The Rush and Cheney Show Accelerates Military Desertion of the GOP
For decades, the conventional wisdom was that the Republican Party was the party of the military. And while no party has or ever will monopolize military support, certainly Republicans had a good amount of support from some big names - from Eisenhower to Powell.
In recent years, however, as Republicans have abandoned ideals that make our military strong - no nation building using our Armed Forces, looking for strong alliances to join us in action, operating on a moral high ground when we do use force, and commitment to a strong enough and large enough force - we've seen big names head towards supporting Democrats - from General Wesley Clark and Major General Paul Eaton to General John Shalikashvili, General Joseph Hoar, and General Hugh Shelton. Oh, and Colin Powell.
That shift towards Democrats, and especially President Obama and Hillary Clinton during the primary, is about to be fast tracked, as Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney take control of Republican messaging, ideals, practices, and policies.
Ideals that include torturing detainees, hoping for a "24-like" moment that neatly helps dismantle terrorist networks, instead of giving them their best recruiting tool. It goes against everything we learn in the Army Field Manual (which forbids torture), and what we know works on the ground. For example, when we urgently needed information about insurgents in Iraq, we didn't bring in a local leader and torture him, no matter what. Doing so would have only inflamed things and made it impossible for us to effectively operate in an area again.
Practices based on use of force first, like Newt Gingrich's odd contention that if he was President, he'd go into North Korea and bomb away to destroy their missiles, unphased by what that would actually mean.
And, policies like favoring big contracts for high-end weapons systems and air power, over a military with a strong ground component - championed by Donald Rumsfeld. Policy still backed by those who would put more money into experimental weapons systems over growing the size of our enlisted forces, which would only hamstring our ability to effectively operate.
For all I disagree on with Senator John McCain, he may have been the Republicans best hope at stemming the trend, by at least voicing opposition to torture, and standing firm on Pentagon waste and bloated contracts, worried more about practical equipment that could help our troops in the field. Now, with Senator McCain vanquished within his own party by those who weaseled their way out of service in Vietnam, no one seems to be in the way of taking the Republican Party full-tilt to the anti-military-ideals fringe.
It's hard to remember, but when General Wesley Clark retired, and was rumored to be interested in politics leading to 2004, there was some buzz wondering if he would be a Democrat or Republican. It says a lot, because even though he supported Democrats privately while serving, there still was a sliver of space for someone like General Clark in the Republican Party, making such speculation not too outlandish.
It reminds me of recent news involving another General.
Last year, those on the right loved General David Petraeus. You couldn't debate anyone on the neocon side without them trying to hide behind the General. There were even rumors swirling that Republicans would recruit him to be their nominee in 2012. Then, supporters of Governor Palin championed her nomination in four years, but they thought General Petraeus would make a fine subordinate to the Governor in a Dream Ticket to take on President Obama.
Well, don't look now, but our friend Sam Stein at reported here:
General David Petraeus said this past weekend that President Obama's decision to close down Gitmo and end harsh interrogation techniques would benefit the United States in the broader war on terror.
General Petraeus goes on to say that he believes we need to stay within the Geneva Convention, and that closing Gitmo "sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees."
Of course, this flies in the face of the Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney crowd - those who believe that we're safer when we do things that serve as great recruiting tools for al Qaeda.
There's no doubt that General Petraeus would be a powerful nominee for Republicans in 2012. One has to wonder, however, if with Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh calling the shots, the GOP is a Dream Party for him.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Donald Rumsfeld's policy would put more money into experimental weapons systems"
xxx
Little boys must have their toys -- and to hell with the country.
The issue of Republican manipulation of the military has many levels. As significant as the Republican recruitment of Generals is what has been happening in the lower ranks.
The Republican Far Right Establishment caters to and manipulates a base of white supremacists. This is the real Base within the base of plain ol' white folks that may not like non-whites for any number of reasons.
Look, the Marine Corps segregates its ranks in the mess hall and most social and recreational activities. Tim McVeigh came from that segregated Marine Corps. The Far Right is recruiting veterans. Tom Metzgar bragged about infiltrating his skinhead cadres years ago into key positions within the System. Maybe that explains how Neopolitino's memo on Far Right recruitment of Iraqi war veterans was leaked.
The Republican party's disarray should be of concern. It has already been proven that Republican thugs with military training and who "love" their country will not hesitate to engage in the mass murder and destruction of fellow Americans. A demagogue like El Rushbo or Glen Beck -- with serious military credentials and sans the buffoonery -- or a cabal of Cheney types -- will bring down the Progressive movement in this country with torture, fire, intimidation and terror.
Not one thread of truth to any of your statements.solo13
we are engaged in 2 wars today. There are 2 more wars on the horizon. NKorea vs the world
and the middle east vs Israel with Iran leading the charge.
Has President Obama made any overtures for possible allies?
Unless the democrats start joining the ranks of the military we could be in trouble. Our troops have been fighting for some time. I say democrats because Obama is President and many democrats think he can do no wrong so maybe now is the time to start hitting the colleges that lean to the left like Berkley and harvard
I never imagined that even now, in it’s final death throes, the GOP and it’s propaganda machine would be so overtly racist? But here we are, even the "dignified" GOP leadership have been reduced to hurling wild-eyed racial insults?, and other nasty little stinkbombs?, the “grand” old party is collapsing under the weight of it’s own hubris, and happily wallowing in it’s own crapulence. The nexus between the last remaining GOP stalwarts, the “Southern Heritage” Republicans, and the messianic “Christian” Republicans is RACE, because with them concept of white supremacy is so fundamental to their world-view, that they never actually notice ( or acknowledge) their own racist tendencies, actions, or statements. Most racist’s see white supremacy as the normal and natural way of things, and they see other racial groups as little more than cattle, or cannonfodder.
Small wonder that Petraeus, et al. are distancing themselves from the GOPS these days. Not only is one of their revered generals, Colin Powell, supporting Obama and speaking out against Cheney, almost to a man the military leaders fear reprisals in reaction to the American torture policy. When you thumb your nose at the Geneva Convention's ban on waterboarding and other [Newspeak alert!] enhanced interrogation techniques [end of Newspeak alert], you risk inviting the enemy to use such methods on your own. Now al Qaida, for example, or the Taliban, can torture American grunts when they're taken prisoner. Protests will be met with shrugged shoulders and justifiable responses of, "You did it, why shouldn't we?" What's good for the goose is good for the gander. And the whole world will only laugh at us when we object.
Ha! It always refreshing to see the left delusion themselves that the military is going to abandon the Repubs. It all comes to a choice between the R v D, the question that is ask is NOT about torture, contractors, unnecessary war, war crimes, lies for oil.........It comes down to who they perceive as loving America warts and all. After all they did volunteer to DEFEND America. The Dems since the 60's consistenantly LOSE that contest! In all honesty you all are really not interested either except to trot out the few servicemen who disagree with the opinion of the VAST majority of the Repubs and military community. That feeling is majority of the military AND the VAST majority of the combat arms and the ones doing most of the fighting.
The right's hero, General Petraeus, didn't need to say anything and it is pretty much standard that active officers don't get involved in political matters. That he did, speaks volumes.
America: Love It Or Change It.
Your "love" for America--warts and all--is called "jingoism". It's a form of mental illness and self-delusion. You should learn the difference between patriotism and smug complacency.
William Starr, the concept that young Black, Latino, and Progressive White military recruits, would somehow immediately abandon their civilian political beliefs (when they put on their dog-tags), is pure nonsense. Why not post a link (to your source data) ?, you seem to possess some "superior" knowledge about the mindset of young recruits? and about military voting patterns, tell me William, how did you arrive at your (false) conclusions?. Clue me in?. I want to learn?. Actually your comment sounds a lot like a standard-issue, right-wing talking point (just my opinion).
Want to learn about the mindset of young recruits? It's easy. Sign on the dotted line, raise your right hand and take the oath. The majority of those who choose to serve in the military are Republican/Conservative, "civilian political beliefs" are not abandoned. Don't believe me? Sign up. I did.
I don’t think I make the argument that young recruits are going to change their political leaning. My point is that most are already leaning to the right because that for the most part is from conservative areas of the country (red counties). They are for the most part young white males from rural and suburban areas with some religious background. Women, blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented in the modern military. Hispanics and Blacks don’t graduate from high schools. Black no longer sees it as a viable option to climb the economic ladder. I BELIEVE (opinion) it because it much easier to get student aid, but that just an opinion. Women will always see it as physical and masculine job and never be fully represented. If you don’t believe me go to the military.com or washingtonpost.com and look at the faces of the KIA. For the most part 90% are white, male and from small towns or burbs…….red counties.
My brother is stationed in Afghanistan as we speak. After talking to him on his first return I assure you the vile that is coming from the GOP and thier bigoted reps is not the philosophy that these men and women use to survive thier tour of duty and complete thier mission. If it were they would all be a bunch of sadistic Rambos getting killed trying to prove how butch and manly they are.
Rush, Cheney and the rest of your club who once dared others to question Petraous have no perspective or experience that would allow them to decide what is the best course of action for our millitary.In fact these are the last men that would ever volunteer to physically defend thier nation. In other words they are just a bunch of loud mouthed cowards and armchair warriors whi would do anything to avoid putting thier money where thier mouth is.
I hope your brother is doing good. I hope and pray he comes home safe. I been in your brothers shoes and it can be at time trying but rewarding. I hope that is his experiance. It been 6 years since I left but it is an incredably beautiful country up north, man those snow caped mountians I will never forgot.
STRIKE HOLD
At this point, the GOP should be pretty much deserted. All they have left is Rush and his ditto heads, which certainly is nothing to brag about. Shallow minds with shallow, mean-spirited, meaningless thought.
Dude... wake-up and think a little... you are saying exactly what the GOP was saying in Dec. 2004. The GOP is fine, restructuring or what ever... I think the only shallow mind here is yours...
You call what they are doing now as restructuring? Good luck with that idea. They are imploding withing their own party by driving anything close to the middle it will be catastrophe for them to let it go on. That is the reason you see some of them in the Senate telling other outsiders like Newt and a few Senators to tone down their rhetoric against Sotomayor's nomination for the Supreme Court. They are treading on thin ice of going from a big tent of a party to oscurity.
"For decades, the conventional wisdom was that the Republican Party was the party of the military." And all this time, I thought the Commander in Cheif during the Bill Clinton Presidency was a democrat. Hillary should be told the truth. Bill" Clinton served as the 42nd President of the United States from 1993 to 2001 Retired General Wesley Clark was the Supreme Allied Commander Europe from 10 July 1997 through 3 May 2000 and Commander in Chief of the United States European Command and the first General since Andrew Jackson to run for President a Democrat and like the US president under whom he served, Bill Clinton, grew up without a father in Arkansas.
Maybe since the author was in the military, he didn't need to know the political ties of his Commander in Chief or of his commanding general.
It's refreshing to finally see someone on the left acknowledge that the majority of those who choose to serve in the military are Republican/Conservative.
That's not even good prop.a.ganda on a story about top military officials siding with Democrats.
Republicans Cheney and Bush sent soldiers into an unnecessary war, then mishandled that war which has caused it to mostly fail in its mission and to become much more drawn out than was necessary and while bungling our public military management, they created a boom for the military industrial complex which has allowed Halliburton and several of it's spinoff companies to make billions of dollars, some due to fraud, and all at the expense of the American taxpayers. Gee, isn't it great to have Republicans running the military.
General Douglas Macarthur is rolling over in his grave. The GOP of today is more concerned with defense contracts, supporting the troops with flag pins and bumper stickers, forgetting that having allies is a good thing, and sending our troops to die where weapon inspectors were on the ground barely having enough time to actually check for WMD's and again fighting for weapons systems like missile defense that are a joke........ and torture and torture and torture. Country first? A joke.
The grand old party ain't so grand anymore.
"General Petraeus would be a powerful nominee"
Well said.
Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney are not taking control of Republican messaging. This is a figment of the leftists imaginations. I know you want people to believe that, but I can see right through the liberal static.
Yea, right. Your statement is very interesting. Liberal Static, figment of imaginations?? I believe Rush and others speak for themselves. That must be why even the RNC Chairman apologized to Rush after making negative statements about his comments. Oh, I forgot, the "leftists imaginations" created Steele also. I believe he also said that the party if open to Moderates just as long as they accept the views of the existing Republican Party of which, I am not sure who or what the message is anymore.
You're right. They're not taking control. Neither is Michael Steele. No one is. It's a huge mess, and until Republicans figure out who they are it will continue to be a mess. Are Republicans hateful, racist creeps who believe in torture? Or are they decent Americans who believe in what America stands for? We Democrats have already decided. It made us unpopular during the Bush years because we opposed policies like torture and spying on Americans that we believed went against our values and our Constitution. Now the Republicans are being torn apart from the inside. Some, like us, believe that America is better than what Bush and Cheney tried to turn us into. Some believe that America is inherently good (American exceptionalism) and that even if we commit evil acts and defy international laws and our own, we're still somehow the "good guys". You guys will have to sort that out. Either you're fascists or you're good conservative Americans. Not my problem.
Yes and a country with 20% of its population identifying themselves a s Republican is a figmment of our imagination too?
You need to get out more.
Rumsfeld was one of the worst things to happen to the US military in a long time...and Cheney didn't serve, so who cares what he says! Petraeus under Palin, what an insult! (just thinking out loud here)
"Petraeus under Palin, what an insult!"
Patraeus under Obama, what an insult!
Patraeus = 'Betrayed us'....
Apparently Petraeus is ok with it.
The only reason that we need to grow our enlisted ranks is because Bill Clinton dismantled the military!
Th Republicans were the ones intitiaing that.
They were the majority in the house and senate
Might want to review your history on that statement. look who was in charge of both the senate and the House at the time of that reduction.
I got out of the military in '94 and saw this reduction first hand. I suggest you check a credible source for your information.
You forgot Gen. Tommy Franks...Oh wait!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
