Only The Shadow (Sy Hersh) knows. Or doesn’t know. Or something like that.
I’ve written before about journalist Seymour Hersh, whose work presently appears mainly in The New Yorker.
Mr. “hardly ever met a source he was willing to name” Hersh (I’m quoting myself, by the way) has recently expanded his oeuvre by giving this interview on Iranian radio (hat tip: Pajamas Media).
Not to be outdone by the globe-trotting Nancy Pelosi, Hersh has tried to be as helpful as possible to the Iranians. But that strangely vacant rambling quality I’ve noted before in his writing—work I believe would never find a home in the ordinarily well-written pages of the New Yorker if it weren’t for his reputation as the long-ago breaker of the My Lai story—is in evidence in the interview, as well.
Read it. Hersh’s expression of bafflement is the interview’s most salient characteristic. The general message is “I haven’t a clue what’s going on, but that’s not going to stop me from talking about it.”
The interview isn’t long, but in it Hersh says many different times, in many different ways, that he simply doesn’t know anything about what the White House thinks it will do, or why. The most he can say is that there are contingency plans, as though contingency plans for almost every possibility aren’t the duty of the Pentagon.
Hersh’s phenomenal cluelessness doesn’t stop him from offering a few pearls, to wit:
…we are doing more than targeting Iran where inside your country. There are a lot of aggressive activities by the United States. I think we and the Israelis, I have written this, have contacts with Baluchis and the Iranian Kurds all of whom in some cases are happy with the government or in opposition to the government and we are also setting our troops across the border. So there is a lot of aggression by the United States right now on Iran and what happens next nobody knows. So far, Iran has been very quiet….
Perhaps what we are doing is for Israel and oil but I don’t think this president believes that he really thinks his mission is to spread democracy in the Middle East, even though, you could argue that Iran is probably the most democratic country. The elections there certainly indicate people vote what the way they believe….
Sure they do, Seymour, sure they do—and I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn you might want to buy.
So, what is this predilection for treating enemies as though they are friends? Is it a case of “if I play nicely, they will, too?” Or is it just an advanced case of Bush-hatred and Bush-blame? Those are the kindest spins I can put on Hersh’s latest caper.
Diving into Hersh’s earlier interviews is an interesting expedition. There’s the murky thinking (he’s especially poor on constitutional issues–here, for example, in an interview with the UK’s Socialist Worker, he indicates an almost breathtaking lack of understanding of both the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions). And how’s this for specious moral-equivalence comparisons:
My Lai told us that the we don’t fight wars any better than the “nips” and the “krauts”.
Of course. Note how he manages not only to slander the vast majority of US servicemen and women, but how he works in self-aggrandizement in the process: it was Seymour Hersh’s big story, My Lai, that did the great service of telling us that we are no better than the Germans and the Japanese in World War II. No mention of differences of scale or degree, of course (and see this for my take on My Lai).
I’m sure Mr. Hersh’s antipathy to this White House’s policy is multi-determined. As he says in the Iran interview, he “has an opposition to the government” (I assume he meant this administration, but one wonders whether it wasn’t a Freudian slip). But the following extra-added motivation for Bush-hatred—revenge—caught my eye in that Worker interview:
But Bush and his people don’t react enough. Most of the time they just ignore me.
I read the transcripts of the Pentagon’s briefings. The first year of Rumsfeld was a real love-in. Someone would say, “Sy Hersh is at it again” and there would be laughter.
Perhaps Sy is determined to get the last laugh.
Sy Hersh didn’t actually break the story of My Lai; He verified it. The story was all over the world, including major European papers and a few small rags here in the US. I think what Sy Hersh did was get somebody in the US Army to verify the story as true, and get it into the New York Times.
You make it sound like hating Bush is a bad thing….
Lots of people hate Bush, TD. It’s only when you reach the far shoals of Rosie O’Donnellism, where you believe not a feather of a wing of a sparrow falls to earth save by the machinations of Chimpy McBusHitler and his Zionist neocon warmongerers that it’s a danger to the country.
And I do love Hersh’s “Bush and his people don’t react enough. Most of the time they just ignore me” pout. A more perfect distillation of the diaper-soiling narcissism of the left would be hard to find.
Neo,
I’m glad you write cogently about Hersh. Me, I just go on ignoring him!
Fausta: you and the Bush administration! Watch out, he’ll get miffed.
I somehow get the sense that Neo doesn’t like Sey.
I think as to the motivations, it is more like “If only I can get people to attack Bush in a coordinated strike, this will net me good positives when I take over in the aftermath”.
Since Iran wants to defeat the US, Sey thinks that’s a potential good deal for him.
If someone else bleeds for him, it leads, you can bet on that.
To me, at some point, somehow, “Hersh” reminded me of sudden, convulsive vomiting. I liked the comic irony, as Sy’s writing is sort of a “Hershing” up of his agendas and speculations, as in:
Sy… Hersh!
I sometimes enjoy silly, and this makes me laugh. Sometimes I also think this:
(Deep breath)…. sigh………. HERSH!
Have you no shame?
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Spc. Clifford A. Spohn III, 21, of Albuquerque, N.M.
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualties
Staff Sgt. Harrison Brown, 31, of Prichard, Ala
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualties (part 1)
Pfc. David N. Simmons, 20, of Kokomo, Ind.
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualties
Staff Sgt. Jesse L. Williams, 25, of Santa Rosa, Calif.
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualties
Capt. Jonathan D. Grassbaugh, 25, of East Hampstead, N.H.
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualties
Spc. Ebe F. Emolo, 33, of Greensboro, N.C.
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualties
Spc. Levi K. Hoover, 23, of Midland, Mich.
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Army Casualties
Pfc. Rodney L. McCandless, 21, of Camden, Ark.
04/10/07 winonadailynews: Walz honors injured Iraq veteran
Army Pfc. Mahlke suffered a serious head injury
04/10/07 DoD Identifies Navy Casualty
Cmdr. Philip A. Murphy-Sweet, 42, of Caldwell, Idaho
04/10/07 MNF: 4 Iraqi Army soldiers killed, 16 MND-B Soldiers wounded
04/10/07 Reuters: Turkish troops kill four Kurdish rebels in clash
04/10/07 Reuters: British troops clash with gunmen in Basra
04/10/07 AP: 15,000 Troops Could Stay Longer
04/10/07 Reuters: Nine bodies found in Baghdad
04/10/07 Reuters: Mortar rounds kill 1, wound 5 in northern Baghdad
04/10/07 Reuters: 3 bodies found in Mosul, 2 in Rashad
04/10/07 AFP: Five die in blast near Iraq university
04/10/07 BBC: ‘Woman’ bomber hits Iraq police leaving at least 14 dead, 20 wounded
04/10/07 MNF: Roadside bomb targets MND-B patrol – 3 killed, 1 wounded
04/10/07 MNF: MNF-W Forces attacked – 1 Soldier killed
Shame for what, exactly?
“Shame for what, exactly?”
A preemptive war that preempted nothing. Cost: almost 3300 US troops lives, 100s of thousands of dead Iraqis, millions of displaced Iraqis and 100s of billions of dollars. What has been gained: An Iraqi “government” that could not survive a single day outside of the Green Zone. What a sham that is. A “government” that can’t do the first thing any government must do … protect itself. And you here supported this? Shame!
Some how this is not taking my replies
OK, I guess its not accepting particular replies.
Sorry Neo, Ive tried to send a reply to a message sam posted, but it will not appear. It contains no foul language…and no, nothing about nuclear powered steam generators.
Althouh, that is an interesting subject…
Of course, “Sam” didn’t mention the “100’s” of “insurgent” casualties from this current operation. “Sam” also forgets to mention the greater part of the current operation is being conducted by the Iraqis, who seem to be well outside the “Green Zone”. Amazing that after four years of “getting blown up in police recruiting lines”, there are still “police recruiting lines” to get “blown up” in. Guess the Iraqis themselves don’t feel the sense of “defeatism” that “Sam” here does. The “Mahdi” army used to “fight” in the streets of Sadr City and Najaf; today, they “demonstrate” in the streets. So, I’ll ask for a second time: Shame for WHAT?
Harry, I’ve had the same “problems” with some of my postings, too. Must be a new feature.
Sam:
“What has been gained: An Iraqi “government” that could not survive a single day outside of the Green Zone. What a sham that is. A “government” that can’t do the first thing any government must do … protect itself. And you here supported this? Shame!”
Abandonment is much more preferable for you isnt it? That would be less shameful. Less shameful to you. After all, what do you realy care about? If thousands more lives of the same Iraqi people you feign to care for are murdered after we leave, you can just shrug your shoulders and blame Bush, secure in the knowledge that there will be no more lists, no more press, nothing left to remind you that there exist people unlike yourself, who have actual convictions instead of empty moral posturing. People who kill and die and sacrifice in order to preserve or foster something better, rather than “fight for justice” by vandalizing the local “Starbucks”.
You use the names of people killed in this struggle against the very purpose they were killed for, for a very cynical purpose, but these are very real people and I bet they’d rather not have some slug use their names in this manner.
There, that took.
Lee
““Sam” didn’t mention the “100’s” of “insurgent” casualties from this current operation.”
Congrats. You supported the invasion of another country and the murder of its countrymen just to prove that the US can really rack up a body count. Was it worth the price listed above? Answer the question or bugger off.
““Sam” also forgets to mention the greater part of the current operation is being conducted by the Iraqis, who seem to be well outside the “Green Zone”.”
Man are you delusional. Where does one start? Do you mean the “Iraqi Army”? That couldn’t be the same feckless “Iraqi army” of the “Iraqi government” that will never set foot ouside the “Green ZOne”? Is that the one? Do you mean the US-trained “Iraqi Army” with the endless list of ghost enlistees that just collect a paycheck and fight for one of the many militia groups killing US troops? Is that the one? Or could it be the “Iraqi Army” that serves as nothing more than a forward inelligence operation for the insurgency and Shiite militias? Is that the one?
“The “Mahdi” army used to “fight” in the streets of Sadr City and Najaf; today, they “demonstrate” in the streets.”
You should be choking on your Mahdi Army comment just about … now.
Do you really think Americans are so stupid that they will continue to buy your propaganda despite the obvious costs.
The answer of course is no. They are, in increasing numbers, asking for the heads of BushCo.
You are stuck trying to relive 2003. It’s over. You lost. We all lost. You will pay.
Harry
There is no price that you and I could pay and no sacrifice that you and I could make that would change what will happen in Iraq as a result of BushCo’s madness and YOUR support of it.
Hasta
In the 1860’s, many Americans(mostly Democrats, what a surprise) questioned wether the hundreds of thousands of casualties was worth the abolishment of slavery and the preservation of the Union(are you a “Democrat”, “Sam”?)
After spending HOURS collating and typing up casualty reports for one day, “Sam” then says I’m fascinated by “body counts”(projection, anyone?)
He(“Sam”) lists “4 Iraqi soldiers killed”, then says they are “cowering in the Green Zone”(contradiction?).
And I’m choking on the Mahdi army……NOW!(no, still “demonstrating) OK, how about…..NOW!(nope, still quiet) OK, OK, this time for sure……NOW!(BAAH….HA…HA…HA!)
I guess “hasta” is Spanish for: “I’m buggering off”.
sam:
While some shame is called for — at least some humility — there is still some opportunity to pull victory and honor from the jaws of defeat and shame.
The line in the sand, (or, the bottom line, if you like) is that we cannot let the head-choppers take over the government of Iraq. They will use the oil revenue to build a war machine and wreak havoc. Listing the flaws of the Bush administration, or listing the costs of the war, is not the same as an analysis of Iraq or the Middle East.
Millions of purple-fingered Iraqis voted for a democratic central government. A few thousand terrorists say no! Whose side are you on?
Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of Sy Hersh?
The shadow do!
sam, as always, is on the flip side. You can’t un-flip him.
There is no price that you and I could pay and no sacrifice that you and I could make that would change what will happen in Iraq as a result of BushCo’s madness and YOUR support of it.-Sam
This I translate as a belief that things can only get worse, they can never get better. It is one of the justifications for anarchy and nihilism. If your support of something only makes it worse, then why support it? But the opposite isn’t true for people like Sam, you can’t make something better by supporting it. That’s not in the cards, for them. They believe everything is going down the tube, so either we must accelerate it by not resisting evil, or they will just ignore it and hope it dissolves them last.
None are good paths to take on the road of human progress.
“The line in the sand, (or, the bottom line, if you like) is that we cannot let the head-choppers take over the government of Iraq.”
And just who are the head choppers?
So, Sam:
You want America defeated and humiliated — why are you just sitting at home spamming other people’s blogs? Why don’t you be a man and put on an explosive belt and kill some innocent women and children? If you’re willing to support Iran’s war against America but haven’t killed any infidels yet, you’re just a chickenjihadi.
“You want America defeated and humiliated”
No. I want neither. I want to limit the damage that BushCo has done. The rest of your post is just silly.
“No. I want neither. I want to limit the damage that BushCo has done.”
Since you’ve already indicated a complete lack of regard for the lives of the people in Iraq once we leave, it couldnt be about limiting damage.
Or were you referring to your own moral convictions again?
Yes, thats what this is about.
Sam,
The odds of you taking to heart any notion put forth here lie somewhere between zero and simply not visible without advanced scientific instruments, but when you wrote:
You might want to read some of the Ancient, Musty texts on warfare, in particular, Thucydides, and consider the role of “The Will to Power” and its relationship to establishing the credibility of deterrence, and what effect that has in preventing war. I mean the whole notion of Sic vis pacem, para bellum (If you would have peace, prepare for war) is true and all, but skips a lot of the fundamentals of the sort that your question above, however inexpertly, brings forward.
Regards,
BRD
You do understand that this occupation of Iraq is unsustainable by the US don’t you? You do understand that there is no US military solution to chaos that BushCo unleashed don’t you? There is but one chance, a slim one at that, to diminish the catastrophe in Iraq and that is a timeline for pull out from Iraq.
The only chance that a civil war can be quelled in Iraq is with the regional participation of its neighboring countries. But they will not participate so long as we have an open-ended comment to saying in Iraq because they understand that they violence will continue as long as we stay and their efforts would be for naught.
You do undertsnad that there is not a chance in hell of shifting the blame to those who oppose the occupation don’t you? The supporters of BushCo will always be seen as the instigators of the Iraq catastrophe and everything that flows from it. It is utterly shameless and childish to try to shift the blame to those who warned you off this atrocity in its infancy. Perhaps most importantly few and fewer Americans buy that nonsense.
You do understand the more evidence of success of the current “surge” operations, the more the lefties insist we’ve already lost. You do understand the participation of neighboring countries incites the “civil war”. You do understand the troops could be home tomorrow by not funding them.
You do understand the Mahdi army is “choking”, not me.
Sam,
You make a lot of assertions which aren’t borne out particularly well in the last 4,000 years of armed organized warfare. You might want to expand on the arguments a little bit more than just providing assertion by fiat as a means of supporting your statements.
The other thing that you may also wish to consider with all of the “BushCo” talk you seem to relish, is that Presidents don’t lose wars – nations lose wars. In a supreme fit of BDS, you seem intent on cutting off your nose to spite Bush’s face.
BRD
You do understand that there is no US military solution to chaos that BushCo unleashed don’t you?
The military solution to chaos is to kill anyone who resists and impose martial law to fill in the vacuum.
The only chance that a civil war can be quelled in Iraq is with the regional participation of its neighboring countries.
The only chance you will have of living to see the shore again, is if you rely upon those who know how to swim, to get you to land without you drowning. The United States Marine Corps already knows how to swim, they don’t need help from you or Iran.
It is utterly shameless and childish to try to shift the blame to those who warned you off this atrocity in its infancy.
Don’t act like narcissists warn people to help them. Narcissists “warn” people in order to destroy them and bring them down.
I’ve mentioned this elsewhere, but a couple of years back, Hersh told the Columbia Journalism Review that Bush had gone to war in Iraq to divert attention from Enron and other corporate scandals. He didn’t appear to be kidding, he offered no evidence and the Review didn’t ask him for any _ not that I expected them to. But this explains a lot to me, and not about Bush.
Pingback:AcientWarrior57
Pingback:neo-neocon: Only The Shadow (Sy Hersh) knows. Or doesn’t know. Or something like that. « Predictive Validity