Congress Hurting our war on Terror!?

[Mike AI]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030813...20409-8659r.htm

Congress to restrict use of Special Ops


By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES



Congress is set to impose new restrictions on the use of Special Operations Forces that for the first time will require a presidential order before deploying commandos in routine but hidden activities.
The restrictions are contained in the classified Senate report accompanying the current version of the intelligence authorization bill for fiscal 2004.
The restrictions were added to the report by members of the Senate Intelligence Committee after consultations with Stephen Cambone, the defense undersecretary for intelligence, according to current and former U.S. officials and documents obtained by The Washington Times.
The new rules, if contained in the final version of the bill, would add a burden to the military's deployment of Special Operations Forces by requiring the Pentagon to first obtain a presidential "finding," or directive, similar to those required for covert-action intelligence operations.
Findings are declarations that the president "finds" a secret activity is in national interest.
A former special-operations officer said the committee language would redefine traditional military activity as a covert action.
"What that means is that things that special ops used to do will now require sending a finding to [Capitol Hill] before doing anything," said the former officer who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The restrictions are being called the "Cambone understanding" and would replace earlier intelligence report language from 1991 that excluded Special Operations Forces from the legal finding requirements.
Currently, so-called traditional military activities, where the U.S. military's role is hidden, do not require a finding by the president.
"We want to be able to deploy [special-operations commandos] in minutes and hours instead of days and weeks," said the former special-operations officer. "And this will get us delays. It will make it hard to kill terrorists by turning over deployment decisions to the Senate."
A senior U.S. intelligence official said the new report language undermines the efforts of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and CIA Director George J. Tenet to loosen restrictions on covert action in the war on terrorism since the September 11 attacks.
The senior official said the report language was inserted based on misunderstandings that resulted from conversations between Mr. Cambone and several senators, who were not identified.
"This hurts both CIA and [the Department of Defense]," the official said.
A spokesman for the Senate Intelligence Committee had no comment.
The restrictions are not included in the House intelligence authorization report. A joint House-Senate conference will be held after Congress returns in September to work out differences between the House and Senate intelligence bills.
Covert-action findings are reported to Congress and in many past cases were disclosed to the public by officials opposed to the operations.
The Senate Intelligence Committee's report on the authorization bill, produced in June, says that secret military activities in countries where the role of U.S. forces is known to the public are considered "traditional military activities."
However, those same activities when carried out in a nation where the presence of U.S. military forces is kept secret are to be treated as covert actions and require a presidential finding, the report states.
The Senate report also says that "the committee commends the designee for undersecretary of defense for intelligence for agreeing to these conditions."
The new restrictions are opposed by most U.S. intelligence and defense officials.
Larry DiRita, the chief Pentagon spokesman, said he could not discuss any details of the classified Senate report.
"We're confident that by the time Congress has finished acting on this, they won't do anything that will make it more difficult to fight the war on terrorism," Mr. DiRita said. "What we're finding now is that fighting that war requires more flexibility in a number of areas, not more restrictions."
A senior Pentagon official would not say whether Mr. Rumsfeld would recommend that the president veto the bill if the report language is part of the final legislative package.
Army Special Forces, along with Navy and Air Force special operators, played a key role in the rapid U.S. military victory in ousting the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Special-operations troops also were key to the victory in Iraq. They were used in western Iraq to seize airfields and monitor any use of short-range missiles by Iraqi forces.
"What we've been saying is that special operations are not covert action," another official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "If you put a clandestine agent inside Iran to prepare for a hostage rescue, that's traditional military activity, not covert action."
Mr. Rumsfeld told Congress in February that the Bush administration is expanding the use of Special Operations Forces and has added $1.5 billion to its budget and nearly 2,000 more troops.
The Defense Department's office of general counsel sent a memorandum to Mr. Cambone on June 18 that explained the differences between clandestine military activities that require a presidential finding and those that do not.
The memo states that "covert actions are conducted by the CIA and require presidential findings."
"Clandestine activities conducted by [the Department of Defense] are part of traditional military activities and do not require presidential findings," the memo states.
"Covert action does not include 'traditional military activities' or routine support to such," the memo states.
The memo also notes that "traditional military activities by statute are understood to encompass almost every use of uniformed military forces to include hostage rescue, apprehension of individual terrorists, [and] counternarcotics activities."
Traditional military activities include routine support, such as unilateral support for U.S. military forces.
Covert action was defined in the memo by the general counsel's office as U.S. government activities "to influence political, economic, or military conditions abroad where it is intended that the role of the United States government will not be apparent or acknowledged publicly."
The covert-action definition specifically excludes traditional intelligence and counterintelligence work and "traditional diplomatic or military activities or routine support to such activities," the memo states.

[PornoDoggy]

This sounds to me like the typical turf war between Executive and Legislative, with some DoD vs CIA thrown in. EVERYTHING DoD is denied is a threat to national security.

You can spin it as "congress tying the hands of the military" if you are of that bent. IMHO, you can make an equally strong case, on the basis of the little information available in the article, that Congress is excercising it's rightful role as a balance on the Executive.

Besides, Mike, I wouldn't worry too much about the Bush Administration having their hands tied by Congress. Until he shot himself in the foot (or was hung out to dry - another of those pesky spin choices) this Administration gave a job to VADM John Poindexter. Remember Poindexter? Before he conceived of futures market speculation on American servicemen's lives and a database that is a civil libertarian's nightmare*, he was once convicted of conspiracy, lying to Congress, defrauding the government, and destroying evidence in the Iran Contra scandal.

Kinda speaks volumes about the attitude of the Bush Administration toward them pesky, annoying Congressmen.

* Even if you are of the opinion that Bush would never to anything mean and nasty with the data, do you really want Hillary to get her hands on it someday?



Last edited by PornoDoggy at Aug 13 2003, 12:53 AM

[sextoyking]

Ahh,

the Washington Times, The right wing version trying to be like the Wash. Post.

I am glad repubs and dems are coming together on this bill. Our elected officials are finally waking up from the scare of 9/11 and the contstant fear Tactics of the bush admin and saying oops, mabey we shouldn't have gave and yielded his admin so much power. Look how fast Patriot Act # 2 was shot down.

Lots of leaders in his own party in the house are now questioning alot of things.

Pondexter was a criminal plain and simple who subverted our constitution, sure the conviction didn't stand but we all know what went on. Of course him and Ollie claim it was just for the security and freedom of the us people.

My question for repubs and even some dems in the past, What freedoms and rights have we lost or tried to be taken away in the name of "freedom and security" ???

[Torone]

Todd,
Be glad that you're far away from me. That remark about 9/11 would have gotten you a broken jaw, along with certain other injuries.

3,000 dead Americans is a hell of a lot more than a scare.

[PornoDoggy]

Would you do that by yourself, or would you bring some friends (all of whom, I suspect, would be wearing matching dark-colored shirts)? h34r:

[Hooper]

dont forget the little arm bands with swastikas pd.

and maybe a funny moustache too.

[JR]

we can also film it. it would be a follow up series to Bum Fights. we can call it Demented Truckers.

[sextoyking]

Torone,

oh that was an intelligent reply to my post. I don't think you man enough anyways to go head to head with me, but anyways I won't play the keyboard warrior here, we save that for gfy

911 put the fear and scare into all of us, I am not saying it happended on purpose or anything, no conspircy things or what have you. What I am saying is 911 and the orange/red colors on tv have worked well for this admin.

Keeping us in "fear" part of the time is no way to run a gov. Bush sure can't run on his economy. Look at his polls #'s lately.

[Mike AI]

There is no doubt in my mind some people are living on different planets.

We are in the middle of WWIII. We have finally woken up, and realized there is a threat. It has been going on since the 80s. We got all caught up in the defeat of the Soviets that we have not see the rise of non-state players in foreign affairs.

This war is unlike any other war, and it will take decades to win it. But to let our guard down will be foolish. Our enemies cannot beat us on the traditional battlefield, so they are relying upon terror and non-traditional ways of destroying this Country.

It is sad this is not one thing that the country can come together on.... there are many other issues that are worthy of fighting, debating, but when it comes to War the country should be United.

[JR]

Originally posted by sextoyking@Aug 13 2003, 10:20 AM
Torone,

oh that was an intelligent reply to my post. I don't think you man enough anyways to go head to head with me, but anyways I won't play the keyboard warrior here, we save that for gfy

911 put the fear and scare into all of us, I am not saying it happended on purpose or anything, no conspircy things or what have you. What I am saying is 911 and the orange/red colors on tv have worked well for this admin.

Keeping us in "fear" part of the time is no way to run a gov. Bush sure can't run on his economy. Look at his polls #'s lately.

why are we being kept in fear? with stories like the one today of arresting a guy buying and selling shoulder fired missiles to terrorists? that scared me a little.

[sextoyking]

JR,

I agree, I was a little worried myself when I saw that on the news last night. It wasn't the first time arms smugglers have been caught in the usa though, and won't be the last.

Look there is so many fucked up things is all I am saying,

haleburton, brown and root, carlyle group, etc, etc.

I don't think bush is the devil or anything, but I just think we need a new leader and a new road map for the usa

[PornoDoggy]

Mike - some people you would categorize as living on a different planet are in fact VERY aware of the problem; they just disagree with you on what to do about it.

Limiting my comments to the so-called "threat" posed by Congressional action described in the article you posted, it's quite possible that the so-called war on terror is being used as a smokescreen by some folks with an ax to grind. A great many players in this Administration - not just the recently departed VADM Poindexter - demonstrated their contempt for the Congress and the Constitution in the 1980s during Iran/Contra.

Going further back, there has been tremendous resentment by many on the right over the restrictions placed on the intelligence community and the President's ability to act without oversight that resulted from the Church committee back in the 1970s. Right thinking Americans (demacommies) have been accused since then by the more facist inclinded (right-thinking Americans) of "tying the hands of the President" blah-blah-blah.

What better opportunity to get rid of those onerous restrictions than in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks?

Now, even if you don't agree with the conclusion you have to agree that it is a plausible way of looking at the same data.

An Administration that offered still unfound Weapons of Mass Destruction, fabricated attempted purchases of uranium, and yet unproven ties to the terrorists that really threaten us as a cause for war deserves a hell of a lot of oversite, in my opinion and in the opinions of a hell of a lot of Americans who are just as intelligent, patriotic, and capable of independent thought as you claim to be.

[JR]

Originally posted by sextoyking@Aug 13 2003, 11:21 AM
JR,

I agree, I was a little worried myself when I saw that on the news last night. It wasn't the first time arms smugglers have been caught in the usa though, and won't be the last.

Look there is so many fucked up things is all I am saying,

haleburton, brown and root, carlyle group, etc, etc.

I don't think bush is the devil or anything, but I just think we need a new leader and a new road map for the usa

Todd, i understand your concerns. i agree with you for the most part. i personally don't think its a fair to refer to "constant scare tactics" and start down that road which implies that there is no terrorist threat or threat domestically to all of us, except one that is fabricated by the Bush Adminstration.

Lieberman 04!