ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

Gen. Jones: ‘Yes,’ we can begin to withdraw from Iraq.

In a House Armed Services Committee hearing this afternoon, Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO) asked Gen. James Jones to comment on his report’s recommendation that the U.S. should reduce its footprint in Iraq. The Jones report suggests “significant reductions” in the “size of our national footprint in Iraq.” Skelton asked Jones if this is a call to reduce troop levels, and Jones answered yes:

JONES: [W]e can consider taking a look at our footprint, taking a look at how many people we have in Iraq, how many bases we have, how many locations we have, and begin to think about ways in which we can realign the force, retask the force, and even remission it, so that we can gradually adjust our footprint and our military commanders can do it.

SKELTON: Does that mean reduce?

JONES: Sir?

SKELTON: Does that mean reduce our force?

JONES: It means — it means finding efficiencies and it means — yes, it means making a candid assessment of who’s over there, who absolutely needs to be there, critically, and making sure that we are operating at peak efficiency and don’t have excessive capacity simply over there because it’s their time to go.

Watch it:

Yglesias

Moderation in Defense of Moderation

Cato’s Neal McClusky ponders student loan reform: “How can you love an auction because it supposedly uses market forces, while simultaneously supporting the gargantuan market distortion that is the overall federal student aid system?” I feel like the answer has something to do with being neither a communist markets in some things nor a libertarian.

Or maybe there is no middle ground. Consider, after all, the totalitarian implications of the federal school lunch program.

Politics

O’Reilly: Media Matters, MoveOn are ‘vicious assassins.’

On his radio show yesterday, Bill O’Reilly called Media Matters and MoveOn.org “the most vicious element in our society today” and referred to their employees as “assassins.” He also claimed that there is “no corresponding level of this kind of vitriol on the right.” Listen to the full segment HERE.

Yglesias

Quote of the Day

Kenneth Walz: “To say that militarily strong states are feeble because they cannot easily bring order to minor states is like saying that a pneumatic hammer is weak because it is not suitable for drilling decayed teeth.”

Hat tips to Farley and Travis Sharp.

Yglesias

Our Ignorant Electorate

Chris Bowers notes that 59 percent of Democrats believe that John Edwards is proposing to withdraw all US forces from Iraq within nine months. 71 percent believe that Barack Obama is proposing to do this. And 76 (!) percent believe Hillary Clinton is proposing to do so. Needless to say, none of them are, in fact, proposing anything of the sort — though I wish they would.

Politics

Jones Report Reveals ‘Progress’ In Shia Ethnic Cleansing Campaign

Bush’s “surge” has escalated ethnic cleansing. Shiites have cleared the western half of Baghdad of thousands of Sunnis, who once dominated the area. Newsweek reports:

The surge of U.S. troops — meant in part to halt the sectarian cleansing of the Iraqi capital — has hardly stemmed the problem. The number of Iraqi civilians killed in July was slightly higher than in February, when the surge began. … Rafiq Tschannen, chief of the Iraq mission for the International Organization for Migration, says that the fighting that accompanied the influx of U.S. troops actually “has increased the [internally displaced persons] to some extent.”

The Iraqi Red Crescent Organization and the U.N. reported last month that the “number of Iraqis fleeing their homes has soared since the American troop increase began in February.” Despite the mass exodus of large numbers of Iraqis from conflict zones, the Iraqi health ministry reports there still have been more civilian deaths this month than in previous months.

The National Intelligence Estimate confirmed that where some “conflict levels have diminished,” it was due to ethnic cleansing. The new report by an independent 20-member military commission headed by Gen. James Jones puts this reality in a stark visual presentation. See the chart below (from p. 34 of the Jones report):

secviolencechart3.gif

The chart reports some decreases in the intensity of “ethno-sectarian violence” in certain Baghdad districts (Note: This is based on military data). But where there have been decreases, they are due largely to the fact that “mixed Muslim” areas are being overrun by either Shia or Sunni enclaves.

The map above demonstrates that Shias have been gradually taking over all of Baghdad (noted by the green mass that now covers much of the city), wiping out Sunni communities that stood in their path. Center for American Progress analyst Brian Katulis estimated that Baghdad, which once used to be a 65 percent Sunni majority city, is now 75 percent Shia.

Next week, when Gen. Petraeus reports “progress” in reducing sectarian violence in Iraq, what he means is that there has been great “progress” in the Shia ethnic cleansing campaign.

Yglesias

Why Tax Cuts

It should be said, that though belief in “tax cuts will pay for themselves” type theories is frequently expressed by Republican Party politicians and Republican-oriented columnists, talk show hosts, and think tankers, I do think it’s unlikely that this theory actually causes Republicans to advocate for tax cuts. For that, you need to look to something more like Jason Furman’s testimony today (PDF) before the Ways and Means Committee.

Here’s a chart that summarizes his main conclusions and, I think, basically explains Republican thinking. If the image is too small for you to read, click and you’ll get a bigger one:

furmanchartsmall.png

What we’re seeing here are dynamic analyses of the effect of tax cuts on the income of people at different income levels, under different scenarios. The top selection shows what happens if you pay for tax cuts via decreases in spending — i.e., what conservatives typically say should be done. Most households — 74 percent of them, in fact — wind up worse under this scenario than they would have been without the tax cuts. But 57 percent of families in the top twenty percent benefit. And 99 percent of families in the top one percent benefit. If, by contrast, the tax cuts are paid for simply by a future re-raising of taxes, then 76 percent of households wind up worse off, but 43 percent of households in the top one percent benefit.

In the real world, of course, you’re likely to see a mix of spending cuts and tax increases used to close deficits (so indicate the precedents of the major deficit reduction packages of the past) so that Republican Party advocacy of tax cutting does, according to Furman’s analysis, probably achieve its purpose of further enriching the richest Americans, albeit at the expense of the vast majority of Americans. For some of the movers behind this policy, it’s a question of self-interest (they’re rich or being paid by the rich to serve their ends) and for others it’s a simple question of justice — a not entirely trivial minority of the population regards the fact that the very richest Americans aren’t even richer as deeply immoral.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up