For those of you who didn’t hear, the White House is kind of falling apart. The Libby trial has been the primary stage recently for such exposure of the not-so-disciplined administration which was just recently famed for its discipline. But the most amazing examples have escaped the radar. Here’s the Readers’ Digest version:
Today, General Peter Pace, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, came out against the administration and Pentagon’s claims that the Iraqi insurgency is supported by the Iranians.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/13/pace.iran/index.html
As you may have heard, GOP senators and congresspersons alike, alongside everyone in the administration have repeatedly stated that the very specter of debate will reduce troop morale (we are divided, therefore we don’t support them and/or believe in what they are doing) while encouraging the enemy. As Joe Lieberman—who helped Republicans block debate of the nonbinding resolution put it—“Our debate here will be heard by Iraqi moderates trying to decide what to do in Iraq. What we say here will be heard by the thuggish regimes in Iran and Syria; by the leaders of al Qaeda. This is a resolution of irresolution on the part of Congress, on the ‘eve of a decisive battle.’” (By the way, if you weren’t paying attention, the filibuster was not against the bill, but against even talking about the bill in the first place.) In short, any discussion about the president’s plan “will compromise our nation’s security” (Lieberman again).
Interesting. Whenever I hear this stuff, I am utterly thunderstruck at how stupid they think the American people are. Why, you ask? I’ve taught logic in college, so I know a little something about it. Let’s follow the logic of the argument here: debate shows a lack of resolve, and therefore either shows that we are genuinely weak or gives our enemies and our troops the impression that we are weak. Either way, this hurts our cause and troops while helping the enemy. Democracy is based on the idea that debate is good for the country. Dictatorship and despotism are types of government that disallow any debate. Therefore, Dictatorship and despotism are stronger forms of government than democracy. Further, since the GOP, administration, etc. are showing preference for strength and resolve over weakness and debate, they believe that dictatorship and despotism would be better forms of government than our current deliberative democracy.
Or: those who make such claims are hypocrites who believe the public will hear their incendiary claims, will see their opponents (the democrats) as weak, and thereby will support the troop surge without ever examining their crappy arguments.
But here is the punch-line: On the 7th, Both General Pace and the new Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, testified before Congress regarding the troop surge. They were specifically asked what they thought of the assertions by the GOP and the White House that such debate itself “emboldens the enemy,” as the talking-point goes. Both stated, much to the shock and awe of the administration (etc.), that debate is good, it shows our strength, and that the troops are smart enough (GASP!) to know the difference.
Gates: “As a truism from the beginning of time and the time the first Neanderthal picked up a club, you try to see whether your enemies are divided or not, all I would say is that history is littered with examples of people who underestimated robust debate in Washington, D.C. for weakness on the part of America.”
Pace: “There’s no doubt in my mind that the dialogue here in Washington strengthens our democracy. Period.” Regarding the troops: “They understand how our legislature works. And they understand that there’s going to be this kind of debate, but they’re going to be looking to see whether or not they are supported in the realm of mission given and resources provided.”
Pay attention to the logic here again. By taking a different tack than the GOP, Pace all but saying that those who claim otherwise believe the troops’ sensitivity to the minutiae of Washington and their melancholy constitutions are stronger than their intellect. Further, both Pace and Gates have all but stated that those who believe debate is dangerous don’t actually understand democracy.
Supposedly we are technically in a time of war. Therefore, Mr Bush is the Commander in Chief. Thus, General Pace is his subordinate and an officer. By stating his mind in such a manner as to disagree with his superiors, is the top soldier in the United States technically guilty of insurrection?
Regardless, if things are this bizarre right now, I can’t imagine how weird things are going to get in Washington before the next election.
-W.
