Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Robert Gates Is Pandering to Obama to Keep His Pentagon Gig

By Ray McGovern, Consortium News. Posted November 24, 2008.


Obama needs a defense secretary with the courage to speak out and halt the lunacy of more war, not a yes-man Bush holdover.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
What if People Actually Treated Religion as Just a Metaphor (Like Trekkies and Secular Jews)?
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Happened to That Prosperity Tax-Cutters Promised Us?
Sam Pizzigati

DrugReporter:
The War on Weed: Marijuana Is Basically Harmless -- The Monumentally Stupid Drug War Is Not
Jim Hightower

Environment:
20 Weird, Crazy Ideas for Helping the Earth

Food:
10 Tips for a Sustainable Thanksgiving
Sarah Newman

Health and Wellness:
Is the House's Health Bill Really Worse than Nothing?
Joshua Holland

Immigration:
Hate Group, FAIR, Is Looking for "Ethnically Ambiguous" Actors to Amplify Its Racism
Adam Luna

Media and Technology:
The Memory Scrub About Why Ft. Hood Happened Is Almost Complete ... If It Weren't for Archives
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
Just When You Thought It Was Safe: 3 Potential Obstacles to Health-Care Reform
Adele M. Stan

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Can't We Look Away From Sarah Palin?
Vanessa Richmond

Rights and Liberties:
Obama Quietly Backs Renewing Patriot Act Surveillance Provisions
Willam Fisher

Sex and Relationships:
Hot Mormon Muffins and Models for Jesus: What's With All the Sexy Christians?
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Poseidon's Financial Shell Game: Why Is a Private Desalination Plant Asking for Public Money?
Peter Gleick

World:
Obama Will Announce 34,000-Troop Escalation in Afghanistan 'Within Days'

More stories by Ray McGovern

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

It may become a biennial ritual. Every two years, if the commander-in-chief (or the commander-in-chief-elect) says he wants to throw more troops into an unwinnable war for no clear reason other than his political advantage, panderer-in-chief Robert Gates will shout "Outstanding!"

Never mind what the commanders in the field are saying -- much less the troops who do the dying.

After meeting in Canada on Friday with counterparts from countries with troops in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Gates emphasized to reporters there is a shared interest in "surging as many forces as we can" into Afghanistan before the elections there in late September 2009.

At the concluding news conference, Gates again drove home the point: "It's important that we have a surge of forces."

Basking in the alleged success of the Iraq "surge," Gates knows a winning word when he hears one -- whether the facts are with him or not. Although the conventional wisdom in Washington credits the "surge" with reducing violence in Iraq, military analysts point to other reasons -- including Sunni tribes repudiating al-Qaeda extremists before the "surge" and the de facto ethnic cleansing of Sunni and Shiite neighborhoods. 

In Washington political circles, there's also little concern about the 1,000 additional U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq since President George W. Bush started the "surge" early in 2007. The Americans killed during the "surge" represent roughly one-quarter of the total war dead whose numbers passed the 4,200 mark last week.

Nor is there much Washington commentary about what Bush's grotesque expenditure in blood and treasure will mean in the long term, even as the Iraqis put the finishing touches on a security pact that sets a firm deadline for a complete U.S. military withdrawal by the end of 2011, wording that may be Arabic for "thanks, but no thanks."

And most Americans do not know from reading the reports from their Fawning Corporate Media that the "surge" was such a "success" that the United States now has about 8,000 more troops in Iraq than were there before the "surge" rose and fell.

The real "success" of the Iraq "surge" is proving to be that it will let President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney leave office on Jan. 20, 2009, without having to admit that they were responsible for a strategic disaster. They can lay the blame for failure on their successors.

Gates a Winner?

Gates stands to be another beneficiary of the Iraq "surge."

Already, he has the defense secretary job. In November 2006, he was plucked from the relative obscurity of his Texas A&M presidency and put back into the international spotlight that he has always craved, because he was willing to front for the "surge" when even Donald Rumsfeld was urging Bush to start a troop drawdown.

Now, the perceived "success" of the "surge" is giving hawkish Washington Democrats an excuse to rally around Gates and urge President-elect Barack Obama to keep him on.

Ever an accomplished bureaucrat, Gates is doing what he can to strengthen his case. 

On Friday, Gates seemed at pains to demonstrate that his approach to Afghanistan is identical to the one publicly espoused by his prospective new employer who is currently reviewing Gates' job renewal application. And, as he did with the Iraq "surge" over the past two years, Gates now is talking up the prospects for an Afghan "surge." 

"The notion that things are out of control in Afghanistan or that we're sliding toward a disaster, I think, is far too pessimistic," Gates said. Yet the argument that Gates used to support his relative optimism makes us veteran intelligence officers gag -- at least those who remember the U.S. in Vietnam in the 1960s, the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, and other failed counterinsurgencies.

"The Taliban holds no land in Afghanistan and loses every time it comes into contact with coalition forces," Gates explained.

Our secretary of defense is insisting that U.S. troops have not lost one pitched battle with the Taliban or al-Qaeda. Engagements like the one on July 13, 2008, in which "insurgents" attacked an outpost in Konar province, killing nine U.S. soldiers and wounding 15 others, apparently do not qualify as "contact," but are merely "incidents."

Gates ought to read up on Vietnam, for his words evoke a similarly benighted comment by U.S. Army Col. Harry Summers after that war had been lost. In 1974, Summers was sent to Hanoi to try to resolve the status of Americans still listed as missing. To his North Vietnamese counterpart, Col. Tu, Summers made the mistake of bragging, "You know, you never beat us on the battlefield." Colonel Tu responded, "That may be so, but it is also irrelevant."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: afghanistan, robert gates, surge, pandering

Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Like what would it matter at this point?
Posted by: maxpayne on Nov 24, 2008 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who could Obama possibly pick to replace Gates? It's not as if Obama is under any obligation to even consider the pro-peace folks. Better to give them the big FUCK YOU than lose his military dough, now is it? Let's face it. He'll shift some troops to Afghanistan and maybe bring some home. Who cares who's the defense secretary. You're in Iraq for oil and you'd much rather have the CIA continue to "support" the terrorist groups to keep the bloodshed and terrorism going on overseas so that you can keep living under the delusion that you're "safe" when in fact you're not. Until we the electorate quit staying the LOSERS' course of associated bomb bomb bomb and sellout sellout sellout as "foreign policy", it won't matter who the flying fuck is Secretary of "Defense".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ray McGovern
Posted by: bobtr900 on Nov 24, 2008 1:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always liked Ray McGovern, and have found that he is one of the reality based an individuals in the Intel community. He seems to be a fact based guy.

Obama should put McGovern back in his job of giving the daily national intelligence estimate(NIE), which he had for a long time, that is until Bush the first fool fired him for telling the truth instead of what the Bushies wanted to hear.

I have always liked reality based people instead of ideologically based people who always seem to live in a bubble of their own making. Reality no matter how painful is far better than ideology; because fewer people die and because the truth leads to the ultimate solution as well as the best solution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spending Political Capital Fast
Posted by: AlexLawyer on Nov 24, 2008 1:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is spending his political capital so rapidly with the progressives and greens that put him into the White House that he'd better count on being a one-term president. We were happy when he was elected because the alternative was so bleak, and many people thought that his tack to the right during the campaign was more tactical than strategic.

His economic policies will be far better than Bush's, his environmental ones at least marginally better, but his foreign and military policy are looking less different by the day.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Open the flood Gate and FLUSH the Trash!
Posted by: Ottomatic on Nov 24, 2008 3:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The disasters will keep coming as long as they're in control.
In with the new and out with the old.
In with the clean air and out with the stale.
You want a breath of fresh air?
Build it.
Shut OFF the Corpirate BU__! SH__!
Wake up and
Start swimming.
Head for the High Ground
Go Local
Go Green
Go Organic

SURGE PURGE
Update and
REBOOT!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Real Change???
Posted by: 2thepoint on Nov 24, 2008 3:55 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gates has done a great job of helping turn that mess in Iraq into something that is less of a mess.

But what is everyone surprised about. Obama said the fight should be in Afghanistan. If you didnt like the policy, you shouldn't have voted for him.

To my pleasant surprise, Mr Liberal is turning into Mr. Moderate. I just wish he'd do it with new faces and not a rehash of the Clinton administration

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barack Carter, Jimmy Obama
Posted by: NoPCZone on Nov 24, 2008 8:09 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Carter Administration was marked by a remarkable tone deafness that put him at odds with Democrats AND Republicans. They were also so very sure that they were doing the right things even if the country wasn't following where they were going.

Mr Obama is going right down the primrose path buying into the Bush Shock Doctrine Looting of America and his embrace of the very DLC 'Democrats' that enabled this tragedy in the first place.

The running cost of the looting of America is now over $24k per person and rising fast. This will be hung around Obama's neck like a burning tire in the MSM come the 20012 election cycle- if not sooner.

Barry Obama is starting to look more like change we can't stomach instead of change we can believe in. The DLC triumphs again. As for me and mine- I'm through with the Democrats and am open to the founding of a Progressive or Liberal Party that isn't a sell out to Wall Street.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» true conservative and honest liberals Posted by: theVRWCwhodatesLiberals
Your Democrat Party
Posted by: theVRWCwhodatesLiberals on Nov 24, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Suckers!
This is your Democrat Party!
more bather wife syndrome so stop crying NOW!
You can bad mouth Republicans all you want however if we an't happy, we dont show up (see: 2006/2008)

Maybe Nader was right after all

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Your Democrat Party Posted by: Mrs. Jefferson
Obama so perfectly represents the American people as did Bush
Posted by: 876 on Nov 24, 2008 9:11 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is such a testament to the savagery, barbarism and hysterical racist madness of Americans that a man can get elected by promising to murder the people of an impoverished nation. How ironic than that you self congratulate having voted in a half black man as you at once hold him is esteem for know which precise population of foreigners to slaughter. In fact there has been no change at all you are still a nation of murderous racist hate filled foaming at the mouth animals with the genocidal self satisfied little troll of leader to show for it. May you and your children live to bear the burdens you have inflicted on others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» hey... Posted by: ellie
» RE: hey... Posted by: Martin32
Ray, please give Gates some credit for pushing back on conflict with Iran
Posted by: leveymg on Nov 24, 2008 10:18 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You gave Adm. Fallon credit for resisting the Cheney orchestrated call for confrontation with Iran. While the threats of unilateral air attack were mostly a psyop designed to dampen Iranian ambitions in Iraq, Gates did lend an appearance of restraining sanity to the Administration's policy pronouncements when sanity was really needed. That was quite a balancing act on Gates' part. All the more remarkable that he wasn't fired. Gen. Pace did the same thing, but got pushed off the tight rope, a self-sacrifice for which Pete also deserves some credit.

Come on - be a little magnanimous, and give them a nod for a very valuable role under difficult circumstances.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

U.S. Foriegn policy never changes. Never has
Posted by: Ghoulman on Nov 24, 2008 11:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hate to contradict another fine article from Ray McGovern... but... it's just a fantasy to suggest American foreign policy will change. Change because Obama is President instead of an utter shit like Dick Cheney? That's partizan talk, that's all. Remembering Vietnam is one thing, especially in relation to the Iraq Occupation, but let's remember that Democrats never have a different foreign policy than Republicans.

Remember Yugoslavia. In the Clinton era the propaganda about genocide and mass graves were on every TV show. It was never shown to be true. The propaganda was more subtle than what Americans are used to today *chuckle*, but it still was all pervasive. Remember how, at the time, criticism of that 'war' caused the Clinton camp to call any detractors the 'blame America firsters'? In the Bush era it just changed to 'you're a traitor, anti-America'. Oh, simpler times? Not bloody likely.

U.S. Foreign Policy is decided by the military industrial complex. The 'commander in chief' doesn't. It's about money... always has been.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Colin Powell...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Nov 25, 2008 1:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He would be my choice if he would take it!

the troops need stability and he is the 1 methodical soldier that WILL deliver...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement