home

Monday Morning Open Thread

World Cup and Wimbledon continue. Tour de France starts Saturday.

The Kagan hearings are scheduled to start today but I suspect it may be put off in light of the passing of Robert Byrd. UPDATE - Nope. The show goes on, confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Open Thread.

< The Third Depression | The Vitality Of Our Constitution >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Grey Mail (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by squeaky on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 11:31:55 AM EST
    I missed this report, pretty nasty stuff:

    Sources close to Blackwater and its secretive owner Erik Prince claim that the embattled head of the world's most infamous mercenary firm is planning to move to the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The Middle Eastern nation, a major hub for the US war industry, has no extradition treaty with the United States. In April, five of Prince's top deputies were hit with a fifteen-count indictment by a federal grand jury on conspiracy, weapons and obstruction of justice charges. Among those indicted were Prince's longtime number-two man, former Blackwater president Gary Jackson, former vice presidents William Matthews and Ana Bundy and Prince's former legal counsel Andrew Howell....

     A four-year employee of Blackwater, identified in his declaration as "John Doe #2," stated that "it appears that Mr. Prince and his employees murdered, or had murdered, one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information, to the federal authorities about the ongoing criminal conduct."....

    Even if prosecutors believed they had enough evidence to charge Prince with a crime, because of the classified nature of some of Blackwater and Prince's work for the CIA and other agencies of the US government, prosecuting him could prove challenging. Prince has deep knowledge of covert US actions that the US government or military may not want public, which could be revealed as part of a potential defense Prince could offer. Blackwater--and Prince specifically--long worked on the CIA's assassination program.

    A good read... the nation

    Im just wondering (none / 0) (#17)
    by jondee on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 12:15:35 PM EST
    how a "born again Christian" winds up running a multi-billion dollar company specializing in mercenaries and assassinations..

    The Lord truely works in mysterious ways.

    Parent

    God Works in Mysterious Ways (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by squeaky on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 01:38:34 PM EST
    The crusades were about love. Prince is doing God's work, and as long as you are a believer, God forgives you of your sins. I am sure that Prince repents on a regular basis.

    And the proof, well he is rich. God is shining a light on him.

    Parent

    typo in the headline (none / 0) (#1)
    by CST on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 09:08:28 AM EST
    moring (not morning)

    Final thought on the U.S. world cup game - I really liked that at the end of the game, Tim Howard was in the opposing team's box going up for a header on a corner kick trying to score a goal.  There was some discussion about whether soccer teams ever go "empty net" like in hockey, and here the U.S. team did.

    Whatever else you can say about them, they wanted this bad, and they never quit trying.  Better luck next time team USA.  Now on to rooting for Germany and Ghana.

    Thanks (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 09:42:06 AM EST
    They wouldn't delay the hearings (none / 0) (#2)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 09:41:35 AM EST
    The Senate is in recess all next week for the holiday.

    And I bet (none / 0) (#9)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 10:44:40 AM EST
    they finish before Friday, as she is not a contentious nominee.  They all have plane tickets out of town.

    Parent
    The passing of Senator Byrd (none / 0) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 09:59:21 AM EST
    and Krugman's column that clarifies what I felt watching the G-20 Obama speech yesterday, essentially takes the zip out of the World Cup for me today.

    Perhaps it will return during game play.

    Military cuts (none / 0) (#7)
    by mmc9431 on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 10:32:13 AM EST
    I think Obama is more concerned  that Europe is including military cuts in the effort to cut their deficits than he is about the actual economic impact.

    It a scary premise that might even catch on here! (snark)

    Parent

    The military has a lot of places to cut (none / 0) (#8)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 10:43:35 AM EST
    but Obama also has two wars to conduct.  He must have allies though in Afghanistan so I think he's smoking crack.  Nobody on the globe wastes as much military money as he does and gets very little for his buck at times.  I don't particularly like military contractor jobs either, they don't have to be responsible for providing quality services and they are people who usually don't end up with a pension or benefits via that employment.  Contractor jobs in the military though are jobs that add an income to the economy.  Just more jobs lost at this point because there is no place for these people to shift their job skills to and become employed.  There are no jobs for anyone anywhere under this POS G-20 policy.

    Parent
    Conduct of the wars, as expensive (none / 0) (#13)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 11:55:20 AM EST
    as it is, is still just a small part of the defense budget.  There are plenty of places to cut big without affecting the wars one iota.

    Problem is that defense jobs are about the only manufacturing we still do in the USA, and there is a lot of resistance to cuts whether the goods are needed or not.

    Parent

    Obama did give kudos to (none / 0) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 12:11:31 PM EST
    Gates for managing to cancel some contracts that were supposed to be for new unneeded equipment.  It used to be that once you had played in the power structure and "negotiated" (bribed) your way into a contract....you were golden.  It is the worst goose laying golden eggs the globe has ever seen :)  It does seem that those days are gone and it is shocking that they can get this done while conducting two wars.  The old arguments used to be that the military couldn't just up and do something like that, it would cause a disturbance in the force.  Then soldiers would wind up with some POS that isn't even usable and they never needed, even in their worst nightmare sometimes.  Those days are magically somehow gone.  It is amazing how "nimble" some gov bureaucracies can become upon a spoken word or two demanding it to be :)  I'm not sure how many kudos we need to pass out though.  The contracts that I do know of that have been cancelled certainly need cancelling though.  It is a refreshing experience :)

    Parent
    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 12:17:53 PM EST
    This is a real change that is flying under the radar, so to speak. Gates certainly seems to know where the bodies are buried.

    Yes, amazing that real commitment to change can shake up even the most entrenched agencies. Salazar, I'm talking to you.

    Parent

    Programs like the F-35 are counting (none / 0) (#15)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 12:11:27 PM EST
    heavily on foreign military sales to make up for decreased project buys by our own services.  It will be harder for Obama to cut buys further if the foreigners do the same. Gives him fwere options to play with.

    This AM I I heard a clip from his speech over the weekend in which he warns US deficit hawks that he is going to call their bluff and propose cuts they will not like. I took that to mean defense spending is going to get the brunt of whatever 'austerity measures' he adopts.

     I don't support any austerity measures at this time myself, but if they are proposed, by all means, let's take a good hard look at the defense budget.  

    Parent

    We are redoing a lot of things (none / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 12:16:44 PM EST
    And it is amazing how much they have accomplished.  We couldn't wait for new Apaches to be built, and the sand in Iraq was literally eating them.  We had to accept that the aircraft would need to be pulled in and they were sending them to Germany where everything was pulled out and sand fell out of everything.  And hey, while we have this thing stripped down...remember those upgrades that were proposed?  So they'd put the thing together with upgrades, and they are very efficient at it now.  And they do it with our tanks and other equipment too.  It has created a whole new area of work in the military power structure and it has attracted some of the quickest minds too and they get stuff done.  They are eating the lunch of the old golden goose power structure too because we are war and we do need this stuff to work top notch and we need it to do that NOW.

    Parent
    Supreme Court Ruling (none / 0) (#5)
    by mmc9431 on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 10:21:49 AM EST
    Just got an e-mail that the Supreme Court has shot done another gun regulation law.

    Maybe if we continue to kill each other off, we can solve the unemployment crisis as well as making Social Security solvent.

    B. Clinton talks Obama (none / 0) (#6)
    by Realleft on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 10:23:43 AM EST
    Bill Clinton makes some interesting observations about Obama here.

    CNN goes for the headling "Blow up the well" but that's not a very good summary of what Clinton has to say.

    Sorry if this has already been posted.

    OT, but Flash player blew up (none / 0) (#14)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 12:01:26 PM EST
    my Safari browser....bug report sent to Apple ;-).   they love collecting Flash player bugs.

    I'll have to watch Clinton later - sounds like an interesting discussion.

    Parent

    More than likely (none / 0) (#20)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 01:34:41 PM EST
    It's a SAFARI bug.

    Flash player never causes my Internet Explorer NOR my Firefox Browser to "blow up."

    Safari is apparently the problem.

    Parent

    More specifically (none / 0) (#24)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 03:02:56 PM EST
    longstanding Flash + Apple OS issues.

    Assuming from past discussions you are not using Apple OS.

    I'll check now again with Flash + Safari + WinXP.  We will narrow this thing down!

    Parent

    Seems Flash + Safari + WinXP works fine (none / 0) (#25)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 03:04:57 PM EST
    Flash + safari + Apple Snow Leopard is the culprit. Again, longstanding issues with Flash's implementation in OSX.

    Parent
    Just for grins when I get home (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 03:26:14 PM EST
    I'll try Flash + Firefox + Snow Leopard

    I really know how to have a good time.

    Parent

    Hey , new version of Flash (none / 0) (#32)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 07:55:46 PM EST
    fixed the bug. Kudos Adobe!

    Parent
    Horrible summary by CNN (none / 0) (#33)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 08:02:37 PM EST
    Clinton says the only thing the Feds have more capability to do to stop the leak than BP does would be for the Navy to blow up the well as a last resort. He's not recommending it at this point.

    I agree with what Clinton says about Obama also. Pols have to be who they are as far as demonstrating emotions.

    Parent

    Three cheers... (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 11:49:10 AM EST
    for the G20 protestors up in Toronto, doing their thang and getting locked up.  

    I'm glad some people are still willing to face impossible odds at great risk to themselves.  I'm jealous of the belief, but not the plastic handcuffs and manhandling...they're better human beings than I.

    Short sports documentary from a buddy of mine (none / 0) (#12)
    by Dadler on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 11:54:36 AM EST
    Petraeus gets another Mc running his (none / 0) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 01:43:15 PM EST
    special ops as he does his COIN.  In Iraq it was McChrystal, and now it is up and coming General McRaven.  McRaven has been doing this though, he isn't new and did this for McChrystal too.  The General in the JSOC seat is seldom spoken of though.  You don't read about them in the media.

    Sorry Admiral McCraven (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 01:56:05 PM EST
    I never get that Navy thing.  But it is odd to have two Admirals in the middle of the current war situation, I suppose because they have commanded SEALS.  So many conventional Army and Marine Generals have bit the dust since 9/11.  And when we had run out of them the Air Force took over and it was a horrible horrible mess in Iraq.  Two Navy Admirals in top spots with Mullen and McRaven.

    Parent
    "Airplane!" is truly... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 03:21:40 PM EST
    a timeless classic, never gets old...good call giving this stupendous film some props Don!

    "Surely you can't be serious!" (none / 0) (#29)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 03:49:35 PM EST
    "I am serious. And don't call me Shirley!"

    "Joey, (none / 0) (#38)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 08:03:33 AM EST
    do you like movies about gladiators? "

    Parent
    Going through my email (none / 0) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 03:50:20 PM EST
    such a porridge right now.  I am noticing one thing though, soldiers are upet about the rules of engagement in Afghanistan.  I can act shocked that they all forgot how COIN goes but that does not change what is going on.  But I don't know how we can change the ROE.

    I have to laugh at people touting civilian deaths in Afghanistan because I know quite a bit about that.  Take for instance the current rules of engagement.  We know where a house is that is building IEDs, but the enemy knows us now.  They now usually put these facilities next to plenty of other houses and the whole place is rigged to go up in an instant if it is raided.  Someone is there 24/7 prepared to throw that switch.  When they do they do everything they can to take out as much of the neighborhood as they can, and then those deaths end up in Americas column with the people and the Taliban will actually claim it was our ordinance that blew everything up.

    So we simply watch most of these places for now, and they keep making IEDs and we don't catch every one they plant.  It is so frustrating for soldiers on the ground.  Because of Bush's Iraq, fighters in Afghanistan know so much more about us.  They know what matters, they know how we will do our best to execute COIN.

    I think it is conceiveable that Obama could have to face being called on the ROE, and I don't know how he can change them, but he could deal with a soldier revolt.  We could end up with soldiers refusing to deploy a year from now and the anti-war left could end up splitting the party taking sides with refusing soldiers.

    I wish Obama would have been more committed to everything earlier on.  Nothing I see in the future looks good for him politically in dealing with Afghanistan.

    According to your sources MT, what percentage (none / 0) (#31)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 04:33:42 PM EST
    of Afghan civilian deaths would you attribute to US soldiers over the course of the past nine years? I gather you believe it to be considerably less than what other sources report.

    You said:

    I have to laugh at people touting civilian deaths in Afghanistan because I know quite a bit about that.

    Why in the world would you laugh at people who are alarmed by the civilian death toll in Afghanistan, or Iraq, or any other war zone? We all know the civilian death toll is higher in guerrilla warfare when "our enemies" are embedded within a civilian population. Are you suggesting this somehow absolves the US military of responsibility for civilian deaths?

    I was thinking about you and Joshua the other day. More particularly, I was thinking how horrendous it would be if the US were occupied by a foreign military power that threatened the life and limb of you and your child on a daily basis. That would be an intolerable state of affairs. I find it no less so for all the women and children of Afghanistan.

    Not laughing at people (none / 0) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 11:37:56 PM EST
    for that reason, but there is a knee jerk component out there touting civilian casualties lately with zero evidence.  They just pull the talking point out of their arse and saying that we needed to listen to Biden and friends and not send more troops to Afghanistan.  And all that Biden wanted to do was bomb everyone.

    It is very difficult for me to fathom that these people REALLY care about civilian casualties when they complain that the Biden plan isn't the plan we are going with.  It is actually impossible for me to fathom that they care about civilian casualties.  I suppose if I didn't laugh at them I would cry at the outright willful inhumanity cloaked in knee jerk liberal speak with no need to actually care about what the real results are of what they argue for.

    One civilian is too many under COIN as it is practiced now.  To be very blunt, I have been told that the only dead civilians that aren't hell to pay would be those killed by the Taliban and completely did not involve us in any way.

    Since General McChrystal took Afghanistan over the ROE got very tight, and excluded any shot that could possibly harm a civilian.  But that hasn't stopped the people arguing for the superior Biden plan because it came with a smaller U.S. footprint...and wholesale slaughter of everyone in an attempt to control the Taliban.

    Parent

    War Strategy (none / 0) (#37)
    by squeaky on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 12:47:45 AM EST
    Well at least the good General and CIC seems to understand that the "enemy" is using civilian deaths as part of their strategy. The PR gained here at home by inflaming "knee jerk liberals" and the local Afghanis is as powerful as any of our weaponry. Hearts and minds is no small thing.

    It is more than smart to not give the "enemy forces" a strategic win by changing the ROE. Too bad the soldiers are frustrated, and good they are taking orders, rather than giving them.

    Parent

    It is a lot of stress though (none / 0) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 12:57:30 PM EST
    I feel some of the troops drifting away from the center of gravity.  This is the hardest part of working a COIN strategy, it was in Iraq too.  It gets bitter and ugly, but I feel like it was better accepted in Iraq because we were going to lose Baghdad, and then we were going to have a civil war bloodbath that was solely triggered by our actions.  This portion of the Afghan strategy is voluntary, it can be questionable that we need to do this to actually keep ourselves safe.  It isn't that questionable in my mind, but it is in the minds of many.  We have adopted this strategy out of choice though this time, and not out of facing complete failure and bloodshed of giant proportions.

    I continue to be surprised by the amount of what the military calls b*tch*ng as we go into this.  I think the troops need one of those George Bush style speeches from the President.  The kind that will probably make Dr. Molly and others who just want our troops home very unhappy.  I often dislike Obama speeches that I often feel are only meant to mask the wounds.  Soldiers are in a different position though, they went into this knowing that wounds come with the terrain and even death at times.

    If we really do mean to do this Afghanistan thing, I think they need some time with their President right now.  It might be good if he could visit them again in Afghanistan.  That is always risky though, getting him in and out untouched.  He won't be able to go announced.  He would probably have to show up in secret and shut down a major chow hall meeting with the troops, but I think he needs to do that.  When he went to Afghanistan earlier he went to a very specific chow hall too, not one which soldiers who must dodge bullets every day are in. He was in the most protected chow hall in Afghanistan :)  It would be good if he visit grunts.  I think they need him right now, or they at least need to know he came to see some of them.

    And I say this after hearing b*tch*ng that he did not show up at the Tomb of the Unknowns this year.  Those things are very important to the active duty, they watch and they know.  A lot of them were very disappointed that they are serving in two theaters of war and Obama didn't show up at the Tomb of the Unknowns during such times of war.

    Parent

    Politics (none / 0) (#40)
    by squeaky on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 01:27:22 PM EST
    Obama is held to a different standard, and those doing the b*tching about his skipping Arlington are either misinformed or playing politics.

    Some conservative talk show hosts and pundits have mounted an effort to politicize Memorial Day by questioning President Obama's plan to visit a national cemetery in Illinois instead of attending the annual ceremony at Arlington.

    RedState blogger and CNN contributor Erick Erickson tweeted, "Obama skipping the Tomb of the Unknowns this weekend for Chicago is offensive."

    Let's set the record straight. Mr. Obama will participate today in a ceremony at Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Elwood, Illinois, about 50 miles south of Chicago. He is not the first president to be away from Washington on a patriotic holiday.

    The critics were either ignorant of the facts or they failed to mention the 2007 Veterans Day ceremony when Vice President Dick Cheney spoke while President George W. Bush observed the holiday in Texas.

    CBS

    In any case, I agree that it would be good for all if Obama did some bonding with the grunts...

    Parent

    I don't read Red State squeaky (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 02:46:08 PM EST
    nor do I watch Fox News.  It is essentially banned in this house.  This is dissapointment from soldiers that I know.

    Soldiers are creatures of habit, that is how they became so skilled, methodical, reliable.  Soldiers are NOTHING IF NOT RELIABLE.  You can't be a Commander in Chief during a time of war and not be reliable for them too, or you will begin to erode the morale of your troops and their dedication to your mission.  And when that happens you may as well just go home then on a mission like this.  Because they aren't in essence protecting their friends and family any longer, this is more along the order of attempting to protect the nation from Islamic Radical terrorism for at least a few generations to come...but that is all bound up in the mists of the future.  This mission is an investment in the safety and security of the world, but it comes with the risk of failure like all investments do.

    If this doesn't look like a good investment to our soldiers, they will lose the will, the mission will lose the momentum and the initiative.  It has happened many many times before.  And the Generals cannot be the inspiration of a military when it is a volunteer military servicing a democracy.  They stop giving this their all when the policy makers betray them.  They can begin to refuse to deploy and lay their lives on the line just like they did to Bush.

    If President Obama is truly smart, he has missed his last Memorial Day at Arlington.  It is how he shows his troops he is reliable.

    Parent

    Huh? (none / 0) (#42)
    by squeaky on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 05:16:23 PM EST
    I don't read Red State squeaky nor do I watch Fox News.  

    I did not think that you did. It appeared that you were describing other's disappointment that Obama did not go to Arlington. Considering the wind from Fox, Beck and the usual suspects, my suggestion was that Obama is being held to a different standard that Bush I, Bush II, Reagan whose record is poor regarding Arlington.

    It never appeared to me that Obama was disrespectful of the military, but then again I am not a Republican, and am not part of the crowd who claims to be Democrat but can't stand Obama.

    He seems like the rest, but I guess if you are GOP you just put on a cod piece and the grunts have an orgasm.

    As far as the soldiers putting their guns down and walking, I hope that happens. If that winds up being Obama's fault, he did a very good thing in my book.

    Parent

    How heinous (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 08:48:48 PM EST
    If I actually cared about what you thought, I'd be offended :)

    Parent
    OK (none / 0) (#44)
    by squeaky on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 08:59:47 PM EST
    Not getting it, but I guess I am for a total pullout and against Obama's position on war, and you are for war, but against anything Obama.

    So I guess your comment sort of makes sense. At least you should take comfort that the right wing is with you. Probably many here too, who share your contempt of Obama.

    Parent

    You are such a jerk (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 09:05:50 PM EST
    I hired Obama for a job, and oddly enough he has hired my husband and this family for a job too.   We are both accountable to each other in a sort of way you are utterly unable to comprehend.  And I don't care if you ever do, never expect you to, whatever man....what you think about me or mine matters zip to me.  Moving along now

    Parent
    I Get It (none / 0) (#46)
    by squeaky on Wed Jun 30, 2010 at 12:38:36 AM EST
    I have been reading your comments for over 3 years now. You were clearly against BushCo, and clearly against the Iraq war. In your regular bouts with ppj, you stated that you were for Democracy and sometimes that means having to go to war, even if you disagree with the CIC. I get it.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that you are for the Afghanistan war, as is BTD. I can respect that. Personally, I think that it is a wasted effort and would rather  spend the money on diplomatic efforts, relief, political solutions, rather than bombs and killing.

    Also I get that you dislike Obama and think he is the same as Bush, and have bonded with the crowd that promised to never vote for Obama. This is where I do not get it. I do not like any of the mainstream Dems, or should I say, I feel they are to the right of where I stand, but am not surprised about it. They represent America. I write letters, complain, to my Dem reps  give $$,  to progressive causes and do what I can to move the party to the left ... But in no way do I think that Obama is like Bush or any GOPer. That seems absurd to me, an idea borne out of the primaries, no doubt.

    Speaking of which, I never understood how you could be so excited about Hillary and so against Obama because, policy wise they are almost identical, and represent the exact same Democratic party machine. Never got that, for sure.

    Parent