When it’s so bad that Iran-Contra-era cretins, start looking palatable
I think it’s comical that with the impending ISG (Iraq Study Group) report and the Gates hearing, some among the right-wing are going to radically turn on a dime today.
The mantra of “we don’t talk to our enemies” (an completely absurd and counter-productive suggestion) will be abandoned by some policy makers for the new shiny talking point of “Nixon did it, Reagan did it, we can do it again” one.
But anyone paying the slightest attention would notice this is exactly 180 degrees from what they were saying 6 weeks ago. Then, Rumsfeld calling for even bolder pullout plans than the Dems were suggesting 6 weeks ago, when they were being accused of “cut-and-run”. (Gee, these millionaire peddlers of hot air never seem to have a problem with “cut-and-run” tactics when it comes to the stock market), but I digress…
Now Gates, saying on Capitol Hill, what most Americans have long realized (except the “slow learners” that just can’t accept that the president that they voted for-twice-is a bonafide “loser”–A loser of wars, a loser of surpluses, a loser who puts maniacs in charge of policy).
If the GOP ever hope to retake power (as long as this war is going on), they are going to have to come up with their own version of a Howard Dean (meaning a mainstream, rather centrist politician that only “acts” like an outsider—like the completely discredited McCain once was). Yet McCain will still probably be their guy in the end. He made all the Faustian pacts with the religious right and remained a loyal servant of the Bush these last 8 years. His one foray into to disagreement, (the meaningless torture agreement) was intended as future campaign fodder for 2008.
It’s all stragegic.
(from the BBC)
US defence nominee frank on Iraq
By Adam Brookes BBC News, Washington
Robert Gates, the man President George W Bush has nominated to be his new secretary of defence, faced the Senate Armed Services Committee with a mixture of deference, caution and blunt independence.
The most striking moment came early in the hearing. Senator Carl Levin asked him whether the United States was winning in Iraq. With no equivocation and no caveats, Mr Gates responded: “No, sir.” Later, Sen John McCain asked him the same question. Once again: “No, sir.”
Mr Gates went on to hint at how he sees the possible outcomes in Iraq.
Over the next two years, he indicated, he could still envisage “a slowly improving situation”. But his worst-case scenario was truly alarming. He spoke of the possibility of a “regional conflagration” involving Iraq’s neighbours if the situation was not controlled.
Repeatedly, Mr Gates was asked his views on whether the US military presence in Iraq should be drawn down. He said that the US was going to have some presence in Iraq “for a long time”. The new Iraqi armed forces, he said, possessed no logistical capability and no air power. Therefore some level of continued support would be necessary, but he said that could be achieved with a “dramatically smaller” number of troops than were there now.
On the vexed question of whether the US should attempt dialogue with Iran and Syria over Iraq, Mr Gates called to mind America’s Cold War experience in earlier written testimony.
The United States should “not be afraid to engage in direct discussions with our adversaries“, as it did with the Soviet Union and China. Overall, Mr Gates appeared ready to speak bluntly about the dangers of failure in Iraq and the possibility of those dangers materialising.
