Fooled Again: Robert Gates Lines Up With Bush:

[bigtree]

December 19, 2006
by ROBERT PARRY

In early December, when Senate Democrats politely questioned Robert M. Gates and then voted unanimously to confirm him as Defense Secretary, they bought into the conventional wisdom that Gates was a closet dove who would help guide the United States out of George W. Bush's mess in Iraq.

The thinking was that Gates, a former member of the Iraq Study Group, would represent the views of James Baker and other "realists" from George H.W. Bush's administration. Hillary Clinton and other Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee praised Gates for his "candor" when he acknowledged the obvious, that the war in Iraq wasn't being won.

Since the Gates confirmation vote on Dec. 6, however, Bush and Gates have signaled that they have no intention of extricating the U.S. military from the Iraq quagmire. They still insist on nothing short of "victory" or "success," no matter how unlikely those ends and no matter how much blood must be spilled over the next two years to avert defeat.

At his swearing-in ceremony on Dec. 18, Gates endorsed Bush's contention that a U.S. military withdrawal without victory in Iraq and Afghanistan is unacceptable. "All of us want to find a way to bring America's sons and daughters home again," Gates said. "But, as the President has made clear, we simply cannot afford to fail in the Middle East. Failure in Iraq at this juncture would be a calamity that would haunt our nation, impair our credibility, and endanger Americans for decades to come."

So, Gates is onboard with Bush's "stay-until-victory" plan for Iraq and is enthusiastic about having a "more lethal and more expeditionary" U.S. military.

>>So, instead of getting the pro-withdrawal ally that they had hoped for, the Democrats may have ended up with a fresh Bush operative ready to carry out Bush's Iraq War policies though to the end of his term, without Rumsfeld's doubts and regrets.


more: http://baltimorechronicle.com/2006/121906Parry.shtml



my take:

New Pimp for the Bush Occupations

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_ron_full_061219_new_pimp_for_the_bus.htm
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2945698


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[devilgrrl]

1. No surprises there.

eom

[90-percent]

4. It's only fair.................

It's only fair to give bob three years and 3,000 young Service-person lives to show us whether he has "the right stuff" to do a better job than Rummy.


I hoping he's talented enough to only loose about 2,000 lives to demonstrate he's as clueless as the guy he replaced.

-85% Jimmy

[malaise]

7. It will only hasten the

impeachment.

[cwydro]

32. Nope, no surprises there.

I'm only surprised if people thought there would be.

Prepare for the surge.

[xultar]

2. That is the dumbest article I've ever read. Really did we think Gates would align with Dems?

WTF is that guy an idiot. Or he's just trying to spin some bullshit as a Dem Defeat.


We knew he would line up with Bush. There was never any question on that.

[bigtree]

6. oh, it can't be the dumbest.

I don't understand, with all the work we do to educate folks here, why we assume everyone already knows all of these things to the extent that they don't need repeating over and over.

As for Robert, he is hard on Democrats . . . with the best of intentions, I think.

[xultar]

14. Why would he assume the Dems in the senate thought Gates would be for withdrawal?

That is dumb...or it is an attempt to spin it as a defeat.

Either way it ranks up there with the dumbest.

[bigtree]

18. I guess he looked at their statements of praise and assumed they believed him

Like the ones who thanked Gates for his "candor" when he hedged during his confirmation hearing on the foolish question of whether Iraq was a win or a loss.

[xultar]

25. Yeah but they never asked about withdrawal. Candor does not mean he won't be a bushbot.

[Junkdrawer]

3. They all have the same bosses. Too bad it's not The People. n/t

[indepat]

5. What is victory? When everyone who opposes their county being invaded and occupied is dead?

When Iraq's oil has been mostly harvested mostly for the benefit of four large multi-national oil companies?

[BeFree]

33. What is failure?

Is it a failure to leave a country without a democracy?

Heck, we hardly have a democracy here.

So what does it mean for Iraq to have democracy? How will we know?

Methinks it's time for our democratic leaders to tell us what would constitute a failure. They sure can't describe what victory might look like, I'll bet they can't tell us what failure would look like either. Who can?

[liberal N proud]

8. Everyone had to know this would happen

Any discussion otherwise was simply cover to get through the process. For what it is worth, I think the senate would have approved him regardless, just to get Rummy out of the Pentagon as quickly as possible

[niyad]

9. let's see--the man is a repuke, nominated by the jerk currently soiling the people's house, and we

are supposed to believe that he MIGHT have been on the side of the dems?

just how stupid does this guy think any of us are?

[judaspriestess]

10. duh!! n/t

[bigtree]

11. Duh for DU'ers perhaps

folks still need reminding throughout.

we should never miss a beat . . .

[GreenTea]

12. Does anyone really believe even for a moment the US occupation in Iraq will end...

before Bush leaves office on 1/22/09?

BushCo has two more years to steal all this money and they are not going to just leave, Bush has even admitted this, that the war will go on until he leaves office...so why would ANYONE believe differently, considering this is their last chance to make this kind of money in the next two years...we are talking about thieves here nothing more.

Do you really believe the democratic congress is going to just cut off the funds to the Iraq occupation? No way, once a year there will be some reason why the yearly funding to Afghanistan & Iraq must be given...of course to "support our troops"....

Is anyone really thinking impeachment? By the time all the investigations, the cover-ups, the foot dragging, the testimonies and then the hearings, etc...even if the investigations started in spring of 2007 it would take almost to the elections of 2008 to get an absolute impeachment.

There's trillions of dollars to be made in Iraq, from our billions from our tax dollars to the stealing of oil from the huge Iraqi oil fields...that's why there the largest fortress/embassy the world has ever seen is being built in Iraq, along with 14 permanent air bases...BushCo is not going to leave Iraq...and it will drag on and on...lots of money yet to be made!!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. I got suspicious when he started taking pucker lessons from JoeMentum.

[flordehinojos]

15. i can't believe anyone in this world expected anything other than a bush-gates alignment.

:puke:

[scarletwoman]

16. Only an idiot would have been fooled by Gates. Or a calculating politician.

I do hope that the reason our Dem "leaders" so unquestioningly allowed Gates sail through the nomination process is because of political calculation and not because they are idiots. I just wish I could more clearly discern which is true.

If the Dems were actually fooled into thinking Gates would show some independence from bush*, then there truly is no hope for our country.

Rule of thumb for the next 2 years: if someone is a bush* nominee, the ONLY reason s/he has been picked by bush* is because s/he has satisfactorily demonstrated her/his loyalty to bush*.

All "advise and consent" functions performed by the Senate over the next two years should keep this fact in the forefront of their deliberations.

sw

[MrCoffee]

17. i've given up hoping for good motives from Senate Democrats

they're all in Bushco's backyard, as far as i'm concerned.

[scarletwoman]

20. I don't bother hoping, I figure continuous prodding is what's called for.

It's not so black & white to me, as it seems to be for you. ("they're all in Bushco's backyard")

I think it's a bit more complex and nuanced than that. We can at least keep pushing them to do the right thing, rather than just throwing up our hands.

sw

[MrCoffee]

22. there's no nuance in the MCA

there's no nuance in rolling over for Roberts, Alito, Gates...

i never advocated the throwing up of hands, merely stated my opinion that the Senate Democrats aren't worth a bucket of warm spit. rather than pushing them to do the right thing, how about pushing them out a window during the next primary season?

[scarletwoman]

23. Sounds like a plan. I just wish it had worked better with Lieberman.

how about pushing them out a window during the next primary season?

Meantime, we've got 2 years to go until the next primary. Just saying that I figure we may as well keep busy...

Peace,
sw

[MrCoffee]

27. hey, Holy Joe was MY Exhibit C!!!

lol. i feel your pain, i really do. i don't mean to be snarky, i'm just drawn that way.

:hug:

[scarletwoman]

28. Oh, go ahead and be snarky. I'm actually quite fond of snark!

The past six years have driven me quite mad, btw. ;-)

sw

[msedano]

40. defenestration!

with this country's luck, the window would be above a big pile of horse shit and the defenestrated would land safey in the sweet pile offering familiar succor.

(i am not making this shit up. this actually happened to the venerable bede.)

[Catch22Dem]

19. Who was fooled? Not me (n/t)

[bigtree]

21. I read a UK take on this article which framed the question

as a play on the expectations of Bush that he would put one over on us with Gates.

That's mostly the gist of Robert's piece, which got a lot of exposure today. There just aren't as many critical pieces on the swearing-in today as you might think. Most focused on the statement by Bush that he wanted to increase the overall military, not on Gates and his intentions.

[Parche]

24. CIA

Never trust an ex or current CIA official.......

[Imagevision]

26. The Saudi's warned the US. last week what would happen if we pulled out of Iraq

Bush is obviously sending a message to the Royal saud's that like daddy said the previous week, you can count on my son... you fill in the blanks!

[LSK]

29. Bush doesnt know how to nominate anyone but a "yes" man n/t

[opihimoimoi]

30. This reminds us we need a SLOVER ...def not a DECIDER esp a ABUSIVE DECIDER

We need Leaders who think, listen, SOLVE..

This Bush is anything but...

[Earth_First]

31. Hillary Clinton and...the Senate Armed Services Committee praised Gates for his "candor"

::patiently awaits Hillary backpedaling::

[Kat45]

34. I think the word "victory" is irrelevant to the US in Iraq.

What does it mean? What constitutes "winning"? The situation is a complex mess, and the black and white concepts of "victory" and "defeat" are not particularly applicable.

[MrSlayer]

35. Who was fooled?

Certainly not I or the majority here.

[Bjorn Against]

36. I am shocked, who would have possibly thought Bush would pick someone who tows the Admin. line?

It is amazing that people are still so gullible as to fall for Gates.

This was the guy that wanted to bomb Nicaragua in the 1980's just because he didn't like their democratically elected government.

I don't see how anyone could have been duped by a Bush apointee, if they did not know who Gates is they do not understand this administration.

I am sorry but as much as I dislike Rumsfeld I don't see how his resignation is going to do any good if we just get more of the same.

[tomp]

44. i am shocked that he was unanimously confirmed by dems!

shocked, i tell ya!

[ecstatic]

37. "If we had known how Gates would turn out, we would have NEVER voted for him"

I can see the headlines now, quotes full of remorse from the usual suspects.

Yawn.

Dear Senators,

Sorry, but I'm done with being played like a fiddle. You don't get to screw me and the nation over repeatedly for your own personal gain. Well, actually, some of you will get away with it because most liberals are very forgiving, but you've lost MY vote.

Sincerely,

THAL

[rman]

38. conventional wisdom my ass

Nothing but an official lie.

[Disturbed]

39. Rumsfailed was following what Busholini wanted.

He is a War Criminal with a sense of style and humor. I would like to see him be charged with his crimes and also have a Civil Class Action Suit against him. In spite of all of that I will miss him.

[rman]

41. M$M and govt officials suffering from collective amnesia?

Not very darn likely is it.

Willful ignorance to the point of it being complicity.

[leesa]

42. Obviously this Congress has wanted this war from the get-go. When

are we going to accept this fact? They know who Gates is...why do you think not one question was asked about Iran-Contra? Why do you think not one question about Gates funding/training OBL? They approve.

Our economy depnds on it. ALL we make are war toys, we HAVE to make war to survive.

[Ganja Ninja]

43. Speak for yourself Mr Parry.

Let's just state the Bush plan for Iraq clearly right here and right now.

Bush is going to try and hold on for the next two years so he can hand this disaster over to the Democrat that will eventually replace him. Then with a sane leader in the White House we will pull out of Iraq and the GOP & the media whores will declare that the Democrats lost the war in Iraq.

Any questions?

[Norquist Nemesis]

45. He would never have been nominated if that weren't the case

Bush doesn't hire 'leaders'; only followers.

[Faryn Balyncd]

46. Robert Parry's Consortium News is independent journalism at its finest.....

Consortium News

http://www.consortiumnews.com

[Avalux]

47. Well DUH.

Bush would have never picked Gates if he wasn't going to agree with him. I have a hard time believing our Democratic Leaders actually thought Gates would be a "pro-withdrawal ally". They aren't that naive. :eyes:

[tavalon]

48. I heard it on NPR yesterday

No surprise though. I knew he would line up. GWB wouldn't have nominated him otherwise. Though shalt not cross the deranged "leader".