That's how much time every member of the US House of Representatives will get to speak on the resolution opposing Bush's ill-conceived escalation of the US presence in Iraq. It was proposed by Rep Ike Skelton (D-MO 4), chair of the House Armed Services Committee, Tom Lantos (D-CA 12), and Walter Jones (R-NC 3), and the rules of debate will give five minutes to each member of the House, as they take up this resolution over the next three days.
The full text of this short resolution [pdf] is a mere two clauses in a single sentence:
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That—
(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and
(2) Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.
The order of speaking is still being worked out, as the leadership tries to accomodate time zones and media deadlines, not to mention status and seniority and congressional egos. It should be quite the debate, as it kicks off tomorrow, and while three days is an extraordinarily long debate for any topic, each member only gets five minutes.
When I listen to the Republicans, I'll be especially attentive to see who does and does not voice displeasure with the White House, and how they choose to do so. Bush is done running for office, but most of the members of the House are already looking ahead to their next election in 2008. As the voters in district after district are turning away from escalation, nervous Republicans are looking over their shoulders. They can look around at the new faces in town – and remember the old ones that are missing – and wonder "am I next?"
As for the Democrats, I fully expect to see TRex's three pronged rhetorical strategy played out in full glory. Various speakers may have their own unique approaches, but I am sure we'll see numerous examples of what TRex first outlined here at FDL in June 2006:
NEVER defend.
NEVER explain.
ATTACK! ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTAAAAACK!!!!
A year ago, it was Jack Murtha taking on the whole Republican caucus. Tomorrow, I'm guessing a couple hundred other Democrats will be speaking right along side him.
Five minutes is not a long time, especially for politicians who tend toward long-windedness. In five minutes, a representative can't say everything, and shouldn't even try. You have to pick your shot, and make it count. So, firepups, let's help out the folks in DC: where would you aim, and what rhetorical ammunition would you use?
Five items can help to sharpen a short speech like this. Each one can be handled in a hundred different ways, but every good five minute speech has to deal with each of them.
- Focus: You can't say everything, so be specific: what do you want to lift up as a huge part of your thinking? Do you hit the lack of planning in the past? Do you point to the growing civil war? Do you slam the White House for the false pretenses of the invasion? Do you knock them for being less-than-forthcoming with congressional leaders and question why Congress should trust the White House this time? Do you hit the costs – US military casualties? Iraqi civilian deaths? Our international reputation and influence? The dollars that cannot be spent on other pressing needs? Do you look at other problems around the world – North Korea, Cuba, Iran, China, the broader middle east – and how this escalation only makes matters worse elsewhere? Do you point out the war profiteering? Those of a military bent would say that this is a "target-rich environment," so be specific: which target to you want to take out?
- Audience: Who are you talking to, and what do you want them to think or do? Do you take on "the opposition" as a whole? Do you aim your comments at "the world"? Do you tailor your thoughts toward your constituents? Do you want to call on folks to join you and your position? Do you want to tear down the opposing viewpoints? Do you rebut the speaker who preceeded you, or try to pre-empt the one who will follow? Do you address your thoughts to the folks at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?
- Tone: Who do you want to sound like: the wise sage, the angry prophet, the humble servant, someone else? Do you make your statement in human/personal terms? moral/religious terms? military terms? economic terms? diplomatic terms? Do you press your own beliefs to the fore, or do you reflect the stance of your party leaders, or the stance of your constituents? Will your words be impassioned, thoughtful, or righteously indignant? Will you speak loudly, firmly, or quietly? Do you use humor or satire, mocking your opponents, or do you try to win them over with kindness and flowers?
- Authority: Do you quote experts – military, diplomatic, and others – who in their wisdom think this escalation is the latest recipe for disaster to come out of Dick Cheney's kitchen? Do you quote family members back home who miss their loved ones? Do you quote politicians and leaders in Iraq and the Middle East? The Baker-Hamilton report? Do you bring in your experence in Congress, in the military, in business, as a parent? Do you quote well-scrubbed think tank scholars and their white papers or dirty hippies and their blogs or Grammy-winning country musicians and their lyrics?
- Destination: At the end of your time, what do you want folks to remember? What do you want folks to take away from your speech? What do you want people to hang on to, in order to share it with others? Where do you want your hearers to be, at the end of your five minute journey?
So what about you — what would you say?
And remember: you've only got five minutes.
Related posts:
- House Voting on Iran Resolution; Human Rights Activist Not Against It, But…
- Valuing Democracy: Iran, Iraq and the War Supplemental
- Robert Reich Explains the Public Option in Less Than 3 Minutes
- Late Night: “Wait, My Fifteen Minutes of Fame Aren’t Up Yet!”
- On “This Week,” Paul Krugman Dispatches 3 Wingnut Talking Points on Auto Industry in 2 Minutes






Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Fitz!
Atrios has the audio tape of Armitage telling Woodward about Valerie Plame’s CIA identity.
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2007_02_11_at rios_archive.html#117132280884004616
Here’s a working link (hopefully):
http://atrios.blogspot.com/200…..0884004616
I would say that I yield my time to that silver tongued young fellow over there, he speaks for me. I urge my less rhetorically gifted friends to do the same.
I think TeddySanFran has it down to three words:
Troops Home Now.
It’s a good start.
PETERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!
Great post, Peterr. Need to think about what I would say, though.
I didn’t vote for the clusterf*ck and all you bitches did. There is no R or D on a grave stone. Since the threat of Saddam and nukular weapons has been addressed, one way and the other, WTF are we doing here, going door to door in Bagdhad pissing off every single citizen? WTF are we doing adding 40,000 more americans to the mix in the soveriegn state of Iraq when the Iraqi goverment does not want more of us there?
Who here can explain what we’re doing in Iraq and how we’ll know when we’re done? Anybody? Anybody? That’s what I thought.
I think jeffreyw has hit on a very important idea. This is not the time for grandstanding. This is the time for pulling the wagons into a circle and working together. Figure out who some of the best speakers are, get the ducks in a row, and line up about 15 or 20 of the best. Then have the “oratorically challenged” yield time. Okay, 30 seconds for the home folks, then yield the rest.
5 minutes v. “24″ hours
I wouldn’t mind seeing a couple of Dems pull out some of Murtha’s old speeches and give them a “he told you so” encore performance.
No way they’ll let more than a few dems speak back to back. They should, they wont.
Marion in Savannah @ 9
In practical terms, that’s what actually will happen. “I ask permission to revise and extend my remarks . . . don’t escalate . . . and I give the balance of my time to my distinguished colleague . . .”
Now, which “distinguished colleague” in the House would you like to hear from the most?
I would work the angle that getting our troops out of Iraq has the added benefit of putting the kibosh on BushCo’s foaming mad plan, already in the works, to goad Iran into war by way of trumped up alleged involvement in Iraq.
I’m sure my rep. Barbara Lee will speak for me.
C-SPAN Interview With Pres. George W. Bush
C-SPAN.org presents an exclusive interview with Pres. Bush from the White House. This interview is now available on C-SPAN.org and will re-air on Tuesday morning at 8am ET during the Washington Journal. C-SPAN’s last interview with Pres. Bush was in on Q&A in 2005. 00:00.
Washington, DC LINK
I would bring up the subject of contractors and how important it is to know how many of them are actually there. Has BushCo been slowly phasing out our military and phasing in their contractors, so that when they send the troops home their own quasi-military will stay abroad?
Sheesh, it took me five minutes to read the article!
“What does Victory look like?”
“Will you ask that your constituent’s child be the last to die for Bush’s Iraq Quagmire?”
The NewsHour has a couple of foreign policy hawks on discussing just how bad the Iranians are giving all those weapons to militias in Iraq. So far we have bad and very bad.
Again I’m not a fan of the current Iranian regime but they are just making this stuff up.
punaise @ 15
(Lucky you to have a Congresswoman who can still speak for her district!)
1. Troops Home Now
2. The Powell Doctrine
3. Engage Our Enemies
4. Impeach Cheney First
katymine @
19
An impeachment.
NBC airs a snip of Bush on CSpan.
Michael Corleone says his daddy is being upset by the nasty news the news are showin’. You’ve been warned, Brian Williams…..
The war wastes lives and money while causing an increase in global terrorism.
Do you think any one of them will use the words “permanent military bases” in their five minutes. I highly doubt it.
btwTeddySanFran @
21
Why?
How about the strength through collaborative multilateralism and global diplomacy doctrine, instead?
This fellow could have my five minutes.
TeddySanFran @ 21
…while yours wears two hats and must temper her positions for national consumption, I suppose. I wouldn’t worry about Grandma selling you down the river, however.
I think it’s important to talk about the Powell Doctrine because it’s the right wing’s favorite talking point about Vietnam — that the US didn’t have the overwhelming force and the American people’s support in order to win. By mis-using the US military in a war they lied us into, BushCo has broken the military and made our intervention in areas where we are really needed much less likely. Not that I’m in favor of future interventions, but it seems our readiness — another GOP talking point — is seriously compromised by the SURGE.
I don’t feel sold down the river, but I sure don’t like the table she’s set….
Give Bush a choice: either bring the troops home or replace some of them with members of the Bush family. The troops would be home faster than a Bush finds plunder.
*xyz @ 3
CNN has broadcast this piece. Unfortunately, it will feed the bogus back story that Armitage was the leaker and poor Scooter shouldn’t be in court. We know the real deal, but 90 percent of the Merkin Publick do not.
Will the msm inform the public yet?
Who will speak for me? Not my congresscritter, for sure. Oh, Lord, how I miss Barbara Jordan…
Nice that the Congresscritters get to grandstand, but when are they going to act? Defund the war now!
TeddySanFran @
29
The Powell doctrine worked well enough in the simplistic world of the ancient Romans… if you’re the only people in your neck of the woods who know how to man a supply line, enforce a troop levy and form a phalanx.. or whatever, the doctrine is just fine, but in the increasingly diplomatically crowded, multilateral, and basically asymmetric strategic, environment todeay, we need something very very different. In such an environment, only the managed avoidance of conflict through aggressive multilateral diplomacy can preserve and expand the peace. The Powell doctrine will not win wars or increase American influence in today’s world.
cowards and traitors in congress. non binding, crotch hugging, stylish, absorptive
diapers. give congress fucking diapers, for it is the only thing for the asshole that has everything else
I might use a few seconds to note that Iraq is a quagmire we must get out of ASAP.
Then – since the “Iraq horse has already left the barn – Now let’s talk about Iran and the utter world catastrophe which would ensue if we attack there”.
Flapping their gums has gotten us exactly where so far?
We need to lock these people in a room with no toilet access and tell them to let us know when they have come up with something useful.
Each of the 435 gets five minutes, but don’t they “yield time” to each other all the time? They seem to be doing that all the time on C-SPAN, at any rate.
So can’t the backbenchers who have nothing much to say just yield their five minutes to the celebrities and big shots? Just get a few of them to do that, and the stars could put together enough time to hold forth for a half an hour or an hour, if they want to.
janinsanfran @ 34
I think that this resolution is step one toward that end, actually. The Dems know that if they push to de-fund the war, the GOP will line up 100% against them, and nothing will change as Bush will veto any such bill.
On the other hand, if this debate makes enough of the GOP reps pull their heads out of the sand and say “enough,” that will make it harder for them to back the President the next time he comes with a supplemental appropriation. If the Dems can sway enough republicans on this vote, it might even make Rove sit up and take notice that this war is on borrowed time.
Some thoughts:
Mission to secure Baghdad with troop escalation is not in the best interest of the troops; therefore does not support troops which Congress is elected to support and protect;
Mission to secure Baghdad using U.S. troops further angers citizens of occupied Iraq and will create additional anti-American sentiment in the Middle East; therefore further erodes a chance of longterm allied relationship between Iraq and the United States, which has been a stated goal of the Administration; Therefore, an escalation is not in U.S. best interest for future peaceful relations in the region.
Mission is costly and previous Iraq war spending has not been accounted for; therefore not in the best interest of the taxpayers who Congress is elected to represent.
U.S. troops should not be used to police citizens either abroad or in the U.S.
President should not be permitted to act without approval of Congress because the issue of instability in Baghdad is an Iraqi issue – not a terrorism issue threatening the U.S. – and is separate from the authorization for use of force voted on in Congress when the mission was to disarm Saddam Hussein of WMDs, and also separate from the authorization relating to the events on 9/11.
This escalation is not a change in strategy that is in the interest of the United States; this is a military action in concert with the internal security operations of a foreign, sovereign country with whom we are NOT at war.
If each Democrat in the House would yield just one minute of their time, that would provide more than enough time for the best three speakers in the House Democratic Caucus to speak for one hour apiece. That could be very effective.
Now, how do you decide who the best three speakers are when you have so many swollen egos in Congress?
Additional thought:
If the administration goes against the will of the representatives of the American people, there will be immediate consequences not limited to impeachment.
Peterr –
does not
whovoice displeasurechosechooserepublicansRepublicanswould you want to trade places with ANYONE in iraq right now?
(pause for some to consider all of the possible tradees…)
can you name anyone with whom you would trade places…….
i didn’t think so……
yield the rest of my time……
Depending on the statistics for my district, my five minutes would be wrapped around the following core:
1. Name the KIAs from my district, or;
2. Give the name of one KIA, state how s/he died, state who s/he left behind, and;
3. Give the number of seriously WIAs — physical and psychological — from my district, with examples of the injuries: arm/leg amputations, brain injuries, PTSD.
Powell Doctrine
The questions posed by the Powell Doctrine, which should be answered affirmatively before military action, are:
1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?
I agree with TSF. If the administration had adhered to the principles of the Powell Doctrine, we never would have gone in in the first place.
In my five minutes, I would say:
oregondave –
Many
tanksthanks!let it Rayne!
Yeah, Rayne!!
Another factor is that every day we stay in Iraq only makes Iran and Russia stronger in the region.
Related to this is that China is financing the $267,000,000/day that it costs.
Another problem is that the increase in Russia’s influence only makes the former Soviet Republics and Europe more skittish.
Neil @
16
Did they ask my question? (it was: Why is Dick Cheney still in the White House?)
List a few of the things we could have bought with the $1 trillion or whatever that we will end up having spent on this freaking war.
You know–health care, medical research, education, development of alternative energy…
ccmask @17
heard on lehrer report the other night and wrote it down–robert young pelton, wrote hired guns, working on a documentary on contractors, said 70,000 armed contractors in iraq, including iraqi ones……private guards, etc……not under any iraqi law or military law, would have to be brought back here for trial, many incidences of violence already a problem, only loyalty is to client…..opposing voice was tommy douglas, i think, if i read my notes right, whomever he was, he agreed with pelton that there is a problem……
John Casper @
47
True.. this war today, perhaps. But its not a framework for managing American foreign policy.. or even defense policy, overall. You could easily answer in the affirmative for everyone of these questions and WIN the resulting conventional war in a heartbeat, and then proceed to lose the peace… again. We don’t live in a world where this type of conventional planning works anymore…communities of people have to manage conflict, treating violence as police events, in much the same way the Bosnian conflict was managed.
I humbly yield my time to Rayne.
RawStory
(oomph added)
Nice job Rayne. We shall see if anyone can come close to your eloquence and make your excellent points.
I support the current surge in rain storms in the Bay Area.
How about standing up and stating the truth that the policies of this administration are out of control and are strengthening, aiding, and abetting the agenda of the enemies who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001 and are contrary to the best interests of this country and the rest of the world.
Or: This administration is not in the best interests of the United States and, therefore; should be eliminated from office immediately.
Rayne — fantastic!
I would also say:
If this Congress doesn’t stop the president from squandering our national treasure, the precious lives of our troops, and the very viability of our armed forces, then we must from here forward share in the blame for the disaster.
I know I can count on Rahm…
Not!
Rayne, John Casper, et al have the right thread
Our actions in Iraq have only served our enemies.
We were goaded into war by three entities:
Iran, Israel and Al-Quaeda
They have all gained footing at our expense.
It is time to examine the *consequences* of our actins before further blind reaction.
We need to form a true Coalition in the region.
And we need to back it with real strength, not baby bravado.
Our troops have served above and beyond,
It is time to back them with policy not Ye Haw.
I bet Rayne would yield 58 seconds to these guys
Keith with John Dean on the “Shadow Presidency”
Libby trial first up.
Great post Peterr, and great advice on honing the message.
As afar as what I would say, it would focus on Bush and his failure as commander in chief.
Well, it’s far less than 5 minutes but this is what I would say:
4 years of failure by this Administration, 4 years of no plans, 4 years of “Stay the course” anyway, 4 years of not enough troops, 4 years of not enough equipment for the troops already there, 4 years of second chances, 4 years of a worsening security situation, 4 years of descent into civil war, 4 years of corrupt civilian contractors, 4 years of hiding behind “Support the troops”, 4 years of getting those troops killed, 4 years of getting them maimed, 4 years of hundreds of billions of dollars gone, 4 years of rhetoric, ego, and lies. Enough is enough. Bring the troops home. If you honor them, truly honor them, you will not allow them to be used for cannon fodder. You will not allow them to be used as political fodder.
The time has come to face up to realities, not evade them or delay them. Iraq is lost. It’s been lost for a while. It was lost by this President, his Vice President, his White House, his Senate, and his House of Representatives. This may infuriate some, those who were the most involved, those who were the biggest supporters. They may not want to hear they are to blame. Or they may want to spread the blame around so that theirs appears less. It is not leadership to accept praise if things go right and refuse responsibility if they don’t.
We have come to a crossroads. The disaster is before us. We have the choice to recognize it and realize that we are in no position to mend it, that we must remove our troops, and deal with a bad situation that we have made far worse. Or we can refuse to admit the evidence of our eyes and prolong Iraq’s agony and our own. But if we do, the life of every serviceman and woman killed or wounded from this point onward will not be sacrificed in defense of our country but to the pride of those who would rather see such sacrifices than admit they were wrong.
Hugh cuts nicely to the chase.
cbl — I would, but those people did speak, they voted with their feet and got to the polls and voted in a Democratic Congress that would take care of business.
I didn’t mention Bush because it’s no longer up to him. His job as Commander in Chief is to tell the military what he has been told in no uncertain terms by the representatives of the people. The people have spoken. It’s time to take care of business and do as they have demanded.
I’ll also point out that NBC’s coverage this evening included a soldier in the field who said we needed to stay another year or two. Do we listen to this guy, too, as we do the folks in the video? Unfortunately, this is a tough love situation; the hardest thing we have to do but have to do now is say NO. We are part of the problem, having set the problem in motion to begin with. It’s time we removed ourselves as part of the problem and let the Iraqi people have their sovereignty, no matter the course. We have our own sovereignty to protect, and messing with Iraq’s has come at the price of our own.
“Four years of failure” makes a nice refrain. Thanks, hugh.
WE do not care what the Repubic congress members have to say. They LOST the election, get over it and now it’s your turn to be the minority. SLAP them, TRASH them, OUT them, but don’t let them speak. Everything out of their mouths are LIES. This was is a Republic party war, they own, they are killing our troops. They are all committing treason against the United States by not doing their jobs. The Republic party is dead and most of us do not hear when dead people speak.
Seven Seconds while pondering five minutes
Juan Cole on Keith!
punaise @
15
And, happily, a little further down the road from you I’m equally sure my Rep. Sam Farr will speak for me. No small miracle here in Dirty Harry’s home county. He may have the majority of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors in his back pocket but Sam Farr is a true blue progressive Democrat.
Ding for Barbara Lee and Sam Farr!
John Casper @ 47
I agree. The Powell Doctrine is not about making a war like Iraq more palatable. It’s about preventing it and making war truly a last resort, not as a matter of rhetoric but of fact. It addresses the world we live in where violent conflicts still occur and sets a high bar to them. It helps prepare the world for a time when such a doctrine will no longer be needed.
Keith Olbermann tonight…
Libby report by David Shuster,
interview with Juan Cole
how cool is that combination?
Madam Speaker, (my favorite line at the beginning)
I rise today in honor of the Constitution, the rule of law, and human decency. I am sad to say these three fundamentals have been missing in action for far to long, and best describe the hallmarks on the roadmap to the restoration of our honor and integrity in this great land. Our inability to face just how wrong this war is may only be diminished by the agony and suffering of our armed forces who are in a quagmire designed by our President and his sycophants who follow him blindly into the sands of Iraq with no real mission.
So I say to you, we have an obligation to stop this war and immediately declare the next battle, energy independence, with all due diligence.
We must quickly admit our mistakes, so we may mend them with the American people and the rest of the world.
So I say to you I will support any proposed legislation that supports our troops by putting an end to this war or any funding associated with continuing it. I say to you this House should not rest until we face the truth that our troops are facing disaster at this very moment for no good reason. We owe them more than we could ever repay so the very least we can do is bring them home now and find every single person involved in lying us into this nightmare and hold them accountable to the fullest extent of the law. We need to learn the awful truth that brought us to this horrible day and make sure it cannot happen again.
The people have spoken at home and for that matter all around the world. It is our duty as Representatives and guardians of our great Constitution. It is our duty as citizens. Let us wait no more. Lets bring our troops home alive and in one piece. They deserve nothing less, so let us do it today.
I stand ready and willing to work non stop. Who will join me?
Don’t you just have to laugh at the Iranian weapons manufactured with the word….in English…..”MORTAR” on them.
How dumb do they think we are? It would be like one of our bombs having Arabic type writing on it. Pathetic, pathetic, Pathetic, Pathetic, Pathetic, Pathetic, Pathetic, Pathetic!
njr @ 76
And John Dean on Shooter
Eureka Springs, AR @ 78
DING!
njr @ 76
Plus, John Dean on Darth Vader!
8 Neil says:
February 12th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
Neil, why don’t you tell us how you really feel?!!
“Madame Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
“May a resolution of impeachment be entertained at this time?
“How about two resolutions of impeachment?
Hey
guysfirepups, we can take our 5 minutes too. That’s what You tube is for.1) This vote is symbolic and is addressed at an executive who believes himself above the law and the constitution.
2) The war is an ongoing catastrophe for the soldiers, Iraquis and American interests.
3) The war is premised on lies. The surge is just the latest edition.
4) The Congress should not appropriate a single dollar for the Iraq war past the end of FY2007. Let the military begin withdrawal and have the occupation ended before 1 October 2007.
5) For those who speak to continue the occupation and the surge, please provide your end date, your costs, and your expected outcome. If you cannot, after these four long years, it is time to tell this president to bring the troops home.
The Republican generic speeech:
“God demands that we support George W. Bush’s Holy Crusade to bring democracy and American Right-Wing Evangalism to these down-trodden heathens! God works in mysterious ways and who are we to argue with his choice of Pres. Bush in obtaining our God given right to the oil of the Middle East.
Now some here will think that the overthrow of our Consititution goes too far. But I say unto you that the needs to the State and Halliburton outweigh our citizens’ rights of privacy. To spread democracy abroad sometimes requires we suspend it here at home. The Supreme Court knew this when they first elected George Bush in 2000.
I say – On to Iran!”
Madame Speaker,
I yield all of my time to the gentlelady from Michigan ; )
Is there anybody here from down under?
Could you please give your prime minister something to keep him really busy at home so he will stay out of our presidential election?
The Powell Doctrine is bullshit. Sure, it sounds good, even intelligent, SANE (which is almost always a good thing) and its supposed to come accross as a mathematical formula that you plug a yes or no into and then always get the “right” answer. All the variables are subject to interpretation/point of view/sanity (or lack thereof), which can change over time. For example, which is probably a big flaw (it might just be me). For example, public opinion, which I highlight above, moveable, changeable feast. Not that the other enumerated parts of the equation are much better, but public opinion can be manipulated (really!), and even if not manipulated public opinion can change over time – for instance, if you start losing, it might have an impact once supportive public opinion.
I’m not sayin I got a better “formula,” but that doesn’t mean I have to accept the Powell Doctrine as some “truth” which will make for better (if not the best) policy decisions.
neurophius @ 88
Might be better to just let Howard play in our sandbox… Name a pol who attaches himself to ChimpCo (thirty-what%) and survives.
I wish my edit function worked, but even with the typos and other errata the point is clear.
EPU-
even better/shorter Powell:
If you break it, would you like to own it?
I received an email this weekend from my congressman asking for my thoughts on what he should say. Here’s my reply to him:
Congressman Doggett,
I appreciate your email soliciting my input on the Iraq War resolution scheduled for debate this week. Five minutes is not much time, but this issue is fairly straightforward: the Iraq War was a terrible mistake, probably the greatest foreign policy blunder of my lifetime. You were right to oppose it then and you are right to oppose escalation now. This point cannot be made loudly enough or often enough. Credibility is an essential characteristic of good leadership. The Bush administration has no credibility with the American people. Democrats in Congress MUST HAMMER THIS POINT. This administration is not truthful. This administration has intentionally misled the American people into a war it always wanted. It disturbs me greatly that history appears to be repeating itself in Iran. The only way to stop the same terrible mistake from happening in Iran is to expedite the end of the war in Iraq.
I encourage you to forcefully make this point in your remarks and remind your constituents and your fellow representatives that what the administration says publicly is often the exact opposite of what’s said behind closed doors. Think back to the period before the Iraq invasion began. Administration officials yammered on about how they didn’t want war and how every diplomatic option would be exhausted before the president would make the difficult decision to commit troops to a war in Iraq. Yet we know from the Downing Street Memos and the reporting of Phillip Sands that President Bush and Tony Blair had already agreed that war was the only option. Nevertheless, for many weeks these men and their spokespersons continually lied to the world by saying how badly they all wanted peace when they did everything possible to undermine a peaceful solution. If this administration wanted peace so badly, why did they discuss the idea of painting a U-2 spy plane in the colors of the UN in hopes of provoking an aggressive response from the Iraqi military? If they wanted peace so badly, why did they terminate the weapons inspections process that would’ve revealed to the world the truth of Iraqi WMD?
Our leaders in the executive branch have no credibility. They didn’t tell the truth then and they’re certainly not telling the truth now. Will you?
True that. The point is not, “do this and you shall win,” but “without this, don’t even think about it.” I doubt Powell would be insulted by the observation that his doctrine repeats Master Sun, who had the same objective. Sun also pointed out that if you don’t plan for “nation-building” after the fighting ends, then your brilliant field tactics will probably come to naught.
have Keith on the tivo, Juan Cole ?!? really ?!? may I assume it was about the Iran weaponry killing US Soldiers flim-flam ? did someone actually use the words “possibly Saudi Sunni Guerillas” on the teevee ?? o – m – g !!!
I could be briefer; I could adhere strictly to the TRex methodology.
But it’s important to remember that whatever is said on the floor of the House is history, being said not only to those in attendance and for our benefit now, but for our children and their children. We have bemoaned the shortsightedness of our predecessors, including those that were Nixon’s contemporaries; we suffer now for failing as young adults to nip the overgrown monsters of Iran-Contra when we had the chance. At this rate, we can expect that our children will face similar challenges twice in their lifetimes; we have to leave them the arguments and the weapons that we must use ourselves.
Believe me, I’d rather scream F*ck you bastards that cursed us and our children and our world, bring our troops home NOW, but it doesn’t set the example I’d like for our heirs and assigns.
At least somebody’s out there protecting our homeland…
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/…..index.html
Cetaceans for Gore 2008!
It just occurred to me that I have Chris Murphy (D) representing me instead of Nancy Johnson (R) – what a wonderful feeling (though it doesn’t quite make up for having Lieberliar claim he’s my Senator).
Murphy is a very articulate and inspirational public speaker – I hope he does us proud tomorrow. I am thinking he probably will talk a bit about the families in CT who have been impacted. He definitely honed his “elevator speech” on the war and why it’s a bad thing for America and the world during the campaign and used it quite effectively against Johnson, so I expect him to be short and sweet tomorrow.
Out of Iraq. Don’t do Iran. Democrats, do something.
Rayne @ 96
“the whole world is watching.
the whole world is watching.”
(chant from Chicago 1968.)
The typos were getting to me.
punaise — yes, that’s exactly what I was thinking. 1968 is the year that made me the Dem that I am today.
I’m giving up – there was supposed to be a strike through on the “for example,” and it WAS there in the window. Really
punaise @ 99
Rayne @ 101
Another vote for quoting dirty hippies!
Of what in life is this not true? What is our form of government supposed to be if not a committment to maintain and act according to some shared sense of what the variables are, including a shared, rather than idiosyncratic, sense of when they have evolved away from previous understandings?
I’d yield my time, rather than have to act out my sentiments.
the whole world was watching in March 2003, holding its collective breath. “We” have failed them miserably.
OT I’m sure, but the media this evening seem filled with Other People Than Scooter being ID’d as The Leaker. I’m sure this is being done to plant the notion in peoples’ heads that “It wasn’t Scooter, it was Other People” when Scooter is NOT being tried for leaking, but for LYING IN HIS TESTIMONY TO THE GJ. Yet I am worried that (to a first approximation, which is where the MSM keep the Great Unwashed) the Defense (backed up by the OVP and the MSM) are doing good PR today, and making illogical but effective headway in the great battle of opinion… Am I just being paranoid?
“Until Scoots is convicted” is a good answer… :)
And is there any news about whether there’ll be a PolitcsTV wrapup this evening? Sure hope so. My fevered brain needs an infusion of FDLpower.
Thoughts?
S.O.S. in MA @
107
Yes, there is a PoliticsTV wrapup: http://www.politicstv.com/
S.O.S. in MA @ 106
the jury isn’t exposed to the noise machine. five guilty verdicts would seize the headlines and go a long way towards balancing things out.
PoliticsTV wrapup is also on the new thread.
There are some mighty Smart Women upstairs.
Joe Scarborough asks, “Is George Bush again hyping intel, this time to start a war against Iran?”
Postdragon – I don’t disagree with you, and they may even be smart and responsible questions to ask and have answered, but that still doesn’t mean it is a magic formula upon which to base the decision to go, or not go, to war.
Even if you throw out the lying to gain public support (wmd’s, Iraq=Al Qaeda, etc.), we would still be in Vietnam II in Iraq – it would still be as unwinnable and as costly (in all terms) with no “victory” in sight.
One rule I’d agree with is that the gov’t can’t lie/has to be honest to get us involved in any war (as Ponytopian as that sounds), another would be that you should never fight a hot war unless actually threatened or attacked (i.e. political aims should be handled politically) (that’s Ponytopian too probably) – but even if a war met all of the Powell Doctrine’s criteria for a yea vote on war, whether said war ultimately is “good” or “bad” or “smart” or “dumb” or in our self-interest or not in our self-interest is ultimately answerable only in hindsight.
So here we are;)
Master Sun also prescribed deep thought on his precepts before acting. Though he was a man of a different era and culture, I suspect that the idea of not lying your country into war would be consistent with those teachings, just as it is consistent—no, imperative—in securing the true consent of the governed in advance of the war in ours.
And by lies, not just phony causes, but the “flowers and candy” scenarios and the idea that our military in any strength level could march unbidden into another country, do wonderful things for both it and ours, and not get bogged down in an imperial occupation. History exposes that as a lie, and those who have studied wars know it to be such. Acknowledging these things happens at the interface between the purely military and the political that both Powell’s and Sun’s doctrines are embedded in (explicitly in Sun’s case). It’s where Congress, supposedly our ultimate “warlord,” failed so miserably.
Today, Not Tomorrow.
That is when we must admit we’ve made a horrible mistake – and stop repeating it!
Too much information that was wrong or worse than wrong. Too many promises that were never kept. Too many hopes that were never based on facts. Too many lives lost to no good effect. Too much treasure and blood spilled for dreams that were false. Too great a belief in the force of arms against history and culture.
We can not give Liberty by giving more Death. We can not bring Peace by bringing on more War.
We had been told if we leave, things will get worse, so we stayed – yet have things gotten better? We had been told we must honor the sacrifice of those who have fallen – yet how high must we pile the bodies until that honor is achieved? How will ever more tears wash away blood when it continues to spill?
We can not undo what has been done. We can not save what we never truly won.
This we can do. We can open our eyes to truth. We can turn away from hubris. We can stop feeding the fire of our own immolation.
Today, Not Tomorrow.
Rayne @ 96
I loved your eloquent speech upthread, however, these ARE the overgrown Iran-Contra monsters that we are saddled with now. No more Mr. Niceguy, no more coddling to political decorum. The majority of the American people, i.e., the true government of this country, have voiced non-support of the policies of this administration. While I agree one need not use profanity (although perhaps warranted in this case) in order to make the case for total opposition to continuing the current course; in order to leave our heirs with the evidence that we fought back at this time in our history (now that we have a 2nd chance to eradicate these upenders of our democratic, constitutional process) far outweighs contrived, political protocol, and artificial politeness during this time of an attempted coup d’etat of our very rights within this country. Not to mention the incessant assault on the delicate balance of power involving numerous nations in the world who do not answer to our government and who are sovereign governments in their own right. It is outrageous to backdown in the face of so-called, patriotic leaders who spit in the very face of our constitution. Surely, this is the time to stand up and tell it like it is. If Congress won’t, rest assured, We the People of the United States, will.
That resolution is a bit brief. It really needs to be attached to about 15 or 20 sheets of soft-fiber tissue to make it suitable for wiping one’s ass, ’cause it sure is fucking worthless for anything else as is.
Linda2 — Oh, I’m well aware we are still infested with Iran-Contra’s parasitic monsters, hence my comment, we suffer now for failing as young adults to nip the overgrown monsters of Iran-Contra when we had the chance. If I had only known on those long afternoons while I watched the Iran-Contra hearings what would become of these beasts, I might have done many things differently instead of doing what most American twenty-somethings do all too often. I mentally kicked my own *ss again tonight while watching a clip of SecDef Gates about Iran — ugh, another horrible Ghost of Christmas Past exacting his toll on us.
But this resolution is only a battle; it is not the war. The war is a long one, will last well beyond 2010; it will last until we have undone the damage these wretched beasts have foisted on us against our will, without our knowledge, and until we have begun to make real progress once again. Stand up and fight? Hell yeah — but it will not be done this week.
My own personal measure to the end of the war we fight: when my stepson no longer has PTSD acquired in Iraq. My uncle still has it from Vietnam; I know the prospects are grim, but I know this is a marathon, not a sprint.
Well said, Rayne @48.
But the train has left the station. The Surge is happening. GWB is operating on blind faith, and will piss on any non-binding resolution. Stop wasting time. (Pray also that the Surge works – it is literally our Last Chance.)
Then slap your congressman upside the head and tell him to forget the Surge. Do whatever you can to keep the US out of Iran. Bang heads, rattle cages, kick over the furniture, but DO WHAT YOU MUST to keep us out of Iran. If we attack Iran, what is now only a horrible situation with no good solution becomes a bloody World War.
Rayne @ 118
Understood, but time is of the essence. It is imperative to stand up and get right in the face of these people now, while we still have a chance – before they succeed in their ultimate objectives – a world in which our voice and the voice of our heirs will have been silenced by their policies and deeds. They have been planning for years and their clock has been ticking for years with a gradual countdown to their version of totalitarianism. We must act now with overwhelming courage. The more we temper our dissent, the more we are disrespected by them; the more emboldened they become, the sooner the quickening of their agenda becomes fact. The point of power is now – not years from now, now. There is tremendous frustration among those that oppose these policies upon the realization that firm opposition has not yet become indisputably evident by those recently elected to office. The electorate is similar to prey that realizes the predator is circling them. The opposition must become firm, courageous, and clear right now.
The truly amazing thing is that my awesome Congressman, Lloyd Doggett(D-TX) sent me, and presumably, all of his constituents who had provided email addresses, a message asking just that: What would I say?
My response:
Hi Neurophius, Howards latest piece of arselicking has backfired bigtime,he now resembles that look to camera that Wiley Coyote gives when things go disastrously wrong! He has a new opposition leader,Kevin Rudd, who is hammering him every day,its great spectator sport.With an general election only months away his coalition is 16% behind and his own seat will be lost with a only a 4% swing.I know its no excuse but Bush and Armitage( the straight shooter)from the gang who cant shoot straight, interfered in our last election to pour a bucket of shit over our last opposition leader.Go Firedoglake the most interesting,humourous, spellbinding site on web.
What I would do is organize the party. What good does it do to have everyone saying the same thing? By coordinating it, everything that needs to be said WILL be said. Many times over. Forget the time zone BS.
Just say the important parts, succinctly, and then repeat as necessary.
It takes coordination … but the alternative? Doesn’t work.
My two cents: FOCUS on educating the American people about our true national interests in Iraq, the Middle East, and South Asia. Explain why the Murtha troop redeployment will further our national interests. The target AUDIENCE should include the many Americans who believe that the war was a huge mistake but are afraid of what will happen if we redeploy. Assuage those concerns! There will be plenty of anger, but I believe the most persuasive TONE would be cool, analytical, and exhortative, like Lt. Gen. William Odom. He is the best AUTHORITY I know on geopolitical strategy. The DESTINATION should be the same as in November 2006 only more so — no more phony “stay the course” rhetoric, let alone escalation — but that Democrats are prepared to stand together and make the hard decisions for the good of the country. And that means getting the hell out of Iraq! IMHO.
Madame Speaker -
Forgive me. I know I’m on the wrong non-binding bill. But at this time, I’d like to introduce Articles of Impeachment.
I would say that the resolution is absolutely pointless. It is a waste of time to debate non-binding resolutions at this point. The only valid issue right now on the floor of either House is “How do we get this cabal out of power with all due speed?” Until they are removed, and it better be soon, nothing else matters. They are bankrupting the country and taking the world to the verge of flames while our duly elected representative posture about resolutions with no teeth.
R.