Petraeus Promoted; Odierno Promoted; Iran Promoted. The Asylum Is Open.

Today’s paper Globe (but not the online version) carries a story by Robert Burns of the Associated Press reporting on the promotion of General David Petraeus, the beneficiary of Moqtada al Sadr’s decision to take his militia out of the fight temporarily, to chief of U.S. Central Command. That’s the command in charge of slaughtering and torturing as many Iraqis and Afghanis as they can manage. Petraeus’ position in Iraq will be taken over by his second, Lieutenant General Ray Odierno. The position of the region’s Ultimate Bad Bad Bad Evil Dirty Satanic Sonofabitch will be filled by Iran.

Consider that this is an election year in the United States. Further consider that the Republicans believe two things. One, only by making US citizens afraid of a boogey man can the Republicans win elections. Two, Iraq is no longer a boogey man, so Iran must be elevated at all costs to the 2008 Election Year Boogeyman. That job now falls squarely on the able shoulders of Petraeus, Odierno, and George Bush’s sock puppet, reputed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

At a Pentagon news conference, Gates said he did not foresee that the new lineup at Central Command and in Iraq would mean any changes in the way the U.S. is approaching the issue of Iranian influence in Iraq. Petraeus and Odierno have both accused Iran of aiding rebels opposing U.S. troops.

“It’s my belief that General Odierno and General Petraeus and Admiral Fallon were all in exactly the same position when it came to their views of Iranian interference inside Iraq,” Gates said. “And it is a hard position. Because what the Iranians are doing is killing American service men and women inside Iraq.”

And once again, the tactical decision made by these eminently political military people is to offer accusations and hope the electorate will regard them as proof.

They have offered no evidence that has withstood legitimate scrutiny that Iran is actively involved in operations against American troops.

And let us assume that what they say is true. That merits a big ‘So what?’

After all, the United States, under cover of a tissue of lies and deceit, illegally and immorally invaded and occupied Iraq, and has spent five years destroying that country, which posed no threat to the United States, and had committed no act of aggression against the United States. And the United States has done nothing but threaten Iran and act against Iran, which has committed no act of aggression against the United States, and generally let it be known that the United States would have no compunction about attacking Iran and killing millions of its citizens on the whim of the American President, currently a psychopath named George Bush.

So if Iran is indeed providing support to Iraqis fighting against the United States, Iran would be completely justified. The more American soldiers they can help put into the ground, the sooner the United States might leave the area and start negotiating rationally instead of acting like a rabid dog, or like a brain-addled drunkard and drug addict.

Petraeus will face broader aspects of the Iran issue if he is confirmed as Fallon’s replacement. A number of U.S. officials, including Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have asserted that Iran also is supplying arms or otherwise supporting the Taliban rebels in Afghanistan.

Again, a big ‘So what?’ Assertion is not evidence of action. And the same reasoning applies regarding Afghanistan and Iran as Iraq and Iran.

What’s missing from the vision of these people in Washington is that when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, the United States supplied the rebels there in order to drive out the Soviets. Now the United States is the new Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and whines about Iran providing support to the rebels trying to drive out the United States. The American military is crashing on the same ancient cultural reefs as the Soviets did, in a land the American political establishment, indeed even the military establishment, cannot, will not, understand.

Earlier this week, Gates said that while war with Iran would be “disastrous on a number of levels,” the military option cannot be abandoned so long as the Iranians remain a potential nuclear threat.

Well, Robbie the Robot Gates, let’s just attack them anyway, never mind how many levels of disaster, catastrophe, and stupidity we can achieve. After all, they might, maybe, someday in the next ten years build a bomb. A bomb. Not an almighty arsenal of several hundred like Israel holds over the heads of everyone in the Middle East, but a bomb. Because they might, being threatened almost daily by the United States and Israel, build an arsenal to defend themselves with, we are morally bound to slaughter millions of them and reduce their country to rubble. Apparently that’s easier than treating them like fellow human beings and talking with them and trading with them and building a positive relationship over the years.

Especially not in an election year when the Republicans who lied the world into a useless war need once again to create a climate of fear and loathing in which their candidate, the misbegotten, sleazy, corrupt and ignorant Senator John McCain can pull off a win in November and continue the insanity of George Bush and his cronies and puppetmasters.

Congratulations on the promotions, guys. Lotsa luck on your extended tour of the asylum.

 

Advertisements

19 Responses

  1. The MSM make a lot of out the November election in America but not very much out of the October election in Iraq but it’s the October election that will set the course for what happens in Iraq.

    Bush has around 150,000 troops in Iraq and is so hated in Iraq he has to fly in unannounced and cower in the green Zone. Ahmadinejad has no troops in Iraq, is given an official state visit, publishes his itinerary on the web and has the red carpet treatment outside the Green Zone. Why? Maybe because Iran doesn’t have 150,000 troops in Iraq, isn’t occupying it and isn’t sponsoring a private terrorist army.

    Like

  2. Is Iraq’s Maliki friendly with Iran?

    We are definitely through the looking glass. Have been for at least 5 years now. So far through that I’m having trouble figuring out how we get back.

    Can we take a Mulligan?

    Like

  3. How true.

    It looks as if there’s also some demented attempt to work up a Plan B with Syria as well.

    Like

  4. Evo –

    As I understand it, Maliki had to depend on Iran intervening in his disastrous offensive in Basra to save his ass by brokering a cease-fire.

    As for getting back through the looking glass or back up the rabbit hole, there’s only one way. Throw the Republicans out on their ass in November. Take the White House and the Senate and the House, and then institute a purge of right-wing Republicans and Conservatives from every bureau of government, right down to the lowliest file clerk.

    And we’re beyond Mulligans. We need Scotch. Billy? How’s your supply?

    Like

  5. Heather –

    This is all about getting McCain elected by frightening the citizenry. Syria is now part of it. More to come. They’re willing to throw whatever progress has been made with North Korea under the bus. Everything anyone from the Bush administration says from now on has to be looked at from the perspective of electing McCain and regaining Congress. They will lie, deceive, distort, cheat, will do anything to hang on to power. It’s what they’ve done all along, and they have all the reason in the world to continue doing it, in spades.

    And the media, aside from Olbermann and the few progressive voices out there, will continue to give McCain a free pass. At least the DNC has begun to take him on, and Obama is apparently starting to turn that way. Clinton’s interests are little more than Clinton’s interests. It’s past time for the Democrats to start dealing with the big picture, and all she is doing is muddying the waters in a sorry attempt to advance her and her husband’s ambitions.

    Like

  6. Ric – I’m not sure your solution gets us back through the looking glass. As you probably are, I’m deeply disappointed in the current DEM congress. But, it’s the only place to start, that’s for sure.

    Like

  7. evo –

    The Democratic majorities in Congress were weak to begin with, and they weakened themselves even more by saying things like “Impeachment is off the table” and by not standing up against Republicans on every issue. When a Democrat in Congress talks about bipartisanship, he shows a complete failure to understand the Republicans. They are not interested in bipartisanship, they are not interested in the welfare of the country. They are interested in power, period, and they want all the power in their hands and they do not care how they get it. If the power struggle in Washington were the proverbial war of wits, the Democrats would have come to the battle unarmed.

    But even if the Dems gain powerful majorities in November, they need the White House in order to dig out the conservatives holed up in every agency and bureaucracy, because those people can stunt and weaken any reforms passed by Congress. Neither we nor the world can afford to have in power people who think the 19th century was the most wonderful time on earth.

    Like

  8. I can understand being completely baffled and stunned by the audacity of the neocons driving the Republican machine for like, oh, let’s be kind and say a month. A solid month of deer in the headlights shock, but then after 30 days the gears in the head have to all synchronize, like tumblers in a lock, and accept the reality that’s happening before them and DO SOMETHING. When was that election? Was that 2006? You know, when we put the Dems into a majority in Congress. Uh, hello? Tick tock, tick tock. What the fuck?

    Like

  9. Gee, Ric, I hope you were wearing an American flag pin on your lapel when you wrote this. You know, so people would know you were a patriot and all.

    (Sometimes I look at this crap and I want to get me a lapel pin so I can wear it upside down.)

    I’ll take even a weak-kneed Democratic administration over the flat-out evil and incompetent Republican one we have now. Not a high bar, admittedly, but that’s what two-party democracy gets you.

    Like

  10. b. t. –

    No pissant piddling little lapel flag pins for me. I had the flag tattooed on my left testicle. Let ’em question that!

    Like

  11. Pictures? We need proof. Enquiring minds absolutely positively need to know.

    Like

  12. spanqi –

    What, you don’t trust me? What happened to faith in your fellow human beings? Besides, I have a certificate. It’s around here somewhere, I think.

    Like

  13. I’m with SI: only high resolution photos will do. And their authenticity has to be assured by a notary pubic, I mean, public.

    Like

  14. Ric: I believe you. I have faith in your honesty. I also have faith in . . . . Oh. Wait. I don’t have faith. Show me the evidence!

    Like

  15. See, now, if Barack Obama gave ’em that answer, the conversation would be OVER!!

    Well, until Hillary said “Me, too!” – as she inevitably would, and then McCain would be trying to remember where…

    I just threw up a little in my mouth.

    Like

  16. (), b.t., chappie, spanqi –

    Obviously there’s been some misunderstanding due to an apparent lack of knowledge of male anatomy on the part of you guys. A testicle, which is where the tattoo is, is internal and thus covered by skin, so obviously it can’t be photographed without surgical intervention. So as much as I would like to oblige all you folks’ desire, you understand why it’s just not possible, my friends… Thanks for your support.

    (Did I mention that I’ve been taking lessons in public relations, obfuscation, and lying from the McCain/Clinton ticket? The lessons are free and available to anyone. A real bargain.)

    Like

  17. b.t. –

    I suspect you might have happier digestive experiences if you simply laid off politics for the next several months…

    Like

  18. I had such good intentions, but then that damnably exciting Guam caucus sucked me in…

    In my own defense, though, my current girlfriend is Chamorro.

    Like

  19. Ah, a Guamette!

    I would imagine she’s not too fond of your reaction to political news that you make up. I suppose, though, that as long as you don’t drool, she’ll never know. (Assuming she didn’t read about it here.)

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: