What jackasses:
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is trying to quell a revolt among U.S. diplomats angry over moves to force foreign service officers to work in Iraq under threat of dismissal.
Rice plans to send a cable to all U.S. embassies and missions abroad on Thursday explaining the rationale behind the decision to begin the largest diplomatic call-up since Vietnam, a U.S. official told The Associated Press. The effort comes after a contentious “town hall meeting” at the department on Wednesday in which diplomats expressed serious concerns about being forced to work in Iraq.
Rice, who did not attend the meeting, was making clear in the cable that foreign service officers have a duty to uphold the oaths they took to carry out the policies of the government and be available to serve anywhere in the world, according to the official.
A freaking cabbie in New York is more likely to die then a foreign service officer is in Iraq. How many FSO’s have died over there exactly? Hmmmm, try ZERO!
But still we have jackasses like this guy who signed up and took an oath to serve this country say this kind of jackassery:
Service in Iraq is “a potential death sentence,” said one man who
identified himself as a 46-year Foreign Service veteran. “Any other
embassy in the world would be closed by now,” he said to sustained
applause.
A potential death sentence? So is working on a skyscraper, or driving a cab, or working the local 7-11, or being a cop. But you signed the dotted line, as did our soldiers. You took an oath, as did our soldiers. Now shut your trap and serve your country.
Of course the lefties don’t like it when people follow through on their commitment to serve this country. Take for example the dim one, Mr. Juan Cole:
I don’t try to start an internet campaign very often,
because the blogosphere has its own priorities and logic that are
democratic and should not be forced. But here is a plea for everyone in
the blogging world to help force congress to save our diplomats.Bush is trying to Shanghai several hundred foreign service officers and force them to go to Iraq. They are protesting.
Now is that time for all Americans to stand up for the diplomats who
serve this country ably and courageously throughout the world, for
decades on end. Foreign service officers risk disease and death, and
many of them see their marriages destroyed when spouses decline to
follow them to a series of remote places. They are the ones who
represent America abroad, who know languages and cultures and do their
best to convince the world that we’re basically a good people.~~~
Bush should not be allowed by Congress to commit this immoral act against the civilians who serve us so faithfully.
We have a volunteer military in this country. You volunteer and you get sent where you are needed. Sometimes that happens to be very cool places, sometimes its not. But you signed up so you go and serve.
Guess what, we also have a volunteer diplomatic corps. You volunteer and you get sent where you are needed. Sometimes that
happens to be very cool places, sometimes its not. But you signed up
so you go and serve.
How in the hell is anyone in favor of allowing our diplomats to break their oath and opt out of serving in uncomfortable places?
I gotta tell ya, these guys have made the State Department even that much more contemptible then before, and that is saying quite a bit.
See author page
What a bunch of ingrates — this is pathetic. Iraq is far more stable now, it’s as safe as its ever been…if you get sent now, be happy…what if this was 2 years ago?
Curt’s bang on…you signed on the dotted line, now serve. If it was the other way around, these same twits would sue.
I got the “honor” to deal with some of the crap that is the US State Dept while in Iraq. One even bragged to us (A Marine, a USAF officer, and myself) how he was working to ensure everything we did would unravel. He then proceeded to insult and demean all three of us, our supposed lack of education (all three of us have technical degrees, not his underwater basket weaving degree), our parent services, and our devotion to duty. He did this within pistol range of Assassin’s Gate (which he never went through) at Phoenix Base and he never left the IZ. Even more telling was as this useless idiot was insulting us, we stood there and tried to debate him (it was difficult as he yelled like Rosie O’Donnell) and we were all armed, yet this boastful traitor was never in any danger of being shot.
Now if this “courageous” leftist went out the gates and yelled at the REAL imperialists and oppressors, the islamofascists, well… He would be a charred body hanging on a lamp-post.
These DOS fools get drunk nightly at the Presidential Palace pool. They have weekends off. They party and have ‘socials’ left and right. They do NOTHING but go swimming and pester Soldiers and Marines. Not all of them are morons and some are very patriotic and dedicated. However, the DOS does not reward or foster these people and unfortunately, the morons stick in my memory
Bush and Rice should have fired half the traitors in the State Dept. and CIA years ago.
Send them all to Iraq!
From what I recall, there was no new admin purge of the State Dept., and since most disagree with the objective there, and since most opposition to the war is anti-Admin (and vice versa) it’s perfectly logical, acceptable, and believable to say what the Dems are saying, and tell alls have said for years:
The military has made great progress in Iraq, but the political objectives, national reforms, and non-military efforts to succeed are left wanting. The war cannot be “won” by the military alone, and the people who can-the State Dept, and other non-military aid groups, are not meeting expectations. It’s sad, but then it comes around doesn’t it? Oppose the mission, brag about undermining it, and then-oh wait…ya mean they can’t leave and HAVE to go back until it’s done? Maybe when a DOS guy’s on HIS 3rd or 4th mandatory deployment, then he’ll get the message and get the job done?
Sad.
As I understand it the State Department guys don’t even have to go. They have the option of quitting (unlike our military guys). In that respect, what the government is doing is no different than what a private company can do: tell the employees they can relocate, or be laid off. So much for the attempt to spin this as some kind of ‘draft’ (let alone ‘Shanghai’).
It has been apparent for decades is the need for something seen by USAF Capt. Keith Laumer, who was also part of the Diplomatic Corps, in his Reteif works. The uproariously funny books gave a hard and fast needling to the US Diplomatic Corps via the CDT. Today we are facing such things with the usual stuffed shirts and old approaches that he made infamous in such stories, and it is only when Retief actually goes out and contacts the locals that situations get resolved.
The problem seen in State Dept. personnel is not a restricted phenomena to *just* State: it is an endemic cultural problem of the bureaucracy in DC. That problem is the Turf War problem that remains obstinately in place even during wartime. This is an outgrowth of the entrenched bureaucracy and its limited ability to relate their jobs to the Nation’s needs. Worse is that during wartime, the very specialities that the Federal Government has in abundance (building design, road design, contract expertise, civil engineering, etc.) is not exercised by the President who is *also* Head of the Government. That Executive decision allows the broad exercise of authority over National necessities and how they affect the actual jobs inside the Government.
Part of that authority is to put in place standards for promotion, and those become a direct part of performance appraisals. If the President wanted to exercise that authority, he very well could on either a direct order basis (as seen with State Dept) or via the promotion process (saying that anyone volunteering for duty in necessary job categories will get a promotion at the end of a full year posting). Notice that the last is not restricted to Iraq, and putting up a Promotion via Labor Category voluntary systems across the Federal Government, would allow the President to find individuals to meet individual job needs wherever the US needed them. The President could also put down that volunteering via application would fully satisfy the ‘other duties as assigned’ portion of the performance appraisal, so that individuals could get that either via the ‘other duties assigned’ to them via work or in demonstrating willingness to step forward in a needed job category.
The flip side of this, and little understood outside of the Federal Government, is that the major department heads inside Agencies are contract Senior Executive (or Intelligence) Service employees. These are one-year term with up to four renewable years contracts with senior government personnel. The SES/SIS system was put in place to give Presidents some leeway in oversight and authority and remove the upper-level entrenchment of the GS-15 civil service employees. As contract personnel the President can do this thing known as: fire them. The SES/SIS has been a plum and relatively cushy job of office management utilizing aforementioned GS-15 personnel for day-to-day operations managment. Any Agency or Department that does not meet the President’s needs can have this senior level of staff *fired* (contract terminated for government convenience)… and I would recommend that ‘firing until competence is found’ is a good way forward and puts the civil service on notice that it will answer for its problems *directly* in the interim to the appointed Agency head.
There is a plethora of job categories the US Federal Government has in abundance and when the Head of the Government directs things to get done, he has the authority to do so and the power to remove the upper echelons to prove that point. The INTEL Community has fiefdom-itis, as well as the rest of the government, and that is restricting the flexibility of the Federal Government via the entrenched outlooks of its personnel. For the sort of shake-up needed you do not need, or even want, a Mitt Romney style executive…. more like a Albert John (Chainsaw Al) Dunlap. We could use one of those to shake up the system… and some Retiefs, too…
omg….I agree with bbart :O
These are diplomats? When a diplomat is out for personal gain, it’s best to fire the person. Who knows what these diplomats would do behind the government’s back? They could be gun and drug running, spying for other countries, living the high life in 5 star hotels etc. If they want a cushion job in a specific country, they should have picked some white collar job in some major corporation. Oh wait, the corporation might expect the person to actually do something.
If we’re “not winning” in this criminal endeavor (the illegal invasion of a sovereign country) it is the President’s fault; he fails to “lead.”
He depends on flimsy “spin” to maintain “progress in Iraq.”
Those, even in the military, who really know what’s going on are either reduced in rank, ostracized, demoted or forced into retirement.
Many in the state department opposed this fiasco from the beginning.
And, it’s not only “SDP” that “enjoy” protection within the Green Zone….many others do also……
Iraq is a Bush fantasy wrapped in a wet dream of “global war on terror.”
“Terror” being anyone who will not succumb to our oppression and economic terrorism.
Give it up…Bring the military home; impeach this criminal administration, then try them all for war crimes….
End of story.
sierra
Ahhh, the idiotic troll parade is out….
wow! I got 11 talking points in Sierra’s post! That’s great!
High score for the day Sierra. Well done. Good for you.
“not winning”
Welp, every single major news organization has now been reporting on the success of the surge in Iraq this year. It’s barely half done, almost all of the military objectives have been met, and almost half of the political ones (not including the big one: national reconciliation which is progressing faster than expected per TIME magazine).
illegal war? UN678 and 687 both were never closed by a peace treaty after Desert Storm because Saddam never fully met a single of the 18 resolutions against him, and a mere timeline of the war makes it clear that the fighting never ended-reduced dramatically and only sparked every 4-6 months, but never ended. As to the occupation, please enjoy reading UN1483 sections 1-4 in which the United Nations mandates that the US stay in Iraq until the Iraqi govt is restored and either asks the US to leave or until peace is restored; ie, it’d be illegal to leave.
As to the global war on terror gig, I suppose you’re probably right. I mean, there’s only Islamic holy warriors affiliated with “The Base” (ie Al Queda) in 60 countries ranging from one side of the international dateline to the other…oh wait…that does kinda make it a GLOBAL war on Islamic Holy Warriors; terrorists.
I’m glad to see that you want the troops home, and that you agree with the President’s decision to do so. Surely you recall from watching General Petraeus’ speech to Congress that the order to start the withdrawal was given on Sept 14 this year, and the troops are coming home.
Impeachment…always a funny one. Really. It’s funny. What’re you advocating? Impeaching them for finishing a war that was on-going, or maybe the Bush Lied myth? I like that one because it sounds like your not gonna vote for a Republican in 08, and that means you’ll have to vote for Hillary who had even better intel access than GWB, and she was even more hawkish on invading Iraq (to say nothing of authorizing it, etc). So, how’s that work-impeach Bush, but vote for Hillary even though both are supposedly guilty of the same crime? Wonderful patriotism there-err, sorry, partisanship.
Anyway, make sure you print out a copy of that talking point post. It’s a beauty!
Thanks sierra…. I found a new Cuckoo clock! Except your chirping 13 times.
Video: Victory parade in Ramadi
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/02/video-victory-parade-in-ramadi/
Duncan Hunter: Wounded Warriors still seeking to serve:
“…let’s go over to Bethesda and Walter Reed and as we get these new — …these soldiers and Marines who are embarking on new careers, let’s recruit them for the State Department and let’s FIRE THESE GUYS THAT REFUSE TO GO and we’ll give the State Department careers to these military guys”.
How many of you brave BSer’s on this board are volunteering to go to IRAQ? Put your money where your mouth is. Charlie Rangel is right – if we instituted the draft this war would be over in a few months. Not even Bush’s own children volunteer to go there.
Pensivepuppy,
I am an Army officer with (this month) 14 years of service and just returned from Iraq a few months ago.
Your next worthless, asinine “point” is???
But then, I guess you cannot read very well as I kind of laid that out in a post above.
Lenin was right, the left is full of “useful idiots”…. Useless Idiots is more apt.
So, ChrisG, let’s force others to go to IRAQ too. Like the Bush daughters or Rush Blowhard. If the fat cats on the right had to go to Iraq or send their kids, this thing would be over in two minutes.
Pensive,
“if we instituted the draft this war would be over in a few months.”
The withdrawal order was given back in September. In June, more will be ordered. Do the math. US forces have deployed to the region 7 times in preparation for invasion (even though the US only invaded Iraq twice), and each time took 6-9 months. It would take months to organize a draft, make one happen, train, and then deploy the forces all at a time when President Bush is withdrawing forces, and with your intent for a draft being to force a withdrawal that’s already begun…it seems like just angst on your part.
…or, didn’t you know that the withdrawal order was given already? If so, that’s understandable. Dems need the opposition to the war to energize their base, so they don’t like to acknowledge that there’s success or that the order’s been given with more expected to follow, and they SURE don’t want their base to remember that
1) the Democratic Party is continuing the war, funding it, and has never made a serious effort at stopping it
2) the Democratic Party’s Presidential candidate (Hillary) will continue the war indefinitely.
If opponents of the war recognized those two things, they’d be hard pressed to vote for Hillary or other Democrats to continue the war while protesting against it.
Man, you lefties are a pathetic bunch. First you make the chickenhawk argument and demand we go to Iraq before we report on anything dealing on Iraq (unless of course we post something anti-Bush which Im sure you would have no problem with) then when told that one of our authors HAS been to Iraq, and is currently still in the military you change the argument to forcing the Bush daughters to Iraq.
P A T H E T I C
Stop playing with the adults and go back to the KOS playground will ya? We wouldn’t want you to get a headache doing some REAL thinking would we….
Curt,
This is predictable.
Next will be the “you are only in the military because you are too dumb to do anything else ignoring that all officer O-3 and above and most O-1s and above have degrees (OCS grads get a few years to complete theirs) and most enlisted have degrees of some sort also.
Then (180 degree flip) will be the “we are wasting the prime of our society in a war we are *losing (per propaganda spouted by Hollywierd, Micheal Moore, and the Democrats).
Then (180 degree flop) it will be “you are just a bunch of baby-killers who deserve to die”. Though, honestly, I have never performed an abortion in all my life.
After losing that “argument”, the leftist’s prattle will begin to deteriorate like Saddam’s corpse into bigoted attacks and socialist party talking points (redundant, no?).
So true Chris. It’s purely argumentative-similar to saying if you want law enforcement, or if you believe in the FBI, you have to force you children to go be cops or agents. The difference of course being one of scale where (while FBI agents for example are good people, highly trained, intelligent, and require years of training), serving in the military means is the most sacrifice possible imo.
What concerns me is the desperation of the arguments against the war today. People are still ranting away about the decision to invade 4 years ago, or the rhetoric from 4 years ago. Those debates are almost completely moot today. Or people will run on and on about Republicans wanting to keep the war in Iraq going on indefinitely despite the promise of leading Democratic Presidential nominees to do just that. Or they’ll actually march in the streets, hold press conferences, and so forth demanding that the US start withdrawing forces, meanwhile the order and plan to substantially reduce forces by withdrawal was started months ago.
So why do these people rant away? Why debate the moot? Why point partisan fingers in the face of bi-partisan determination to finish the war to success? Why demand withdrawal when it’s begun?
Is it because the msm isn’t reporting those things? That’s probably a big part of it-at least the first place to look.
Is it because they still don’t understand any of it and continue to believe the misinformation stemming from political leaders who they now KNOW will do and say anything to get elected (see also New Direction in Iraq, Most Ethical Congress ever, New Spirit of bi-partisanship)?
Or (my fear) do many people hear the news, not accept the disinformation anymore, and still rant and rave against the decision to invade etc because of habit; a habit that satisfies their feelings of political alienation by talking tough to power in the aire of talking truth to power?
Oh well, let them rave. Let them whine about the war with this talking point and that, and then let them try to so clearly form excuses to vote for Senator Clinton: who promoted the war, authorized the war, supported the war, funded the war, and will-in her words-keep combat missions going until 2013. Even partisan hacks are rethinking that one now since they’ve come to realize that when the Democratic Party’s leaders talk…it’s just to get them elected; ie, they aren’t really looking out for the little guy anymore-just saying anything to get a vote from demographics.
Foreign Service Officers
Over lunch today I switched on my cable news channel and saw something that made my stomach turn. A bunch of foreign service officers from the State Department fucking whining about how they don’t want to be sent to Iraq. One of them said tha…