Of Bombs, Benchmarks and Bullshit
Here's a glimpse at how politics really work. When results don't sync with your rhetoric, don't even dream about altering your program to produce a better reality. Simply shift your rhetoric to cover-up the ugly reality.
Faced with the real possibility of a bi-partisan majority approving one or another congressional resolution opposing the White House escalation of the war in Iraq, some GOP Senators are cooking up a rhetorical dodge. They're planning to offer a competing resolution that would not slam the President's policy but would instead attach a series of "benchmarks" to make sure the surge was really working.
Benchmarks? Like what? That the average 100 a day sectarian murders be reduced to only 75 within, say, three months? Or how about 50 in five?
The truth is that for the last 3 1/2 years of this war we've had nothing but one failed benchmark after another. Every six months we've been told that some great event six months in the future will turn everything around: an agreement on a constitutional assembly; transfer of authority to a provisional government; Iraqi sovereignty; transfer of authority to an elected government; ratification of the constitution; formation of a unified government; increased training of the Iraqi security forces. Then, they stand up, we stand down to they kill each other, we send in more troops.
But wait! Lt. General David Petraeus -- the new commander in Iraq-- we have been told, has written a whole, entire, new manual on how to fight a war of insurgency. Fantastic. Stalin, you will remember, asked the Pope who protested the invasion of Poland just exactly how many divisions he had to throw up against the Red Army. Maybe someone should ask Petraeus just exactly how much does that little book of his weigh? Is it heavy enough to be dropped in the thousands on the heads of the insurgents?
That, it seems, might be its most effective use. Twin pieces today in The New York Times pretty much sum up just how far the official rhetoric veers off the from the facts on the ground.
Here's a story about that small club of men who behind the protective barriers of the Green Zone and call themselves the government we are now defending with American blood and treasure.
And here's a grim, grim, grim report on the Keystone Kops Battalion of the Iraqi Army, the guys upon whom all these benchmarked surges will rely.
Oh, sorry. Just give'em another six months to get it together.
P.S. On a totally different subject... For a couple of days now I have been meaning to post an obit/homage to one of the greatest and least appreciated journalists of our time: Ryszard Kapuscinski. He died Tuesday at age 74. Fortunately, Randy Paul has gone ahead and beat me to it. And here's a marvelous essay on him in The Guardian.
I discovered Master Kapucinski a tad late in life, in my early 30's when the first English translation of one of his books came out. But he's been one of three or four giants that have inspired my career as a writer. Witness to 27 revolutions, rebellions, and coups over nearly a half-century of work, Kapuscinski set the standard for engaged, literary journalism. If you've never read any of his books, well, shame on you. Your loss.
January 25th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
American Troops Explain “The Rodney King Treatmentâ€
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nuMAooG6SM
January 26th, 2007 at 12:08 am
The Department of Defense has identified 3,053 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans this week:
BROWN, Nicholas P., 24, Specialist, Army; Huber Heights, Ohio; First Cavalry Division.
HILL, Ryan J., 20, Pfc., Army; Keizer, Ore.; First Infantry Division.
JOHNSTON, Gary S., 21, Sgt., Marines; Windthorst, Tex.; Third Marine Expeditionary Force.
KASHKOUSH, Michael M., 24, Sgt., Marines; Chagrin Falls, Ohio; Third Marine Expeditionary Force.
KINGMAN, Jonathan P. C., 21, Sgt., Army; Nankin, Ohio; First Infantry Division.
MATUS, Andrew G., 19, Lance Cpl., Marines; Chetek, Wis.; First Marine Expeditionary Force.
STOUT, Brandon L., 23, Specialist, Army National Guard; Grand Rapids, Mich.; 46th Military Police Company.
WIGGINS, Michael J., 26, Staff Sgt., Army; Cleveland; 79th Explosive Ordnance Disposal Battalion.
WILSON, Jamie D., 34, Staff Sgt., Army; San Diego; 25th Infantry Division.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:31 am
casey cox trustees of iu said vet will be fired
now at iu 900e 7th st bloomington in 47405
all workers will be pay $2.oo a hour now of the 5,000 workers here we done 2.25
billion dolars last year thank you \in
bloomington indiana 47405 and no health
insurance at all too workers and i make i
millions off these done students last year
thankyou
January 26th, 2007 at 7:14 am
I wensed at the irony of the Senate Armed Services Committee members final words to General Pateras; “Gods speed”, “I wish you success”, “I know you will do a good job” “Good luck” etc, from both Dems and Repubs, while many planning on voting positive on the Nancy and Harry Resolution to undermine him. Is this why I hate these sleazy bastards? No, its just one of many.
Cut off the fucking funds or shut the fuck up. Take some responsibility and make a decision that might cost you your job if you’re wrong, just like the rest of us poor slobs have to do in the ‘real’ world.
But nooooooo! Leave our troops and their new commander in dangerous limbo, while you cover your on fucking sleazy pathedic cowardly fat pig asses with a ‘good luck’ smile on your face and a poison pen in your empty-suit pocket.
DISGUSTING!
January 26th, 2007 at 7:17 am
that should be ‘winced’ of course.
January 26th, 2007 at 7:21 am
Say all you want about screw-up Bush, but you can’t say you don’t know where he stands on tough issues. He at least behaves like a man.
January 26th, 2007 at 7:33 am
Gotta agree with all of Jim R’s comments except the last sentence. I know a lot of women who make it clear where they stand on the issues.
January 26th, 2007 at 7:46 am
Fortunately, Randy Paul has gone ahead and beat me to it.
Great minds think alike
Seriously though, I will never get the images of Luanda in its last days as a Portuguese colony out of my head from Another Day of Life.
We should also give a shout out to his translators. I don’t read or speak Polish and I don’t know if you do Marc, but I would imagine like me you had to read them in translation. Amazing work by the translators.
January 26th, 2007 at 8:16 am
If I can add to the Kapuscinski chorus of praise: I have never read any of his books, but during the years I subscribed to Granta I read many of his shorter pieces, including a stunning one about Angola in one of the travel writing issues, and he was a major inspiration during the ten or so years I worked as a travel writer before turning to science and Science. I find that I often don’t get around to reading an author until he or she dies, a somewhat morbid habit, but I will now get started on the books. From my more limited experience with him, it was still clear that Kapuscinski combined incredible personal courage and journalistic skill with great literary talent, and he set the bar very high both for himself and his readers.
January 26th, 2007 at 8:19 am
JIM R.,
Bush is a bitch.
A spoiled brat.
A diva.
It is no surprise that a right-wing nationalist like you get’s a rise out of a right-wing alpha-male like Bush.
Stop showing off your “salute” to The Man of your dreams.
January 26th, 2007 at 8:46 am
A good first Ryszard Kapuscinski book? Are they in print?
January 26th, 2007 at 8:51 am
They’re in print. Any of them. The Soccer War was my first.
January 26th, 2007 at 9:03 am
“It is no surprise that a right-wing nationalist like you get’s a rise out of a right-wing alpha-male like Bush.”
So I wasn’t being ‘gender sensitive’ enough by calling Bush’s willingness to take responsibilty ‘manly’.
Well excuseeeeeee me Mr. PC. Wouldn’t it be more constructive of you to begin to critize too many men who would rather fuck than be fathers. Would you be one of these btw, ‘dude’.
January 26th, 2007 at 9:37 am
“too many men who would rather fuck than be fathers.”
You know, I fucked for more than 20 years, then I became a father, and then I fucked some more. Maybe we need to look at some statistics about how many men never have children, then we could see just how serious a problem this really is–morally and demographically.
January 26th, 2007 at 9:41 am
…you can’t say you don’t know where he stands on tough issues…
The whole fiasco of his presidency has shown how easy it is to “take a stand” and how hard it is to actually solve problems. Like maleness, “taking a stand” is a neutral quality, isn’t it? Neither bad nor good in itself.
These past years have also been deeply instructive about the old saying, “no matter how bad things are, they can always get worse.”
The NYT story is worth reading all the way through. It makes it clear how far the Iraqi security forces are from being able to secure the country.
January 26th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Good point, Michael Turmon, Hitler took a stand too, although Jim R hates it when I bring up the H word.
January 26th, 2007 at 10:30 am
Those Southern slave owners took a stand.
The South shall rise again, and all that.
January 26th, 2007 at 11:10 am
As 2008 comes closer and closer watch the opposition of people like Liddy Dole and John Sununu grow louder. People like Jim R will just have to live with that.
BTW in a testosterone contest I’ll take Nancy Pelosi over the boy-king in the WH any day.
January 26th, 2007 at 11:39 am
“Good point, Michael Turmon, Hitler took a stand too, although Jim R hates it when I bring up the H word. ”
Godwin’s Law lives!
January 26th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
Fresh Air on NPR is rerunning an interview with Kapuscinski today.
January 26th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Hitler took a stand, and he “had only one red ball . . . ”
So much for testosterone.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
Ooh, a good topic, fucking and fatherhood, to go along with fish on my birthday.
You guys make me laugh sometimes.
I’m still not a father, despite my substantial fucking experience. But as for fucking the World, I pale next to GW Bush.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Jim R,
Wouldn’t it be more constructive of you to begin to critize too many men who would rather fuck than be fathers.
Dude, why did you go there?
Many fathers can have a fimily and good fucking — at the same time.
Why is it such an either/or proposition for you?
January 26th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
I wish Dubya’s father preferred fucking to fatherhood.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
“I wish Dubya’s father preferred fucking to fatherhood.”
Are we absolutely sure that Herbert Walker was really the father? I wouldn’t put it past Barbara Bush to sleep with Satan.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
Leave it to The Onion to best address this topic of fucking and fatherhood:
Local Lutheran Minister Loves To Fuck His Wife
“So enamored is he of his wife-fucking hobby, Snowdon said he would recommend fucking to just about anyone. “So long as the fucking is done within the sacred bond of matrimony, I say, ‘Fuck away.’” Snowdon said. “But if you’re not married, please, whatever you do, don’t fuck anybody. An eternity of sin and punishment await those who fuck without church sanction.”"
January 26th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
“I wish Dubya’s father preferred fucking to fatherhood.”
I was gettin’ pissed until Randy made me laugh. And I thought I had him won to my side, damnit.
Alright all the rest of you fuckers. I was talking about the little fuckers that are already fathers by definition, but not behavior, ie, they’re not at home and their fucking some other childs mother. Behavior liberalism promotes and conservatives have to pay for.
Taking a stand means no mealy mouthing, fence stradling, having it both ways, say what you mean and mean what you say. Not exactly a trait of nannys and Democrats.
Do you have some
January 26th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
I don’t know where the last sentence came from. Was that you Balter?
January 26th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
“Say all you want about screw-up Bush, but you can’t say you don’t know where he stands on tough issues.”
Sure, W is crystal clear on how he FEELS about Iraq and the world at large.
The key to his political success–such as it is, is maintaining a consistent emotional pitch that blends feelings and ideology in a way that salves the chronic feelings of intellectual inadequacy and confusion about modernity at the core of his constituencies’ insatiable political psychodrama.
But where does Bush stand on Iraq as a matter of policy? We have no idea. At the start of the war, the policy was to “take out” Saddam and then…well, there was no policy beyond taking out Saddam. Things were supposed to take care of themselves after that, what with ALL THAT OIL, and anyone who questioned the lack of planning and rush to war was accused of “not supporting the troops”–in the same presumptive tones Jim R now suggests people who oppose tossing more U.S. troops into the meat grinder in Iraq are “undermining” the mission there.
W vaccilated from insisting that there were WMDs to the existence of “programs” for WMD, then “program plans” or somesuch, then…nothing, silence, only a tacit admission that there were no such arms.
Seamlessly, on Fox News Channel anyway, the mission in Iraq was transformed from WMD elimination to “bringing democracy” to Iraq. W vaccilated again, downshifting the rhetoric and mixing that macho-insecurity faux-bravado with naive geopolitical paranoia, just to show that, aesthetically, the formula hadn’t changed, i.e. we were “staying the course.”
Once it became clear that “brining democracy” to Iraq would require more than rhetorical political marketing campaigns, W downshifted again, now denying that he was “stay the course.”
Sorry Jim R, but however consistent W’s rhetoric is, his policies on Iraq are all over the map. The only “course” he stays on is trailing after opinion polls by about 6 months to a year.
January 26th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
“I wouldn’t put it past Barbara Bush to sleep with Satan.”
And here you have Bush in Bushian terms with himself. She’s also a descendant of president Franklin Pierce, who drank himself to death.
January 27th, 2007 at 1:16 am
If you want to get a sense of what is going on in Baghdad right now, watch this story from CBS correspondent Lara Logan–which is on the Web but was not broadcast on the air. Sorry, you have to watch a 30 second Chevron commercial first.
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2371456n
January 27th, 2007 at 1:21 am
The Department of Defense has identified 3,060 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans yesterday:
CALLAHAN, Keith A., 31, Sgt. First Class, Army; McClure, Pa.; Second Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry.
GRANT, Sandra S., 23, Seaman, Navy; Linwood, N.C.; U.S.S. Eisenhower.
KIDD, Mark D., 26, Cpl., Marines; Milford, Mich.; Fourth Marine Division.
LANHAM, Jane E., 43, Lt. Cmdr., Navy; Owensboro, Ky.; Naval Branch Health Clinic, Bahrain.
LEIJA, Hector, 27, Staff Sgt., Army; Houston; Second Infantry Division.
NAPPER, Roger A., 20, Petty Officer Third Class, Navy; Greensburg, Pa.; Mobile Security Squadron Three, Detachment Bahrain.
SHIPP, Darrell W., 25, Pfc., Army; San Antonio; First Cavalry Division.
January 27th, 2007 at 1:29 am
And while we are on the subject of Bush and parenting, here is an enlightening story from the always interesting Timothy Noah:
http://www.slate.com/default.aspx?id=2158226
January 27th, 2007 at 1:35 am
And really finally, a different view of Kapuscinski:
http://www.slate.com/id/2158315?nav=tap3
January 27th, 2007 at 1:55 am
Republicans engaged in a “rhetorical dodge.”?
Sure.
But what about the Democrat dodge?
We are years into this war. Would it be too much to ask that our Senators and Congressmen either support this war or oppose it?
Democrats now have the power to shut this war down. So why don’t they do it?
Why don’t they?
January 27th, 2007 at 7:31 am
“Democrats now have the power to shut this war down. So why don’t they do it?”
Because they are afraid to death of being “wimp baited.”
Our pop political culture has gone to seed on the issue of rhetorical military aggressiveness as an emotional salve for the rising sense of economic immobility so many Americans feel.
Back when the war was an oil-bonanza cake-walk to destroy evil, liberate Iraq and “scare” swarthy people worldwide, virtually no one within the American mainstream dared to criticize the enterprise. No, come to think of it, none dared fail to praise it. Those fringe voices who declined to join the war cheerleading or even criticized the project or warned about the potential disaster were, at best, dismissed and, most often, branded traitors or worse.
But Samuel does have a point.
Now that even Fox News Channel, David Brooks and Tom Freidman can’t hide behind RNC propaganda on Iraq anymore, one would think mainstream liberals would crawl out of their three-decade defensive crouch and start to walk on two feet.
In fact, we are seeing that, just not from the leadership. Alas, change is slow at the top, where the political elite still believe that being labeled a traitor by Rush Limbaugh actually matters. Their still listening to the assinine “conventional wisdom” that presidential candidates have to present themselves as “centrists.”
But these leaders will soon enough be eating John Edwards dust. Edwards has made clear his view that the U.S. should start withdrawing NOW. A handful of other national Democrats have very similar, if not identical, views on the way forward. These people are the future of the party.
January 27th, 2007 at 8:51 am
How screwed is the U.S. project in Iraq and how ill-concieved - childish, really, in the notion that BushCo could create a controlled environment in Iraq - has this strategy been since day one ?
http://www.nysun.com/pf.php?id=47446
Money quote: Documents captured from Saddam Hussein’s intelligence service show “Iran’s deep penetration in Iraqi society and institutions. Iran clandestinely supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq and took measures to turn it to her advantage…End clip.
The Iranians have done a dance around us while Bush beatt his little drum assuming he was the maestro - and there’s no turning this baby around. The dominant players we’ve brought to power are on the other side.
The sycophants for this madness who chose to ignore the obvious for nearly four years now tells us 20,000 more troops are going to make a difference and radically shift the terms of an abysmal strategic failure that has, yes, potentially disastrous political and national security consequences. It’s probably going to be very bad, but if it’s all as urgent as the True Believers tell us, my advice to these worthies of the right blogosphere is to suit up, grab your weapons, fill your canteens and head for the fray to save the West. Their ideology demands more of them than waving pompoms and America will be better of with the lot of them gone. If there’s even a 1% chance that they can do a tenth of the damage to our enemies that they’ve done to the fortunes of their fellow countrymen, the sacrifice will have been worth it. To arms!
(Jim R’s “At least you know what Bush is thinkiing” is pretty wack. This man is sending others into battle on the basis of a hunch and a hollow “hope for the best”…and we’re supposed to give him props because “we know what he is thinking” ? This crap turns my stomach. If Bush himself actually believed “what he is thinking” what ever one thinks of the invasion of Iraq, even at worst it’s conduct would not have devolved beyond tough going and a likely setback into one of the most ignominious episodes of delusion and incompetence in American history. As for the role of the Democrats, where the hell were calls for more troops and more serious pressure on the Iraqis to pull themselves together coming from years ago when the chances of a policy impact were merely slim, as opposed to none. John “Surge” McCain - looking more and more like a basket case as Bush gives a green light for a half-measure - is now calling for “benchmarks”. Shades of Joe Biden. McCain’s become a figure in Sumbelt Shakespeare. Tragedy soon to be farce. As for the warbloggers, NRO, etc. when a bunch of second-rate wankers maintain that a guy named Fred on the Weekly Standard masthead, a laughable twit like Michael Ledeen and a classics professor from Fresno are the go-to guys for global military strategy, what can one expect other than reams of delusional bullshit.)
January 27th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Might I suggest to Samuel Stott that “support this war or oppose it” is an indication of more of the kind of crap thinking that got us into a bad war in the first place. Most Democrats have been proposing alternative strategies to make a bad situation better. Probably couldn’t have worked, but there’s no shame in not simply pushing for withdrawal in the middle of a war. It looks now, with Bush having done everything wrong possible, as though withdrawal is the only alternative that makes any sense. But to try to blame Democrats for this war, whether the blame comes from the left or the right, is an example of sandbox politics that’s opportunistic and petulant. I don’t think that people like Joe Biden have been doing anything less than trying to see through and try to have positive impact on an incredibly messed up situation that was not of their devise. Save the total contempt for the crazies on “both sides” - i.e. the single-minded morons like Ramsey Clark and George W. Bush.
January 27th, 2007 at 9:31 am
Good points, reg. All too many on the right are now trying to squirm out of the hard facts that this war was their brainchild. It reminds me of the Vietnam war: By the time it was over, it was very hard to find anyone who ever admitted being for it in the first place.
January 27th, 2007 at 10:41 am
Shades of Joe Biden. McCain’s become a figure in Sumbelt Shakespeare. Tragedy soon to be farce. As for the warbloggers, NRO, etc. when a bunch of second-rate wankers maintain that a guy named Fred on the Weekly Standard masthead, a laughable twit like Michael Ledeen and a classics professor from Fresno are the go-to guys for global military strategy, what can one expect other than reams of delusional bullshit.
damn funny and sad
January 27th, 2007 at 11:00 am
I was told by a US official yesterday that US military spokesman Caldwell will present alleged US evidence on Iranian materiel support to militants in Iraq at a press conference in Baghdad early next week.
It’s fair to say that a very many people are speculating offline that Iran may possibly have been behind the Karbala abduction and killing. The more sophisticated the operation, the more it smells of Iran, one said. We’ll see. More here and here.
Posted by Laura at January 27, 2007 10:14 AM
January 27th, 2007 at 11:17 am
I still enjoyed Kapuscinski’s work and I think that by and large they captured the mood of the time/region they were portraying. I know that he was short on note-taking an long on relying on his memory and there is danger in that, but reading his work with that knowledge is important.
a laughable twit like Michael Ledeen
Who claims to have solid credentials rtegarding the Middle East and speaks neither Arabic nor Farsi.
January 27th, 2007 at 11:20 am
Reg pretty much said it all but I would add that if the Dems seem a little gun-shy all you to do is read any of Bob Sommersby’s rants on THE DAILY HOWLER to see why. While I don’t agree with everything he says his analysis of the MSM’s clodish behavior towards the dems and (in 1999-2000) Al Gore in particular make chilling reading. And he suggests they’re starting to do the same to Pelosi, Clinton, and Obama. I’m no fan of Hillary but his clips show incredible bias by the kool kids in Punditland and their enabling news reporters.
As for Bush I was struck by a line in a column by Harold Meyerson in TAP the other day. Recalling the famous dictum of Sir Isiah Berlin that pols fell into two camps - the fox who knows many things and the hedgehog who knows one big thing - Meyerson pointed out that Bush was a hedgehog who knew one big very wrong thing (Iraq) and would never change. I think he’s got it!
January 27th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Marc, you believe that Kapuscinski was actually “witness to 27 revolutions, rebellions, and coups”? I don’t, and a lot of others don’t either. I prefer your writing to his, for one thing, since I have reason to believe that you don’t just make things up. The book that made his reputation is entirely unreliable as a guide to Ethiopian history or culture: http://www.richardwebster.net/johnryle.html. It is also somewhat offensive, unless you regard it as a lark, sort of like The Mikado.
January 27th, 2007 at 11:46 am
On the subject of the MSM I hope by now everyone here has heard of the little memo released at the Libby trial (you can get it at FIREDOGLAKE which is doing a “Court TV” - style analysis of each day) which said that the best place for Chaney to discuss the Wilson/Plame flap was “Meet the Press” because they could “Control” the environment!
Ah yes, tell us again how “Vicious” and “Probing” Tim Russert is!
January 27th, 2007 at 11:52 am
And that little Demo that is going on in DC? John Aravosis at AMERICABLOG has a little piece on there today saying “I just saw some Idiot on C-SPAN”. Why? Well the speaker was ranting endlessly about the Israeli oppression of the Palestinian People and just mentioning the Iraq war in passing. People here’s reason #199 why these demos don’t do squat. As John rightly points out (and as Marc has noted over and over) these rallies are cluttered with Save the Palestinians, Native Americans, Mumia, and (according to John), for all we know the Amoebas. Great PR folks. Look like the crazies everyone on the right portrays us as.
Why not make it easy for Bush and - his master - Chaney - to ignore it!
January 29th, 2007 at 10:18 pm
“Great PR folks. Look like the crazies everyone on the right portrays us as.
The Fox News Channel/Wall Street Journal/talkradio Republican Media Complex portrays all opponents of the war as traitors, fundamentally, and always will, no matter how carefully anti-war protestors try to control their image.
One mistake some liberals never tire of making is to assume that the right wing noise machine is limited by reality. They call Hillary Clinton a left-wing extremist. The NY Times, in their view, is subversive, and they never tire of asserting that ridiculous notion, now a shibboleth of the conservative “movement” such as it is.
On this point, the left should ignore Marc Cooper and other public relations hygienists’ naive suggestions that image management will make a significant difference. Instead, we should take a page from the right-wing playbook and get whatever mileage wackos are willing to provide and leave it at that.
How many rightist officials do you see rushing to distance themselves from the anti-abortion kooks and so on that menace their public events? Rather, they spin it as a measure of confidence in their own ideals and, even, courage of conviction.
Bush himself made most excellent use of disdain for pubic opinion, appointing people like Bolton to the UN and Wolfowitz to the World Bank–right up until the Iraq project spun far enough out of control to make everything look beyond the pale.
Let liberals take note of that and stop taking the Fox News bait…