Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Supporting the Troops

...Some Historical Perspective

Way back in the 16th century a coalition of Catholic nations led by Spain decided that they would invade England and punish them for their heretical Protestant ways. After years of diplomatic efforts, political bickering, bribery and cajoling they finally assembled a fleet we now know as the Spanish Armada. In 1588, after a logistic nightmare getting the ships, men and equipment together they set out for the glory of God. Of course, by this time Queen Elizabeth I was well aware of their intent, and had cobbled together an army from the peasant farmers of the realm to defend against the anticipated onslaught. Her country appeared about to pay in blood for her father Henry VIII's snubbing of the Papacy, and establishment of the Anglican church.

The attempts to land the invasion force were a disaster for the Spanish coalition. Initial attempts were made near Southampton, and were thwarted by local conditions that could best be described as treacherous. Truth be told, in the days of square-rigged ships, any approach to land was fraught with hazards, and could only be taken on by an experienced ship's master equipped with hard won local knowledge of wind, current and tide. Even with the services of such a local pilot, one may have to wait days or weeks for the optimum combination of conditions to occur. To be caught on a lee shore could well lead to the loss of the fleet.

The Armada was forced to make its way further and further north along England's channel coast, but nowhere were conditions to be found that were favorable to longboats laden with soldiers, horses and cannons. Eventually the invasion fleet was forced all the way around the northern end of Scotland. I think a 'plan B' emerged, to stop in the still-Catholic parishes of Ireland to replenish supplies and take on replacements for the crewmen and soldiers who had already been lost. Water and food were running low, as such a lengthy voyage had not been contemplated.

The final blow to the Armada came when a gale force storm came upon the fleet and dashed the ships against the rocks of the Outer Hebrides. They were caught on a lee shore. A true believer could be excused for thinking that maybe God didn't want this particular plan to succeed.

But I digress. I'll admit, I told that story for no better reason than that I think it is one of the greatest examples of hubris in all the great span of human folly - and for background. This next bit I tell to make a point.

Queen Elizabeth I now had a standing army raised ad hoc for the purpose of repelling an invasion that had never come. Even before word made it to her of the Armada's fate, it was clear that the invasion had failed. Winter was coming on, and the soldiers were clamoring to be paid, and released from service to return to their homes and families. Times would be hard enough, for they had been away from their fields all summer, and larders would be thin.

The story goes that the chancellor of the exchequer came to 'Good Queen Bess' that winter to plead for the soldiers' cause. She was advised that many of the troops could and likely would starve to death without immediate relief. Her response was as cold-blooded and cruel as one could imagine. "Good. Let them starve. Then the problem will have solved itself at no cost to my treasury."

History has a terrible way of repeating itself. (Visit Ice Station Tango - more at The Washington Post)

Kansas City Star: "The Bush administration plans to cut funding for veterans’ health care two years from now — even as wounded troops returning from Iraq could overwhelm the system." (h/t Americablog)

UPDATE: Read Jurassic Pork's reaction to this scandal here.
"You want to know why we bloggers get outrage fatigue from time to time? It’s because of stories like this, stories such as this that drain the soul, that beggar the imagination at how criminally we’re treating and even exploiting these wounded troops after all the overtures Uncle Sam made them about taking care of them and their families, all the pie in the sky promises under the fucking sun just to get that John Hancock on the dotted line to get them one blip closer to making quota."
IMAGE: Calshot Castle, one of many forts built during Henry VIII's reign to defend England's channel coast.

TAGS: ,
,

Labels: , ,

Link

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Ten Billion Dollars Wasted..

...Depending on Who's Doing the Math

This AP story from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer cites federal investigators in claiming $10 BILLION of waste in the Iraq reconstruction effort.
"About $10 billion has been squandered by the U.S. government on Iraq reconstruction aid because of contractor overcharges and unsupported expenses, and federal investigators warned Thursday that significantly more taxpayer money is at risk.

The three top auditors overseeing work in Iraq told a House committee their review of $57 billion in Iraq contracts found that Defense and State department officials condoned or allowed repeated work delays, bloated expenses and payments for shoddy work or work never done.

More than one in six dollars charged by U.S. contractors were questionable or unsupported, nearly triple the amount of waste the Government Accountability Office estimated last fall.

'There is no accountability,' said David M. Walker, who heads the auditing arm of Congress. 'Organizations charged with overseeing contracts are not held accountable. Contractors are not held accountable. The individuals responsible are not held accountable.' "
For more details, consult the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Coverage from MSNBC adds another intriguing detail, "Of the $10 billion in overpriced contracts or undocumented costs, more than $2.7 billion were charged by Halliburton Co., the oil-field services firm once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney.

To my mind it's much worse than 'just' $10 BILLION wasted. Since nothing has been accomplished in Iraq, if fact the entire foreign policy situation in the Middle East has been made WORSE, far worse by this ill-conceived misadventure, ALL of the money spent has been wasted. How much? This much.


Of course with BushCo™ in charge of things, you could expect that Enron-like accounting is taking place. Losses and liabilities will be passed off to other entities in order to make things look lots better than they are. When nearly all the details are classified, it's even easier to do that. An analysis done over a year ago, and reported in the Boston Globe, tells a more sobering tale;
"The cost of the Iraq war could top $2 trillion after factoring in long-term healthcare for wounded US veterans, rebuilding a worn-down military, and accounting for other unforeseen bills and economic losses, according to a new analysis to be presented today in Boston.

The estimate by Columbia University economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard lecturer Linda Bilmes far exceeds projections made by the Bush administration.

The figure is more than four times what the war was expected to cost through 2006 -- around $500 billion, according to congressional budget data."
YOU do the math. Or would you rather leave it to this fool?

TAGS: , ,
,

Labels: , ,

Link

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Iranian Diplomat Kidnapped

..By Gunmen in Iraqi Uniforms
From CBC.ca:
"Thirty armed men dressed as Iraqi soldiers kidnapped a senior Iranian diplomat on the streets of Baghdad, an Iraqi government official said on Tuesday.. ..The Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini as saying the Defence Ministry was ordered to detain Jalal Sharaki, the second secretary at the Iranian Embassy.

'Iran holds American forces in Iraq responsible for the safety and life of the Iranian diplomat,' Hosseini was quoted as saying, in his condemnation of the 'aggressive act.'

One Iraqi government official backed those statements, telling the Associated Press the diplomat was seized by a special Iraqi army unit that reports directly to the U.S. military.

But a military spokesman denied any U.S. troops or Iraqis could have been involved. 'We've checked with our units and it was not an MNF-I (Multi-National Forces-Iraq) unit that participated in that event,' U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said."
Whether the unidentified gunmen were acting under US authority or not, this is incredibly bad news. On the one hand, assuming they were not acting on American orders, you have a scenario very similar to events of Jan. 22 in Karbala, when a group in Iraqi uniform entered a government compound in GMC SUVs;
"Once inside, [ ] the men unleashed one of the deadliest and most brazen ambushes of U.S. forces in a secure, official area. Five U.S. service members were killed in a hail of grenades and gunfire in a breach of security that Iraqi officials called unprecedented."
One has to ask, how did these uniforms, weapons, and equipment (GMC SUVs for cryin' out loud !?!) get in the hands of the insurgency? And the simplest answer would be that the insurgents simply stood in line and signed up with the Iraqi army. They were then issued all the necessities to wage war against coalition troops, trained in their use, fed and payed for months.. then, when the time was ripe they deserted, taking as much with them as they could lay their hands on. That's what happens when you arm and train people who hate you. I'm waiting now for the inevitable 'Who could have anticipated this?' statement from Condi Rice.

Of course the alternative scenario, where the kidnappers were under US command, although covertly so, is much worse. That would signal the US invasion of Iran, the expansion of the war in the Middle East, and all the bloody horror that would entail. With only two years to achieve Armageddon, the Stuffed Codpiece in Chief may be kicking it up another notch. Anyone who believes that the Iraq war isn't the biggest foreign policy boondoggle in American history should read this editorial from Common Dreams, by Jay Bookman. Pretty gloomy - but true.

TAGS: , , ,

Labels: , ,

Link

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Deja Vu All Over Again

There's nothing much I can add to this. Keith Olbermann lays it all out perfectly, and anyone can draw the correct conclusion seeing Bush's arguments for war with Iraq in 2003, and his parallel rhetoric now regarding Iran.
Keith Olbermann Video

TAGS: , , , ,

Labels: , ,

Link