Iran/Contra, the other way now?

[Dancing David]

According to Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/01/24/050124fa_fact

...
The war on terrorism would be expanded, and effectively placed under the Pentagon’s control. The President has signed a series of findings and executive orders authorizing secret commando groups and other Special Forces units to conduct covert operations against suspected terrorist targets in as many as ten nations in the Middle East and South Asia.


The President’s decision enables Rumsfeld to run the operations off the books—free from legal restrictions imposed on the C.I.A. Under current law, all C.I.A. covert activities overseas must be authorized by a Presidential finding and reported to the Senate and House intelligence committees. (The laws were enacted after a series of scandals in the nineteen-seventies involving C.I.A. domestic spying and attempted assassinations of foreign leaders.) “The Pentagon doesn’t feel obligated to report any of this to Congress,” the former high-level intelligence official said. “They don’t even call it ‘covert ops’—it’s too close to the C.I.A. phrase. In their view, it’s ‘black reconnaissance.’ They’re not even going to tell the cincs”—the regional American military commanders-in-chief. (The Defense Department and the White House did not respond to requests for comment on this story.)

In my interviews, I was repeatedly told that the next strategic target was Iran. “Everyone is saying, ‘You can’t be serious about targeting Iran. Look at Iraq,’ ” the former intelligence official told me. “But they say, ‘We’ve got some lessons learned—not militarily, but how we did it politically. We’re not going to rely on agency pissants.’ No loose ends, and that’s why the C.I.A. is out of there.”

 

[Darth Rotor]

According to Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/01/24/050124fa_fact

Why in the Sam Hill was any of this leaked to Hersch?

Or, is he making stuff up?

They’re not even going to tell the cincs”—the regional American military commanders-in-chief. (The Defense Department and the White House did not respond to requests for comment on this story.)

This is the first step to a blue on blue engagement. Put a stovepipe into a CINC's battlespace, and don't tell him who's in it.

*slams head on desk*

DR

 

[Ziggurat]

Or, is he making stuff up?

Might as well be given how unreliable he's been in the past.

 

[Dancing David]

Why in the Sam Hill was any of this leaked to Hersch?

Or, is he making stuff up?

I am kind of wondering that myself. Leaks are leaks, but the Constituetion does not say the president can do certain things. But the statement of saying it is legal and not doing it are different.

I am more concerned by the allegation that we are funding Sunni insurgents to destabalize Iran.

Given our history of overthrowing a duly elected president of Iran, that might be a bad thing.

Gathering intelligence, that makes sense. Continuing the behaviors that led to Iran being pissed with us, that is short sighted. I believe it is useful to covertly do things like gather intelligence.



What does blue on blue means? An internal fight?

 

[Dancing David]

Might as well be given how unreliable he's been in the past.

I wondered about that as well.

 

[Darth Rotor]

What does blue on blue means? An internal fight?

Apologies, that is a military term of art that means "our guys hit our guys" like what happened to Pat Tillman, or to the four Canadians who got hit by mistake by US air attack in Afghanistan.

See also "friendly fire" and "fratricide."

With sneaky spy/special operations mixed in with regular operations, if the CINC is unaware of friendlies in an area, there is ample opportunity for a Command and Control screw up if the movements of those friendlies ends up overlapping a fire fight, or other operation.

There are similar risks with deep undercover operations in law enforcement.

DR

 

[Dancing David]

Apologies, that is a military term of art that means "our guys hit our guys" like what happened to Pat Tillman, or to the four Canadians who got hit by mistake by US air attack in Afghanistan.

See also "friendly fire" and "fratricide."

With sneaky spy/special operations mixed in with regular operations, if the CINC is unaware of friendlies in an area, there is ample opportunity for a Command and Control screw up if the movements of those friendlies ends up overlapping a fire fight, or other operation.

There are similar risks with deep undercover operations in law enforcement.

DR

Thank you, that is what i thought, and I was thinking police or naval.

Yeah, one of my high schools buds is in the Green Berets and has done covert ops, or at least been close to them. Of course he won't talk about it.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Thank you, that is what i thought, and I was thinking police or naval.

Yeah, one of my high schools buds is in the Green Berets and has done covert ops, or at least been close to them. Of course he won't talk about it.

That is as it should be.

If only the suits in Washington would keep their damned lips zipped, there would be less trouble for a lot of them. I have been aware of "tactical leaks" as a political shoehorn for a couple of decades. It pissed me off when I first learned about it, and it irritates me still. Declassification is a formal process, and can be done. It can be even done quickly if info needs to be presented to support US strategic interests.

I was exposed to classified, and at times sensitive, information from an early stage in my Naval career. If I had I handled it improperly, I get punished with either a reprimand, career ending fitness report, fines, possibly jail time, maybe even dismissal.

Sandy Bridges gets what?
John Deutsch gets what?
Richard Armitage gets what?
All of the suits (and I suspect a few high ranking officers) who are "sources who cannot reveal their names" get what when they leak classified information?

Nothing.

Freaking Jimmy Carter, when he blew the OPSEC on the Stealth program, was punished for breaking the law -- no, wait, he wasn't.

Screw the lot of them. They are breaking the rules.

Loose lips sink ships.

DR