When Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies appeared on FAIR’s radio show CounterSpin last week, she challenged Barack Obama’s assertions that U.S. combat in Iraq was ending and that the last combat brigade was leaving the country, describing the plans the U.S. actually has in store for Iraq:
The policy has not changed. It is true that the number of troops are significantly lower than they were at their height of 165,000; it’s now down to about 50,000. That’s a good thing. Reduction in troops is a good thing. But the notion that this troop reduction somehow means that all combat brigades, let alone combat troops, are out of Iraq is just specious.
The 50,000 troops that are in Iraq now are combat troops. The Pentagon has, in their own words, remissioned them. They have given combat troops a new mission, which is for training and assistance of the Iraqi military. But they remain combat troops, ready to reengage in combat at any given moment.
We heard from President Obama about the Fourth Stryker Brigade, which is, as he described it, the last combat brigade leaving Iraq. We didn’t hear about the 3,000 new combat troops, more combat troops, from Fort Hood in Texas, who were just deployed to Iraq about 10 days ago. We also didn’t hear about the 4,500 special forces, which have the job, one, of continuing its counterterrorism operation, meaning using its capture-or-kill list to run around the country and capture or kill people. The other is to train their Iraqi counterparts, the Iraqi Special Operations Force, which is shaping up to be something that looks suspiciously like an El Salvador-style death squad. This is not the end of combat.
This was newsworthy enough, though few other media outlets challenged the White House “end of combat” hype. But Bennis had something even more troubling to add. When CounterSpin pointed out that John Pilger was reporting in the New Statesman that U.S. policy with regard to airstrikes and bombings would be unaffected by the “new” policy, and that U.S. military contractors would be increasing in numbers, Bennis responded:
Absolutely. The number of contractors is quite disturbing, both in its own right and because it’s the beginning of a process underway of militarizing U.S. diplomacy. There will be 7,000 new armed contractors coming into Iraq solely to work under the auspices of the State Department, not the Pentagon, when the State Department becomes the primary U.S. agency in Iraq. What we really didn’t hear from President Obama is that the transition underway is not so much from U.S. control to Iraqi control as much as it is from Pentagon control to State Department control. The agreement that was signed between the U.S. and Iraq that requires, if it doesn’t get changed–which is, I think, a likely possibility–required all U.S. troops and armed contractors under Pentagon control to be out of the country by the end of next year does not apply to contractors, armed or not, under the auspices of the State Department. So with this giant new embassy that holds 5,000 diplomats–it’s the size of Vatican City–there will be at least 7,000 armed contractors. The State Department is bringing in armored cars, surveillance drones, planes and their own rapid response forces. So what we’re seeing is the Pentagon leaving, largely, but the State Department taking on military tasks.
The planned militarization of the State Department has received some coverage in recent months. Stories by McClatchy‘s Warren Strobel, the Associated Press‘ Richard Lardner and Michael Gordon in the New York Times have reported on the State Department’s new military role, fortress-like embassies, planned use of military contractors and purchase of military equipment, including Black Hawk helicopters and armored vehicles. According to AP‘s Lardner, State Department documents sent to the Pentagon last April reveal the agency expressing the need to “duplicate the capabilities of the U.S. military” by the end of 2011, when all American military forces are required to leave Iraq.
But journalists beguiled by the White House hype were apparently too busy perpetuating it to address such meddlesome details.
As Salon‘s Glenn Greenwald pointed out, NBC News anchor Brian Williams reported the withdrawal of combat forces without qualification (8/18/10): “It’s gone on longer than the Civil War, longer than World War II. And tonight, U.S. combat troops have pulled out of Iraq.” Greenwald also cited liberal MSNBC commentators like Keith Olbermann, who touted the story as an historic event in a “special edition” of Countdown where his MSNBC colleague Rachel Maddow gushed about the last U.S. combat troop to leave Iraq: “We just saw, right here live with that gate closing, the last U.S. combat troop. I’m totally covered in goose bumps. It is an important moment.â┚¬Ã¢”ž¢”
Greenwald did offer deserved kudos to Associated Press standards editor Tom Kent, who instructed AP journalists in a memorandum to challenge the White House hype, writing, “To begin with, combat in Iraq is not over, and we should not uncritically repeat suggestions that it is, even if they come from senior officials.”
But, overall, it was a bad showing by journalists, many of whom seemed more interested in regurgitating an officially endorsed feel-good story rather than the more complex truth that the U.S. military involvement in Iraq would continue, and continue in some strange new ways.
Seems no more than ritual, that the media is struck dumb by political gamesmanship. From before day one, when Powell gave the infamous rendition at the UN about Husein bristling with nuclear and chemical weapons. Where was the vaunted “Freedom Media”?
Lost in speculation and Pentagon fantasy rather than doing a little quality “investigative” digging. That the disconnect was in from FBI and CIA and other military intelligence of the WORLD’s MOST POWERFULL, we now understand there is no honesty in the American media. They started out writing as if their readership was at a grade 8 level, progressing to a position of reporting from a grade 8 level.
Bullary, do pantsuits come in “camo”?
U.S. citizens who are aware of this militaristic, imperialistic, trend need to demand sanity from our government. It has already become morally bankrupt, willing to continue the mass killing, mass destruction, and taruma suffered by our military and Iraq and Afghanistan civilians. The monetary cost of this insanity will soon bankrupt us economically as well.
No positive change will happen as long as we are apathetic or feel helpless about demanding change of this self-destructive policy.
I love this piece.And i love the lack (so far) of return opinions.You actually just for the first time in a long time, took a swipe at the believability of this president.And nary a word blaming Bush.Two cheers for you at least.Soon I expect the blogs to come flowing in explaining how he (Obama) is trying his best to right the world Bush knocked off kilter of course.But for now Im in my happy place with a small smidgen of sanity being printed.
Look Bam is a hard core ideolog .But he does get those briefing we do not see.The military realities.Trust me he will not carry the blame for a failed Iraq no matter what he says or what the retreat defeat and surrender crowd demands of him.
Contrary to the “ideas” and “thoughts” of one addled poster who shits out an amazing amount of gibberish here, there are huge numbers of people who voted for Mr. Obama and who are also appalled at his continuation (if not enthusiastic support) for various Bush crimes, not the least of which being the Iraq war (and the branding of anything unpleasant, embarrassing, or criminal a State Secret, totally unpunishable). There are, sadly, many ignorant hicks who think all Obama supporters goose-step behind the Dear Leader. They believe this because that’s what they did, and will do, next time another authoritarian crackpot and religious fraud is exalted by all the dumb fucks who think “liberals” are just as craven and stupid as they are. Think, you simpletons!
As always Tim…. you are foul and as nasty as cat piss,with a tongue that could clip a hedge.But you do enlighten.AS to that nature that is your party.
Once again, the Major Media leave it up to Comedy Central to get to the truth. The other night Colbert was interviewing a general about the troops in Iraq. He asked the simple question: “Are they getting combat pay?” to which the general replied in the affirmative.
Seems like an easy question to ask at a briefing or press conference.
I think ‘Yachtscrew’ has it right with the word ‘ritual’, as refers to the media’s handling of these things. They’ve pretty much developed a predictable formula, something like the following:
1.) Report official pronouncements (no matter HOW non-credible they are, after having been
shown to be false numerous times before) in a serious manner.
2.) Intimate that the moral thing to do is to go along with the the warmongers, because we’re
dealing with “another Hitler” or “a madman”
3.) Giddily cover the ‘shock & awe’ when it happens! (“Journalism’s finest moment!” etc, etc)
(DON’T print any pics or significant details of the ‘enemy’ casualties, even if it IS a ‘turkey
shoot’ or there are significant ‘collateral damages’ – – which are ALWAYS reported as
being ‘disputed’)
4.) Eventually report some of the horrors that happened, especially if the actions drag out
longer than the US publics’ attention span and they start getting restless (and object
when some of their children don’t come back alive).
5.) When many of the causal distortions/exaggerations/lies start to become known, and/or the US
public wants an end to the war, issue the standard mea culpas, implying that it was sloppy reporting
or casual assumptions, and intimating that it won’t happen the next time!
6.) Repeat as necessary.
PS – TimN: please don’t feed the trolls. Just scroll by them — they’re easy enough to recognize even WITHOUT reading, and you won’t miss anything remotely important, so why upset yourself? Remember the old adage about not trying to teach a pig to sing, because you’ll frustrate yourself and it annoys the pig.
Big em
Before you scroll on by…….That old adage is a very elitist sounding bit of snobbery in my humble opinion.I would rather Jim listens to one I see often in a house that helps children with disabilities. Someone cross stitched it painstakingly, and hung it near the door .It is there so these kids will always remember that people can learn from them as well.And it is this….
“ALL MEN ARE MY SUPERIORS<IN THAT I MAY LEARN FROM THEM."So you and your elitist snob friends just scroll on by. TROLL out
Michael seems to have the same tone considering those that disagree with him, but he just keeps his rhetoric on network standard than cable. The poorly disguised disdain doesn’t really make people want to listen, but I read Tim — well, because I agree with him. (Is that so wrong?) Michael, even in his little anecdote and quote sounds so ex-military and is there a more elitest feeling group than the military with all their sacrifice and power.
Bilho The Military is a place where you take an oath to take life and sacrifice your own if so ordered.I cant imagine ever explaining that one to some advanced alien race could you?The Amish say take a gun into your hand and you take a gun into your heart.I wish everyone could be Amish sometimes.Osama would of course slaughter the Amish.So a military with ice water in their veins is needed to protect the innocents.Ice water soldiers are not always under complete control.And so it goes.A world apart.An acceptable evil?Of course we are still in Iraq.The president pulled a mission accomplished just like Bush- and people are still dying.period.Make of that what you will
Disdain for those who disagree with me????So what if I do- or I don’t .I have no want- to force them through elected government to agree with me.And that seems to be the template of the Democratic party.Bill (from mars) said it best.”Sometimes people are just stupid and you have to force them to water and force them to drink”or something along those lines.He was speaking of forced healthcare upon a population that at last poll wants it repealed.A carbon tax people scoff at.Complete government oversight and Taxes as a means of control.As government size and scope grows it infringes as a matter of course in all our lives.You Dems are ok with that with the saintly Obama.How would you feel with Sarah Palin at the helm?Using the power you handed Obama to end abortion?I am against BOTH having that power..
Isn’t that just what young German boys heard in the thirties and forties? Also, the great Exceptionalism. Isn’t that something like that same old – dare I say it – white male superiority? I could be wrong. It was wrong of me to accuse you of disdain. I don’t even remember what made me think that. michael e. Tone is so important and very difficult to convey properly in print. Aren’t drones taking out some of the amish of other lands and cultures. I like the Tao where it says when you use force things have a way of backfiring anyway.
Bilho
Thats a great saying,and very true.Yes I suppose German boys did hear similar quotes.Young men off to war to fight a war old men decided was worth fighting.With reasoning that in the end amounts to little more than wasted lives and the decay of death.Black or white,red,or blue “we” as a group known as humanity do seem to be missing a chip.
If I show disdain -than i will work on showing (and feeling) it less.It is not how I was raised, and is something that do “disdain” in others.
I used to be very happy to search out this internet-site.I needed to thanks on your time for this glorious learn!! I undoubtedly enjoying every little little bit of it and I’ve you bookmarked to take a look at new stuff you blog post.