State of Denial: After the Big Leak, Spinning for War

[bigtree]

from Norman Solomon: http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/62158


July 27, 2010 9:33 am

Washington’s spin machine is in overdrive to counter the massive leak of documents on Afghanistan. Much of the counterattack revolves around the theme that the documents aren’t particularly relevant to this year’s new-and-improved war effort.

Unfortunately, the “change in strategy” has remained on the same basic track as the old strategy — except for escalation. On Tuesday morning, the lead story on the New York Times website noted: “As the debate over the war begins anew, administration officials have been striking tones similar to the Bush administration’s to argue for continuing the current Afghanistan strategy, which calls for a significant troop buildup.”

Even while straining to depict the U.S. war policy as freshly hatched since last winter, presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs solemnly proclaimed that the basis for it hasn’t changed since the autumn of 2001. “We are in this region of the world because of what happened on 9/11,” Gibbs said on Monday. “Ensuring that there is not a safe haven in Afghanistan by which attacks against this country and countries around the world can be planned.” In other words: a nifty rationale for perpetual war.

Some Democrats on Capitol Hill were eager to rebrand the war. “Under the new counterinsurgency strategy implemented earlier this year, we now have the pieces in place to turn things around,” said the head of the House Armed Services Committee, Ike Skelton. “These leaked reports pre-date our new strategy in Afghanistan and should not be used as a measure of success or a determining factor in our continued mission there.”

Other prominent war supporters in Washington have tried to show how open they are to tweaking the same doomed approach that they’re clinging to. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry, continued his record of hollow leadership by speaking of a need for “calibrations.” A statement from Kerry declared that the leaked documents “raise serious questions about the reality of America’s policy toward Pakistan and Afghanistan. Those policies are at a critical stage and these documents may very well underscore the stakes and make the calibrations needed to get the policy right more urgent . . .”

read more: http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/62158

[SpiralHawk]

1. "Oh noes, they are blaming the past on me & my cronies." - xCommander AWOL (R)

[ProSense]

2. There's nothing damning in the leaks. Everyone knew these things were happening.

If there was anything damning in these reports, something would have splashed it all over the Internet by now, the MSM aside.

Trying to make them seem more damaging by claiming people are denying they're damaging is ridiculous.

[bigtree]

3. the general public isn't yet up to speed on the revelations

The debate in the country over the military operation in Afghanistan is a continuing one and may well intensify behind the details revealed in these documents. The scramble to defend against them is coming from occupation supporters worried about the tarnish of their careful control over reports which might reflect badly on their precarious enterprise. That public impression of the dubious Afghanistan military enterprise (and Congress' reaction to them) will be the most determinate measure of how 'damaging' the revelations are. I'm sure occupation supporters will do their best to control and dampen all of that.