The Bush administration is pushing a narrative on national security issues (and has been for some time now) which can be summed up as: "Trust us, we know what we're doing -- and we're doing it to keep you safe." Two facets of this issue are on the front burner this week: warrantless wiretapping and torture (or as they put it "extraordinary interrogation techniques," one of many euphemisms they've trotted out). But what seems to be lost in the debate are two data points that just don't fit in with their pre-packaged narrative. And, once again, the mainstream media are largely ignoring these points since they'd have to... you know... commit an act of journalism to confront them squarely.

Read Complete Article »

The time has come for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to hand in her resignation. The latest revelation that the Blackwater personnel involved in the recent Baghdad shooting were given immunity by the State Department for giving statements about the incident should be the final straw for America's patience with Rice to come to an abrupt end.

Of course, the real time for Condi to have handed in her resignation in an honorable administration should have been September 12, 2001. Remember, at this time Rice was National Security Advisor to the president. The NSA's job description is to "take all the intelligence from the various intelligence agencies in the U.S. government and put it all together for the president to act upon." Her spectacular failure to perform this job would have meant disgrace and a shameful resignation in virtually any other administration in history.

Read Complete Article »

Six House members -- three Republicans and three Democrats -- have joined together to introduce legislation strengthening the 1973 War Powers Act which (if successful) could mean a showdown on the separation of powers before the Supreme Court. This showdown may determine once and for all the limits of the president to order American troops into battle.

Of course, I have no idea what chances this new legislation has for passing Congress as a whole, but the astonishing thing is that it is being ignored almost totally by the mainstream media, which is a shame. Because it deserves debating now, while the White House seemingly is preparing the American public for yet another war (this time against Iran).

Read Complete Article »

I admit I was going to give this week's award to Henry Waxman, who (as Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform) singlehandedly seems to be taking on the job of investigating Bush's numerous power grabs and fiascos, perhaps he'll qualify for a special "Most Impressive Democrat of the Year" award later.

Read Complete Article »

There is one thing that just about everybody in the Iraq debate agrees on, from President Bush to anti-war Democrats to Republicans to the generals on the ground: that the biggest thing we want to avoid in Iraq is a "wider regional war." No matter what your position on Iraq, from "leave troops there for 50 years like in South Korea" to "bring all troops home tomorrow," pretty much everybody agrees that a wider war which involves Iraq's neighbors is a thing to be avoided if at all possible.

We're now on the brink of that war starting, but we barely even realize it because it's happening from a direction we haven't been paying much attention to -- Turkey. Now, I personally have been warning for a long time that the situation with Turkey could put the United States in a very tough spot, both diplomatically and militarily. Last year (8/9/06) I wrote:

Read Complete Article »

Getting a clear picture of the situation on the ground in the middle of an occupation or war is a hard thing to do. For various reasons, it's hard to trust the reports from the Pentagon, the embedded media, or politicians of either stripe, because their views are usually skewed in one direction or another.

Which is why I give much more weight to first-person accounts from soldiers who have been there. And you can call me anti-elitist, but the lower the rank of the soldier, the more weight I give to their accounts. I see it as: the closer you get to the bottom, the tougher jobs you likely will have performed. This may not be fair, but I wanted to lay out my own personal biases (since I'm criticizing everyone else's).

Read Complete Article »

I must say, Charles Rangel impressed me last weekend, on CBS' Face The Nation, as he is the first Democrat I've heard yet using the "block grant" argument against the Republican spin on SCHIP. Modesty forbids me to take any credit, but if he is indeed reading these columns I'd like to say, "Well done, Representative Rangel!"

Read Complete Article »

The elitism and disdain dripping from Pelosi's comments are staggering, considering the fact that she knew she was on the record when she uttered them. Not content to rail against anti-war protesters on her front sidewalk (which likely would have been enough to gain her some sympathy from normal people, who might agree that the protesters had crossed some line of propriety), Pelosi can't resist the urge to twist the knife by complaining about the First Amendment. Wow. You don't hear Democrats saying things like this very often, for a good reason -- the Democratic base actually believes the First Amendment is a good thing.

Read Complete Article »

Sovereignty (n) -- government free from external control

Is Iraq a truly sovereign state, or is the Maliki government a puppet of America? We may know the answer to this crucial question in a very short time. Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki could show independence from American interests in many ways, some of them decidedly not to President Bush's liking.

Read Complete Article »

Is Basra a lot better than when the British were holed up downtown? Or is it a lot worse? Or is it currently experiencing a lull in violence that will prove to be the calm before the storm of factional Shi'ite war? Or are the Iraqi militias actually working out their differences with agreements rather than bullets?

Of course, this is not Jeffersonian democracy at its finest. It's closer to warlordism than we'd care to admit as a nation. The process is going to be messy and unpleasant, no matter how it works out. And the lessons of Basra likely can't be applied to other parts of Iraq (due to different ethnic and sectarian populations).

But, as I said previously, Basra bears watching. Because there is a larger question to be asked here: If U.S. troops pull out, will Iraq become more or less stable when we're not around to shoot at anymore?

Read Complete Article »