A clarification

Azmi Bishara, one of the 3 (or 4?) Palestinian members of the Israeli Knesset and the chairman of the Balad party, has fled the country and resigned from the Knesset because of some sort of secret investigation of him. There is a gag order on exactly what is being investigated, although, in a triumph for Israeli openness, the gag order on reporting the existence of the gag order was lifted this week.

After meeting the Egyptian president, Maliki said, “I clarified to the president the reality of what is going in Iraq, which is not a civil or sectarian war.” Sadly, he didn’t clarify for the rest of us the reality of what is going on in Iraq. What is the Arabic for “crapfest”?

I’ve been waiting all day to say, Hoo-ah!

Some of our brave troops made the ultimate sacrifice today: listening to a speech by George Bush. They listened to him over there (in Fort Irwin, California) so that you don’t have to listen to him here.

He opened his remarks thus: “I’ve been waiting all day to say, Hoo-ah!” What a rich, full, rewarding life he leads.


He thanked the troops for joining the army, which evidently people don’t do in other countries: “Ours is a remarkable country when people volunteer to serve our country in a time of war.”

He thanked the families of the troops who joined the army: “I understand that when a loved one is deployed, it creates anxiety.” Actually, now that I read that sentence again, it sounds kind of dirty. “You’re an integral part of making sure this volunteer army is as successful as it is today.” Dude, you’re blaming them for that?


He says that on 9/11 “my attitude about the world changed that day”. Really? Wasn’t his attitude about the world pretty much always that it revolves around him? “Like many Americans, we struggle with understanding with what this attack meant.” Duuur, big buildings fall down boom. “See, what changed on September the 11th is oceans can no longer protect the people in the United States from harm.” I think the Indian Ocean just hasn’t been pulling its weight. Stoopid Indian Ocean.


Oh, let’s just skim quickly through the rest of the speech: “make no mistake about it, these extremists believe things -- for example, they don’t believe you can worship freely; they don’t believe you should speak your mind; they don’t believe in dissent; they don’t believe in human rights.” I don’t think you need me to MST3K that sentence for you.


If we pull out of Iraq, “The enemy that had done us harm would be embolden.”

On Iraq: “it’s not a civil war; it is pure evil.” He’s not the messiah; he’s a very naughty boy.

On Congress: “Then, instead of sending an acceptable bill to my desk, they went on spring break.” And didn’t invite him. DIDN’T INVITE HIM!

“The enemy does not measure the conflict in Iraq in terms of timetables.” They probably use the metric system, those bastards! Stoopid metric system.

At Fort Irwin, they let him play with the bomb detonation robot,


and they let him play with a surveillance aircraft,


but all he really wanted to do was rub that big old bald head.

Worth it

The Pentagon finally admits that “Some elements of the situation in Iraq are properly descriptive of a ‘civil war,’” (crappy writing: the term civil war describes Iraq, not the other way around), although they add “The term ‘civil war’ does not adequately capture the complexity of the conflict in Iraq.” I’m telling you: crapfest.

Tony Blair, on the other hand, won’t (Word document): “it’s not a country at civil war. The majority of people in this country [Iraq] don’t want this violence. ... What is happening is that small numbers on either side of extremists – no, hang on a minute – who don’t represent the majority, are trying to provoke people into a civil war. That is a completely different thing.” Are referenda usually held before the start of a civil war, and they’re called off if there isn’t an absolute majority in favor?

Asked a couple of times if the Iraq war “was worth it,” he answers that it was and is the “right thing” to do, which isn’t exactly the same as being worth it. His shying away from the phrase is an interesting mirror-image of the outcry in the US when Obama and McCain said that soldiers’ lives were “wasted.” I want McCain and every other supporter of the war to be asked if the deaths of American soldiers was worth it.

The Sky interviewer, Adam Boulton, asked if Blair thought Maliki is a democrat. Blair: “I do believe he is a democrat, he was elected, right, and he was then chosen as the President...” Boulton points out that Robert Mugabe was also elected and “just being elected doesn’t make you a democrat does it?” Blair: “Er, well I think it is quite a good indication”.

The best plan is to have this plan succeed

Brent Scowcroft, testifying on Iraq before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday, used a familiar obnoxious analogy: “When you’re training your child with training wheels on the bicycle, how do you know when to take the training wheels off? I don’t know.”

Bushies are beginning to use admission of the mess that Iraq has become to their own advantage, by suggesting that it’s so completely impossible to comprehend what’s going on there that there’s no point in even trying to set up standards to measure whether we’re making progress or not. Chuck Hagel repeatedly asked Scowcroft for such a standard, getting this response: “It would be nice to be precise and to have all these benchmarks that everybody can see and so on. This is not that kind of a problem. We’re in a mess, and we’ve got to work our way out of it.” He went on to list various things that needed to be accomplished to work our way out of it. “Then,” responded Hagel, “how do you measure that?” Scowcroft: “The way you measure anything.”

Such a disconcertingly unhelpful response has not been heard since Rumsfeld last trod those halls.

The em-messification of Iraq is also now being used as a reason not to call it a civil war. Last year, it wasn’t a civil war because it wasn’t that bad yet; now it’s just too messy. Secretary of War Robert

this morning said that civil war is “a bumper sticker answer to what’s going on”.


Naturally, he couldn’t comment on the new National Intelligence Estimate, because he held a press conference without having read it, an old Rumsfeld trick. The NIE’s summary (pdf), the only part we’re allowed to see, while saying Iraq is actually more fucked up than the term civil war implies (“does not adequately capture the complexity of the conflict”), does say that the term “accurately describes key elements of the Iraqi conflict, including the hardening of ethno-sectarian identities, a sea change in the character of the violence, ethno-sectarian mobilization, and population displacements.”

National Security Adviser Stephen “Boo” Hadley also squirmed his way out of using the term civil war at a press briefing today:

Q: Can you call it a civil war, and why haven’t you?

HADLEY: We know what kind of fight we’re in. We know the facts. That is described well in this NIE, and we have a strategy to deal with those facts and to try to succeed.

Q: Is it a civil war?

HADLEY: I will tell you what this NIE says.

Q: I want to know why you avoid using that term.

HADLEY: Because it’s not an adequate description of the situation we find ourselves, as the intelligence community says. ... And what we’re doing is saying, if you’re going to run policy, and if you’re going to explain it to the American people, we need to get across the complexities of the situation we face in Iraq, and what is our strategy to deal with that.”

Because the Bush administration is all about getting across complexities. Known for it, really.

Hadley continued to embrace sophistication and complexity when summing up the NIE: “one of the things you should conclude from this NIE is the best plan is to have this plan succeed.”

The Iraq Study Group report

William Caldwell IV, Military Moron, has an op-ed in the WaPo, in which he says, “I don’t see a civil war in Iraq. I don’t see a constituency for civil war.” And he should know: “I studied civil wars at West Point”. So that settles that.

Okay, I’ve read the Iraq Study Group report (pdf). Nine months to come up with this, huh?

The funny thing is that the assessment of the situation in Iraq is actually more realistic (and depressing) than I would have expected from this bunch: grave and deteriorating situation, Shiite and Sunni politicians in the government not especially influential, militias “seen as legitimate vehicles of political action,” etc etc. It’s just the recommendations that are unhelpful and even unserious, since I can’t believe anyone who understood and accepted that assessment would also believe that the commission’s recommendations could a) be implemented, b) help much if they were.

Most of the focus on international diplomacy (“The United States should immediately launch a new diplomatic offensive to build an international consensus for stability in Iraq and the region”) is DOA. Bush won’t talk with Iran and Syria, they won’t join any “Iraq International Support Group,” there will not in fact be an Iraq International Support Group. Bush isn’t going to spend his last 2 years in office solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By the way, these are the juicy incentives the ISG suggests we offer Iran and Syria:

i. An Iraq that does not disintegrate and destabilize its neighbors and the region.
ii. The continuing role of the United States in preventing the Taliban from destabilizing Afghanistan.
iii. Accession to international organizations, including the World Trade Organization.
iv. Prospects for enhanced diplomatic relations with the United States.
v. The prospect of a U.S. policy that emphasizes political and economic reforms instead of (as Iran now perceives it) advocating regime change.
vi. Prospects for a real, complete, and secure peace to be negotiated between Israel and Syria, with U.S. involvement as part of a broader initiative on Arab-Israeli peace as outlined below.

Dude, you had me at “enhanced diplomatic relations with the United States.”

By the way, it doesn’t really have 79 recommendations. Some of them are repetitive, and one (#24) just says that the timetable for the benchmarks in #23 may be unrealistic.

A bunch of them relate to oil, you’ll be surprised to hear. Otherwise, it’s mostly all about training and embedding (or, as the ISG put it in order to emphasize their maverick independence, imbedding). They seem to put rather a lot of faith in the power of the proximity of an American or two to improve the characters, competence and courage of any Iraqi in their vicinity. Honestly, I’ve been near Americans my entire life, and I don’t know that it’s made me a better, braver person (and yes I will cut out the alliteration now).

It’s not just the Iraqi military that needs the purifying power (that one just came out) of “imbedded” Americans, but every branch of government. For example, “The ethos and training of Iraqi police forces must support the mission to ‘protect and serve’ all Iraqis. Today, far too many Iraqi police do not embrace that mission”. Also ag, oil, whatever. Of course those require Americans who aren’t in the military and may not really want to go to Iraq. So #74 suggests simply ordering civilian government employees into Iraq anyway.

As I said, it took them nine months to come up with this. It’s a paean to, indeed a fetishization of consensus, anywhere and everywhere: “reconciliation” in Iraq itself, the “new international consensus for stability in Iraq,” and in the US (“success depends on the unity of the American people”). This should come as no surprise after the ISG developed their own consensus through nine endless months of team-bonding and trust exercises – rope courses, drumming, falling backwards into Ed Meese’s arms, etc.

It wasn’t worth it.

What Americans are trying to figure out is why Iraqis are killing Iraqis when you have a better future ahead

Fiji has indeed had a coup. As is the custom, Australia was asked to send troops to prevent it and, as is the custom, it refused. An interesting sidebar: Fiji is a COW (Coalition of the Willing) country. What happens to its troops, currently helping bring democracy to Iraq?

By the way, I misread the title of the coup leader: he’s Commodore Bananarama, not Commander Bananarama. I’m not sure any coup has been instigated by a commodore before, although there was a flight lieutenant (Ghana).

According to the Guardian, Iran’s President Ahmadinejad is under attack from, how shall I put this gently, the religious loons who normally back him, because he attended the opening ceremonies of the Asian Games, which featured women singing and dancing, and he did not immediately run from the stadium (he claims he had already left).

Yesterday, Bush met with Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). I’m not sure if his chair was facing the Christmas tree, and if so whether he was more put off by the tree or by the expression on Sadly Hadley’s face (possibly Hakim had just told him that Santa isn’t real?).



Bush said afterwards, “I told His Eminence that I was proud of the courage of the Iraqi people.” Proud? Like he’s responsible in some way for that courage? Granted, he is responsible for the need for courage.

Later, Bush told Fox News, “what Americans are trying to figure out is why Iraqis are killing Iraqis when you have a better future ahead.” Yes, that’s exactly what Americans are trying to figure out.

In a speech later in the day, Hakim also took a position against Iraqis killing Iraqis, calling instead for Americans to kill Iraqis (Sunni Iraqis, of course): “The strikes they are getting from the multinational forces are not hard enough to put an end to their acts.” He made this speech to the US Institute for Peace.

In that Fox interview, Bush praised Maliki: “I think he is -- I know he is prepared to take on the fact that there are murderers inside that society. What I’m looking for is somebody that says, a society in which murder and assassination takes place is not acceptable, regardless of who’s doing it. And I absolutely believe that the prime minister and Mr. Hakim are committed to ending murder. The hard work is to get it done, particularly when you have outside influences like al Qaeda stirring up sectarian violence, these suiciders are spectacular death.”

Bush praised John Bolton for choosing “to leave gracefully”. Who says “this business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it at all”? Bush blamed “the shallow politics of the Senate”. He also portrayed Rumsfeld’s resignation as entirely Rummy’s decision after the two of them had “a very heart-to-heart.” Adding, “One thing about Don Rumsfeld is he understood mistakes.”

Asked again whether Iraq is in a civil war: “Listen, I’ve heard a lot of voices say that. And I’ve talked to people there in Iraq who don’t believe that’s the case. For example, some would argue that the fact that 90 percent of the country -- let me just say this -- most of the country outside of the Baghdad area, is relatively peaceful, doesn’t indicate a civil war as far as they’re concerned. And by the way, I get briefings all the time about where the level of violence is and the American people I think would be interested to know, most of it occurs around the Baghdad area. And therefore they don’t get to see, kind of the normalcy of life outside of the Baghdad area.”

Once again denied that his father was bailing him out, says he didn’t even tell him in advance that he’d be appointing Gates. Also, he just knows more stuff than his father: “Listen, I love my dad. But he understands what I know, that the level of information I have relative to the level of information most other people have, including himself, is significant and that he trusts me to make decisions.”

Speaking of that level of information, he described both the Rumsfeld memo and the Baker Commission report and so on as “advice documents.” “It’s very hard for me to, you know, prejudice one report over another. They’re all important.” Although the one he asked the Pentagon to write, to counter the Baker report, may just be that little bit more important.

He said that he “feels” that people are praying for him. Not that he knows it because people say they’re praying for him, but actually feels it. “Because the load is not heavy, I guess is the best way to describe it. Look, somebody said to me, prove it. I said, you can’t prove it. All I can tell you is I feel it. And it’s a remarkable country when millions pray for me and Laura. So therefore I am able to say to people that this is a joyful experience. Not a painful experience.” So glad he’s enjoying himself.

Caption contest, Latvian style

Pictures from the NATO summit in Riga, for your captioning pleasure. The women are respectively Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga (try saying that five times fast), German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and an unidentified scary black chick.

Following Bush on his expedentions abroad

Like Stephen Hadley, Bush today referred to Iraq as being in a “phase” rather than a civil war. A phase of what, he didn’t say. Phase of the moon, phasers on stun, whatever. He’s putting a lot of emphasis on who started the “phase” (“There’s a lot of sectarian violence taking place, fomented, in my opinion, because of these attacks by al Qaeda, causing people to seek reprisal”), which wouldn’t be particularly relevant to stopping it even if he were right. He says, “You know, the plans of Mr. Zarqawi was to foment sectarian violence. That’s what he said he wanted to do.” “[W]e’ve been in this phase for a while,” since the Samarra bombing (everything was going perfectly in Iraq until February), which was intended by Al Qaida “to create sectarian violence, and it has. The recent bombings were to perpetuate the sectarian violence.” That’s funny, because I thought all those things actually were sectarian violence. He seems to think that violence and civil war is an end in itself to the bad guys, forgetting that some people actually prefer to finish wars.

Bush grudgingly admits that he can’t really object to Iraqi leaders talking to Iranians: “Iraq is a sovereign nation which is conducting its own foreign policy. They’re having talks with their neighbors. And if that’s what they think they ought to do, that’s fine. I hope their talks yield results. One result that Iraq would like to see is for the Iranians to leave them alone.”

He praises Estonia for being a COW (Coalition of the Willing) country: “And the interesting contribution that a country like Estonia is making is that, people shouldn’t have to live under tyranny. We just did that; we don’t like it.”

Asked about the Russian attempts to subjugate Georgia, Bush is clearly bored with the whole subject, unwilling to criticize Putin, and may possibly have forgotten a few words into his answer which conflict he’d been asked about: “Precisely what we ought to do is help resolve the conflict and use our diplomats to convince people there is a better way forward than through violence. We haven’t seen violence yet. The idea is to head it off in the first place.”

In Latvia, he said that “Europe no longer produces armed ideologies that threaten other nations with aggression and conquest and occupation,” while lauding NATO’s armed occupation of Afghanistan in the name of freedom and the transformation of NATO into an “expedentiary” alliance, and he demanded that members increase their military budgets so they can participate in these, um, expedentions I guess.

Mortis

A new phase characterized by this increasing sectarian violence that requires us obviously to adapt to that new phase

Today Bush signed the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, which somehow I hadn’t heard of before, which classifies as terrorism, and increases the penalties for, any acts against “animal enterprises” (i.e., companies that use or sell animals) which reduce their profits, including non-violent acts such as blockades, trespassing, freeing animals, “threats,” etc. Terrorism.

Actually, acts of animal terrorism are committed twice daily in my home when I give my cat her pills, although she and I might have differing ideas about which of us is committing the terrorist acts.

The White House website also informs us that Thursday is “National Methamphetamine Awareness Day.” So don’t forget to be aware of meth on Thursday. The proclamation informs us that “Chronic use can lead to violent behavior, paranoia, and an inability to cope with the ordinary demands of life”... oh, you’re all way ahead of me, aren’t you?

NBC has decided to use the term “civil war” to describe the situation in Iraq. Did they even consider my compromise alternative, “crapfest”?

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley disagrees, but does say that “We’re clearly in a new phase characterized by this increasing sectarian violence that requires us obviously to adapt to that new phase”. Not very Ken Burns-y, is it? Cue plaintive violin music: “My dearest Martha: this new phase characterized by this increasing sectarian violence that requires us obviously to adapt to that new phrase drags on, and I grow weary...”

Hadley continued, “Obviously, everyone would agree things are not proceeding well enough or fast enough.” You’ll notice the word “enough” assumes that things are in fact proceeding in the right direction and at a measurable pace.

He also said that while “there’s been a lot of discussion within the American press about the need to adapt our strategy, a lot of discussion about Baker-Hamilton, a lot of discussion on talk shows... it’s important, I think, for the President to send the message to Prime Minister Maliki that while he is listening to all of these voices for ideas, is open to ideas, that in the end of the day to reassure Prime Minister Maliki that it is the President who will be crafting the way forward on Iraq”. Yes, George W. Bush crafting the way forward, how... reassuring.

At that briefing, Tony Insert-Snow-Related-Pun-Here denied that there was a civil war in Iraq because it was not, he said, a battle for territory. “What you do have is sectarian violence that seems to be less aimed at gaining full control over an area than expressing differences”. Expressing differences. Like a letter to the editor, but slightly more horrific.

Robin Wright and Thomas Ricks of the WaPo say, without sourcing or further explanation, that Cheney was in fact “basically summoned” by Saudi Arabia.

Bush, meanwhile, was in Estonia today, meeting with Estonian President Herman Munster.



Everyone assumes that Alexander Litvinenko received the fatal dosage of radiation poisoning in that London sushi restaurant from an agent of Putin, but has anyone asked whether he ordered the Godzilla sushi?

In Ecuadoran presidential elections, Rafael Correa defeats “pro-American banana tycoon” Alvaro Noboa. I don’t have any analysis of that, I just wanted to be able to say “pro-American banana tycoon.”

“Banana magnate” is also funny.

“Banana baron.”

Really, anything in the whole banana area is amusing.

Banana banana banana.

Just saying.

Breaking curfew

A mention of this on today’s Now Show reminds me that I forgot to relay the story that the manufacturers of “Welsh Dragon Sausage” are in trouble with the trading standards people because the name inadequately describes the product. As the Now Show put it, the dragons from which the sausage is made are not in fact Welsh.

Iraqi President Talabani says that an emergency security conference was a success. Hurrah! Evidently, “All parties agreed on the importance of working together and really participating in Nouri Maliki’s government of national unity.” Gosh, I’m sure everything will be fine now. I don’t know why no one thought of holding a pointless conference in order to mouth platitudes before now.


New White House spokesmodel Scott Stanzel says that this certainly isn’t a civil war (“We’re constantly asked that question, and while the situation is serious, Prime Minister Maliki and President Talabani have said they do not believe it is a civil war.”), but all this killing and shit is bad. “It is an outrage that these terrorists are targeting innocent civilians in a brazen effort to topple a democratically elected government.” You’re missing the point, Little Scotty II: no one needs to topple the “government” because it is irrelevant. Also, of course, the militias are associated with the parties and politicians who constitute the government – any day I’m expecting to read about a firefight between the Health Ministry and the Ministry of Education – with the difference that the militias can actually get things done, albeit evil things. The government can’t fill in potholes; the militias can, but, like those Welsh Dragon Sausages, you really don’t want to know what they’re filled with.

Sorry. I made that joke but even I was grossed out by it.

I’ve read several stories about Iraq today that begin like this one: “Defying a government curfew, Shiite militiamen stormed Sunni mosques in Baghdad and a nearby city on Friday, shooting guards and burning down buildings...” Etc, etc. Every one of these stories insists, for some reason, on mentioning along with all the other atrocities, the wanton disregard of the curfew. Does their wickedness and perfidy know no bounds? Did they also run any red lights on their way to pour kerosine on Sunnis and burn them alive?

There was an exception to the Baghdad curfew, according to the BBC: “The only vehicles allowed out were those carrying the coffins of Thursday’s bombing victims.” So, um...

It’s not just car bombs

On a visit to France, Iraqi President Talabani (seen below arriving at Orly) says that in only two or three years, Iraq will be ready to say “Bye bye with thanks” to American troops. Bye bye?

He also said, “There is no civil war. The media is focusing only on the negative side of Iraq. ... We need to give the real picture. It’s not just car bombs. Visit Iraq from the north to the south. Never mind Baghdad.” Iraq’s new motto: “It’s not just car bombs.” Iraq’s other new motto: “Never mind Baghdad.”


Bush characterized the chart that appeared here and in every other blog yesterday, showing the descent of Iraq into color-coded chaos, as “one of those mysterious charts that somehow appear.”

We have upheld doctrine

Okay, now there’s a transcript available of Bush’s meeting with right-wing commentators I blogged in my last post. Compared to this event, the press conference earlier in the day was a model of clarity:

“Well, on North Korea, we’re putting in the places to — putting in the parts to make sure that, to the extent that he’s got capabilities of launching a weapon or preventing him from selling the weapon, we’re putting those in place. The missile defense system was designed precisely for this kind of situation, the one we’ve got now, which is ones, twosies, or threesies — it’s not a multiple launch regime, but it’s getting pretty accurate. And all of a sudden, somebody stands up a weapon and aims it and says, “Hands up,” and we say, they’re not coming up, because we’ve got the capacity to stop it.”

On Democrats: “I’m not casting dispersion,” but “it’s an interesting world in which people are not willing to listen to the words of an enemy”.

Earlier in the year the Bushites had moved towards a more realistic assessment of Iraq, acknowledging that every enemy wasn’t a foreign jihadist or a member of Al Qaida. But now, they’ve been reverting, arguing that withdrawal would lead, not to a Shiite-Sunni civil war, but to an Al Qaida takeover. Bush describes the enemy: “They morph. You know, they kind of — there is al Qaeda central, there is al Qaeda look-alikes, there is al Qaeda want-to-bes. They’re dangerous. Some are more dangerous than others.” Probably the ones who can morph are the most dangerous.

Iraq can still avoid civil war: “I think there are two elements around which the country can unite: the army and the oil.” I wonder what the flag would look like?

It would also be an interesting national anthem.

As for us, “And we’re pretty successful. We have upheld doctrine.”

Relating a conversation with some American who’d been kidnapped in Iraq: “I said, what’s it like to be kidnapped, man? It must have been weird – Baghdad, to be kidnapped.”

And this is the helpful part in which he casually threatens a whole country:

Q: Instead of talking to Syria — can’t Syria get some payback for sending all these guys over the border to subvert Iraq? Can’t — shouldn’t Syria be getting subverted in return, in some way?

THE PRESIDENT: Now you’re thinking. (Laughter.)

Bush press conference: And the reason I’m confident we’ll succeed in Iraq is because the Iraqis want to succeed in Iraq

Caught some of Chimpy’s press conference, which, with the normal press room still under construction, was held in the Hideous Yellow Drapes Room of the White House. No transcript yet available, just my notes, so let’s wing it. (Update: transcript.)

Iraq is “tough for a reason.” There’s a significant difference between benchmarks and a timetable, evidently. The former is so Iraqis know “when are you gonna get this done.” One benchmark will be when the Iraqi troops are able to drive themselves. He did say he wouldn’t put more pressure on the Iraqi government than it could bear. Isn’t that what religious types tell people at funerals that God wouldn’t do to them?


He said something about convincing Iraqis that a civil war would be “not worth the effort.” (Update: “It’s one of the missions, is to work with the Maliki government to make sure that there is a political way forward that says to the people of Iraq, It’s not worth it. Civil war is not worth the effort -- by them.”) A question on what we would do in the event of a civil war was rejected as “hypothetical.” He told the reporters that he could see how people would think Iraq was in bad shape when they “watch your tv screens,” but reminded us that 90% of the – and he actually used this word – “action” takes place in just 5 provinces.

Ah, now I’ve got a partial transcript from CNN. The best bits all seem to have been before I tuned in. “We must not look at every success of the enemy as a mistake on our part, cause for an investigation or a reason to call for our troops to come home.” Notice how he slipped in the bit about no need for an investigation.

Bush’s attempt to formulate a Zen koan: “And the reason I’m confident we’ll succeed in Iraq is because the Iraqis want to succeed in Iraq.”


He explains that the Iraq war is different from World War II, but his grasp on what exactly World War II was seems a bit tenuous: “We were facing a nation state -- two nation states -- three nation states in World War II.” Also, WW II was easy: “We were able to find an enemy by locating its ships or aircraft or soldiers on the ground.”

Nodding their heads and voting with their feet

Rumsfeld on why it’s entirely coincidental that the current civil war in Iraq followed the American invasion and occupation: “Now, we talk about the violence that’s going on in that country, and there is violence in that country; let there be no doubt....” Was someone doubting that? “...But there was violence before. I mean, there are -- hundred thousands of people are in mass graves all over that country. Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds, his own people, as well as his neighbors. So violence is not something that’s new to Iraq. Indeed, it’s a pattern in that country.” A pattern. He makes it sound like wallpaper. I’m not sure what sort of a “pattern” it is that encompasses both the repressive violence of a dictator and a sectarian civil war. They seem to me to be quite distinctive phenomena, having in common only a “pattern” of a high body count. Or possibly he’s saying Iraqis are just inherently violent.


Rummy adds that the war won’t be won militarily (on that much we can agree), but on the “political front and the governance front... when people say, ‘Okay, it’s going to make it,’ and they start nodding their heads, and they vote with their feet, and the economic circumstance improves.” I’m a little unclear on whether they’ll be nodding their heads at the same time as they vote with their feet, or they’ll nod and then voting with their feet, but I’ll definitely keep an eye out for the nodding and the foot-voting.

Meeting the stringent international legal standards for civil war

Wouldn’t you know it? On the Friday before a holiday weekend, the Pentagon released a report (pdf) saying that violence is increasing in Iraq, that “Death squads and terrorists are locked in mutually reinforcing cycles of sectarian strife” in which civilians are increasingly targeted, and admitting that the campaign to reduce violence in Baghdad has had no effect.

It admits that “Conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq, specifically in and around Baghdad,” but gives this very comforting reason why there won’t be a civil war, or at least not something we’ll ever call a civil war: “there is no generally agreed upon definition of civil war among academics or defense analysts.” So the term has no meaning? Funny, because you seemed to think it had a meaning when you said on page 3, “the current violence is not a civil war.” It goes on, “Moreover, the conflict in Iraq does not meet the stringent international legal standards for civil war.” So that’s all right, then.

Did you know there were stringent international legal standards for civil war? Really, you have to dot every i and cross every t, it’s all “the party of the first part” this and “no implied warranty is created” that. Lawyers, huh? Take the fun out of everything.

Comment link, same caveats as before.

They had the guns and we didn’t know what the hell was going on

In comments on my last post, Mrs. Malaprop suggests an answer to my question, what the Holy Jihad Brigades thought forcing the Fox reporter hostages to “convert” would accomplish: it’s an allegory, like introducing democracy at gunpoint. I’ll buy that. Thus this statement by one of the reporters, Steve Centanni: “It was something we felt we had to do because they had the guns and we didn’t know what the hell was going on.” Pretty much sums up the human condition in the 21st century.

Update: oh for crummsake, they videotaped the “conversion.” Of course they did. Here it is, if you’re curious. The Foxies are forced on pain of death to say that Islam is a religion of peace, and that “Islam is not fascism. Words like that only serve to deepen the great chasm between peoples, to fan the flames of anger and distrust that already burn in the Muslim world.” I know you can’t turn people into democrats by application of military force, but boy if you could bring an understanding of irony to the Middle East... The War to Make the World Safe for Irony, has a ring to it, huh?

Adblock

Adblock

This sounds strangely familiar:



Yesterday there was a completely incoherent interview of Iraqi PM Maliki by Wolf Blitzer on CNN. I assume it was Maliki’s translator who was incoherent rather than Maliki, but who knows? A sample: “Therefore, the agreement of the Iraqis is like a ship that all Iraqis should all be in to face terrorism and explosions that you mentioned with these numbers.” So we got some incoherent answers about when US troops might leave Iraq, an incoherent answer about whether Israel has a right to exist, and an incoherent response to Blitzer’s demand that Maliki apologize for having criticized American troops who massacred civilians “at a time,” said Wolfy, “when the United States military has done so much to try to bring democracy and freedom to Iraq.” Through the translator, this is the “clarification” Wolf asked for: “There’s a difference between the forces that are there to protect Iraqi experience and help Iraqis, and difference between have violations -- which is natural.” About the only comprehensible statement was this: “The violence is in decrease. And our security ability is increasing. And I want to assure he who loves Iraq that Iraq will never be in a civil war.” I’m curious whether the translator worked for Maliki or for CNN, and why CNN bothered putting this gibberish on the air, and I know you’re all waiting for me to say something about Bush’s speech patterns, but I’m not gonna do it, it’s just too easy.

Bush press conference: disasters, objectives, strained psyches, what good, decent people say, and what we won’t do so long as he’s the president

Bush held a press conference today. He praised himself for giving humanitarian aid to Lebanon, which he called “disaster relief,” as if it was hit by a flood or an earthquake rather than American-made munitions.

Actually, I think he may simply have forgotten just what “disaster” it is that happened to Lebanon, since he also accused Iran and Syria of “working to thwart the efforts of the Lebanese people to break free from foreign domination and build their own democratic future.” He seems to think that the only foreign domination Lebanon has had to contend with recently has been by Iran and Syria.


WILL THIS BE ON THE FINAL? Asked if Iran’s influence in “the region,” meaning Lebanon, is growing, Bush says, “The final history in the region has yet to be written.” Final history? That sounds pretty ominous. “They sponsor Hezbollah. They encourage a radical brand of Islam. Imagine how difficult this issue would be if Iran had a nuclear weapon.” Er, how would the one affect the other? And would it have anything to do with that “final history”?


OBJECTIVELY SPEAKING: Bush has been very big on the word “objectives” for a while now. Just in this presser, he said that the US has a plan to help the Iraqis achieve their objectives, that we should help Middle Eastern reformers achieve their objectives, that a UN force will help the Lebanese government achieve “some objectives,” that in relation to Iran’s nuclear program, “we will work with people in the Security Council to achieve that objective, and the objective is that there’s got to be a consequence for them basically ignoring what the Security Council has suggested through resolution.” Also, the terrorists “want to achieve objectives.”

YA THINK? “Obviously, I wish the violence would go down, but not as much as the Iraqi citizens would wish the violence would go down.”


The key sentence was the announcement that we’ll be occupying Iraq at least until January 2009: “We’re not leaving, so long as I’m the President.”

He says that politicians who disagree with that policy are good, decent people who are undercutting our national security and betraying our troops for political gain: “This is a campaign -- I’m sure they’re watching the campaign carefully. There are a lot of good, decent people saying, get out now; vote for me, I will do everything I can to, I guess, cut off money is what they’ll try to do to get our troops out.”

Our old friend Sum has been expressing unlikely opinions about terrorists again: “Now, I recognize some say that these folks are not ideologically bound. I strongly disagree. I think not only do they have an ideology, they have tactics necessary to spread their ideology.” Chimpy may just be stringing words and phrases together in a random order, but I think he just said that terrorism is an effective means of persuading people to believe in an ideology.

Sum’s cousin Sumbody has also been talking: “And somebody said, well, this is law enforcement. No, this isn’t law enforcement, in my judgment.”


On whether the violence in Iraq is now mostly sectarian, i.e., a civil war: “No, al Qaeda is still very active in Iraq. As a matter of fact some of the more -- I would guess, I would surmise that some of the more spectacular bombings are done by al Qaeda suiciders.” I suppose it’s an improvement that when he has no evidence, he now admits he’s just making stuff up.

On Lebanon: “You can’t have a democracy with an armed political party willing to bomb its neighbor without the consent of its government, or deciding, well, let’s create enough chaos and discord by lobbing rockets.” That’s from the Federalist Papers, right?

On Iraq: “Leaving before the job is done would be a disaster, and that’s what we’re saying.” There’s that word again.


Asked about reports that he expressed frustration about the lack of gratitude of the Iraqi people: “Frustrated? Sometimes I’m frustrated. Rarely surprised. Sometimes I’m happy. This is -- but war is not a time of joy. These aren’t joyous times. These are challenging times, and they’re difficult times, and they’re straining the psyche of our country. I understand that.” But “if we ever give up the desire to help people who live in freedom, we will have lost our soul as a nation, as far as I’m concerned.” So we’re straining our psyche but not losing our soul.

Speaking of strained psyches:

The great challenge of the 21st century

Bush & Condi had a press conference this morning. Possibly because he was standing next to Condi, Bush was very much in his faux-Thomas Jefferson mode


– you all got that was a Sally Hemings reference, right? – talking about creating democracies in Lebanon, in Iraq, in Cuba, and using the exact same narrative and the same vocabulary for each. Reading Bush’s speeches and press conferences reminds me of the old joke where someone is reading Romeo and Juliet and exclaims, “Why it’s just like West Side Story.”

When you’re a Hez, you’re a Hez all the way.
His latest grandiose phrase is that it’s the “great challenge of the 21st century” to protect fledgling democracies against the onslaught of the terrorists.


The contradiction there, which he is blind to, is that self-determination in those countries is undercut at every turn by his own ham-handed efforts to run the world. The past couple of days Bush & his various underlings have been repeatedly asked about the Lebanese government’s utter rejection of the big smelly turd that is the proposed UN Security Council resolution, and have always sidestepped it. Bush usually goes off on a tangent about supporting democracy in Lebanon blah blah blah, with the implication that they should be grateful and keep their little quibbles to themselves. The message is that Lebanon should be a democracy, but the world is very much not one, it is the personal fiefdom of George W. Bush. He proclaimed that “The people on the island of Cuba ought to decide... their form of government” and “The Iraqi people decided against civil war when they went to the ballot box,” but I forget, who was it he said was The Decider in this country?

Condi on first steps (good), the status quo ante (bad), and hypothetical questions (no comment)

Sgt. Milton Ortiz, Jr. of the Penn. National Guard plead guilty to obstructing justice by planting an AK-47 near an unarmed Iraqi, Gani Ahmed Zaben, killed by his buddy in Ramadi in February because he was believed to be walking in a “tactical” manner and carrying a gun, which he wasn’t. Charges were dropped against the shooter last month. Ortiz also faced a separate charge of beating up another Iraqi. He was reduced in rank. Not even discharged from the military.

The US is pressing forward on getting a UN Security Council vote, because if there’s one thing that’s influential in the Middle East, it’s a UN Security Council resolution. But while the US and Israel keep talking about the need for the Lebanese government to displace Hezbollah from what they like to call a power vacuum (how can it be a vacuum when Hezbollah is there? In the vacuum of space, no one can hear you scream “Death to Israel”), they’re treating the rejection of their resolution by the Lebanese government as irrelevant. Condi said today that they may not like it now, but “I suspect that after this resolution is passed that you will see an understanding on the part of both parties that the time to have an abatement in this violence is now.” She’s a great one for telling people that it’s “time for” this or that.

And what a busy Condi she was today, appearing on ABC and NBC, and holding a press conference. I’ll take them together.

When did “that’s a hypothetical question” become an acceptable reason not to answer it? Lieberman refused to answer a question about running as an independent on that ground, and Condi refused to talk about the possibility of civil war in Iraq: “I’m not going to deal with a hypothetical.” Yes, heaven forbid we plan for stuff before it happens; worked so well for us in Iraq up until now. She did, however, say that “The Iraqi people and the Iraqi government have not made a choice for civil war.” Did Bosnia hold a referendum first, “Civil war: yea or nay”? Or any other country? Imagine what the campaign ads would be like. I mean I’ve heard of attack ads... Condi admitted that sectarian violence is at its height, but she offered a helpful solution: “The Iraqis need to get a handle on that.” Yeah, they should really get to work on that.


After all the talk about how a ceasefire only made sense if it were lasting, enduring, permanent, stable, eternal, etc., she does rather seem to be trying to lower expectations, saying “these things take a while to wind down” and “there could be skirmishes of some kind for some time to come.” However, “The violence that we are all seeing every day on our screens has simply got to stop” – oh, won’t someone think of the real victims in this: Americans watching CNN – “so that the Lebanese people have an opportunity to begin to return to a normal life.” Under Israeli military occupation, living as refugees amidst piles of rubble, without food, shelter or electricity. Normal for Lebanon, I suppose.

And while at times she treated the UN resolution as a magical incantation, at others she downplayed it. She called it a “first step” 3 times on NBC, 5 times on ABC, and 7 times in the press conference, including, “a good first step,” “a very good first step,” “the best first step,” “the right first step.” Beyond moving in international forces, she was a little unclear about what the second step would be, but that’s probably one of those – how you say? – hypothetical questions.

Her other favorite phrase, all this week, has been “status quo ante,” (5 times on ABC, 6 times on NBC, 4 times in the press conference) the thing to which we cannot return.

Replying to a question from Russert about the rise in support for Hezbollah in Lebanon in reaction to the invasion, she said, “Well, first of all, it is quite understandable that there is a lot of emotion in Lebanon about what is going on there.” Oh, thank you for being so very understanding.

I haven’t heard Olmert complaining

Asked whether Bush planned to call any Middle Eastern leaders about the draft UN resolution, Tony Insert-Snow-Related-Pun-Here said, “I don’t know if he needs to. I haven’t heard Olmert complaining.” Oy. Besides, Bush was busy with more pressing matters.



Hearings have begun for the soldiers accused of conspiring with Pfc. Steven Green to cover up his rape of a 14-year old Iraqi girl in Mahmudiya and subsequent massacre of her and her family. The London Sunday Times, which seems to have seen papers that no one else has, reports that the girl was not raped only by Green.

The Iraqi national security adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie says that Iraq has civil strife but not a civil war. So that’s okay then.

Pointless invention of the week: a $1.5 million bed that floats. Magnets are involved.