Blogs » Politcs Plus » Loose Lips Sinks Ships

Subscribe


Image

The recent leaked information controversy is a very serious one because it could put our armed forces in harm's way. If the two investigators, Atty. General Eric holder, has assigned to the case find evidence of wrongdoing, it will not bode well for the president because fair or unfair, responsibility for the security of classified information is the sole responsibility of the Executive Branch.

The executive branch uses a program called “Original Classifying Authority" which classifies a particular type of information, but the ultimate decision lies with the president of United States. President Bush allowed vice President Cheney to declassify information, as he did in the Scooter Libby incident.

There are several incidents where the executive branch purposely leak secret information to gain an upper hand on its opponents, but it must never be used to gain a favorable domestic impression of an American president. I'm more than positive that President Obama never ordered his security staff to engage in an unlawful manner, but there was a breach somewhere at some high level of trust. In July of 1945, President Truman told Stalin that we had a weapon capable of tremendous destruction not knowing that Stalin already knew about the Manhattan Project; nevertheless, President Truman was trying to delay the Soviet Union's desire to enter into the Pacific theater. It's common knowledge that Vice President Cheney leaked information to the New York Times and the Washington Post to get them on board just before the invasion of Iraq.

Congress has been missing in action for a long time because they have the right to assert that the president does not have the sole discretion to leak information. This is a classic "constitutional powers of the president “argument. Congress could certainly impeach the president, but right now they could not obtain the 67 votes needed to remove and there certainly isn't any talk of a drastic move like that. Congress should be ashamed of itself because they don't have access to the so- called hit list nor have they been inquisitive enough to inquire about our use of armed unmanned aerial drones in countries that we're not at war with. The American people seem comfortable with their use because they're cost effective, extraordinarily successful, and they don't put our troops in harm's way. What if we extended their use to attack the Syrian government targets? Their success has made other countries want to buy drones, and now we have a different problem.

I have a problem that U.S. special force's officers in Afghanistan had already admitted that they count civilians killed in attacks as combatants based on "guilt by proximity." Now we have confirmation that the CIA follows similar rules, discrediting official denials of large numbers of civilian deaths in drone strikes and other targeted killings. Evidently the president is covered under President Bush's signed directive that authorized arming the drones, called Predators, with Hellfire missiles to try to take out terrorism suspects. He later widened the directive to allow strikes against anyone working inside terrorist camps, not just individual suspects. I don't think Congress has ever seen that directive nor do they want to. It was a memo by the Bush's lawyers that authorized torture, but President Bush and vice President Cheney could just shrug their shoulders and say that they left that stuff up to the lawyers but President Obama was a constitutional professor.

It shouldn't be surprising that this has become a political issue in a presidential election year. The Republicans cried foul when a whole day was dedicated to celebrate the killing of Bin Laden, and now they think that leaking our role in delaying the nuclear capability of Iran by inserting a virus called “Stuxnet " that attacked Iran's nuclear program, will call for cyber warfare repercussions. I don't think the president's team needed to leak the president's foreign policy accomplishments but perhaps someone thought that he wasn't getting enough credit. For example, if the Stuxnet virus kept the Israelis from attacking Iran nuclear facilities, the world would've never known without the leaks. That’s not a justification; it’s just an example of what might have transpired.

If this investigation is like the previous ones and it will go on for a couple of months and then simply fade away. Meanwhile, we will have nightly panels that will appear angry, like the one that was on Fox News Sunday, yesterday. They will look angry and shocked that our foreign secrets could be compromised. Come on now, neo conservatives like Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney never met a war that didn't like and should be the last ones lecturing the White House.

In all seriousness Americans don't need to know troop deployment or any other other sensitive military information but they should know what's being done in their name and be given a platform for their voice of approval or disapproval. Congress could step up and do its job of asking pertinent questions, and then do everything in its power to uphold the United States Constitution and come up with a set of standards all Americans can live with..I don't know if that's possible but war should always be a bipartisan issue.