Which Dem 08 candidate can regain control of the Joint Chiefs,

[OzarkDem]

CIA and FBI?

First, let me say I haven't made a decision yet about any of the candidates. But one of the most important jobs facing the person we run is going to be regaining control of the runaway machine of our military, foreign and domestic security apparatus. I think we all agree this apparatus, controlled by the executive branch, has seen massive change under Bush and Cheney geared towards the most dangerous foreign policy the country has experienced since WWII.

Even Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Carter and Clinton were never able to fully exercise control over the CIA, Joint Chiefs and, especially in Clinton's case, the FBI.

The path of our country for the next generation will be determined by the next president's ability to regain control of the levers of power from the military industrial complex, energy companies and a "shadow government" all protected by a compliant news media. It will be a huge undertaking, requiring someone very intelligent, strong and determined, who can bring in an administration and Cabinet powerful enough to get the job done.

Of the current candidates out there, who do you think is most likely to get it done and why?

[Kagemusha]

1. ...Uh, is this really the right question?

If you believe Republicans, Hillary is the obvious choice to launch a massive purge of the government since she has prior experience in such efforts, but uh...

Shadow government?

[OzarkDem]

3. Do you believe

that Bush and Cheney alone are in charge of US foreign policy right now? Do you think that once they've left, all the institutions, coroporations, etc. who control US policy will just pack up and go home?

On edit: This question came to mind as I've been reading "Brothers" the book by David Talbot about Jack & Bobby Kennedy. Its very well researched and details all the difficulty Kennnedy and other presidents had in controlling the activities of the Joint Chiefs, the CIA and the FBI - all geared towards the Cold War mentality, and all of whom worked to undermine Kennedy's approach to move away from it. He wasn't able to stop the CIA from meddling in the overthrow of government leaders in Latin American, for example. He struggled with his own Joint Chiefs, just as Eisenhower and later, Clinton, did.

Our military and foreign policy apparatus is more linked than ever to corporate interests, and not just US corporate interests. I would call that a "shadow government".

[Kagemusha]

4. What the hell are you talking about? There's forming policy and there's doing it.

Implementation of policy can only be done through the institutions that exist to accomplish it. In other words, Bush himself, ambassadors, Rice, the state dept, and attached portions, like, oh, Blackwater, to use one example. There's a vast amount of policy formulation institutes - think tanks, stuff like that - and a lot of those work with Cheney. They're fairly permanent.

But I don't see the basis for concluding that corporations can force the government to do things it doesn't want to do under a new administration. And I don't see the basis for non-government institutions to act as a de facto government without the, you know, uh, power, to make that work.

[OzarkDem]

6. What about energy companies

banking interests, etc. who have been disrupting governments in the ME, who have worked with other countries to sell arms (even the US) to enemies of the US, who have used the drug trade to influence and finance organizations all towards the end goal of trying to control oil in the ME.

Every Dem president since Carter has had to deal with them. They've been able to exercise (by proxy) control over our own military and CIA. They're not going to pack up and move away overnight, just because a Dem is elected to office.

[gateley]

2. I don't understand, either, but I'll say Biden. I'm nothing if not loyal. :) nt

[AuntPatsy]

5. There is no way one person could do anything of the kind at this point in time

by themselves, it would take alot of wheeling and behind closed doors dealings to even attempt to right the many many wrongs and even then it will never be fully restored the way it should be.

[OzarkDem]

7. I tend to agree with you

but which candidate has the ability to make the best attempt in a way that makes real progress instead of appeasement? No doubt they all want to try, but not all may be able to.

[KharmaTrain]

8. I Thought Hillary Was "Corportist" or whatever...

IMHO, whomever comes in should shake up all those departments...look at how horrible a job they've done over the past several years. I might keep Mueller at the FBI, but the rest, especially McConnell have got to go.

If you're basing your support on that issue, Biden's probably your guy.

[JDPriestly]

9. Edwards is the most likely to be willing to take the risk of

dismantling the power structure that props the military-industrial complex up. The secret weapon will be tax reform. Edwards has the intelligence and willingness to do this. And the military-industrial complex has nothing "on" him. He has no past dealings that make him beholden to them. That is why he has never managed to bag 5 Sunday morning talk shows in one week.

Hillary is their girl -- the Democratic girl of the military-industrial complex. Granted they would prefer a Republican, any Republican.

[L. Coyote]

10. Whichever gets elected will be the commander. Who says they are out of control?

[Kagemusha]

11. The original poster.

Not further commenting..

[OzarkDem]

14. What is that supposed to mean?

If you don't want to participate in the discussion, stay out of it.

Let's not drag it down to the level of schoolyard taunts.

[WilliamPitt]

12. "You're fired."

Any new Dem president will be saying that the January after next.

[OzarkDem]

15. Which Dem candidate is fearless enough to do it?

Recall, during Clinton's years he was under so much pressure from the news media, GOP (and who knows who else) that he made some questionable appointments e.g. Louis Freeh. There was also a bruising battle over the Joint Chiefs, initially, with lots of name calling and fighting. He ended up making a good appointment and getting good foreign policy work done, but after a lot of fighting.

Whoever takes over this time has to be someone willing to put up with some really nasty stuff.

[Captain Hilts]

13. They're not out of control. Most CIA, JCS folks oppose the war. Adm Mullins opposes the war. nt