For six years we have heard many such criticisms from Democrats. There is a difference this time. They can do something about the things that they are criticizing.
Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, told a gathering of the American Bar Association on Friday that the Bush administration's secret wiretapping program for suspected terrorists is illegal.
That statement to the ABA sets the tone for a sea change in the US strategy in the fight against terrorism. The Bush Administration with the Republican Congress has chosen to take on the jihadis by the use of intelligence and military action. The Democrats have been increasingly critical of the Administration seeming to prefer the use of the criminal court system.
Harman, once a supporter of the WOT, has become increasingly critical of President Bush's policies. Recently, her initial support for the Iraq war and her defense of the Patriot Act, has wained. Harman, who had been backed for the chairmanship by conservative Democrats, lost to more liberal Democrats. That was punishment for being too kind towards Bush policies.
House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, bypassed Harman in announcing that Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, will become chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the new Congress.
Yet in her speech Friday, she said, "The term 'war on terror' is a misnomer," Harman said. "Wars are fought and won with military power; but the era of terror will not be ended by military force alone. In addition, the very designation of the struggle against terror as a 'war' enables the president to invoke commander-in-chief authorities to circumvent Congress, legal precedent and many constitutional requirements."
She repeated the usual nonsense about how our fighting style does not go down well in more refined circles:"How we treat people in U.S. custody says a lot about us and what we're fighting for. Holding detainees for years with no status determination, or using interrogation practices that go over the line, erodes our moral authority and ultimately harms our effort in the struggle for the hearts and minds of the moderate Arab and Muslim world."
So it looks like we will be doing a hearts and minds thing.
Although passed over for top billing, Harman, as a senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Homeland Security Committee can make havoc for Bush. She also had this to say:
"For the first time in 12 years, Congress will have the opportunity to conduct meaningful oversight. The days of 'just trust me' are over," she said. "The president should seek legal consensus on these questions."
I preferred her tone when in April she In her keynote address to the Duke Law conference on April 7th and 8th. "Strategies for the War on Terrorism: Taking Stock" , she said:
"It's not a ‘war on terrorism,' a notion which connotes a finite adversary against whom we will win or lose. We live in an era of terror," said Harman, likening the use of force against terrorists to "hammering jello".
"You can hit as hard as you want, but they just squirt out-disperse-and they reconnect with their networks in other locations, and literally plug into a wider and growing jihadist movement."
Good intelligence, diplomacy, and public diplomacy-"a broader public effort to win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world"-are also necessary to defeat the threat, Harman noted, before launching into a critique of the administration's policies towards detention and interrogation of terror suspects, the result of its "one-dimensional view" that the United States is embroiled in "simply a ‘war.'"
That talk then lost her the top job. The Democrats have something else in mind.
The resume for the new chairman who beat Harman does not look bad at all. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, is a Texan, was drafted into the Army and served during 1966-68 as a helicopter crew chief and gunner. His service included 13 months in Vietnam. During 26 years of service in the Border Patrol he rose in rank, leaving as a senior law enforcement official in 1995. He won his seat in Congress in 1996.ReplyDelete
For those who have yet to read Chester’s latest, please do so. And, don’t be repulsed by the use of “ecosystem” in the article’s title; neither Al Gore nor Kyoto are mentioned even once. This churning of American policy in Iraq, as it affects the abandonment of a series of clearly failed “policies”, is starting stimulate some first-rate analyses. Chester’s is one several recent products.ReplyDelete
A Red Harvest in the "Conflict Ecosystem"
Regrettably, I have been unable to locate your comment; I was looking forward to it.
The wrap on Mr. Reyes is "anti-war." That doesn't tell me much other than he could be selectively supportive.
Tommy Franks also began his career as a gunner. Let's hope there's something intrinsically ennobling about starting out life as an enlisted gunner.
May be it's just me, but I am sensing one of those blogosphere periods when we can expect some awfully good work. You and Whit are included!
I want to like Harmon--I hope I will be able to.ReplyDelete
You make many good points in your article. I would like to supplement them with some information:ReplyDelete
I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being used by our forces as we speak.
If you are interested in a view of the inside of the Pentagon procurement process from Vietnam to Iraq please check the posting at my blog entitled, “Odyssey of Armements”
The Pentagon is a giant,incredibly complex establishment,budgeted in excess of $500B per year. The Rumsfelds, the Adminisitrations and the Congressmen come and go but the real machinery of policy and procurement keeps grinding away, presenting the politicos who arrive with detail and alternatives slanted to perpetuate itself.
How can any newcomer, be he a President, a Congressman or even the Sec. Def. to be - Mr. Gates- understand such complexity, particulary if heretofore he has not had the clearance to get the full details?
Answer- he can’t. Therefor he accepts the alternatives provided by the career establishment that never goes away and he hopes he makes the right choices. Or he is influenced by a lobbyist or two representing companies in his district or special interest groups.
From a practical standpoint, policy and war decisions are made far below the levels of the talking heads who take the heat or the credit for the results.
This situation is unfortunate but it is ablsolute fact. Take it from one who has been to war and worked in the establishment.
This giant policy making and war machine will eventually come apart and have to be put back together to operate smaller, leaner and on less fuel. But that won’t happen unitil it hits a brick wall at high speed.
We will then have to run a Volkswagon instead of a Caddy and get along somehow. We better start practicing now and get off our high horse. Our golden aura in the world is beginning to dull from arrogance.
Tell me you're not German.
Sorry about that; I lost my thread.
sooo, 2164th, which is it? Is it a travesty that the the Dems think the spy program is illegal or is it the the perfect storm infringing upon your freedoms? I'm trying to understand where you are coming from on this - do you really think all these spy programs only spy on terrorists leaving the rest of the folk like yourself to bask in the privacy of your constitutional freedom? Seems to me you expect to have your cake and eat it.ReplyDelete
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.ReplyDelete
Well, at least we know he has above-average luck. That was just about the most dangerous duty in Nam.ReplyDelete
there is a difference between the government requiring private companies to maintain records on their private emails and the national security agency listening in on Islamists telephone and email correspondence. I am sure you see the difference and agree with me.
can't access your link, rosecovered (got my screen rez waaay high). maybe someone will 'blue' it. ???ReplyDelete
all i can see isReplyDelete