Or we could look at the Constitution
and follow its broad guidance. That would certainly be different... :wry:
Regrettably, the ONLY 'normative' structure in Washington is Congress and until you fix it or fire it up somehow; little will be accomplished. I think it has something to do with the Golden Rule, he who has the gold rules... :(
My suspicion is that competition for dollars, egos and turf outweigh the legal aspects...
In Washington, it all begins and ends with money.
Not only the raw dollars and amount thereof -- that's pretty straightforward. Hmm. Bad choice of words, let me restate that -- that's pretty well standardized. The problem is what pots those dollars are in -- and Congress micromanages that to the nth degree...
State may get more money -- but they'll get it in appropriations that are spent in the US, not in some other country.
Which is why the Coast Guard, the CIA, the FBI, the Air National guard and a whole host of other organs and agencies have significantly increased the population of West Virginia among other things...
And State's National Passport Agency is in New Hampshire...
Anyway, the Executive agencies do indeed have some problems but many can be ascribed correctly to Congress and the way it does business.
West Virginia, I understand,
with one senior senator and another who began as a dinosaur trainer. But, New Hampshire ?? ....
Given your logic - which my daddy told me to follow without fail, the only solution then is to move the host nation populace to West Virginia - thereby insuring that all appropriated $ are spent in the US.
Works for me.
Population centric means many thing to many people.
Pun intended.
For JMM:
Re: NH, no clue but I'll bet money that somewhere, some time, there was a powerful Senator or Congressman from NH on one of the Foreign Affairs Committees in Congress that needed some bacon. There are examples from all -- repeat, ALL -- government agencies all over the country, every State -- and they almost invariably increase the cost to those agencies of doing business. They also breed inefficiency...
Slapout said:
Quote:
"I am not saying we should have supported his overthrow and neither does the PCE theory, but it would have alerted us to stand back and see what happens or better yet advised the Shah to make some changes or he will have big problems and we will not support him since it would conflict with the long term interests of his people and US interests."
That's the common wisdom version and it may be partly correct; it is also partly incorrect. One could strongly disagree on both the US interests and Iranian population aspects.
I think the issue with PCE and with your example is that the near term ('people-centric" ??? -- or for the USG policies, perceived voter centric ???) view is allowed to shape policy as opposed to the great benefit of a longer term approach. People sometimes; often, in fact; think they want things that are really in the "Be careful what you want, you may get it" vein. Iran in 1979 is a good example -- the Ayatollahs killed more people in two years than the Shah had in 25. Been downhill there ever since also. For the US as well...
I'll address Bob's excellent post separately after I run an errand... :D
I thought I was voluminous...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmm99
Well, Mr. White, you were quite right in suggesting we follow the money. The available structures to play-out "COIN's" role in the "GWOT" are very much limited to the organizational charts, funding streams, etc., established by Congress and signed-on by the Executive (with or without "signing statements").
If you really believe that, I have a bridge I can let go for a mere pittance...
You are, I'm sure, aware that those items are mutable -- and that's an understatement -- and can be changed at either end of Pennsylvania Avenue with great speed and frequently some slight of hand. :wry:
And sometimes at both ends without the knowledge of the other end causing some,to me, amusing contretemps. Lord help the poor guys caught in the middle...
Quote:
The whole schema is tied at the hip to the appropriation and budgetary classifications. Absent recourse to the legislative process, you would have to be something more than a John Yoo to make any serious deviations from the present structure.
The classifications are the 'pots' I mentioned. If the rest of that means Congress can and will ignore the law and the Constitution and do pretty much what it wants, I agree. If it is to imply their hands are tied and they cannot do that, as I mentioned, I have this bridge... ;)
Quote:
So far as change here is concerned, me thinks we are left with the axiom: "Change what you can change. Accept what you cannot change. Have the wisdom to know the difference."
On this we can totally agree. I'd strongly suggest that a thorough knowledge of how the US government works is advised before one starts laying out policy advocating change. How it really works, not how it's supposed to work. Take a look at the Federal Budget and ponder the fact that it is beyond opaque, it is virtually incomprehensible to most. Those accounting classifications? They and many other things the GAO and many in government have tried to discard; many have tried to get the US government to use a standard commercial accounting process and GAAP. Guess who doesn't want to do that? Congress -- they like opacity...
Quote:
True that dollars, egos and turf > the "law" as we have it. I can't do much about dollars, egos and turf. So, I'm left with the legal aspects created by them.
Not to worry, Congress and the new Imperialer Presidency will likely take care for that for you.
Quote:
BTW: the Constitution is not directly helpful.
As I said -- I'll add that documents which are ignored (in particular by both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue) rarely are much help.
Quote:
The Operational Law Handbook was quite helpful. After reading about 20 pages, the "Congressional intent" became very obvious. Suggest a read of Chapter 11 (about 60 pages) - and, for more enjoyable fare, read Chapter 21 (SOCOM; 16 pages).
I'll pass, as you point out, a new version will be out soon. Uh, and which Congress was that, the one whose intent was obvious? Same number as next Quarters?
I'll also point out without giving away anything here that SOCOM has many other funding sources proving that yet again what you see is often not what you get... ;)
Quote:
Not a very specific plan, is it ? Note that the above provisions come into play when considering SOFA stuff.
Wasn't meant to be as you know; and true -- if they're heeded. My wife rarely moves the sofa, I understand I'm a lucky man and that some folks make a habit of of moving sofas on whims...
The important thing to remember about war is that it will
Quote:
Originally Posted by
slapout9
The Important thing to remember about PCE is there are lives in the Balance.
cost lives no matter what and there is not likely to be a balance...
So, don't go unless you gotta -- and if you do go, you better be ready to kill most everything. :D