Military Role in U.S. Embassies Creates Strains, Report Says

[NVMojo]

Another way for Bush and his neocon dream of global military domination?

Published December 20, 2006

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 — The expansion of the Pentagon’s presence in American embassies is creating frictions and overlapping missions that could undermine efforts to combat Islamic radicalism, a report by Congressional Republicans has found.

As the Pentagon takes on new roles collecting intelligence, initiating information operations and conducting other “self-assigned missions,” the report found that some embassies have effectively become command posts, with military personnel in those countries all but supplanting the role of ambassadors in conducting American foreign policy.

The report, completed by the Republican staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, concluded that Pentagon “enthusiasm” has blurred chains of command and has the potential to backfire by weakening American relationships abroad and setting back American counterterrorism efforts.

Even with the military strained by long-term deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon has been steadily expanding its presence outside of declared war zones, dispatching troops to embassies in remote parts of Africa, Asia and the Middle East to conduct counterterrorism missions and to train local militaries.

more...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/washington/20embassy.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

[izzie]

1. Hard to change minds. Force is the thing with these people.

I do not think it is a good move.

[psychopomp]

2. heh heh

"...with military personnel in those countries all but supplanting the role of ambassadors in conducting American foreign policy."

change that to "...with military personnel in those countries all but supplanting the role of the CIA in conducting American foreign policy" and the writer might be correct.

Not that that is anything peculiar to the U.S., every country does it to some extent.

[tanyev]

3. Quelle surprise.

Let's get those Dems sworn in, and get some oversight going!

[underpants]

4. I was expected an excuse to replace the Marines with private contractors

I'm glad to see that I was wrong - it is just a further example that we have no f***ing clue what we are doing.

[Peace Patriot]

5. "..to conduct counterterrorism missions and to train local militaries..."

Read: To operate Rumsfeld-directed death squads in foreign nations, to 'disappear' witnesses and whistleblowers re Bush Junta crimes or the crimes of its global corporate predator friends, or to capture, render and torture such persons for more information, and to train friendly local fascist militaries in these dreadful methods of the protecting the richest of the rich.

Something's going on with this. There have been a couple of news stories about it. Connection to Rumsfeld ouster? WHO was he really torturing or killing? WHAT local terrorist investigations was he disrupting? And of course, why?

(Note: I think the ouster of Rumsfeld had less to do with the election, and more to do with behind-the-scenes events--perhaps an internal investigation of some kind by truly patriotic military or FBI, that got the goods on Rumsfeld. The election may have been just a convenient way for Bush to announce it, so that it appeared that Bush cares about the opinion of the American people. (Since when?) The possibilities, re the Rumsfeld crime wave, are many. Plamegate is one.* 9/11 is another. The billions and billions in missing funds in Iraq is another. The real reasons for all the torture, rendition, etc., is another. (You don't think it was to "keep America safe," do you?) Planned war/mayhem is South America is yet another. Anyway, these several articles about the Pentagon's Nazi-booted "intelligence" activities are provocative.)

*(There is a particular theory about this, that the outing of Plame, and of the entire Brewster-Jennings WMD counter-proliferation network, is connected to the killing of David Kelly in England, which occurred in the same week. Kelly, the British WMD expert, who was already whistleblowing about the WMDs to the BBC, may have known something quite damning about the Bushites (and/or Blairites), such as a scheme to plant nukes in Iraq (possibly traceable to Iran, for expanded war) that would then be "found" by US troops. The Libby trial (lying, obstruction) on the outing of Plame/B-J is heating up. I've always suspected that Rumsfeld was the mastermind of these outings, though trial docs point to Cheney. Which one of them is now out of power? That's my point here. Rumsfeld out. Cheney still in. Cheney about the testify for Libby at the trial. Are they going to point to Rumsfeld to save their butts? Rumsfeld was the one with the most opportunity and immediate interest in destroying the honest professionals in the CIA. He was running his own intel/hit squad shop to get around them. He is the most logical mastermind for this anti-CIA plot. There is evidence that it was cooked up in Rome in 2001, at a meeting organized by NeoCons on the Pentagon payroll, and attended by notorious Iran/Contra arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar. Many suspect that this is where the phony Niger/Iraq nuke forgeries originated--part one, get this phony allegation into Bush's speeches; part two, plant the nukes in Iraq to make the phony allegation come true. (??) If this is why Kelly was killed--that he got onto this--that action may have pissed off a whole lot of people.)