spent on behalf of the Iraqi people. The CPA didn’t properly check out the courier before handing over the cash, and, as a result, according to an audit report by the CPA’s inspector general, ‘there was an increased risk of the loss or theft of the cash.’ Paul Bremer, the American pro-consul in Baghdad until June last year, kept a slush fund of nearly $600 million cash for which there is no paperwork: $200 million of this was kept in a room in one of Saddam’s former palaces, and the US soldier in charge used to keep the key to the room in his backpack, which he left on his desk when he popped out for lunch. Again, this is Iraqi money, not US funds.
[…]
There was a good reason for the Americans to stall. At the end of June 2004, the CPA would be disbanded and Bremer would leave Iraq. The Bush administration wasn’t going to allow independent auditors to be in a position to publish a report into the financial propriety of its Iraqi administration while Bremer was still answerable to the press. The report was published in July. The auditors found that the CPA hadn’t kept accounts for the hundreds of millions of dollars of cash in its vault, had awarded contracts worth billions of dollars to American firms without tender, and had no idea what was happening to the money from the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI) which was being spent by the interim Iraqi government ministries.
[…]
Pilfering was rife. Millions of dollars in cash went missing from the Iraqi Central Bank. Between $11 million and $26 million worth of Iraqi property sequestered by the CPA was unaccounted for. The payroll was padded with hundreds of ghost employees. Millions of dollars were paid to contractors for phantom work: $3,379,505 was billed, for example, for ‘personnel not in the field performing work’ and ‘other improper charges’ on a single oil pipeline repair contract.[…]

dmac @
94

Great comment. You found a fine way to put it into words.

Are you familiar with the article titled Baghdad Year Zero ?

The link goes to CommonDreams and the original is Published in the September, 2004 issue of Harper’s Magazine. I found it the day it came out and it seemed to fit perfectly to explain what was happening.

Nice you should mention Franklin. By chance I bought Ed Morgan’s biography of Franklin for my 92 year-old mother to read, but had to read it first on the plane out to see her. It is fabulous, and let’s us see the kind of people that actually tried to make the United States what we dream it should be. Franklin was an amazing person.

U.S. military: Iraqi lawmaker is U.S. Embassy bomber

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — A man sentenced to death in Kuwait for the 1983 bombings of the U.S. and French embassies now sits in Iraq’s parliament as a member of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s ruling coalition, according to U.S. military intelligence.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/…..index.html

Don’t forget about Obama’s de-escalation and bring-the-troops-home bill, introduced in both Houses today.

the antithesis @
67

I deleted the ironic quotes.
I wonder what Ned Lamont is doing right now?

Excellent question. Anybody know?

Peterr @
19

Glenn Kessler at the WaPo gave a brief rundown on how the State Department fared in Bush’s new budget proposal:

Spending for the State Department and key international affairs programs would climb by $3.7 billion to $33.9 billion. Reflecting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s interest in public diplomacy…

Condoleeza Rice has an “interest” in diplomacy. That’s very nice.
I have an “interest” in curing my hemorroids. Maybe if it were my “job,” or perhaps if I was committed to it, believed it possible, was dedicated, resolved, determined, willing, driven, accountable, had a vision or even just simply had faith that diplomacy my hemorroids could be better…
Oh well; that’s interesting.
Scratch Scratch.

dmac @ 94

dmac, during the years of the Military Occupation of Germany, we had hundreds of artists and museum people on the ground in Germany sorting out what Germany had looted from other countries, but also protecting what was part of the German National Inheritance. One odd thing about it, the most influential person in this group was Lincoln Kirsten, who insisted on remaining a private in the US Army. Yes, some things went wrong — but they did a hell of a job.

There was a great deal to learn from what was done well in the occupation and reconstruction of Germany — but no one should assume one could just copy plans. What got me going was that Condi kept referencing it as the model during the ramp up — and as someone who does know a bit about it all, I found her comments essentially illiterate, largely because I know something about George Marshall’s near 25 year intellectual and planning process as to how one concludes combat, occupies a country, and then restores something of normal politics. (Marshall was the liason and briefing officer for General Pershing regarding the US occupation of part of the Rheinland in 1918-1919. — he spent the next 25 years thinking out how to do it right.) I happen to consider George C. Marshall utterly brilliant as an intellectual combining the world of the military with those of diplomacy, economics and politics. I think it is time to study what he did — both in terms of his occupation plans which were executed, but also his follow on Marshall Plan, and the politics that surrounded that.

In Assassin’s Gate, George Packer tells us that Jay Garner was given two weeks to prepare to “govern” Iraq, and he wasn’t even given control over his own transport in Iraq, but he did have a chance to spend two days in the Pentagon Library reading up on George Marshall’s planning process between 1938 and 1945. I suspect Garner was yellow livered jealous as to what Marshall had available. The plan called for 6000 officers specifically trained for occupation duty who had not been blooded in combat, half that for NCO’s, Marshall was able to get FDR to help him recruit the precise kind of talent he needed, and FDR did that working over lists and all and writing invitations to volunteer from the Oval Office. (You needed a certain number of judges who had grown up in German Speaking homes, and who had good reputations with the local Bar. — that’s what they looked for, and a personal note from FDR asking a 50 year old judge to volunteer for occupation duty as a mid level officer, did wonders.) In the case of Iraq, we had the anthropologists and archeologists begging DOD for a contact so that they could map what was of critical historic value. During World War II, FDR appointed a Supreme Court Justice and the head of the National Gallery to oversee preservation of cultural artifacts, and he put them in uniform. Bush — he appointed no one and never met with anyone who had this concern.

Iraq had no history of ever having anything like a Democratic System — Germany, in contrast had vast experience with efforts to accomplish something a-kin to Democracy. In 1945 we invited all but the Nazi Party to reconstitute itself, and about 8 parties had conferences, reorganized, merged and so forth during the summer of 1945. (one ought to read up on the Hannover meeting in July, 1945 when the Social Democrats, outlawed in 1933, had their conference among the survivors and the exiles.) They prepared themselves for local elections in the fall of 45, yes, elections where the village councils would only work with sign-offs from the US Military Government officers. But those who comprehended governance got recruited to help formulate how to re-establish the Lander — (German States), and in the late 46 and 47 period, that was the project, with late 47 elections to the Lander assemblies. It was built from the bottom up, from the local village or neighborhood into Lander government. The Marshall Plan came along when they were ready for National Government.

My contention is that the US has much to take some pride in vis a vis the Military Government of Germany and the follow on Marshall Plan. It was not without mistakes or errors, but I think it was properly organized and executed. You can only understand that if you look at the precise goals of each element, and how those were resourced, look at them against the background of what else was going on and was influential, and as we can now do, look at long term outcomes.

I am of an age that was about being an exchange student in Denmark and Germany shortly after the official end of Occupation and the conversion to NATO status. One of my academic papers involved interviewing local government officials in a south German Town who had served under the Military Government. Marshall Plan was real to these folk. I did the interviews with no knowledge of the history or structure of the Military Government — I worked that out in the library after I got home.

My initial insight into Marshall plan was when I lived with a host family on a small Danish farm. The Plan had allowed for low interest purchase of a tractor, and much equiptment that went with it, but, you know, the old plow horse still had to be walked everyday because that horse was beloved. But then the farm had the modern pigs and cows, and the co-op that assisted everything. As a guest I got to attend the local co-op’s presentation on the delights of flash frozen veggies. I think that was something funded by Marshall.

wow, thanks rumi @ 97 and sara @103

came back into this thread the next day to check to see if anyone had insights/answers to my questions….info i can sink my teeth into…thank you……..

((((firepups))))