First, this link to Sy Hersh's New Yorker article on the current Bush Administration plans for (literally) world domination, starting with Iran. It would appear that groundwork similar to the invasion of Iraq is now underway at the Pentagon and in the White House. The lessons the White House believes it has learned from the Iraq fiasco? Political. I wonder what that means: arresting protestors?
A Pentagon spokesman (Larry DiRita) promptly disputes Sy Hersh's conclusions.
We will see. Hersh has yet to be wrong. The Pentagon has yet to be right. Draw your OWN conclusions.
I just posted. I expect the absolute worst. Bush has stated his intention of pushing his mandate to the hilt. and he means it.
Posted by John Emerson at January 18, 2005 12:46 AM
I keep thinking Di Rita is one of the three stooges.
but I digress.
then again, so does he.
If this man is a Pentagon spokesman, couldn't he have come up with an answer that relied less on Google?
Posted by julia at January 18, 2005 3:25 AM
Bush and what army? Literally? With what military force is this to be carried out with?
If they think they stage manage a revolution from the wings with a few bombs then they're bigger fools (and villians) than I'd realized.
Posted by Michael Farris at January 18, 2005 4:50 AM
I'd like to clarify one small point:
"If they think they stage manage a revolution from the wings" I should add "by pressing an issue in which there is no disagreement between the mullahs and the general population".
That is, by all accounts, essentially the entire Iranian population supports the idea of their country going nuclear (if nothing else, the NKorea example shows that Washington will pretty much leave you alone if you manage it).
I hope this article is disinformation fed to Hersh to embarrass him, but on the other hand, I really don't think the administration has learned anything from Iraq (except to be more secretive and more irresponsible than ever).
Posted by Michael Farris at January 18, 2005 6:13 AM
What a bitchy DOD press release! Are they usually written in such a tone? Doesn't seem very crisply professional. And Mr. Farris, you're right: with what army?! Hard to imagine a war with Iran that's going to be even "lighter, faster, and cheaper" than the war with Iraq.
Posted by Miss Authoritiva at January 18, 2005 7:17 AM
Well, I think DOD's and Bartlett's responses were classic examples of non-denial denials. Where's the part about "this is total fiction--we categorically deny that anything of the sort is going on in Iran or in the Pentagon"???? No such luck. It's happening.
Are they stupid enough to think (even after Iraq) that they can "stage manage a revolution from the wings"?--Oh, yes. All they have to do is make a couple of strategic air strikes, take out a few mullahs, and the Iranian people's desire for reform will cause them to rise up and form a representative democracy with full civil rights. They honestly believe this. (They are delusional, but sincere.)
I am particularly enjoying the part about Douglas Feith convening his own personal think tanks of former Iran-Contra participants, who are being referred to by that particular corridor of the Pentagon as "Iran experts." Anything goes in the reality-free universe. It's the best of all possible worlds.
Posted by mamayo at January 18, 2005 1:42 PM
Where's the part about the Iranian people greeting our forces with flower petals?
Posted by Jeremiad Screamer at January 18, 2005 2:35 PM
Imposing a draft and accusing anti-war people of treason has to be part of the mix. Except for the Dog and me, Democrats seem to be oblivious.
I expect the draft to be rushed through in a hysterical crisis atmosphere, even though everyone knows it will take 6 months or a year for the draft to change anything. Once the draft is in place, the crisis will prove manageable.
Posted by John Emerson at January 18, 2005 7:45 PM
I didn't mention the D word, but yeah, it's hard to see how they can accomplish any of their goals without one (unless their goal is just to embroil the whole middle east in conflict while wrecking the US Armed forces).
My working assumption is that they won't _Call_ it a draft, it'll be called something else ("Patriot service" anyone?) and there will be a wrinkle or two (such as exemptions for the wealthy) that will allow the W-ites to bray that W said there wouldn't be a "draft" he never said there wouldn't be "patriot service" (and advise the "left" that anyone who protests it, will be getting exactly what they deserve ...)
Posted by Michael Farris at January 19, 2005 1:10 AM
They could, say, raise the pay of the military to attract more people to join; or we could have a really deep recession that serves that same purpose... join up, or starve to death... almost poetic that both the American and Iraqi services in Iraq have the same induction incentives...
My guess, though, is John is right: some manufactured crisis-- probably a 9-11-LITE here at home, and the schmucks we call our countrymen will "rally 'round the president" again, even as THIS TIME he calls for good old FORCED national service...
Posted by the talking dog at January 19, 2005 9:43 AM
It seems that Iran is denying that operations have taken place upon its sovereign soil as well, calling such allegations "ridiculous".
So-- the score: one heretofore trustworthy Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who say its so vs. two peculiarly untrustworthy governments who say its not.
Once again: draw your own conclusions.
Posted by the talking dog at January 19, 2005 5:52 PM
I wonder how difficult it would be to get this song back on the charts in the next year or so?...
Posted by Phoenician in a time of Romans at January 20, 2005 12:13 AM
I agree with the dog on the "join up or starve to death" draft as opposed to "patriotic service". Why should Bush feel shy about being caught in a lie? He never has before. Look at the whole WMD thing. He believes (with good reason) that no one will call him on any lie he tells. He'll have to use the draft board so everyone will know the truth. If they're calling up 60 year old men now, who (but the rich) won't fear becoming an involuntary part of the Global War On Terror.
Posted by irisclara at January 20, 2005 9:32 PM
O yes Phonecian. When The Who played Won't Get Fooled Again at the Paul McCartney's Concert for 9/11 I watched all those cops and firefighters singing along and grinned so hard my face hurt.
Posted by irisclara at January 20, 2005 9:40 PM