If Obama really has things under control, then why the loose talk from CentCom’s Mattis?

Yesterday Eli Lake published a piece at the Daily Beast showing that CentCom commander James Mattis is is rattling the chain of command for a war in the Persian Gulf. Mattis, some of you may recall, dodged possible reprimand in 2005 for an anti-Taliban comment that went off the rails:

You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling.

He "speaks his mind" ala General Curtis LeMay back in Vietnam days, even as Obama is urging patience. Lake:

Those who have worked with Mattis say his views when it comes to Iran are more in line with those of America’s allies in the Persian Gulf and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu than with his own government’s. At a recent charity event for Spirit of America, Mattis, known by admirers as the “warrior monk” and by detractors as “Mad Dog Mattis,” said his three top concerns in the Middle East were “Iran, Iran, and Iran.”

I asked David Bromwich-- who has described Obama's presidency as "the Peace Prize War Presidency" -- what is going on. He says:

I think Obama believes he has all this under control. He wants the
pressure to be ratcheted up continuously but slowly between now and
November; he looks for a position of slightly increased hope for peace
with Iran. So the evident plan is to put off an attack but not remove
the pressure for attack before November. Yesterday's "hopeful" statement about inspections in Iran by the IAEA director Yukiya Amano, accompanied by the cautious remarks of Obama's press secretary and the extremely skeptical public statement by Ehud Barak, show the plan going forward apparently on schedule.

But as with the debt ceiling, as with health care, as with Israel/Palestine, as with the economy--Obama's sense here of his own control has a precarious foundation in the visible facts.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Iran, Israel/Palestine, US Policy in the Middle East, US Politics

{ 10 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. BillM says:

    Obama is very clearly not in complete control of the process. He’s supporting more or less unlimited bribes to Israel to keep them in line (the latest reports of new aid are so big no one has been able to quantify them yet), but both Israel and the American neocons (in Congress, the media, and the military) are constantly working to undermine Obama.

    This is an extremely dangerous cycle. Obama has to take harsher and harsher position to stay out in front of the warmongers. Those positions not only make a deal less likely, them lock the US into an expensive an unsustainable position (the US simply cannot keep forces massed in the Persian Gulf forever, nor can it keep Iranian oil off the market and thus oil prices high). Something will have to change, and Obama could effectively be forced into war, whatever he may personally want.

  2. lysias says:

    Very odd that Mattis got that four-star CENTCOM command. Besides having gotten into hot water for his comments, Mattis is also not an Annapolis graduate. His undergraduate degree is from Central Washington University.

  3. HarryLaw says:

    Mattis sounds like a knuckle dragging idiot to me, another US General when asked what they were doing in Afghanistan replied “to kill the bad guys” where do they get these clowns, subtle they ain’t, I recommend a few years at a Swiss finishing school, paid for by the pentagon of course.

  4. i do not trust elilake as far as i could throw a stick and i think we are being taken for a ride.

    Mattis wanted to send a third aircraft-carrier group to the Persian Gulf earlier this year, The Daily Beast has exclusively learned, in what would have been a massive show of force at a time when Iranian military commanders were publicly threatening to sink American ships in the Strait of Hormuz….and Mattis was told a third carrier group was not available to be deployed to the Gulf.

    from the comment section over @ DB

    Uh, folks — the Navy DID send a third carrier, this year, and after you say Obama nixed sending one. I have been following the carrier postings to the Persian gulf and the Fifth Fleet ever since the Bush Administration’s first brush with attacking Iran in 2005. Precisely because a third carrier posting would be the crossing of a red line. For precisely that reason I was horrified to see three carriers showing as with the Fifth Fleet earlier this year. For all its faults, the Bush Administration never did that.

    The Navy’s official website itself displays these assignments. It is something that is very easy to check. So, if the Daily Beast report is correct, that means the President said “no” to a third carrier and our military DEFIED him and sent one ANYWAY…

    well, to be perfectly clear..eli lake never really said “Obama nixed sending one”…it just implied as much..and that’s how propaganda works.

    plus, there’s this post: link to mondoweiss.net

    “Pentagon fears Israeli strike on Iran would drag US in” and who did they quote:
    Gen. James N. Mattis, who commands American forces in the Middle East, was said to be troubled by results of the war game…The results of the war game were particularly troubling to Gen. James N. Mattis, who commands all American forces in the Middle East, Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia….

    this article made israel furious.

    and source? “according to U.S. military officials familiar with his thinking…”

    but later he said: “Military sources close to the general..Those who have worked with Mattis ”

    now note the article also references israeli military leaders who have worked w/mattis..iow, the second allegation (about “when it comes to Iran are more in line .. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu”) could be referencing…you guessed it Israel Military sources who have worked with Mattis …like the mentioned Maj. Gen. Gadi Shamni, the military attaché at the Israeli Embassy in Washington

    then lake says “rebuff ..odd man out”? he’s the commander of central command! he could be a lot of things but ‘odd man out’ is not one of them.

    plus, notice “At a recent charity event for Spirit of America

    check out link to sourcewatch.org

    and link to rightweb.irc-online.org

    neocons all the way.

    this is a hatchet job from israel. i don’t trust it. and this:

    Mattis declined to comment for this article.

    yeah, i bet he did. the article is setting up the mattis as being more aligned with israel than his the prez, that’s a hatchet job screaming out for an official response meant to create internal strife. remember when israel has done that in the past?

    also remember when the Rolling stone wrote that article that happened to be true about mc crystal? he resigned almost immediately, that will not be true in this case.

    eli lake is a servant of the lobby.

    • ToivoS says:

      Annie, this is a pretty good take on what is happening. I was puzzled recently seeing Eli Lake as someone who was expressing “concern” about the move towards war. He always seemed like a war monger to me. It is much more reasonable to assume that he is playing the role of the concern troll in an orchestrated attempt by Israel to sabotage the negotiations with Iran.

    • Rusty Pipes says:

      Whether you trust Lake or not, Mattis appears to be out of line here. “No Drama Obama” has had little patience with civilians in his administration or campaign staff who have created scenes. But military officers in the chain of command speaking out of line goes to another level of concern about their respect for the office of commander in chief.

  5. Dan Crowther says:

    “Those who have worked with Mattis say his views when it comes to Iran are more in line with those of America’s allies in the Persian Gulf and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu than with his own government’s.”
    ————————————-

    Rubbish. This guy has made it through every filter, to say his views are not aligned with the washington consensus is absurd – if anything he is just more vocal and vulgar. I love it how here at MW, and it seems elsewhere, even if you are wearing the uniform on the US, and are a general in its military -as soon as you spout “neo-con” views, you are at once a de-facto agent of israel or saudi arabia etc, you cease to be a functionary of the US government – what an unbelievable mechanism to re-direct guilt for US policy. This is part of my criticism of a lot of lobby arguments – most of “the lobby” is in OFFICIAL positions of power, their decisions are OFFICIAL policy, yet we talk about the lobby as a foreign entity, this doesnt make any sense to me. Take some responsibility for who you elect and the people those you elect appoint.

  6. RE: “You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. . . ” ~ James Mattis, the “warrior monk”

    FROM YNET NEWS – Rabbi Aviner: Women must not wear pants even when alone, by Neta Sela, 05/02/08
    One of Religious Zionism’s most prominent leaders defines trousers as a ‘self-prohibition,’ says women ‘must dress modestly also when alone and in the dark’

    [EXCERPT] Women must not wear pants even when they are home alone, Rabbi Shlomi Aviner has ruled.  Aviner, Beit El’s rabbi and one of Religious Zionism’s most prominent leaders, was asked in a cellular Q&A session published in the “Small World” bulletin, “When a girl goes to relieve herself at night, is she allowed to say the ‘Asher Yatzar’ (‘he who formed’) prayer while wearing a short-sleeved shirt and trousers?”  The rabbi replied that it is permitted to say the prayer in such a case, but added that “in general, a woman must always wear modest clothes even when she is alone and in the dark, because the Holy one blessed be he is everywhere. And yes, trousers are a self-prohibition even when a woman is alone.” . . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to ynet.co.il

    P.S. I wonder what Barbara Streisand will have to say about this. That is, if Babs can tear herself away from raising money for the IDF long enough to read about what is actually going on in Israel.

  7. lysias says:

    OT, Prof. Ali Shalal, the man behind the hood in the Abu Ghraib pictures, testified in the trial in Kuala Lumpur that condemned the Bush administration (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Addington, Haynes, Bybee, and Yoo) for war crimes. He confirmed that he was interrogated by an apparently official Israeli, who confessed he had tortured Palestinians and apparently participated in the torture of Shalal:

    Ali Shalah [sic], a renowned professor of theology, was tortured by both US and Israeli interrogators for allegedly being anti-semitic and anti-Zionist:

    “When I answered that I am an Iraqi Muslim, the interrogator refused to accept my answer and charged me for the following offence (a) That I am anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic. …

    “In the morning, an Israeli stood in front of me and took the bag from my head and told me in Arabic that he was an Israeli had interrogated and tortured detainees in Palestine. He told me that when detainees would not cooperate, they would be killed. He asked me repeatedly for names of resistance fighters. I told him that I do not know any resistance fighters but he would not believe me, and continued to beat me.

    This Israeli dressed in civilian clothes tortured me by inserting in turn first with a jagged wooden stick into my rectum and then with the barrel of a rifle. I was cut inside and bled profusely. During this time, when any guard walked past me, they would beat me. I had no food for 36 hours.

    The next morning, the Israeli interrogator came to my cell and tied me to the grill of the cell and he then played the pop song, “By the Rivers of Babylon” by Pop Group Boney M, continuously until the next morning. The effect on me was that I lost my hearing, and I lost my mind. It was very painful and I lost consciousness. I only woke up when the Israeli guard poured water on my head and face. When I regain consciousness, he started beating me again and demanded that I tell him of the names of resistance fighters and what activities that I did against the American soldiers. When I told him that I did not know any resistance fighters, he kicked me many times.”

  8. RE: “If Obama really has things under control, then why the loose talk from CentCom’s Mattis?” ~ Weiss

    FROM ROBERT NAIMAN, Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy, 11/23/12:
    “Would It Make a Difference to Progressives if Norman Solomon Goes to Congress?”

    (excerpts) A key paradox for progressives of our national political life goes something like this: everybody complains about Congress, but nobody does anything about it. . .
    . . .Even now, the national infrastructure for effective caring is too weak. If the Progressive Caucus and the groups that support it effectively exercised all the functions of a political party, the fact that Norman Solomon is a candidate for Congress with a serious possibility of winning would be foremost in the consciousness of every pragmatic peace advocate in the United States. Every pragmatic peace advocate would know that Norman is running, every pragmatic peace advocate would know that there is a primary on June 5 and that voting by mail is already underway, every pragmatic peace advocate would know that Norman will survive the primary if he places second, every pragmatic peace advocate would understand why it matters if Norman survives the primary, and every pragmatic peace advocate would be doing their bit to help ensure that Norman survives the primary. . .
    . . .I am looking forward to Norman going to Congress because I know that Norman will work to raise the profile of the Progressive Caucus and will work to help make the Progressive Caucus more effective. Right now progressives in Congress are fighting to end the wars, to prevent war with Iran, to curtail drone strikes, to cut the military budget and redirect the money to human needs. But too few progressives in the country even know these fights are taking place, still fewer are engaged in them. With Norman in the Progressive Caucus, with Norman on TV, more people would know about these fights and more people would be engaged in them.
    Having Norman in Congress would do a lot to help build the progressive movement for political reform in this country. Check out his website. – link to solomonforcongress.com Think about what you could do to help move the ball forward.*

    SOURCE – link to commondreams.org

    * I made a modest contribution via ActBlue and Paypal. – link to secure.actblue.com