I watched the Showtime movie "The World According to Dick Cheney," but was disappointed at its failure to challenge Cheney's views. My first objection was that it did not say anything about Cheney's failure to serve in Vietnam. It talks about how he was expelled from Yale and worked back in Wyoming as an electric lineman before resuming his education in Wyoming and then Wisconsin. This was in the 1960s, prime time for the Vietnam draft. His Wikipedia page and this Slate article describe how he weaseled out of the draft. Normally a student deferment was for only four years; Cheney got more. For his fifth deferment, he reportedly got a hardship deferment because his wife was pregnant. Wikipedia says he told that Washington Post, "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service."
I don't think that everybody who avoided the draft was a coward, but it certainly raised questions about their patriotism. I think that Cheney thought he was more important than America. Maybe he thought he was destined to save America from itself. If so, it didn't work out. The wars have probably weakened the US militarily and damaged our image abroad. The huge costs incurred without increasing taxes to pay for the wars damaged the US economy for years to come.
One new, unfavorable fact about Cheney that I learned from the movie was that toward the end of the Bush administration, he became seriously estranged from President Bush. Bush thought that Cheney had led him astray on foreign policy and defense issues, and in particular had sandbagged him on the issue of illegal wiretapping by the government.
I think it is safe to say that Cheney has no regrets because he has no heart and no conscience. While he avoided the draft as a young man, he let young men from Wyoming serve in the wasteful wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, although it looks like only 14 from Wyoming died in Iraq.
Dick Cheney: unpatriotic coward who undermined American greatness.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Government Funding Deja Vu
The sequester episode brings to mind very bad memories of my government service. I basically quit the Foreign Service because of the government's refusal to fund things I thought it should have funded in the turmoil around the government shutdown in 1995 and 1996.
In the early years of the Clinton administration, before Newt Gingrich and the Republicans came to power in 1994, two years into the Clinton administration, the US had signed a agreement to provide funding for joint science projects between the US and Poland and other former eastern bloc countries for five years. When I arrived in Warsaw, the US had already provided $2 million funding for one year, and it provided the same amount for the second year, which was the first year of my assignment in Poland. But Congress refused to provide funding for what would have been the third year of the program.
A fairly senior Polish diplomat repeated called me into the Foreign Ministry to berate me on behalf of the United States for failing to live up to its obligations. I told him that if wanted results, he should call in the Ambassador rather than me, but at that time Poland was not yet a member of NATO, much less of the EU, and it did not want to do anything that would damage its efforts to join those organizations. So, he continued to tell me how upset Poland was at the US default. Having been raised in the South with a heavy dose of lecturing on the importance of honesty, honor, integrity, etc., the fact that I was the representative of a country that failed to live up to those standards hurt me deeply.
About six months or so after the US decision to abrogate the cooperation agreement, the Ambassador decided that the embassy had no need of a science officer, because there was little scientific activity outside of the cooperation agreement. He said that I could finish my tour, but I would not be replaced when I left. A little while after that, the State Department in Washington asked if I would be willing to transfer from Warsaw to Rome to take the science job at the embassy there. I agreed and was scheduled to leave in a few weeks.
It turned out that the day of my departure from Warsaw to Rome was the day the United States Government shut down, November 14, 1995, according to Wikipedia. My wife and I had moved everything out of our government housing in Warsaw. Most of our things had been shipped to Rome, but we had a car full of clothes and two dogs that we planned to drive to Rome. At about 4:00 pm, while I was saying farewell to some friends in the embassy, Rome called and said not to come because I had been furloughed and there was no funding for travel. However, we had nowhere to live in Warsaw and everything we owned was either in transit or in the trunk of the car.
Unfortunately, this reminded me of an experience in the Army during the Vietnam War. My artillery battery was stationed on a mountaintop at a base called Firebase Barbara, west of Quang Tri, near the Laotian border, where we were shelling the Ho Chi Minh trail. Vietnamization had started; so, we had no American infantry to defend us. Instead we had two "dusters," old anti-aircraft weapons systems that shot 40 mm rounds like a machine gun. The duster crews were always stationed in isolated, dangerous places and had a reputation of having gone native and not being very professional. One night we got an intelligence report that enemy troops were massing at the base of our mountain, apparently planning to attack us. I got a radio call from our headquarters telling us not to give the dusters any gasoline, because they were famous for not having any, and it was too hard to get it out to us. However, it looked like if the dusters could not shoot, we were all going to die. We made sure the dusters had gas; they blew away the area at the base of the mountain where the enemy was supposed to be assembling, and the attack never materialized.
But that's how it struck me -- that the US Government would rather that my wife and I freeze to death in Poland than provide us shelter. A government that sends troops into the field and then fails to provide them with ammunition and other necessities is a pretty worthless government, and that's what I thought of our government. We weren't going to die, but for all the government cared, we could have. Unfortunately, a similar attitude led to the deaths of the American diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, a few months ago.
I tended to be just a soldier in the Foreign Service. I was not an outstanding diplomat. The assignment in Rome was a plum, but it had fallen into my lap. Most people who go to nice places lobby hard for the assignment. I didn't know much of anything about the personnel in Rome. I was so mad that this time, rather than be the good soldier and camp out in some hotel in Warsaw, I called Rome to complain about being left on the street. It turned out that the DCM, the deputy ambassador, was someone I knew from a previous assignment in Brazil. He said to go ahead and travel to Rome and they would figure out the paperwork somehow. I did, but that basically ended my desire to serve the US government. I would not serve a government that abandons its troops in the field.
A diplomat is many things: a journalist reporting on the country where you are assigned, a mailman carrying messages from our government to theirs, but also a salesman, both for American products and for the American way of life. When the government I was representing fell to some mean-spirited, dictatorial, third-world standard, I didn't want to represent it anymore.
I went to Rome. One reason they wanted me there was that Italy was assuming the presidency of the European Union, which meant that most of the diplomats in the embassy did double duty, they had to deal with the Italian government on the usual bilateral issues, but also on European Union issues. The presidency lasts for six months. I stayed for six months to take care of the extra work, but then retired from the Foreign Service and left.
In the early years of the Clinton administration, before Newt Gingrich and the Republicans came to power in 1994, two years into the Clinton administration, the US had signed a agreement to provide funding for joint science projects between the US and Poland and other former eastern bloc countries for five years. When I arrived in Warsaw, the US had already provided $2 million funding for one year, and it provided the same amount for the second year, which was the first year of my assignment in Poland. But Congress refused to provide funding for what would have been the third year of the program.
A fairly senior Polish diplomat repeated called me into the Foreign Ministry to berate me on behalf of the United States for failing to live up to its obligations. I told him that if wanted results, he should call in the Ambassador rather than me, but at that time Poland was not yet a member of NATO, much less of the EU, and it did not want to do anything that would damage its efforts to join those organizations. So, he continued to tell me how upset Poland was at the US default. Having been raised in the South with a heavy dose of lecturing on the importance of honesty, honor, integrity, etc., the fact that I was the representative of a country that failed to live up to those standards hurt me deeply.
About six months or so after the US decision to abrogate the cooperation agreement, the Ambassador decided that the embassy had no need of a science officer, because there was little scientific activity outside of the cooperation agreement. He said that I could finish my tour, but I would not be replaced when I left. A little while after that, the State Department in Washington asked if I would be willing to transfer from Warsaw to Rome to take the science job at the embassy there. I agreed and was scheduled to leave in a few weeks.
It turned out that the day of my departure from Warsaw to Rome was the day the United States Government shut down, November 14, 1995, according to Wikipedia. My wife and I had moved everything out of our government housing in Warsaw. Most of our things had been shipped to Rome, but we had a car full of clothes and two dogs that we planned to drive to Rome. At about 4:00 pm, while I was saying farewell to some friends in the embassy, Rome called and said not to come because I had been furloughed and there was no funding for travel. However, we had nowhere to live in Warsaw and everything we owned was either in transit or in the trunk of the car.
Unfortunately, this reminded me of an experience in the Army during the Vietnam War. My artillery battery was stationed on a mountaintop at a base called Firebase Barbara, west of Quang Tri, near the Laotian border, where we were shelling the Ho Chi Minh trail. Vietnamization had started; so, we had no American infantry to defend us. Instead we had two "dusters," old anti-aircraft weapons systems that shot 40 mm rounds like a machine gun. The duster crews were always stationed in isolated, dangerous places and had a reputation of having gone native and not being very professional. One night we got an intelligence report that enemy troops were massing at the base of our mountain, apparently planning to attack us. I got a radio call from our headquarters telling us not to give the dusters any gasoline, because they were famous for not having any, and it was too hard to get it out to us. However, it looked like if the dusters could not shoot, we were all going to die. We made sure the dusters had gas; they blew away the area at the base of the mountain where the enemy was supposed to be assembling, and the attack never materialized.
But that's how it struck me -- that the US Government would rather that my wife and I freeze to death in Poland than provide us shelter. A government that sends troops into the field and then fails to provide them with ammunition and other necessities is a pretty worthless government, and that's what I thought of our government. We weren't going to die, but for all the government cared, we could have. Unfortunately, a similar attitude led to the deaths of the American diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, a few months ago.
I tended to be just a soldier in the Foreign Service. I was not an outstanding diplomat. The assignment in Rome was a plum, but it had fallen into my lap. Most people who go to nice places lobby hard for the assignment. I didn't know much of anything about the personnel in Rome. I was so mad that this time, rather than be the good soldier and camp out in some hotel in Warsaw, I called Rome to complain about being left on the street. It turned out that the DCM, the deputy ambassador, was someone I knew from a previous assignment in Brazil. He said to go ahead and travel to Rome and they would figure out the paperwork somehow. I did, but that basically ended my desire to serve the US government. I would not serve a government that abandons its troops in the field.
A diplomat is many things: a journalist reporting on the country where you are assigned, a mailman carrying messages from our government to theirs, but also a salesman, both for American products and for the American way of life. When the government I was representing fell to some mean-spirited, dictatorial, third-world standard, I didn't want to represent it anymore.
I went to Rome. One reason they wanted me there was that Italy was assuming the presidency of the European Union, which meant that most of the diplomats in the embassy did double duty, they had to deal with the Italian government on the usual bilateral issues, but also on European Union issues. The presidency lasts for six months. I stayed for six months to take care of the extra work, but then retired from the Foreign Service and left.
Hegel Confirmed
Chuck Hegel was confirmed today as Defense Secretary according to the Wall Street Journal. The article cites Hegel's positions on Israel and Iran as obstacles to his nomination. Iran is really a subset of the Israel issue, since Iran is much more of a military threat to Israel than to the US. I have been upset that his nomination was being blocked by Jews who were more concerned about Israel than the US. However, in the final vote, most of the Jews in the Senate are Democrats who vote for Hegel, while the good-old-boy,
Christian, conservative Republicans voted against him. The one favor that some of them did was to vote against filibustering his nomination. Many of these conservative, Christian Republicans were responding to urging by the Jewish lobby AIPAC, which represents the conservative wing of Israeli politics.
Christian, conservative Republicans voted against him. The one favor that some of them did was to vote against filibustering his nomination. Many of these conservative, Christian Republicans were responding to urging by the Jewish lobby AIPAC, which represents the conservative wing of Israeli politics.
Saturday, February 16, 2013
Jewish Vendetta
This Politico article reinforces the impression that there is a Jewish vendetta against Hegel for his comments about the Jewish lobby. It says that right-wing Hegel opponents were seeking a video of a speech he made to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination League because they thought it would contain anti-Israel or anti-Semetic comments. So, the opposition to Hegel seems motivated by those who love Israel more than America and who consider themselves Jews rather than Americans. But Politico says Hagel said nothing of note to the ADL. Nevertheless there seems to be a lot of race hatred behind the opposition to Hegel
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)