Benny Morris and the Inevitable in Iran

The famed Israeli revisionist historian Benny Morris has penned a piece in the New York Times today basically stating that war with Iran is inevitable. Either Israel or America (more likely Israel) will bomb them, he predicts, in the Bush lame duck period between November 2, 2008 and January 20, 2009.

Israel, believing that Iran is building a bomb, is under intense pressure to launch an attack before Bush leaves office. This is a shame. The channels of diplomacy have not been given a chance to work. This timeframe is too short. Israel must hold off until real and serious negotiations can take place, likely after an Obama administration takes office. Provoking a broader war in the region that will certainly draw in the U.S. while America is still under the thumb of an despised and unpopular lame duck (who will support the attacks) may seriously backfire with the American people.

Will Israel be able to count on U.S support? Probably. But just how much is the question. In case you haven’t noticed, we’ve got plenty of troubles of our own, and Americans have no appetite for expanding our war in the Middle East. Bombing Iran will mean, truly, the beginning of full blown regional war.

Let’s not go there just because Bush is leaving office. If, as Morris states, the Iranian’s are really one to four years away from the point of no return, then we still have time to talk. On this front, it’s time for Bush and Olmert to get on the ball.

The Iran Policy Two-Step

Could there be any greater acknowledgment that Barack Obama is right about talking to our enemies than the news that the Bush administration will send a high level diplomat (#3 at State, William J. Burns) to Geneva to meet with the Iranians?

Could there be any greater indication of the enormous opportunity cost of the previously childlike (and perfectly in character) Bush administration negotiating policy vis-a-vis Iran?

Could there be any more “welcome” a flip-flop by the Bush administration? My only fear is they will use this meeting as an excuse to say they tried negotiations and they failed, so we have to bomb.

Could there be a greater a second act revival than Condi Rice? No excuses for Condi’s terrible failures as National Security Adviser, but she is actually doing a pretty good job as Secretary of State. This must have been a difficult one to pull off and it will be interesting to hear how she did it.

Could there be a more uncomfortable position for John McCain (and the whole anti-appeasement crowd) to be in? He is now forced to defend a policy that every reasonable person knows is stupid and belligerent against the current administration and the next one.

Could there be any greater joy than is seeing John Bolton, Joe Lieberman, Dick Cheney and the rest of the neocons being made to look like jackasses by their former chief enabler?

Just asking.

In Praise of David Petraeus

Gen. David Petraeus was confirmed by the Senate last week to take over CENTCOM, the U.S. Central Command that puts him in charge of the military in the entire Middle East. Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno will take over the direct command of operations in Iraq. The senate approved the promotion by a vote of 95-2. And rightfully so.

David Petraeus deserves all the praise we can give him. He has taken an Iraq situation that was near chaos and turned it into the groundwork for a functioning state. By almost every measure, Petraeus has had enormous success. He deserves the Medal of Freedom that Bush gave to Tommy Franks. In fact, he deserves the three medals Bush farcically gave out that day. Franks, Tenet, and Bremer should all hand their medals in, especially Tenet and Bremer.

It is possible, as I have, to make the argument that Iraq is ultimately an intractable quagmire that offers America no good options. We’ll be lucky if we get another Saddam Hussein out of the deal. But the reasons for this are almost all political. And the fact that that can be said can be directly attributed to Petraeus’s strategy for the country. McCain likes to talk about the surge, as though sheer numbers solved everything. But throwing troops at the wrong general wouldn’t necessarily yield results. There is no question that our troops have made the surge a success. Their brave fighting and, yes, diplomacy, has worked. But all of their hard work and sacrifice might have been wasted if it weren’t for the facile brilliance and flexibility of their commander. Petraeus’s multi-pronged strategy in dealing with Sunni, Shia, and Kurd was masterful.

Wherever you are on the political spectrum, this fact is indisputable. We are on the cusp of salvaging a near stable state from what was an impossible situation and, as a result, there is now serious talk on the Iraqi side of an American withdrawal by as early as 2010 (no matter when we leave there will be a civil war). I don’t know if Petraeus is our best general, but he is certainly one of the best. Personally, I would like to see him run for president. He is a brilliant man, and my sense is, a decent man. I’m not sure of his politics, but I would be predisposed to vote for him if he threw his hat into the ring.

Fannie and Freddie: You’ve Got Their Back

Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson issued a statement yesterday declaring the the Treasury Deparment stands ready to expand their line of credit to the two troubled Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) that backstop or own half of all U.S. mortgages, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. In addition, his proposed plan calls for the Treasury Department to purchase an equity stake (buy stock) in the companies if necessary. The Federal Reserve has also made substantial credit available to the two companies.

Lest you think this doesn’t involve you, I urge you to remember that the Treasury Department mean you. Your tax dollars, or much more likely, your good name on an I.O.U., because, frankly, the Treasury Department doesn’t have the money. This plan will need to be approved by Congress (it will) and is not, at this point, even necessary. Both Fannie and Freddie claim to have enough cash on hand to meet all their debt obligations. We’ll see. In any case, and despite the prospect of another bailout, this was a good move by Paulson et al. in advance of today’s market opening. As you may have heard elsewhere, Fannie and Freddie really are too big to fail.

Along with these remarks there is the expressed promise by Paulson and Bernanke to reform and regulate our remarkably deteriorated financial system. This is essential. Deregulation (and downright greed) has been largely responsible for this mess. The regulations that were put in place - many of them after the Great Depression - must be reenacted. Yesterday, Paulson referenced protecting the taxpayer (instead of dollars he’s going to use magic beans) and the legislation currently make it’s way through Congress to reform the GSEs.

Don’t trust the government to protect you. Make sure that Congress handles this legislation (and lots more too after all is said and done) the right way. I know it’s easy to have your eyes glaze over when you read about GSEs, financial regulations, etc. But, trust me, this is of vital interest to anyone reading this. Don’t wait until you lose your home or your job or simply can’t afford to buy milk to get involved. Get angry and get active. Start by contacting Congress.

P.S. Here’s a great piece by the always brilliant Gretchen Morgenson about Fannie and Freddie’s bloated books, greedy executives, and the ultimate lesson of all this: when it comes to big business, it’s privatized profits and socialized losses.

Rove Defies Congress

As expected, Karl Rove failed to show up before the House subcommittee investigating political tampering at the Justice Department. He’ll likely be charged with contempt and the whole matter will go to the courts as it has with Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten.

Stay tuned.

Seymour Hersh and the War in Iran

Reading Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker is like reading a spy novel crossed with the blind items on Gawker; lots of dangerous intrigue by politicians, soldiers, and spies, some anonymous gossip, and more than a hint of something still unknown. He’s really in a class by himself with this kind of reporting.

In his latest piece, Hersh travels in the murky areas of the intelligence community to reveal America’s covert operations in Iran and the push, largely by Cheney, to enhance those operations and, it seems, provoke a war. It’s a fascinating article, as all of his writing for the New Yorker has been, and worth reading.

The situation in Iran is a difficult one. For all the obvious reasons, America does not need a war with Iran. With that said, Iran is clearly dangerous and they cannot be allowed to make a nuclear weapon. The Bush/Cheney approach of using Special Ops and indigenous surrogates to carry out attacks and assassinations, according to the article, has met with some resistance from the military and intelligence communities. What has worked in other parts of the Middle East and Pakistan, may not work so well in Iran. So what to do?

Elect Obama President. The reason? He will try to negotiate a legitimate settlement of this issue. If someone actually goes to the Iranians without a belligerent stance (Bush demands that they halt enrichment work before negotiations can start), it might - might - settle the issue. And if it doesn’t? Well, then we know for sure, and the military option becomes legitimate.

After all, just consider all the time Bush has wasted in these years while Iran has continued to enrich uranium. Economists talks about opportunity costs. The entire Bush administration has been an astronomical opportunity cost, not least in our dealings with Iran.

Here’s Michael Schwirtz and Alan Cowell in the New York Times on the recent saber rattling.

FISA Amendments Fail in Senate

Go to this post on Daily Kos and watch the video to understand what is happening today in the Senate.

All of the proposed amendments to the FISA update bill have now been voted down. This afternoon, the Senate will affirm that the President of the United States and his vassals and corporate enablers are above the law. To be clear: Bush commited a felony under federal law, and he is about to be, in a sense, pardoned by a Democratic Congress. Furthermore, the bill preserves the ability of the president to spy on Americans without a warrant.

Once again, here is the 4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This bill is unconstitutional. Obama supports it. Disgraceful.

The Iraqi Timetable for Withdrawal

As the negotiations continue over the agreement for the continuing presence of American troops in Iraq, the Iraqis continue to make trouble for the Bush administration. According to Sally Buzbee of the AP, Iraq’s national security adviser Mouwaffak al-Rubaie said today,

“We will not accept any memorandum of understanding that doesn’t have specific dates to withdraw foreign forces from Iraq.”

Hmmm.

Best case: three years until Iraq assumes control over all 18 provinces (they currently control 9), and another three years to make sure the peace holds. That means, 2014, at the earliest. And, the best case, as anyone who has paid the least attention to Iraq knows, is unlikely to come to pass.

So what is the story here? That the Iraqi government wants America out eventually? That someone on the Iraqi side used the previously verboten word “timetable?” How about that al-Rubaie spoke to reporters

“after briefing Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Najaf on the progress of the government’s security efforts and the talks.”

The big question is who is pulling the strings on this deal with the U.S. and why, after all the blood and billions, are we having such a hard time getting our way? Aren’t we supposed to be winning in Iraq?

Bush Signs New GI Bill

The new GI bill became law today when Bush signed the war supplemental spending bill that contained the new education benefit for veterans. This is a big victory for the men and women who serve in our military. Happy 4th of July to all!

For members of the armed services looking for more info about the bill, visit IAVA.org.

The Housing Rescue Plan Fiasco

It isn’t easy to oppose a bill that is designed to help prop up America’s cratering housing market. Just yesterday, the S&P/Case Shiller composite index noted that home prices are down more than 15% since April 2007. In some markets, like Las Vegas and Miami, home prices are down more than 25%. This is having an enormous impact (along with inflation) on the health of our economy. But the nine senators who voted against moving this bill (invoking cloture) forward deserve praise.

Although passage is by no means certain - there are a number of amendments to the bill that are in dispute - the move yesterday signals that Congress is working hard on a bipartisan compromise.

Unfortunately, this bill, once again, puts the taxpayer on the hook; this time for the irresponsible borrowing of consumers and financial malfeasance of lenders.

Mike Enzi (R-Wyo) is quoted in this story by Julie Hirschfeld Davis of the AP:

“They expect the federal government to turn their backs on responsible lenders and borrowers and renters waiting — waiting — to become first-time homeowners, and support those groups that have pushed our housing market into decline with bad loans and bad investments. This bill is a federal government bailout.”

Like the Bear Stearns bailout, only bigger, this bill…

…would let the Federal Housing Administration back $300 billion in new, cheaper home loans for an estimated 400,000 distressed borrowers who otherwise would be considered too financially risky to qualify for government-insured, fixed-rate loans.

$300 billion!!! Not only is this the moral hazard writ large, but how exactly are we going to pay for it? What percentage of these new FHA loans will default? Just how rigorous will be the oversight to ensure that speculators don’t receive help? And so on.

I have written that the Bear Stearns bailout was necessary to prevent an epic and immediate collapse of the financial markets. In the end, it was one of those deals that you had to hold your nose and roll with. But this is going too far. Millions (32% of Americans rent) of responsible American renters didn’t buy into a market they couldn’t afford, they waited. Now you’re going to tell them that the U.S. government is going to help defer their dream even further by artificially propping up home prices?

I say, let them fall!

And let those who have borrowed to buy a house they couldn’t afford learn their lesson the hard way. This is a great start to breaking the American culture of debt.

As Benjamin Franklin put it: He that goes a borrowing goes a sorrowing.

Though if the Congress (and likely Bush, too, despite the veto threat) has their way, those who have borrowed (and lent - after a loss, the bill will clear some of the worst mortgages off of the books of lenders like Countrywide) won’t go a sorrowing, they’ll go a prospering.

Look for a final resolution, one way or the other, on the bill this week.

Go to Dick Armey’s (and Steve Forbes’s) AngryRenters.com to sign a petition against it.

DOJ Inspector General Finds Anti-Liberal Bias

A report released (go straight to Conclusions and Recommendations) Tuesday found the Department of Justice illegally based hiring decisions on the political views of potential employees.

This is one of a few investigations by both the Department of Justice’s Inspector General and Congress.

Sen. Chuck Schumer is quoted by the AP saying:

“This is the first smoking gun. We believe there will be more to come. This report shows clearly that politics and ideology replaced merit as the hiring criteria at one of our most prized civil service departments.”

All I can say is the courts had better force Harriet Miers, Rove, and the rest to testify under oath before Congress. These actions are illegal and should be punished accordingly. We all knew that the Bush administration elevated politics above honor, propriety, and impartiality, now we know they elevated politics above the law.

The Department of Justice has its work cut out for it in order to regain a reputation of upholding our laws with scrupulous fairness.

America’s Nightmare Scenario

Iran’s Nightmare Scenario is the headline of a story by Eli Lake in the New York Sun this morning. It outlines some possible plans for Iranian attacks in response to an Israeli move against Iran. Included among them are actions against Saudi oil infrastructure (driving up the price of oil) and terrorist attacks in Israel and the U.S. Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is quoted as saying that an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities would turn the Middle East into a “ball of fire.”

This analysis comes as speculation continues that Israel will attack Iran before Bush leaves office.

This is a thorny situation. There is an obvious and very real danger in letting Iran develop a nuclear weapon. The bottom line is that it can’t be allowed to happen. On the other hand, if Israel attacks Iran, Iraq, and all of the progress we’ve made there, will be destroyed. Iran has substantial influence in the country and the capability to bring about chaos, if they so choose.

I hope the Bushies are truly thinking about both America’s best short- and long-term interests as they deal with Israel on this. We are already at war. Are we ready to start all over again in Iraq? Are we ready for a massive conflagration that may spread far beyond the Middle East? Is it really time to bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran?

Trying to squeeze this neocon wet dream in before Bush leaves office leads me to believe that the decision along these lines is being made by political considerations and not strategic necessity.

32,334: The Hidden Cost of the War on Terror

32,334 is the total number of soldiers that have been wounded in action in fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq through June 20. The numbers break out like this:

Afghanistan: 2,087
Iraq: 30,247

Of those wounded in Afghanistan, 1,280 were seriously wounded enough not to return to action. In Iraq, that number is 13,441.

There have been 4,620 deaths in the War on Terror. These numbers break out this way:

Afghanistan: 517
Iraq: 4,103

I am always surprised when the press reports the number of deaths but leaves out the number of seriously wounded. Those who have died have made the ultimate sacrifice and their service must be noted and honored. But the men and women who have suffered serious injuries must also receive the attention and honor that they are due. Many of these men and women have lost limbs or other significant parts of their body. They have been burned and disfigured. It is important that the relatively small number of deaths in the War on Terror is given perspective by the large number of seriously wounded soldiers. The War on Terror has been a war of physical (never mind, mental) sacrifice for tens of thousands. Let’s remember that, too.

Source: Department of Defense

Whither Obama? November 2, 2008

O Obama, how you disappoint. First campaign financing, and now FISA. You’ve got you’re eyes on the prize and your tacking to the center and you figure what difference will it make because McCain, of course, supports the new FISA legislation that legalizes previously illegal spying and gives immunity to the telecoms. And you’re better than McCain. We all know that.

Except, maybe, we don’t. Maybe we just know that you’re a bright guy with a biracial background who is capable of conveying a sense that you possess sound judgment and an inherently decent character. After the pathetic farce that was Bush, we’re desperately desperate and you know it. But DO NOT continue to test us. It’s an election year and we know that if you vote the right way they could turn it against you. They’ll say you’re soft on terror. You’re not experienced enough to face, as McCain puts it, the “transcendent” battle of our time.

But you are wrong. Support for this bill is wrong. You know it and we know it and we know you know it. You’re a lecturer on constitutional law. Here, as you well know, is the fourth amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

As I’ve written before, you want a strict constructionist interpretation? Here it is: The bill, and all the previous illegal spying by Bush, is unconstitutional. This is a disgrace to our founding principles and another notch on the belt of the terrorists.

So shame on you. We all understand why you did it, but that doesn’t make it right. For shame!

McClellan’s Testimony

He’s on C-Span. You can watch it online.

So far nothing we didn’t already know, but still a powerful indictment of the Bush Administration. Lies, deceit, cover-up. And McClellan is good, and tough. Not a wilting flower. He’s getting great publicity for his book (I hope he gets rich).