Blue Alert: Obama And the Dems Need Contingency Plans for Terror and War

I can't be the only one who's been privately warning Democrats: Obama and the party need emergency preparedness plans. Major events between now and November could change the course of the election - especially a U.S. strike on Iran, or a terror attack against Americans at home or abroad.

We're not seeing any signs of such plans. Not that we should - except that one outcome would be to explain now why Americans are much less safe as the result of GOP policies.

If it seems crass to weigh political considerations in the face of war or tragedy, remember that the future safety of civilians here and elsewhere will be greatly affected by this election. And they - the Republicans - are certainly thinking politically. When McCain's chief political advisor, lobbyist Charlie Black, said yesterday that a terror attack "would be a big advantage for him, Black's biggest mistake was excessive honesty. That's one of the few imaginable scenarios that could lead to a McCain victory in November.

When William Kristol suggests that Bush is more likely to attack Iran if it looks like McCain will lose, he's probably telling the truth. Kristol's stated rationale is that the neocons assume this attack, which they consider vital, won't occur under President Obama. The fact that such an attack would also boost McCain's electoral chances is politely left unstated.

So what should Obama and the Democrats be doing about these two possibilities? Some of their planning should be invisible - for the speeches that Obama might give and the surrogates (military and otherwise) that would appear on Democrats' behalf. But we ought to be seeing some groundwork being laid now, and we're not. So, what should be happening?

Guanatanamo and Abu Ghraib should be described as Bush-created "terrorist factories."

A well-researched McClatchy report tells us what we could already surmise: That Guantanamo (and by inference or other torture sites as well) are fertile ground for motivating nonpolitical detainees to become terrorists. And while they're motivating them they're introducing them to people who really are terrorists.

McCain doesn't want to close Guantanamo, even though it's become both a terror training camp and a Fundamentalist madrassa.

While the McClatchy piece focuses on a thug who became a terrorist, it could just as well have focussed on innocent detainees - people who were sold to the US by their neighbors, feuding families, or rivals in love. These prisoners are naturally enraged at being tortured. Then, thanks to GOP policies, they're introduced to terror cells where they can channel their rage into acts of murder.

We might just as well have spent our money setting up Job Fairs for Al Qaeda. We're getting the same result.

Democrats should explain that torture is un-American, that it breeds terrorists -- and that it doesn't help catch bad guys.

It's too easy for the public to be seduced by "24"-like scenarios of torturing evil people to break their schemes. But how many Americans know that a general begged that show's producers to stop running these fantasy scenarios? How many know that we won't get better intelligence that way, but that more American soldiers are likely to be tortured as a result? How many know that we've tortured dozens of innocent Iraqis, only to send them home with $100 in their pocket? That's like raping a woman and then leaving money on her dresser.

The short version: Torture is un-American, and it hurts our military.

McCain has played cute on torture, which undercuts his own moral standing. This guy has correctly noted that and so has this editorialist. McCain uses the too-clever-by-half phrase "extra measures" to describe torture. It opens the door to yet more public shaming of America - and yet more breeding of terrorists.

If Democrats don't tell that story, it leaves voters with the impression that tough-minded Republicans may not be as polite -- but that they're getting the job done. Torture may come back in style if more Americans die - unless Democrats use this time to explain that it doesn't work.

If we surrender our freedoms, the terrorists win.

Others have criticized Democrats from Pelosi to Obama for capitulating on the FISA bill. I can understand the political calculus involved, and I certainly understand why Obama wants to position himself closer to the center. But, moral arguments aside, it's not going to work - especially if there's another terror attack.

Obama should be introducing himself to Americans as a President they can trust in times of shock and fear. That means laying the groundwork now with a series of speeches that explain why we can - and must - defend the liberties that make us Americans, even in the face of terror. He needs to lay the groundwork for the speech he must give if, tragically, there's another attack - another "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" speech.

He can't give that speech if he capitulates on retroactive immunity for telecoms. Someday he may need to explain why terrorists can't convince a free people to sacrifice their freedoms. He should begin making that case right away - and then pray he never has to deliver the rest of the speech.
____________________

We'll never know if a competent White House response could have prevented 9/11 (although we know the Administration responded incompetently to warnings). And if there's another attack, we may never know to what extent the GOP's many errors contributed to it. In the end, it may not even matter. These tragedies are shared by all Americans.

But Democrats owe it to themselves - and more importantly, to the nation - to start telling the real story immediately. There should be no equivocation and no calculation.

Their motto should be: Hope for the best, plan for the worst, and do what's right in the meantime.

UPDATE: Josh Orton at MyDD has a statement released by the Obama campaign in response to Black's comments. Good reaction by the Obama team - but it's still a reaction. The narrative still needs to be changed, although the language in this statement shows they're on the right track.

UPDATE II: Is the once-feared Karl Rove losing his touch?

A Night Light
The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog
RJ Eskow at the Huffington Post

Comments

[neesy08]

i found the remarks by kristol and black to be disturbing. it's as if they are willing for people to atack us just so they can hold on to the presidency. it's crazy to want that to win an election

[UltraClassic]

The Christ like Obama will have two plans to combat terror

(1) roll over and play dead

and if that does not work

(2) Hear no evil, see no evil speak no evil

It's quite simple actualy

[Raymondf]

The Israelis have a mind of their own. They listen to no one, but their military commanders.

[Raymondf]

Israel is planning an attack right now, that is the reason one of our admirals is over their right now. Trying to talk the Israelis from following through. Not that it will do any good since Iran is financing Hamas, and hessbalah to keep attacking Israel.

[georgiaR]

The Republicans have kept us safe for over 6 years - so something is working
How did FDR interm all the japanese in WW2 and not be impeached?

[rmreddicks]

Why is Obama moving to the right when he could win this thing from the left? It smacks more of craven opportunism than belief in the electorate. As a somewhat old guy I was privileged to listen to some college folks describe why they wanted to work for Sen. Obama's election to president. My thoughts, as I stared at their earnestness, were "We have all been here before." I much prefer that a person of color or a woman gain the office. I don't think either will make much of a political/economic difference. The societal change is in itself invaluable. It is a shame that Sen. Obama is parsing and triangulating the election as opposed to leading.

[dwmulenex]

Obama the Frontrunner--starting in March--became about not losing instead of winning, . The CAMPAIGN is doing very well, depolying thousands of volunteers, gathering up donors l preparing for smear attacks, and positioning Obama with key groups (women, Jews) and key states--Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico. But Obama is gasping for air when it comes to policy leadership, whether foreign affairs, energy, or the economy. He wants to drift between now and the party convention into a centrist position, in the process blurring the sharp edges that made him a candidate of promise. The terrorism debate is taking place between two equally uninformed and uninformative campaigns that are rehashing 2001 as a predictor of 2008 and after. This is a strategic blunder of the first order by Obama. He needs to define how peaceful pursuits engaged in 24/7 can bring more security to the U.S. than John "just bomb 'em" McCain. Each day that passes without an Obama policy direction is more costly than the day before t because he is showing the very weakness--procrastination in the face of danger--top notch diplomacy avoids. The only contingency plan a candidate for president can have if an attack occurs on the current president's watch is to ensure that the Congressional war powers are fully observed. But Obama can and should tell us why he is less likely to face another attack by "suiciders" than his war prone rival.

[Titonwan]

What Barack does now will be a barometer of the times to come. If he caves (which a lot of the trolls and dead enders are hoping for) on this FISA bill, then welcome to the machine. We've suspected it for a long time, but now, in this day and age, we can see the entire size and scope of this monstrosity. IF Barack doesn't deliver! I've seen him pull a rabbit out of his hat in past, so I'm trusting he'll do the correct (read Constitutional) thing and either filibuster this thing into next year OR have the immunity removed. If Nancy held on for so long, the it's the least Obama can do- picking up the weight and burden of this fight to seek justice and freedom. Bush/Cheney trials in 2009.

[Titonwan]

You are so correct, Sir! The adults now have to take action, as the spectators are like children before the tsunami. I agree, that to let the ironic "Protect America Act" get away with the immense crimes waged against this country (from within, mind you), would be a terrible sign of things to come. Liberty truly has never been in such deep jeopardy. For months upon months now, I have been waging war against the Telco's dog/god like power over the government like "Ra" shining his wrath at the peasants! The profits, the pharaohs at the top the "pyramid" earn, are obscene. And when they can litter Washington with 180 million dollars with lobbying monies, well HEY! LET'S PARTY! I suspect far more sinister reasons for top brass (DNC, DLC) to capitulate- Bush has DIRT on them. Can't win votes if the Prez can prove you're complicit (a scum bucket too) in crimes that he had his hands in. He's taking everybody with him, folks!

[serena1313]

Obama really does need to get a head start on this issue by explaining the unnecessary loss of our civil rights are directly inter-connected to the repercussions and unintended consequences relative to Bush's failed policies to deconstruct the republicans narrative claiming to be better on national security.

The longer that false narrative goes unchallenged the more entrenched it becomes in the voters' minds. When Obama simply appealed to our common sense he neutralized his opponents attacks. So why not now?

Obama has a golden opportunity to assure Americans he is better qualified to handle any emergency. The republicans disregard for the people, the morass they created, and their irresponsible, incompetent actions proved counterproductive and as a direct result thereof will lead to further consequences. The latter has not yet been explained to the voters.

Getting his message out will inspire confidence in Obama's understanding of foreign policy. However if Obama intends to change the public's thinking he needs to do more than say he welcomes the debate. He needs to initiate it.

By driving the meme abandoning one's principles, traditions and values, placing loyalty to the republican name above loyalty to our country have cost life, limb, treasure, civil rights and standing in the world community -- more than any American should be asked [forced] to pay.

We, the people, have been held hostage in this tragedy of errors for far too long.

Therefore if Obama has what it takes, this is his moment to seize.

[Titonwan]

"He who hesitates- is lost..." and "Strike when the iron is Hot!" or "Seize the Day!" all come to mind, my campadre!

[Comanchero]

Obama and the Demoncrats do have a plan! It's the same one they have always had which is Defund, Cut and Run in Iraq and from the NATO run war in Afganistan! They will just bury their heads in the sand like the Clintons and feebly wave white flags like Carter at the Islamic Terrorist threats as they escalate all over the world! There is no guess as to what they will do!

[Aaror]

Gosh, you mean Obama won't be spending trillions of dollars to get people to hate us so much that they fly planes into our skyscrapers (or plant nukes in our subways)? How horrible.
Without the Republican imperium, the terrorists would have no foreign foe to direct their energies against, and would be stuck fighting the dictatorships at home (the ones we prop up).
But at least our allies like the Saudis are not putting "America is the great satan," in their textbooks-oh wait, they are.

[LAWTON]

I see signs a that things are not going to be so rosey after all for us. Can we all spell the OBAMA FISA ISSUE. This bodes bad for America and those of us who supported him.

[BitJam]

Obama does want the US to leave Iraq but he wants to simultaneously increase our forces in Afghanistan.

If you want to complain about Obama's actually policy positions, that's fine. But you look a bit foolish when you don't even know what his position is and you complain about it anyway.

[biwee]

The threat that Israel poses to the USA makes any threat from Islamic terrorists pale into insignificance.

[Raven]

As is so often the case, RJ, you're right on the mark.

Dems need to be leading the way here - not reacting. And yet, react away they go.

This criminal administration, try as they may, have not yet completely emptied the American coffers. Until they do, none of us are safe.

And since these thugs have a ready 23,000 member posse all waiting to hear their shooting orders WHEN, not if, marshall law is declared...well, having a backup plan of our own would not be a bad idea.

By backup plan, BTW, I do not mean making all of my international communications with family and friends up for grabs by the idiot and his minions. That's not a plan, that's not good politics, that's not strategy - that's just bullshit.

Because giving away my right to privacy - and expecting me to be stupid enough to not notice - isn't going to help any of us once the idiot pushes that damn button.

[leftLibertarian]

The Democrats needs to grow a spine and impeach the criminals Bush and Cheney.

[research]

If an Attack happens, The BushCo conservatives are at Fault!

Pelosi should (waste of time, I know) promise immediate impeachment of bush and Chaney should BushCo allow an another attack, (besides 9/11), on the USA.

[serena1313]

Yes they are. I agree.

[FemWorkingClass]

Well said, Mr. Eskow. The points of discussion must be reframed. I wish Mr. Carlin were here to help do just that.

[serena1313]

Who is Mr Carlin?

[WAstateliberal]

Yikes, this makes me feel old. I assume you are a young millenial. George Carlin. He died yesterday.