Congress to Bush and Cheney: Do What You Want in Iran

Seymour Hersh's "Preparing the Battlefield," in the July 7 New Yorker, will be discussed in the coming weeks by everyone interested in our foreign policy and the future of the American constitution. The complete failure of congressional oversight, to which the article points, is a larger subject that will be with us until the election and beyond. For if the vice president and his neoconservative advisers have their way -- and they remain, in spite of setbacks, the most active, energetic, and ambitious faction within the Bush administration -- the U.S. will be at war with Iran or on the way to war by January 2009. And if that is so, it will matter less than we think who is elected in November. The momentum will be there; the country will be committed.

In late 2007, after winning an election whose central issue was a more prudent and rational policy in the Middle East, congressional Democrats, obedient to the wishes of a Presidential Finding, signed away $400 million for secret operations against Iran. A more craven act of submission would be hard to imagine; and they did this in the glow of victory, in direct contradiction of their mandate. What were they signing for? Sabotage, assassination, covert support for political clients and "destabilization" generally are predictable parts of such a design; but the Democrats, in the months between their capitulation and Hersh's article, made no mention of dissatisfactions at having been cut off from oversight. The truth seems to be that in this area, as in so many others, only the Office of the Vice President oversees the Office of the President.

"The process is broken," one of Seymour Hersh's informants told him, "and this is dangerous stuff we're authorizing." Yet the Democrats in the "Gang of Eight" whom the president consults on classified programs -- Reid, Pelosi, Rockefeller, Reyes -- may prefer to have things broken. What they don't know, can't hurt them at the polls, or so they seem to believe. It is the same passive obedience that led the Democrats to close the debate early for the authorization of the Iraq war in 2002, so they could clear the decks for the election; to banish all use of the words Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, in late 2004, so they could clear the decks for the election; and to confine themselves to flawless platitudes about Iraq in 2008, so they can clear the decks for the election. The desertion of principle is exceeded only by the evasion of responsibility.

Still, what were they risking when they let the administration go ahead in Iran without accountability? The answer was given by Secretary of Defense Gates when he met with a group of Democrats late last year. Gates told the Democrats that if the U.S. made a preemptive strike against Iran, "We'll create generations of jihadists, and our grandchildren will be battling our enemies here in America." Now, what Democrat, in 2007 or 2008, has spoken as if he heard that warning from the Secretary of Defense?

To the extent that we have sidestepped a war with Iran, the notable resistance has been mounted so far by persons within the armed forces like Admiral Mullen and Admiral Fallon -- the latter of whom (according Hersh's informant) got along fine with President Bush but crossed Vice President Cheney by wanting to know about the secret operations officially under his command. Had Fallon consulted the Democrats, they might have shown him how to hold onto his job by following their pattern of uninformed consent.

The stifling of free discussion within Congress about the American provocations in Iran, is both a cause and a symptom of the one-sidedness of the treatment of the issue in the mainstream media. It is handled as if Iran's nuclear research were the sole danger in the case; and as if it were a foregone conclusion that in this matter, the fears of some Israelis are bound to be closer to the truth than the National Intelligence Estimate of 2007.

Why has House Concurrent Resolution 362 -- a device promoted by AIPAC that commits its supporters to press for a naval blockade of Iran, which would be an act of war -- received so little public attention and debate? AIPAC has denied that a blockade is intended, but the language of its resolution leaves no doubt; it goes for "imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran's nuclear program." Nothing except a blockade could possibly accomplish the enumerated tasks of interdiction and inspection.

The whole purpose of such a resolution is to herd the Democratic Congress into the Office of the Vice President until the two spaces are indistinguishable. A vote for the resolution amounts to a vow of silence regarding anything the U.S. chooses to do against Iran. The vice president believed that he had war within his grasp when an incident almost erupted in January 2007 between Iranian patrol boats and American ships in the Strait of Hormuz. There were no cheers of relief in the OVP when the navy stayed calm and the fever went down. A few weeks later, Hersh reports, the vice president held a meeting. "The subject," said a former official of the administration, "was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington."

Vice President Cheney learned long ago that he can outplay the Democrats in the game of power, because he is willing to use power. The Democrats, by contrast, don't even want to be responsible for the power that they have. In early 2007, when most voters believed the result of the 2006 election signified a policy of withdrawal from Iraq, nobody was surer than Dick Cheney that a plan to withdraw would never be brought forward. If the Democrats were serious, Cheney said, they would vote against appropriations. He was right. They didn't have the nerve, and they did not mean to withdraw. Instead, they rewarded the administration, whose venality and recklessness were a matter of international embarrassment, with an exorbitant donation of public money to subsidize new acts of violence.

Thanks to Seymour Hersh's reporting, today they are under the glare of public exposure; and, unlike the vice president, they can hardly invoke a new-model interpretation of "inherent powers" or a "theory of the unitary executive" to screen them from public questioning. Nancy Pelosi, Jay Rockefeller, Harry Reid, Sylvestre Reyes, John Murtha, David Obey and all the bewildered and negligent Democrats (to say nothing of the Republicans, who claim nothing for themselves but a perfect dependency on the president) -- all may fairly be asked if they are happy with the Cheney-Bush secret operations in Iran. Are they even interested in knowing what the operations are? They did not care much about oversight, but now we are watching them.

Comments

[NoFactsJustTruth]

Whether just a 'gang of eight', or actually one of 488, the control structures well entrenched will not be easily overcome, even for someone elected to bring a change. To a complicit CONgress this half Billion for covert Iran operations, bribing some OUR country's worst foes to assassinate and stir the unrest, may be far less egregious than geopolitical crimes already committed of using might to crush and 'take' the natural resources of another country. Probably Democrats believe it's just one more misdeed laid at the feet of republicants and this administration, while to voters they'll play the injured party somehow 'forced' to go along with evil.
'Coerced by the phrase 'National Security', what could they do?'

The prevarication and posturing always appears a measure of expediency, preparing for the 'next' election. I've long felt instead that the answer is far more sinister, and the feigned weakness is born of a greater meanness than any fear, namely one of 'greed'. CONgress is far more the lobbyist-bought 'one-party system' than most of OUR citizens are prepared to admit, where under-the-table, behind closed door, deals are the norm and not exception, where votes are 'engineered' to look close or hard-fought when actually staged like some miscreant's off-Broadway production, designed to take the money and run. I'd love to be proven wrong, yet too often I'm reaffirmed by the results.

Thank you again, David, for tenacious TRUTH on behalf of OUR country.

[jdizl]

I'm on the floor...
David B, call your boy Dick C and tell him to stop the BS!
Control your own leader!

They might listen to a beloved follower! HA HA...

I'm on the floor again!

It's silly season!
AS MR. T WOULD SAY: "I SMELL PAIN!"

McCain's message:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

WHEN HAVE WE HAD ENOUGH...
PERHAPS 7 BUCKS A GALLON?

[StephenJK]

OPEC to the World: We will do whatever we want to you.

[paixa3]

Look, do not blame OPEC. To do so is complete IGNORANCE. OPEC is made up of soverign nations, just as we are one.

If you are going to blame anyone, blame lobbyist, congress, the white house and sadly, the supreme court as well. They ARE traitors, PERIOD.

[altovuelo]

Why is J.R. spineless? It's not only about money, it's about the most potent drug that will ever exist: power. (It's not important that Congressional power is now, ironically, merely an illusion of their own making; it's nevertheless a powerful illusion that will drive those who think they have it to do anything and everything never to lose it. Look at Mugabe, and countless others.)

We can bemoan spinelessness from now until the United States becomes an irrelevant afterthought in a world dominated by China. Or we can start to really think about how to address what underlies our institutional rot. And as much as I detest agreeing with anything ever said by Newt, the one thing he got right was the need for term limits.

Just think about what a 12 year limit for both houses would mean. Can you imagine how utterly liberating it would be if Jay Rockefeller and the other fossils who now see trading away what's good for our country (and the world) so they can play it safe and fly under the radar, simply to be re-elected forever, if all of a sudden -- THEY HAD NO POSSIBILITY OF BEING RE-ELECTED?

Why is nobody putting this idea forward? If not now, when?

[elbzee]

I like it! I've had it with these liers and cheaters. Every damned one of them needs to be kicked out of office and shamed in their communities. Makes me so mad I could spit!!!

[Vinca]

To Altovuelo:We really need term limits for congressmen and senators, Corporations and Lobbiest couldn't get them under their THUMB so easy, IT SHOULD HAPPEN SOON

[murrieta]

The GOP is 98.5% owned by corporate interests and the war machine. The DEMS are about 96% owned. I am about at the point that for the first time in my voting life - I very well may vote 3rd party. Or, should I vote DEM for that 2.5% difference?

[Boobaloo]

Dont forget AIPAC.

[antirepublocrat]

The Democratic Congress has essentially abdicated all power to the Presidency. No matter what laws Congress passes, the President can now do whatever he wants via signing statements or executive orders. The President is an elected dictator, and Congress is an irrelevant debating society. It really doesn't matter much whether Republicans or Democrats are elected to Congress since they really have no power anyway. Therefore, the lesser of two evils argument is moot when it comes to Congress. If you vote Dem, you become complicit. If you vote for a 3rd party, you might see some actual change. I doubt I will vote republocrat for Rep. or Sen. in November. My Dem Rep (Walz) has voted for war funding every time and even voted for Protect America. My Dem Sen (Klobuchar) just signed on to sponsor S. Res. 580 (the Iran blockade). If this is the Democratic Party, I want no part of it.

The Presidency is a different matter, since the President is so powerful. If you see a genuine difference between the two, perhaps you should vote for the lesser of two evils. I see some difference between McCain and Obama, but I'm not sure yet that I see enough to warrant a vote for Obama.

The situation is truly depressing and frightening.

[Mattjoe]

‘was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington­.’

Here it comes people – your Gulf Of Tonkin, Kuwait, WMD storyline, this time, they’re not even hiding it, their gluttonous entitlement clearly at viral proportions.

AIPAC, PNAC and accomplices be damned – to The Hague!

Other fears of mine include the fact that what JFK and RFK had more in common, was stoppage of war.

[StephenJK]

OPEC be damned! They have pushed us to the brink of economic disaster. FIST YOU OPEC!

[confuseddemocrat]

Could you imagine what would happen if a democratic President and Congress:
-lied to get the nation into an unjustified war where America
-failed to provide sufficient armor and supplies for the troops in that trumped up war,
-sent wounded soldiers to VA hospitals infested with germ-laden crunchy critters and black mold
-refused to give our brave fighting troops a salary increase commensurate with inflation,
-allowed the houses of the troops to be foreclosed by unscrupulous lenders
-passed legislation that allowed spying on Americans without provocation or court orders
-opposed a GI bill that would provide educational benefits to our troops and their families on the grounds that it was too generous
-then question the members of the opposite party are traitors and terrorists

Right about now, there would be a great wailing and gnashing of teeth, and we would be experiencing a severe shortage of strong ropes, kerosene, tar and feathers.

I don’t get it. How do McCain, Bush and the Republicans get away with this? And why are we on the verge of repeating the whole process again?

[earthwealth]

It is simple. Forget about speculations! You want the price of oil to drop at least $50/ barrel, stop repeating “all options on the table”. Or if you want the price of oil to go higher, repeat the phrase “all options on the table” more frequently.

[StephenJK]

BS!

OPEC would have continued to skyrocket the price of oil based on speculations no matter WHAT we say. And they will continue to gouge the world's eyes out of their sockets so long as we depend on them for the majority of our energy resource.

[Boobaloo]

How's the weather in Tel Aviv StephenJK?

[brutus948]

You mean to tell me the price of oil has nothing to do with a OIL man in the white house. you're delusional. How come OPEC couldn't do this when clinton was president. I'll guarantee you the oil prices will be in the 50-60 dollar range 2 years after obama takes office. Guarantee it. Unless bushie starts a war with iran before he leaves office

[3in1]

obama will be a war president. Come on democrats? Get a life. Congress is not getting out of Iraq. Hillary should be your candidate.

[sb250guy]

Huh?

[jbatch]

"Now we are watching them..."

Really? I thought America was watching American Idol, or maybe Brittany's snatch, but certainly NOT Congress.

"If Democrats were serious ... they'd vote against appropriat­ions." Exactly.

So there you have it: A collection of gutless wonders operating (or failing to operate) under the cloak of our own national ignorance.

[mccabe49]

ezcuse me? I am upset at the democrats but didn't you forget there are also republicans in Congress too????

[emsique]

I hope their constituents are proud. These spineless weasels should be unseated in the primaries by people who will stand up and fight for their principles.

[Gma11]

Sigh. Time to send another letter to my Congressman Obey. Sometimes I am so proud of him. Sometimes so angry.

[earthwealth]

Ignorance is the root of most problems. Nothing will change until majority of people in this country realize that they are the main source cause and perhaps feel guilty enough to do something about it or prevent it from happening again. The politicians who initiate wars are all publicly elected. Without public support they would never get to such position of authority. Public mostly in forms of taxes also pays for such actions. The bottom line is that shame and shame on us. At least we will pay it at the pumps and we will NOT know why.

[WindmillSlayer]

If it is ignorance, it is rooted in what my husband calls being Fat and Happy. It has everything to do with money. People vote with their dollars -- and as long as Americans can afford their flat screen TVs and SUVs, they don't care about what happens to our civil rights or our armed service members. The only other thing that might wake Americans up is a military draft. In the meantime, most people don't care enough to pay attention to what's happening to our country.

[pvernier]

Exactly !

I was in a heated conversation with someone on Iraq, and their response was, "It doesn't affect me"

Sad and Frightening

[earthwealth]

Even if some people decide to get real news, where would they find it? Aljazeera and presstv.com tried very hard to get into our cable systems but were stopped by AIPAC & Associates.

[StephenJK]

I know exactly why we are paying at the pump. The OPEC nations have been conspiring for a long time to find a way to bring the US giant to its knees. The speculator's ridiculousnessness is just a convenient excuse to skyrocket oil. They know that this is the way and they will continue to pump more oil as demand rises with prices. And our economy will continue to take the brunt of the beating. They also realize it is one of our top priorities to get away from M.E. and OPEC dependence for our energy resources. If it's ignorance that our problem is it's ignorance of what OPEC's long term goals are; to destroy our economy and bring about a depression in the US. All the while OUR dollars have been replace by rupees and yuan. You all better wise up before you're eating dog food and grisle.

[strifeknot]

Please. High gas prices have far more to do with the weakened dollar and gouging by the oil companies that with OPEC. OPEC is pumping out the oil at a high rate, as usual. There is no lack of supply.

[whitenoise007]

Ignorance is a choice.

[KPinSEA]

This Congress is already morally complicit in the murder of tens of thousands of Iraqis ... will it now compound its sorry record and allow the murder of Iranian citizens at the direction of the White House?

This decade has seen the absolute end of America's moral standing on this planet ... and it died to thunderous applause.

[terramartom]

The Republicans identify with greed , intolerance and self rightiousness as the Democrats identify with cowardess, lack of any true direction and conviction! The only two democrats who actually stood up to be counted have been Kucinich and Feingold. The rest have capitulated for power and selfishness of personal aspirations. Liberman is now a war hawk for Israel and the Republicans? There is no one representing the people of America in the White House, the Senate or in Congress!

[CharlieMarlowe]

You see what believing in The Rapture will get you?