This is must-read stuff from the New York Times. It's about the ex-generals who show up on television as "military analysts" presumably there to provide a neutral point of view. In practice, however, it seems that they mostly have close ties to defense contractors as lobbyists or executives and are, in fact, just part of the Bush administration communications apparatus.
« The Malthus Coincidence | Main | Ironies »
Military Analysts
19 Apr 2008 11:52 pm
Comments (37)
And right on the heels of Bush admitting he knowingly lied about his own assessment of the war during the 2006 election season.
You know, when this is all over we really will need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
Kiril, when this is all over we'll need mysterious 'accidents' and 'illnesses' to befall a great number of people. Reconciliation commissions are a cop out to give a pass to the elite for the crimes they commit. My way works better.
"communications apparatus"? - how about "propaganda machine"?
"communications apparatus"? - how about "propaganda machine"?
soullite, why don't we not emulate banana Republicans and see how that works for a while?
...we'll need mysterious 'accidents' and 'illnesses' to befall a great number of people.
"Accidents" my foot!!!
What we'll need---and hopefully get!---are wholesale mass executions encompassing a pretty good fraction of our entire worthless and corrupt political/media elite.
That way, the unpleasant smell of all those rotting corpses hanging from the trees and lampposts in DC will serve to continually remind the chastened survivors to carefully avoid similar misbehavior in the future.
And just consider the likely national and international ratings of the new wave of resulting TV reality shows established as part of the "rectification" process. The crucial "audience participation" component will allow viewers to vote on suggested questions, "questioning techniques", and the perceived truthfulness of the responses. Viewers whose suggestions win will be granted the privilege of personal participation in the process.
And the name of the show?---"No Survivors"...
I'm waiting for the memos describing how they met with Bill O'Reilly.
Well, if it was up to me the whole bunch would be carted off to the Hague. Vigilante justice (soullite's solution) is just destructive, but the entire U.S. system is too compromised to deal effectively with this level of criminality.
If the U.S. media had any integrity, they'd ban any of these analysts from ever giving commentary again in any medium (TV, radio, web, print). Certainly no reason for anyone encountering their comments to give them any credence at all.
What, you mean retired military officers contracted to television networks are happy to follow orders from the defense establishment? Say it ain't so!
I'm with Kiril. Right now, the BushCo M.O. is the belief that dodging subpoenas and claiming privilege serves as a de facto amnesty. Let's set it out clear enough: amnesty comes from full disclosure.
(Plus, I'd like to see an incoming Dem president assert Bush Justice executive power to declare null and void the blanket pardons that Bush is bound to spend most of January 2009 scribbling off with his presidential Sharpie. Just to see the lake of shit that suddenly fills the GOP exurbs around DC.)
This is exactly why ABC News got slammed this week.
American voters are not stupid. We see, taste, and smell the corruption. As a result, many of us instinctively, pragmatically, emphatically do NOT trust the MSM anymore.
And, as an aside here, it's also why many of us can never vote for a candidate who supported the trumped up and incidious "evidence" (i.e., phantom WMD) for war in the first place.
No person like this should be trusted with the lives of our soldiers.
It would require an Act of Congress (if not re-submittal and ratification of the International Criminal Court Treaty) to extradite anyone to The Hague. Easier to kick them over the border to Canada.
We already have an extradition treaty with Canada and they assert universal jurisdiction over war crimes committed anywhere. Besides, unlike an ICC trial, a war crimes trial in Ontario would have a jury and other legal protections similar to what defendants receive in The US. And once 12 men honest and true convict them, prison visits will be more convenient in Canada versus their families having to fly over to Europe.
We should definitely put the Canadian invasion on hold until after we get this squared away.
What? I thought that papers don't cover stuff like this, because it doesn't sell? Megan told me so herself.
I would've asked Marc Ambinder if he agreed, but he limited comments after wondering why Obama-backers were bitter after his 12th post in a row implying Obama was unelectable.
I must say, you must be happy to look so good in comparison Matt.
I wonder if this is the sort of lefty discourse that preceded the establishment of the Cheka, and later, the NKVD.
Fred, I'd be happy to repeatedly stick my YAF pin into the most sensitive parts of each and every one of these lying 'analysts'.
I remember one of the talking heads from Fox, former green beret Maj. Bob Bevelacqua. He was on the tube all the time, he was O'Reilly's go-to guy about kicking muslim ass. But then he made a major mistake. He criticized Israel during their invasion of Lebanon.
I have not seen him since. I think Mossad made him sleep with the fishes.
In the John Boorman documentary on Lee Marvin, he told this story:
Sometime during the Vietnam War...Lee Marvin and director John Boorman were sitting on a couch in some airport VIP lounge waiting for a flight. A ***General was also seated in a couch across from them - his polychromatic service braids gaudily resplendent on his breastplate.His Green Beret hat nattily arranged. Seeing the famous tough guy actor the General bumptiously rose to introduce himself and satisfy his curiosity as well:
***General: "Mr. Marvin, I was wondering- what's your opinion on our mission in Vietnam?"
Lee Marvin: "Well, General, I wouldn't know about that, but I like your hat."
***General (perplexed): "My hat?"
Lee Marvin: "yes, it's a fine-looking beret. May I see it?"
***General: "Well, alright. I don't mind."
The General handed Lee Marvin the hat and Lee Marvin proceeded to begin chewing on it. The General was astonished momentarily, whereupon Lee Marvin began to rip pieces of the green felt away with his teeth...Mortified, the General slowly arose from his hurriedly left the VIP lounge never to be seen again until flight-time.
John Boorman concluded his telling of the story with the coda that-
John Boorman: "Lee didn't like Generals."
Of course, that's PFC Lee Marvin - a decorated hero in the Battle of Saipan, and interred at Arlington National Cemetery after his 1987 demise.
Check out this video I just found called "Fun With War Crimes" ...Just a trailer, but I think the real show comes out May 1st. Wow...scary! Are they kidding me?! WTF?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXxTooNIsBc
"What we'll need---and hopefully get!---are wholesale mass executions encompassing a pretty good fraction of our entire worthless and corrupt political/media elite."
See, now, that was my original plan back in the early '90's. That was WHY I spent eight years in the joint.
By the way, I'm still available for hire. But I ain't cheap.
Greg Cochran, thanks for that latest example of your sadistic ideation. BTW, do you know who Charlie Munger is? I speculated recently on Sailer's site that I could see the two of you getting along.
I know a little about Munger: he sounds interesting. We both like figuring out answers that go against conventional wisdom. He makes a billion dollars, I get to say 'I told you so' - the same thing, really, when you think about it.
They are all whores.
Of course these guys are on someones payroll who have skin in the game. It's a given. Why would anyone think otherwise? That is the way the world works. Self interest lives in the Pentagon as much as anyplace else. Often more. With several hundred billion disappearing down rabbit holes ever year there it might be said it is the most corrupt place on earth. Most everyone has an angle there.
Skeptics or critics of the war are always identified as connected with some group. That too is the way the world works.
Ditto rapier. We're lucky to get as many different perspectives as we do.
I saw and read Scott Ritter and all sorts of other ex-weapons inspectors and experts on BBC and other news outlets saying loud and clear in 2002 that Iraq's wmd program was a shambles, but you've still got people who imagine the only reason we invaded Iraq was because everyone was hypnotized by "Bush lies". The debate and the relevant facts were wide open. People hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest.
Military experts, like any other expert witnesses, provide pieces of the puzzle that citizens who take their responsibilities seriously must weigh and balance against opposing points of view. People who are too lazy or too stupid to work on getting the story reasonably straight deserve the frustration they feel for being constantly surprised and/or ignored.
Next in this NYT series: Many Sunday TV football analysts are actually .... former NFL players!!!
That's nice Robert Powell, but it would help the people make an informed decision if the "military experts" disclosed that they received their marching orders from the government and were essentially mouthpieces for propaganda, instead of counting on the people to somehow instinctively perceive this unspoken fact.
I agree that the people have a duty to inform themselves about issues of importance. Attempting to figure out whether the media is foisting liars and stooges on them in the guise of independent experts is not part of that duty.
The whole piece is a definite MUST READ, all caps, for sure. So much perfidy, it's hard to know whether to laugh or cry. I like the bit about the meetings to push back on the General's revolt against Rummy, especially this line from the Pentagon's own transcript:
n analyst said at another point: “This is a wider war. And whether we have democracy in Iraq or not, it doesn’t mean a tinker’s damn if we end up with the result we want, which is a regime over there that’s not a threat to us.”“Yeah,” Mr. Rumsfeld said, taking notes.
Just so you know.
sowhat, your analogy might hold three drops of water if Troy Aikman, Phil Simms, et al, were meeting with Roger Goodell every week to get their talking points, and were subsequently parroting those lines while calling the games.
This is hardly news.
There needs to be a lot more reporting and cleanisng light of day exposed on the various links between the political Pentagon appointees, Neocons, media and the AEIs of the world.
Also worth seeing what kind of relationships Petraus and Croker are developing with these groups-- feather bedding.
I applaud you linking the one page version as opposed to the page by page version
While this shouldn't be surprising really, the utter collusion between the administration and the defense industry is simply galling. This is all about money - whether from oil or contracts. They are perpetuating a terrible lie on the american people at the expense of thousands of live and billions of dollars.
And comparing this to football is disgusting, except for the fact that a few people get rich off of the american people (tax money war, taxes for new stadiums). If you see the situations as similar, you must be writing during a fox news commercial.
This is actually no where near as bad as I thought it would be when I read the headlines. The analysts wanted to stand up for Rummy and the War? No shit. They're all ex-military, and they're all wired into the the Pentagon. If they weren't, they wouldn't have access to the information they spew at us. What's scary to me is that people ever thought these analysts were anything but mouthpieces for the government.
It's really groundbreaking for a tiny, impoverished publication like the New York Times to be willing and able to take a systematic look at the sources of analysis proffered to major news producers a mere 5 years into a war which followed a massive propaganda effort to push the war, one in which the New York Times joyfully participated.
Powell: "People who are too lazy or too stupid to work on getting the story reasonably straight deserve the frustration they feel for being constantly surprised and/or ignored."
How does it feel, Powell?
In terms of war crimes of the Bush admin, I'd like a trial in which two facets would be emphasized.
First, the increase in deaths due to the Iraq War over and above what Saddam committed. Estimates of deaths due to Saddam in around 20 years of horror: 200,000. Far more Iraqis have died due to American intervention on their behalf than from the ill we were fighting. The Lancet study pegs it around 600,000 for the war, and various groups have estimated around 1,000,000 deaths due to our pre-war embargo.
Second, the introduction of torture into the images one associates with America. Obviously, the innocents who have been tortured have primacy on our sympathies, but there's a future toll as well: Americans who will be tortured and those who will be tortured by us due to the precedent Bush set. And the spiritual toll. And the legal horrors due to the Yoo memo.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, Yoo, Perle ... the list of defendents needn't be long but it must be choice.
General Anthony Zinni, Lt. Gen. William Odom and Lt. Col. Andrew Bacevich are retired officers that advised publicly before the war that it would be a mistake and not in our national interest.
I think the NYTimes should have adressed this to show that there are retired military men who are not all stooges for military contracts, media acclaim, Big Oil, and Israeli Middle East hegemony. Zinni, Odom, and Bacevich are patriots and knew that this war would be a disaster.
Re-education camps. Use the NSA to find everyone who ever--EVER--watched BillO'Reilly more than once (or maybe an entire episode). Confine every one of them in the camps until they have memorized Tom Paine's little primers about liberty and the sermon on the mount. Oh, and confiscate every penny they made from 2002 on.
That would do it.
Comments closed May 03, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
I dunno, if it was a bunch of food scientists telling people to eat the vegetables, would we care if the government was coordinating their talking points? No.
That was stupid. Of course we care! This is a goddam war! Definitely check out the multimedia part of the NYT story. The memos are unfuckingbelievable.
Posted by chris | April 20, 2008 12:04 AM