Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Monday, January 08, 2007

Iran Attack Plans: US Still Botching Iraq

Congressional oversight of Iraq needs to consider:

(1) Info we have about Iraq -- five years after the 2002 invasion plans -- is still not accurate;

(2) The new US leader for US ground operations is resting on a phony legacy

* * *

With these many problems still in Iraq despite the supposed wakeup call of the elections, there's little reason to believe the US has a credible plan or team in place to effectively attack Iran.

Consider: The US is engaged in active combat operations on the ground in Iraq, but can't get things right. The US is not physically located in Iran, and should not be expected to do better.

* * *

This smells of the same NeoCon approach: Rewrite reality; induce the Congress to support a non-sense objective; and make the Members of Congress believe they cannot do anything to stop the activity.

* * *

Congressional Action

What's needed:

(1) Tough Senate Questions

A no-kidding confrontation between the Senate, using their appointee oversight role, and the President.

(2) Use Power of Purse: House Appropriations Committee

A credible threat by Congress to shut down funding for the covert ops being moved outside the CIA into DoD and State, which is targeting Iran, Syria for destabilization; Ref

(3) Review: There is Internal Opposition to White House Plans to Attack Iran

Tough questions on Negroponte about why he opposed the Iraq invasion plans; Ref

(4) Challenge: There is No Convincing Distinction Between Iran and Iraq

A fair showing, on top of the explanations about Iraq, why Members of Congress should believe the same crew -- that can't get Iraq right -- should be trusted to do any better with Iran. The same crew which lied about Iraq is lying about Iran.

5. Challenge: US Planning, Execution-leadership Problem

Despite the 2002 plans, the US found the "right" crew for Iran in 2007, only five years later. This late in the game, the US leadership has chosen the "best" for Iraq -- a dubious assertion. Consider how much time after the 2002 invasion planning the White House needed to review these issues.

___ Who's the second string for Iran;

___ Or, if the "better crew" is with the Iran planners, why aren't they in Iraq;

___ How much time do they want to make reality sink in? Ref

* * *


It's a problem when the President is moving personnel who oppose the Iran attack plans. Negroponte has some valid reasons which the Senate and House need to hear before the President is given carte blanche to expand cobat operations against Iran.

The Public and Congress are being fed non-sense about Patreus: His legacy isn't as stellar as some woudl like; and the problem he's facing is much larger that what the President and Congress comprehend.