I don’t try to start an internet campaign very often, because the blogosphere has its own priorities and logic that are democratic and should not be forced. But here is a plea for everyone in the blogging world to help force congress to save our diplomats.
Bush is trying to Shanghai several hundred foreign service officers and force them to go to Iraq. They are protesting.
Now is that time for all Americans to stand up for the diplomats who serve this country ably and courageously throughout the world, for decades on end. Foreign service officers risk disease and death, and many of them see their marriages destroyed when spouses decline to follow them to a series of remote places. They are the ones who represent America abroad, who know languages and cultures and do their best to convince the world that we’re basically a good people.
Amazing prick.
You see, it’s Bush who’s trying to Shanghai these people into serving in Iraq. It’s not the country that they’re serving calling on them. It’s Shanghaiing, because they didn’t, as a prerequisite of their employment, take an oath to serve wherever they were posted. It’s not a betrayal of their obligation to their country, but a repudiation of Bush. How can that be wrong?
They serve the country courageously, putting our best face forward abroad, and unlike those stupid bastards in the military who, if they knew something, wouldn’t be over there, they know languages and cultures.
Guess what, douchebag? Americans in numerous lines of work risk disease and death with greater frequency than do most State Department employees, and many of them have to follow their work from place to place, and suffer from financial and other difficulties that place strains on their marriages.
Undoubtedly, there are dedicated people in the Foreign Service, some of whom take dangerous assignments and assignments that are inconvenient for them and their families. They are to be commended. But doing what they are employed to do is no more heroic, as a general rule, than what many of us do every day.
Bush should not be allowed by Congress to commit this immoral act against the civilians who serve us so faithfully.
You don’t know what moral is, Juan. My apologies if that wasn’t diplomatic enough for you, you degenerate.
US observers keep expressing puzzlement as to why the killing of hundreds or thousands of insurgents has not had an impact in repressing the guerrillas. They don’t seem to get it that Iraqi clans still matter and that when they kill an Iraqi, they anger the man’s brothers, uncles, and first and second cousins, some of whom step forward to take his place. In the US a lot of people don’t even know their cousins and certainly would not sacrifice their lives to avenge one. Iraq is not like that. So, it isn’t really even a matter of ideologies, necessarily. The US military has incurred enough clan feuds to keep the insurgencies going. And, of course, Iraqi and Arab nationalisms are powerful enough that people hate seeing Western troops in their country. The line between being angry about it and being angry enough to pick up a gun is a thin one.
Well, you know what, Juan? The worm has turned, and while people in this country may not know their cousins well enough to take up arms to defend them for the sake of consanguinity, Americans will take up arms to defend their countrymen, with the understanding that their countrymen–the people who share their values–would do the same for them. Of course, nepotists such as yourself can’t really understand that.
UPDATE: And while I’m in this mood, I’d be remiss not to mention this. So, all of you who argued that voter fraud was an issue ginned up by Rethugs to suppress minority voting can grab a number and line up to kiss my ass. Puckers.
UPDATE2:
Comment by happyfeet on 11/1 @ 7:02 pm # |Edit This
But he got quickly to the point. “We have 250 jobs to fill in the summer of ‘08 in Iraq,†he said. “We have filled a little
over 200.â€ÂSo we’re talking about less than 50 people. Meaning, of the full complement in 2008, less than 20% will have been “shanghaied.â€Â
There are 11,500 eligible employees. 200 volunteered. So something over 98% of State Department employees are in the game for something other than to serve their country. This explains much.
UPDATE3: James Joyner has a reasonable assessment (of the situation, not Cole), if you’re into the whole even-handedness thing. Drew M at Ace’s.
UPDATE4: One of Andrew’s readers points out a falsehood in Cole’s PoS.
UPDATE5: Mr. Bingley at Coalition of the Swilling has some choice ruminations.
UPDATE6: Ex-Dip speaks whereof he knows
- Comment by Ex-Dip on 11/2 @ 7:27 am # |Edit ThisI’m an ex-diplomat and I served in hardship posts with some courageous, dedicated FSOs. Some points to consider while you are trashing the motivations of 11,500 officers. First, not all officers are cleared for postings in hardship areas for health or other reasons (but I’m not sure of the percentage, but I know State doesn’t want to medevac sick people), so scratch them from the list. Some officers are coming off hardship postings where they’ve been separated from their families for years at time, where their spouses are at risk of dying everyday, or where they’ve watched their children get sick on tropical diseases or wilt in pollution. Naturally, they don’t want to be separated again for years or send the kids to boarding school. Many FSOs in the 11,500 have already done a tour (or two) in Baghdad or Afganistan and are waiting for others to step up and contribute. We’re seeing the cost of bleeding the foreign service for many years, too. State hiring for many years was not nearly adequate to maintain a pipeline of qualified, trained individuals. Rumor has it that Colin Powell was shocked at how training was sacrificed at State to get people out to post, seeing as he spent a good portion of his Army career at staff colleges and universities. Personally, I served in jobs two pay grades above my personal rank and without the training I needed to do the job, so stripped was the cabinent. Young, single and healthy officers are making the sacrifices and are probably tired of it.
Yes, there are FSOs who want their glamorous posting in Paris and London. Yes, there are offifcers who don’t like the Bush administration and it’s policies. But there are other factors to consider.
Wait, I thought we had a volunteer military. Am I wrong ?
He’s talking about the Foreign Service.
That gives one an idea how truly nasty things are in Iraq. Why not close the embassy, as was suggested, and convert it to a weapons depot? The diplomats seem to know that they can’t set foot outside their precious bombarded Green Zone without their sainted Blackwater mercs spraying bullets in all directions. Diplomacy as combat pay. Nice work if you can survive it.
I believe that organization is voluntary as well.
A cab driver in Philadelphia is more likely to die in the line of duty than is a US diplomat in Iraq.
What about the phrase ‘foreign service’ is so hard to comprehend? You ‘serve’ in ‘foreign’ place. Not yourself, the United States of America. You serve your country.
If you can’t, then leave and let us be done with you.
In the name of God, Go!
Last time the Iraq emabassy(CIA/Plame and dad/Joe and dad) complained; the Japanese announced they were leaving Iraq. Now, they are leaving Afghanistan, Navy.
Languages and cultures mean absolutely nothing. They scam jobs that way.
There are thousands of Iraqi vets who can do the job. Bush can appoint them.
Yes, Matt, Esq, We have a volunteer military. You volunteer, and then you get sent to some decent places to serve; and sometimes some nasty place. But you volunteered – so you go, and serve.
We have a volunteer diplomatic corps. You volunteer, and then you get sent to some fabulous places to serve; and sometimes some icky places. But you volunteered – so you go, and serve.
Again, what is so hard to comprehend?
I think you and Matt are arguing on the same side of the issue, Mikey.
Cynn – see comments #6 and #8, supra.
It ain’t always cucumber sandwiches.
Dan, I thought Matt was being sarcastic.
But I wanted to be sure, so I laid it out for the terminally clueless.
Like Cynn. And Ac.. I won’t spell that out!
I didn’t try to insult him, you know.
Matt, If you thought I was insulting you, then please except major mea culpas.
I understand and agree that these people are to go where they are assigned. The fact that they’re terrified says a lot. Get it?
They finally did it. They found a way to make the State Department’s employees more contemptible than they were already. As a Soldier, they make me want to puke.
You know, it’s not a simple contract: it’s an oath. I’m pretty hard core about that kind of thing. I think that, for example, if you promise to pay some guy a grand for unprotected butt sex, and you only fork over $200, you owe him the $800. And if that costs you your political career, too bad, you welsher.
This is more serious.
Yes, that they read Juan Cole.
“A cab driver in Philadelphia is more likely to die in the line of duty than is a US diplomat in Iraq.”
How much more?
The fact that they volunteered to serve also means they can un-volunteer to serve. Get it?
If our diplomats were guarded by Whitewater talking-points spraying democratic pollsters they’d be rave dancing in converted warehouse spaces throughout Iraq. Bushco has mismanaged this war so mismanagedly that our diplomats don’t feel safe even having their cars valeted at happy hour in Fallujah, much less passing out free condoms in Karbala. It’s a diplo-disaster!
Like no one is ever terrified going hwere they are assigned, Cynn?
I’m sure people must have been clapping their hands with joy to be sent to Spain in 1942, or Uganda and lebanon in the 1970’s.
Face it, going overseas for the foreign service means going overseas where some bad things are happening. It is part of the job, they knew (or should have known if they are so G.D. smart) that it was. How about embassy staff in Yemen when they were all shooting at each other there? I’m sure Peru or Nepal or Sri Lanka have been the ultimate in picnics.
Grow up, Cynn. Give it a shot. It’s worth it.
So we’re talking about less than 50 people. Meaning, of the full complement in 2008, less than 20% will have been “shanghaied.”
There are 11,500 eligible employees. 200 volunteered. So something over 98% of State Department employees are in the game for something other than to serve their country. This explains much.
You are much to hard on our FSOs, they joined so they could serve our country by living in Paris tax free. They might accept a hardship posting to London, but Iraq, sacre blue! People get shot there and the locals don’t speak French. Besides the way the climate there is, how shall we say this, not salubrious.
In my little puppy dreams this scenerio of having to serve in Iraq leads to a mass exodus of pussy liberals from State. The fact that their buddies in Congress are trying to make Blackwater go away only makes it better.
“The diplomats seem to know that they can’t set foot outside their precious bombarded Green Zone without their sainted Blackwater mercs spraying bullets in all directions.”
You know what, cynn? I seem to remember a couple of months back a tirade of yours against Bremer for staying in the “precious Green Zone”. Never mind the fact that Bremer was about 6000 miles closer to the situation than you’ll ever be. You know where these heroes of yours in the State Dept. go? The SAME FUCKING PLACE. So which is it? Are they to be commended for their concerns and lack of desire to go over there? Or are they the same chickenhawks that you implied Bremer was?
As for your (again) ignorant statements about Blackwater, it’s interesting to note that as much as the State people look down their noses at them (not to mention the military) they’re also scared shitless about going anywhere without them. I think it’s instructive that your attitude and theirs are so similar.
OK, let’s all go over. I’ll charter the bus. We’ll roll into Bagdhad, hit the niteclubs, and plan our strategy. We’ll host victory forums and Freedom rallies, and then retire to our rooms to recoup for another day of smearing democracy on a lightly browned Middle East toast.
I’m game. Unless I gotta wear a burka. Let me know about the dress code. :)
Not really. They could be terrified because they only get part of the story. Or they could be acting terrified because it serves what they see as their political interests.
In any case, they took the shilling, they should carry out their duties. If they won’t, I hope their contracts have some pretty nasty penalty clauses.
No thanks. I’ve been there. Twice. This one time, in the DFAC, the soft serve icecream machine was broken for TWO DAYS. Sure, there was a Baskin Robbins there too, with a guy to scoop out the icecream for you and make a shake if you wanted, but what I really wanted was some fucking soft serve icecream.
Gawd, I hate this fucking war.
The girls from State aren’t going to know if they should shit or go blind.
I am grateful for your sacrifice, Swede.
“The fact that they’re terrified says a lot. Get it?”
Courage is being able to face your fear, Cynn. We’re all terrified at the prospect of your next comment, yet we read on. Courage. Your lib Dips are cowards, plain and simple.
So did anyone here say it was a tourist spot? Yes, it’s dangerous. But if you signed up to be in the foreign service, you signed up to serve in dangerous places. Are you in favor of allowing our diplomat corps to opt out of serving in places they feel uncomfortable? So who would serve in Pakistan? Or Azerbaijan? Or Haiti? Or Sudan? Or pretty much anywhere in Africa, for that matter?
And does that last sentence strike anyone else as massively condescending to the people of Iraq?
See what cynn did there? Cute. Unless you are brown.
“And does that last sentence strike anyone else as massively condescending to the people of Iraq?”
If you’re not schnockered on Ripple, it probably does.
“The girls from State aren’t going to know if they should shit or go blind.”
I knew a real pro-war dude. His wife worked for a contractor. They asked her to go to Baghdad. This was back closer to mission accomplished, like 04. She didn’t go. Like a girl.
The point’s not so much to abuse cynn (though I appreciate her contribution) as to heap scorn upon Cole, I think.
Ah, there you are, Andy.
I knew this guy who was born with his heart ON THE OUTSIDE!!!
your move andy.
I know several contractors who’ve been there for 3 years and more. They’re sitting on a pile of money so high that from the top of it they can see in through your window and watch you masturbate to MaryKate and Ashleigh.
What, you don’t think we know?
I know which cartoon character happyfeet reminds me of: Courage.
That’s why Lance Armstrong broke my nose.
“In the US a lot of people don’t even know their cousins and certainly would not sacrifice their lives to avenge one.”
Largely because we have this thing called the rule of law which renders that type of behavior unnecessary and even frowned upon. Most people consider it an advancement of civilisation, which is why we are trying to establish the concept in the Middle East. As a native hillbilly, let me assure you if the government over here was to collapse cousins would get avenged on a fairly routine basis.
“Yes, it’s dangerous. But if you signed up to be in the foreign service, you signed up to serve in dangerous places”
Embassies are quite different. Some have noticed that the baghdad one is quite a special thing. Because of whats going on there.
Cab drivers in Philly need Blackwater guards to protect them when they leave their driveway?
Just an absurd comment, cofer.
Nonetheless, Dan is right. If you don’t like where the Foreign Service needs you, then you should retire and prepare for visits to Niger to investigate yellowcake claims.
Fire them, and blacklist them from any more federal government jobs. They’ve proven themselves unreliable.
“They’re sitting on a pile of money so high that from the top of it they can see in through your window and watch you masturbate to MaryKate and Ashleigh.”
I’m sure she was aware of what she was turning down, like a pussy liberal.
The point of what, Dan? And AlP, I was giving out those liqueur candies from Sam’s Club last night and I had extras. So what?
“Embassies are quite different. Some have noticed that the baghdad one is quite a special thing. Because of whats going on there.”
Plus, you can get sand in your mangina.
“I’m sure she was aware of what she was turning down, like a pussy liberal.”
Oh, I doubt that.
Did I mention that they have Filipino girls there to do your laundry? Yeah, you just drop it off and pick it up a day or two later. And soft serve icecream. Most of the time.
“Did I mention that they have Filipino girls there to do your laundry? Yeah, you just drop it off and pick it up a day or two l”
A friend was telling me about that emerald city book.
Why not iraqi girls? Not marriage material?
If their fathers knew they were handling my underwear, they’d put a fatwa out on me.
In Burma, handling women’s underwear saps your mojo. If you’re a guy, I mean.
Actually, I don’t even wear underwear.
Does that turn you on, andy?
Is the Foreign Service not like any other job? Do your assignment, or you’re fired. End of story.
Juan Cole would do more good to support the Blackwater contractors who actually put their lives on the line to protect the State Department employees in Iraq.
“Does that turn you on, andy?”
I have met some swedes that would be true for.
They thought it was Foreign Room Service.
And they were right. It’s just that sometimes that room service is in Baghdad.
I know. I married her.
Andy, please provide the names of FSOs killed in Iraq. Got any?
James Wentworth Pennington III. Of the Schenectedy Penningtons.
He died when he heard he was going to Iraq, so maybe that one shouldn’t count.
“Andy, please provide the names of FSOs killed in Iraq. Got any?”
Names? nope.
How about numbers?
Also, does anybody buy that these FSOs are actually “terrified”, and not just trying to torpedo the progress being made in Iraq?
If one looks throught the DoS site/press releases/data, you find that being an FSO in the embassy in Baghdad has a fatality rate of 0.
Those UN guys did get blown up back in 2003 at that hotel.
The only two DoS employees who have died in Iraq were Foreign Service Officer James Mollen and Diplomatic Security Officer Edward Seitz – in 2004.
“If one looks throught the DoS site/press releases/data, you find that being an FSO in the embassy in Baghdad has a fatality rate of 0.”
Wow, safer than being black. or white. or alive.
Being alive is a VERY risky condition.
Farmer Joe is on the right track I think.
Think of it this way. There were 200 volunteers according to the WaPo, of 11,500 eligible people. They’re short about 50. If volunteering for Iraq were seen as a way to get ahead, there would be no shortage of volunteers. What State Department employees are afraid of is that volunteering for Iraq will be damaging to their careers. It will set them apart as people who aren’t with the program, perhaps ok people but decidedly in need of reeducation.
That’s what the deal is, and these are the people running our foreign affairs.
“The only two DoS employees who have died in Iraq were Foreign Service Officer James Mollen and Diplomatic Security Officer Edward Seitz – in 2004.”
That does look like zero.
andy – back to remedial reading or math for you – were they in the Baghdad embassy?
Remember, we are hearing the whinging regarding FSO slots in Baghdad – not being piushed into a PRT or such.
And zero deaths are what we’re looking for in a war.
If only Al Gore had won.
…because you never leave home and the Blackjack Dudes kill everyone else if you do.
Yeah, but if Kerry had won, Superman wouldn’t have died.
Edwards Seitz was killed in October 2004 in an attack on the United States military base near Baghdad’s airport.
James Mollen was shot leaving an Iraqi Ministry, as he was a consultant to teh Ministry of Education.
And Major John’s typing skills were last seen face down on the pavement near LaSalle Street in Chicago, IL. They have not returned.
What Condi needs to say: “Any State Department employee who will not this day reconfirm their oath to serve the United States anywhere and any time at my direction as Secretary of State will be terminated effective immediately, with cause. Make it so.”
“andy – back to remedial reading or math for you – were they in the Baghdad embassy?”
This says:
“I was profoundly saddened to learn of the murder of State Department official Jim Mollen today in Baghdad. Jim was the U.S. Embassy’s Senior Consultant to the Iraqi Ministers of Education and Higher Education.”
I’ve been to Logbase Seitz. Back when it was actually a logbase. Now it’s got the fellas who don’t shave and whose hair is so long even the Air Force complains about it.
Fire the pussies and put a help wanted ad in the paper. With the inflated salary these wimps get the lines of willing employees will stretch for miles. Bagdad is safer than Phillie (for Americans).
The Embassy is where Mr. Mollen was assigned out of. He actually went forth and worked with real live Iraqis, at Min Ed.
He is the kind of DoS worker that should be admired, not the “send me to the Green Zone and who will look out for my orphaned children?” types.
“I was profoundly saddened to learn of the murder of State Department official Jim Mollen today in Baghdad. Jim was the U.S. Embassy’s Senior Consultant to the Iraqi Ministers of Education and Higher Education.â€Â
Which is why Major John said: “James Mollen was shot leaving an Iraqi Ministry, as he was a consultant to teh Ministry of Education.”
If common sense actually existed, this would be obvious.
Oath of an FSO: I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.
Oath I took: I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.
What was the original question?
“Fire the pussies and put a help wanted ad in the paper. With the inflated salary these wimps get the lines of willing employees will stretch for miles.”
I can start in a month. Where do I sign up?
“The Embassy is where Mr. Mollen was assigned out of. He actually went forth and worked with real live Iraqis, at Min Ed.”
If thats what it takes to make your zero, you can have it.
How about we ask medically discharged former service personnel to do it?
It’s a job I’ve thought of applying for.
TO: The Congress of the United States of America
From: The State Department
Message: Ix-nay on the ackwater-blay. All of the sudden, things just got serious.
Sure andy, if it takes all that to make the DoS whiners right, you just stick with how dangerous it is to work in the Embassy.
I had to go out for a bit and I missed the Courage thing. That is the little dog that has his own show on the Cartoon Network yes? He sees scary things that people around him are oblivious to.
Oh. Sometimes I think maybe that’s apt at least in my head.
I would volunteer to work in the embassy. I’m really good with PowerPoint and I know how to look kind of blank and inoffensive yet quite possibly competent. Do they let you use the Internet?
Internet, yes. Pr0n, no.
So there’s not much to do.
I can handle that. Also I know how to practice active listening.
Couple that with some annoying therapist-esque mirroring question skills and you’re 7/8th of the way to full blown diplomat. All you need are the stripped pants.
Comment by Dan Collins on 11/1 @ 7:34 pm #
The point’s not so much to abuse cynn (though I appreciate her contribution) as to heap scorn upon Cole, I think.
Permission to abuse both Cole and Cynn as the face of Cole, sir.
It has become increasingly obvious that the US State Department has progressed even beyond the parody of the Retief stories of Keith Laumer. That some of this crowd would refuse a posting to such an important mission on the basis of a completely illusory mortal threat is reprehensible.
For every cloud, there is a silver lining, however. This could be used as a tool to purge the department of unworthy elements. Simply ship 1/12 of the entire bureaucracy to Iraq at the beginning of each month — and offer a lottery to come back at the end. Even if this lottery ended up returning 99% of those applying, enough deadwood would resign to completely reinvigorate the agency.
Further, if all the anti-American, anti-Western, anti-civilization bastards at State resigned, how could this be anything but an improvement? Having nothing done is better than doing evil.
“Sure andy, if it takes all that to make the DoS whiners right, you just stick with how dangerous it is to work in the Embassy.”
Sounds good:
“Yes, it’s dangerous. But if you signed up to be in the foreign service, you signed up to serve in dangerous places.”
Turns out you signed up to live easier than windy southern california.
OK, andy, if you cannot seperate the Embassy from the rest of the country (PRTs and the like) I guess you can ride off holding your head high.
Jaun Cole has been an Iranian propoganist for years. The Informed Comment is anything but informed. Jaun is entitled to his opinion. We are entitled to ignore him.
I wish I was too cool for thoughts more complex than a single sentence. Paragraphs fucking suck.
“OK, andy, if you cannot seperate the Embassy from the rest of the country (PRTs and the like) I guess you can ride off holding your head high.”
You do know that these people that are supposedly bitching aren’t just up for the safer-than-california embassy work, right? I don’t think i’m the only one here with the idea that this work is dangerous. Thats why I quoted someone else.
But I am talking about the ones that are complaining about Embassy duty, as I made clear in my statements about the folks going out to PRTs – the bitching has come from FSOs who have been told they are going to the Green Zone and whining that “they have been rockets shot at the Green Zone – who will look out for our orphans when we die?”
as in “Incoming is coming in every day, rockets are hitting the Green Zone,” said Jack Crotty, a senior foreign service officer who once worked as a political adviser with NATO forces.”
Great, we are talking past each other…
er, found here: http://govexec.com/dailyfed/1007/103107ap5.htm
I guess I just don’t see how it matters. We don’t really need a bunch of useless whiners representing our country, but we do need to get these losers on record.
“But I am talking about the ones that are complaining about Embassy duty”
You first asked me about FSO’s in Iraq. Which people are bitching about being. Both the safer-than-california type and the heroic talk to real brown-not-filipino-people type. And people here seem to think is just the sorts of daring do that people sign up for when they take that stupid test.
Something less than what cthulhu is proposing I guess, but it’s definitely time to start taking names.
If you sign, you go where assigned, and that is proper to point out to both sets of whiners. However, the most egregious, and most easily scorned are the “my latte got cold one morning so where is my HazDuty Pay?!”
Everyone else seems to have hit both – I can’t get past the Green Zone = Hell on Earth whingers…
andy, these losers have had years in a near-full-employment economy to find jobs they are suitable for. They chose not to. But I guarantee you these leeches have been occupying more than enough slots into which people who CAN do the job could have been recruited.
Someone I’ve known for a long time works in Iraq. Sometimes he’s in the Green Zone; sometimes he’s outside. When outside he and his companions travel with a security detail that I can’t imagine is superior to that provided to State Department personnel.
He doesn’t have to be there. He’s high enough in his company that he could choose to return to the States without affecting his job. He didn’t take an oath to go wherever he was sent. Yet he chooses to remain. Because, at this stage of his life, that’s where he feels he can do the best for his country, his company, and his family.
Grunt, it’s actually a little more complicated than that. Juan Cole is a beneficiary of the “fight Cultural Imperialism!” meme. (Me, too, BTW)
The net result of opposing Cultural Imperialism is the preservation of the existing oligarchs, tribal leaders, etc. for any given culture. Since the said oligarchs are only fractionally less ignorant than the people they oppress, those who wish to exploit LBPs have only to make the single contact; they can exploit the oligarchs, and the oligarchs will do the heavy lifting. Meanwhile the exploiter gets to visit the oligarch at his estate, with the finest viands the culture has to offer and hot&cold running chambermaids.
Cole gets the benefit of the academic version. For years he’s been visiting the countries of the middle east, being treated like visiting royalty by the sheiks and tribal chieftains and the occasional Saddam or Assad. The suggestion that his applecart might possibly be upset disturbs him because if ME people learn liberality — old-style, with individual responsibility and reward — he won’t get to go to nearly as many dinners with the upper crust of Middle Eastern society. Think Cordelia Naismith: democrats get along fine with aristocratic societies, so long as they get to be aristocrats. The difference is that Cordelia and Aral use their positions to weaken the hold of the aristocracy, whereas Cole is too [ist] to even see the possibility.
Another difference, of course, is that the Vorkosigans are fictional, whereas Cole is all too real, as well as being depressingly characteristic of what passes for “liberalism” among the pseudoLeft.
Regards,
Ric
those who wish to exploit LBPs have only to make the single contact
I guess you raise the other possibility that State Department employees may be scared to death of taking a position where they might actually have to take responsibility and perform. Better to stay far out of the spotlight of history than risk being accountable.
Ric, ah, a Bujold reference. I like.
I must respectfully disagree with Dan.
There’s nothing amazing about him whatsoever.
Reagan:
Air Traffic Controllers..
Good bye.
Someone on another site suggested they quit then… but as “job for life” bureaucrats they won’t.
See, they have principles; as long as they are risk free.
Dan
A friend of mine worked for an NGO in that part of Asia a few years ago, when she’d fly in or out of country she used to pack her backpack by putting a layer of panties sprinkled with tampons on top covered by a couple of folded t-shirts. Nothing to hide, just saying screw you.
The airport army guys wouldn’t hire women to check the bags and the men would recoil from a tampon as if a nut had been tasered. I believe if she did the same thing at Guantanamo she’d be incarcerated at Leavenworth, but there even Amnest International people did it just for fun and it was considered a small bit of payback.
I do condemn the action though. Not only was it “cultural torture”, she no doubt caused untold damage to the ecosystem as river otter penis and ball consumption (dried… which I know is it’s own joke… but consider the bad news of wet river otter penis and balls..) went way up amongst the airport staff.
By the way, nothing like watching your luggage pushed through an unplugged scanner by a bamboo pole to build confidence in the security system
A lot OT, but:
“Comment by cthulhu”
Did you actually finish that F’ing game, or do you actually know who or what “Cthulu” is (was)?
That game is a pisser, I say. I almost threw my kid’s X-Box into the toilet after the fourtieth time I died in the same spot…
Sorry, everybody, but enquiring minds need to know this stuff. Really. I take my hat off to anyone who actually finished this game, and decree that they won’t have to go to Bahgdad..
Thank you for your time –
I’m with Reagan. Government employees – that is to say, those feeding at the public trough – don’t get to go on strike. If they do not like their job, they are welcome to return to the private sector and actually have to work for a living. If they’re wanting sympathy, they can find it in the dictionary between ’shit’ and ’syphilis’.
I’m interested in the 160K annual salary for a posting in Iraq. Of course, my education did not prepare me for international diplomacy during a time of war, but I can juggle. Juggling just might be the perfect skill for a ME diplomat. And chariot driving. Which I’d be willing to learn.
omment by alppuccino on 11/2 @ 2:42 am #
I’m interested in the 160K annual salary for a posting in Iraq.
160K! What’s the name of the guy at State?
If we’re supposed to fix all this through diplomacy, how are we going to do it without diplomats?
Actually, I think Cole addressed your points. You should have just included them and saved everyone 5 minutes of their life:
“In response to readers who said, essentially, that the State Department personnel signed a contract and should be sent same as the troops, I beg to differ. While all foreign service officers join knowing there will be risks, none is joining the army and typically embassies in war zones are shut down by the secretary of state and the president for precisely this reason. Foreign Service Officers are civilians. They are not combat personnel and cannot perform combat duties. Indeed, if they had any military aspect it would doom their entire mission and make them useless. They are supposed to be civilians representing the US to a foreign government.
Closing the embassy and ceasing to force foreign service officers to go to Baghdad against their will not prevent the US from brokering political and diplomatic deals. Most deal making is done in Amman as it is, and that has long been the case. The ambassador and a small number of volunteers could still fly out to the Green Zone and hammer out agreements. Indeed, closing the embassy would force the Bush administration to use State Department personnel for diplomatic purposes instead of as cannon fodder in a desperate offensive.
Bush is dragooning these career diplomats into dodging bombs and bullets, which is not their job. He is trying to create them as a shadow colonial administration of Iraq, which is not their job. The US embassy in Beirut was closed during the Lebanese Civil War. There is still no US embassy in Tehran. Tehran is a hell of a lot safer than Baghdad. Keeping the US embassy in Baghdad open is a political and military decision on Bush’s part, which flies in the face of precedent and good sense. “
Read John Burgess comments in the Joyner link in the post, Billy Joe. Cole can “beg to differ” all he wants, he is still intellectually bankrupt.
Really? Since when do we close our embassies in allied countries during a time of war? Since when do we “typically” do it? Take that dubious premise away and Cole argument falls into the pile of rubbish that it is.
And see the stats on FSO’s killed in the Green Zone above. It’s that very round number up there.
Wasn’t that a war zone?
Comment by cynn on 11/1 @ 6:38 pm #
You’re an embarrassment, cynn.
Really.
True, but irrelevant. No one is arguing counter to these statements, so they serve no purpose at all.
Dragooning? I thought he was Shanghaiing.
Cole’s biggest problem, methinks, is typical of those piled higher and deeper: he behaves as if his doctorate entitles him to subject matter expert status on pretty much everything. I mean, just look at this horribly wrong opinion piece on the Millenium Plot.
Completely, utterly, totally wrong. Factually contradicted by the very article it cites for evidence, yet still up and uncorrected on his site.
“Comment by LouP on 11/1 @ 7:44 pm #
Cab drivers in Philly need Blackwater guards to protect them when they leave their driveway?
Just an absurd comment, cofer.”
Cops in Philly need Blackwater guards to protect them.
Three police shootings in the last week, one dead. Head shot.
You’re breaking the rules, Dan. The rules are:
If you agree with me, take my arguments literally. If you don’t agree with me, don’t be so damned literal.
“Comment by Billy Joe on 11/2 @ 3:51 am #
Actually, I think Cole addressed your points. You should have just included them and saved everyone 5 minutes of their life:…”
Well, then I’m glad I don’t read Juan Cole.
Just that little bit drained about 5 IQ points out of my head.
E.G.:
“They are not combat personnel and cannot perform combat duties.”
One word: Blackwater.
The have not lost one lace-pantied diplomat that they guard.
They should stay in DC. In the State Dept lobby. Next to the ATM. The one whose other end is in Riyadh.
“One word: Blackwater.
The have not lost one lace-pantied diplomat that they guard.”
You don’t suppose this little insurrection could be linked to Blackwaters suspension, do you?
Juan Cole (and Billy Joe) are perfect examples of the New Copperhead Party in action.
I’m still amazed by people defending this. These people are taking taxpayer money for their jobs; they’re getting civil service benefits; they’ve taken an oath to serve their country. And they’re refusing?!
OK, so two people working for the DoS have been killed in Iraq since the invasion. It’s not a perfectly safe job. But it’s not a death sentence, either.
This is political posturing from Foggy Bottom. They’re doing their damnedest to undermine policy. They should be fired, at the least, because they’re essentially mutinying.
Dare I say . . . foggots?
Y’know, I can’t say as I blame anyone at all for not wanting to go to Baghdad. If my job, for instance, demanded that I travel over there, I’d have to give it serious consideration. I’d argue against it, and try and come up with some way to make things work without me traveling. I work with a guy who actually did have to live on an airbase in Iraq, somewhere, for quite a while (six months, I think) and it was hard business, because they were getting attacked almost daily. He was a (inactive) Marine, though, and got to wear a sidearm and sundry other weapons.
So in my case, I’d have to (as I said) give it some serious thought. Unlikely, though, which is comforting. I’m not a maintenance guy, and it’s those guys who wind up doing field work. One of them was even killed (somewhere else in the ME; not Iraq); one whose face was known to me. They found his head in a freezer. Google it, people.
So, I’d have to give it thought. If the choice was between going and quitting, I might have to choose quitting. I’m absolutely certain, though, that I wouldn’t get Juan Cole to write a piece on how LockMart was shanhaiing its workers into going to Baghdad, nor would I stand idly by and let Dr. Cole speak for me.
there’s a missing “g” in there, somewhere. Here’s a few spares, in case I missed one:
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
Take as many as you need.
Slart buys in bulk and passes the savings along to us!
Plenty more where those came from, Dan. Trick is to use ’em before they go bad.
I must say that this kinder, gentler new progressive Shanghaiing is pretty cool. Back in the old days, when you got Shanghaied, resignation was not an option. Thanks, Juan!
Youg Ggggo, Boyg!
LockMart, eh? Those wouldn’t be any of those $400 g’s, would they?
They’re only $150 in volume, Mikey.
“I knew this guy who was born with his heart ON THE OUTSIDE!!!”
The better to cry crocodile tears with…
“There are 11,500 eligible employees. 200 volunteered. So something over 98% of State Department employees are in the game for something other than to serve their country. This explains much.”
Kind of puts me in mind of that university in paris that’s relocating to a more pedestrian, disadvantaged suburb. All the academics are up in arm because this would separate them from the shops and cafes they claim “is necessary for intellectual work”. Yeah, these same people have no doubt spent the their careers championing socialism and the little man. Uhhhhh, yeah were all for the little man, but from a distance, non?
Same probably applies to the lions share of state dept people. Nice career, exotic posts, you get to leech off the government while working against it under the radar. “The situation is Iraq is scandalous, but I’m fairly comfortable here in Beunos Aires. And besides, my daughter has a concert recital next week. Sorry Boss, just can’t make the gig.”
I can’t say as I blame them either, Chip. Who wouldn’t be pissed by the loss of easy access to high-quality foix gras? So, yes, you complain about it, and you fight it, and ultimately you may have to decide whether to stay or go. That’s the nature of life; there are no guarantees.
The minute you start believing that there should be guarantees is the minute you start voting for the government to do for you what you’re unwilling or unable to do for yourself. And we all have a notion of where that leads us, I think.
Maybe that should be foie gras. Even the French websites can’t seem to keep it straight.
I’m an ex-diplomat and I served in hardship posts with some courageous, dedicated FSOs. Some points to consider while you are trashing the motivations of 11,500 officers. First, not all officers are cleared for postings in hardship areas for health or other reasons (but I’m not sure of the percentage, but I know State doesn’t want to medevac sick people), so scratch them from the list. Some officers are coming off hardship postings where they’ve been separated from their families for years at time, where their spouses are at risk of dying everyday, or where they’ve watched their children get sick on tropical diseases or wilt in pollution. Naturally, they don’t want to be separated again for years or send the kids to boarding school. Many FSOs in the 11,500 have already done a tour (or two) in Baghdad or Afganistan and are waiting for others to step up and contribute. We’re seeing the cost of bleeding the foreign service for many years, too. State hiring for many years was not nearly adequate to maintain a pipeline of qualified, trained individuals. Rumor has it that Colin Powell was shocked at how training was sacrificed at State to get people out to post, seeing as he spent a good portion of his Army career at staff colleges and universities. Personally, I served in jobs two pay grades above my personal rank and without the training I needed to do the job, so stripped was the cabinent. Young, single and healthy officers are making the sacrifices and are probably tired of it.
Yes, there are FSOs who want their glamorous posting in Paris and London. Yes, there are offifcers who don’t like the Bush administration and it’s policies. But there are other factors to consider.
It seems to me that it was much more dangerous to work in a US Embassy under the last president, than under the current one. I wonder if there was this sort of “problem” then. If it was, I don’t remember hearing about it.
#147 – check back for 1990’s era comments by Jesse Helms re: the Foreign Service and it’s utility. Congress bled the nancy-boy stripey-pants dips at State, transferred many of it’s traditional functions to Defense, Treasury, Commerce et al, and now we wonder where the expereinced mid-level officers are to be found.
The problem, is that, unlike the military personal, I believe that State Dept. can resign at will.
See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_Vance
A long and grand history of DoS officials resigning when they feel they can not support a policy.
#21. re: taxes. Unlike ex-pats, American diplomats posted overseas are considered domiciled in the USA for income tax purposes. VAT and other local taxes are exempted by host governments, but often getting the money back is more than a hassle than it is worth.
Billy Joe, others, question for you: How long did the US embassy to Britain (in London) stay active during the Blitz, when whole sticks of 500-lb. bombs were falling nightly?
Ex-dip: I don’t see or recall, here or elsewhere, anyone suggesting that there were no FSOs whose hardships prevented them from taking a dangerous post. Your comment only makes sense in this context if we assume that the entire corps of FSOs is composed of people with AIDS and other chronic diseases, single mothers with babes in arms, the handicapped, and others who do not meet any objective criteria for being a Foreign Service Officer in the first place, but have the position as the result of efforts to create a Diverse and Representative Workforce that Looks Like America rather than one that can, you know, do the job. It’s certainly plausible.
Regards,
Ric
#149 – As it should be. As a foreign service officer I was told that it was my job to put my full and focused attention to implementing the policy of the Secretary of State, the President, and the American people to whom I served, without reservation or thought to my personal beliefs. If you have disagreement with a policy you should air it internally through the dissent channel, but once the decison is taken you implement to the best of your ability. Or you resign.
I often counsel friends and acquaintences wanting to enter the foreign service, and demand they think about implementing Republican policies if they are liberals and Democrat policies if they are conservative. Many don’t like to hear that and I’m pleased to say they didn’t apply.
Objective criteria are re-evaluated every 3-4 years. While you must be adequately healthy to become an FSO in the first place, over a 30 year career people can and do become sick and are ineligible for hardship postings.
Diverse and Representative looks pretty good when you’re looking for Arabic and Pashtu speakers.
I’m terribly sorry, sir, but in good conscience I don’t believe that I can exterminate the brutes.
How about “I’m terribly sorry sir, but in good conscience I don’t believe I can deliver the funding to the abortion clinic?”
Actually, that last isn’t likely to be a problem due to the Mexico City Policy. It would be more along the lines of “I’m terribly sorry sir, but I can’t accept this posting unless I can deliver funding to the abortion clinic.”
Also, are you saying that Jesse Helms was the reason why our Staties weren’t up in arms about postings to Africa under Clinton?
Ex-Dip;
Except that all the good points you make aren’t relevent to the current controversy. Not one of the quoted FSOs nor Juan Cole have cited any of your argumetns or even variations.
Phrases like “virtual death sentence” and “lind up in front of a firing squad” have been the objection promoted thus far.
So yeah, until the FS becomes an employment for the duration situation or they change the oath, I’ll stand behind the various charges, especially the ones I’ve leveled, of a broad yellow streak through the US Foreign Service.
Web Reconnaissance for 11/02/2007
A short recon of what
Yeah I still think FSOs have as a rule shown themselves to be contemptible little snots. Embarrassing.
The French also like fromage but it smells like old “gâ€Âs to me.
On the contrary, I think you’d want to focus on the very narrow sector of Arabic and Pashtu speakers. Transgendered Aleutians or disabled Mauritanians aren’t going to be of much help.
Notice that I am have not and am not defending Cole and the FSOs. I can’t and won’t and am embarrassed for some of my former colleagues. I am making arguements on why it can be hard to fill posts in places like Baghdad.
I’m also saying that neither republican or democrat has clean hands when it comes to the state of State. Senator Helms and others wanted to reduce our footprint abroad and tried to force State to do so by restricting funding. That, combined with a general neglect of our diplomatic corps for many years by both parties gives us the State Department we asked for.
Happyfeet, I’m appaled at your statement. I expect that type of invective and broad generalization from Kos, not here. Replace “FSO” with “soldier” and “snot” with any number of pejoratives and you’ll fit right in.
I took an oath and fufilled it. I served in some nasty places where people wanted to kill me, and I won’t apologize for it.
98% of State have shown their colors. I like that.
Ex-Dip – Comparing these diplomats to soldiers is laughable.
happyfeet – Well said.
Ex-Dip – Since you fufilled your oath, that would make you part of the 2%, and happyfeet’s comment was not directed at those people.
Let’s just say that the ones who are making a stink about this deserve the characterization, and that the ones who are doing their jobs don’t deserve it.
Allow me to submit that the ChickenFSO! meme is a bit premature until such time as we have some number of them refusing postings, and that we ought not attribute Cole’s twaddle to the entire service.
Failure to volunteer for a posting and the stark refusal to do one’s job/fulfill one’s oath are not the same thing. And we do have 200 volunteers who are…wait for it…FSO’s.
happyfeet’s just thinking of an assignment in Rome, and feeling envious. So am I.
Or what Dan said.
JD – Read my statement again. I was not comparing soldiers to diplomats. I was comparing Happyfeet’s broad generalization to the type of broad generalizations one finds at Kos. If you don’t like soldiers, let’s change that word to “Rethugs.”
I think you’ll find more than 2% fufilling their oaths as well.
XD, your snotty little colleagues not only staged their Norma Rae-wannabe oppressed anguish cry of “but we don’t wanna do the jobs they hired us for cause it’s unfair“… they LEAKED it to the Washington Post in an attempt to actively enlist the public in the subversion of the foreign policy they are sworn to implement.
The Washington Post has subsequently shared the tape with other media – not a transcript… they made the audio available for broadcast.
And you, XD, would maintain that these pouty little bitches are worthy of the trust that’s been placed in them? That’s setting the bar pretty damn low.
I think Ex-Dip has been very evenhanded about this. Our argument is not with him. He is not excusing mollycoddled shirkers. At the same time, he thinks it unfair that those who put their performance of duty before their selfish interests ought not be broadbrushed. What’s the problem?
I’d be more inclined to be forgiving of them in general, if I felt that this sort of behavior was likely to result in poor reviews, demotions, and sackings.
Re: Rome. Just think about how I felt when I lost a cherry post in Western Europe to a less-qualified colleague and headed to Upper Cholera instead.
But then I found out his kid had leukemia and needed good hospitals, which made me feel like an ass for my little problems.
Dan, Pablo, thanks for the shout out. Also, let’s not forget the large number of FSOs in Afganistan.
And I would reiterate…
A culture of corruption, made more pitiful by the blinkered arrogance of pampered snots too out of touch to realize that a public display of their childish tantrums, captured on tape for history to weigh, is not particularly reflective of a deft diplomatic approach.
Ex-Dip – I was attempting to point out that I was not reffering to you, and the likes of you, that took seriously the words in the oath. I was specifically referring to the ones that happyfeet pointed out, and I believe they are worthy of our scorn. On the other hand, why in the hell would we want people like that in Iraq. Can we mount an internet campaign to get RTO that job?
Ex-Dip, I certainly appreciate what you say, especially regarding the shorthandedness you have experienced, but there’s another side to it that you haven’t acknowledged. Even the worst demagogue has to have something, however thin, to base his campaign on, and in this case the State Department in general is at least somewhat reaping what it’s sowed.
I’m not nearly the world traveler some are, but I’ve done a bit, and wherever you go experienced American travelers and expats will tell you the same thing: avoid the US embassy! — not “at all costs”, but whenever reasonably possible, and expect little or nothing from it in any case. The reaction one gets there tends to run the gamut between bored indifference (“Oh, I didn’t see you there”) and hostile indifference (“Dammit, you’re interrupting my routine!”), rising to active obstructionism if there is any hint that the US or any American citizen might (horrors!) profit by whatever the subject of the inquiry is.
Every other embassy in the world acts not only to protect the interests of its country as a whole, but also those of their citizens who are active in the host country. If one is seeking business contacts or help navigating the local bureaucracy it is much more profitable to cultivate the after-hours acquaintance of a French or German diplomat, and in cases of run-ins with the Law the British ambassador or consul can, and usually will, if nothing else, put you in contact with the American officer who can actually do something, where the clerk-equivalents in the front office of the American embassy will (apparently) act to prevent that if at all possible.
That being the case, from the point of view of the individual citizen the question becomes: what the f* is the State Department for? And “individuals” are also “constituents” of Congressmen and Senators, who are apt to balk at expanding the ranks of people who don’t appear to accomplish much and are hostile to suggestions that they should do so. It doesn’t help that public perception is often such as to suggest that we would be better off shipping Foggy Bottom in its entirety off to Brussels, where they could have closer contact with the people whose interests they appear to see as paramount.
Regards,
Ric
Ex-Dip, I second what JD said.
Now it is easy to blame Senator Helms, but a number of other senators had to go along with those cuts, as did a number of representatives. And the reason why is easy – what is your constituency? what is the group that is going to lobby Congress on the behalf of the State Department? No one. Increasing your budget won’t bring pork back home, whereas transportation, or defense, or housing always does.
Second, State does get saddled with political appointees whose main qualification for posting is a very large checkbook. Of course, all departments of government have had that problem, and State isn’t necessarily unique (although it is one of the few wherein a tipsy insurance executive could embroil the nation in a war – and to be fair, other nations also have crony-ridden governments and ministries, so it is expected that the cousin of the brother in law of El Presidente’s squash partner may get some do-nothing appointment in an embassy somewhere). What has hurt State’s image is that it, along with Defence and the Intelligence agencies, is the department that affects US foreign policy, that implements it. And that foreign policy comes from the elected executive, and it sticks in the craw of a lot of intelligent commenters that career bureaucrats believe that they, not the elected and appointed executive branch officials, should create foreign policy. I don’t know how many in State are like that, but that image – personified by Joe Wilson – has soured a goodly number of intelligent, educated, informed citizens towards the State Department and its employees, so that when an article like this comes around the benefit of the doubt is not given and the consensus that is reached is to “fire the lot and start over”.
That consensus is not fair to all those in State who do their best to implement the foreign policy as articulated by the elected and appointed executive branch officials, but until they step up and start outing the Joe Wilsons and having them disciplined and fired, then the State Department will continuously operate under a cloud of suspicion that it exists not perpetuate the interests of the United States but rather the interests of its employees.
‘feet, keep the source in mind. WaPo. And note this from it (emphasis mine):
Are there whiny, snotnosed bastards among the set of FSO’s? Sure. Is it all of them, or 98%? I see no evidence that it is.
Or what Ric Locke said.
To reiterate, the death figures for FSO’s in Baghdad is exactly 2, right?
Tempest, here’s your teapot. It’ll be a squeeze, but you should fit right in.
As I’m always seeking irony for irony’s sake, I guess this will only demonstrate the further cluelessness of Her Absolute Moral Monarchness Cindy Sheehan: Interview with Wolf Blitzer, 12/06/2005
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0512/06/sitroom.01.html
Oh, maybe she meant an army of somebody else’s diplomats! :-)
I think she meant an army of France’s diplomats, but they surrendered shortly after her statement was made.
It doesn’t matter their number, Pablo, what matters is that their active subversion of policy is TOLERATED.
What’s so galling is that 88% of FSO’s believe that the job of the Secretary of State is to “fight” for their implicit right to wield a veto over the foreign policy of a duly elected president.
I’m pretty sure this was the sort of guy happyfeet was refering to. He should be sent on a one man post in Sudan. I wonder how many of those diplomats in 1940’s London were complaining about their postings being a “potential death sentance?”
Self aggrandizing tool.
Implicit in the quislings’ stance is the idea that a foreign posting deemed too dangerous for the United Nations, with their glistening armor of Absolute Moral Authority, ought define the parameters of what duties our precious State Department employees may be asked to undertake.
Actually, happyfeet, I think it’s guys like RTO, wishbone and Major John who are fighting for them. Not that they would acknowledge that…
Screw asking for volunteers. I would post John Naland and that 46 yr. old Foreign Service veteran to Iraq ASAP. They could resign, or go.
Yes BJ – exactly. Compare and contrast – what part of September 11 was NOT interpreted by those charged with our nation’s security that it was time to man up and get a bit of that steely glint in the eye thing going on? What part of September 11 WAS interpreted as such by our feckless State Department?
And yet they will simper and whine that there is no “military solution” while but a fraction of them display the simple fortitude of spine to do fulfill the duties to which they are sworn.
I heard a clip on NPR of a meeting that the outraged Foreign Service employees held. One guy said he thought it was wrong to put employees in danger in support of a policy that many of them didn’t agree with.
So now I expect my garbage man, who is Jewish will begin refusing to pick up my pork ribs.
Perhaps the Black cooks at the local eatery will refuse to cook me Aunt Jemima pancakes and at the laundry they will quit washing my Confederate Flag.
My Catholic pharmacist will stop selling birth control pills and condoms.
My car mechanic who belongs to the Sierra Club will stop fixing my Suburban.
My termite inspector who has joined PETA will soon tell me to just feed the critters fireplace logs.
Let’s all take our ideology to work.
I want Bolton’s moustache supervising this.
Any guesses as to when the Democrats will call for a diplomatic draft?
Or, possibly, we go to the embassy with the diplomats we have, not the diplomats we wish we had.
ok now I have to go fulfill the marketing duties I am sworn to perform. I wish you guys could see how totally steely and glinty I look right now.
As I read Obama’s call for diplomacy with Iran I’ve got just one question:
How has that worked out in the past?
Cyrus Vance not withstanding, Iran welcomes diplomacy for the purpose of lying and ofuscating their way to more time to make big bang things that will further destabilize the Middle East and be a potential threat to Europe and our own shores.
Those invested in endless diplomacy share the same set of blinkers as those trumpeting affirmative action: A complete lack of self realisation as to when to stop beacuse it’s no longer productive.
“If volunteering for Iraq were seen as a way to get ahead, there would be no shortage of volunteers. What State Department employees are afraid of is that volunteering for Iraq will be damaging to their careers. It will set them apart as people who aren’t with the program, perhaps ok people but decidedly in need of reeducation.”
This, to me, is utterly ridiculous. In today’s environment any dip knows that the way to promotion and other glories is through hardship postings, regardless of the present political situation. My first mentor took a look at my bidsheet littered with nice places and told me I was looking at a short (but very nice) career. A career spent entirely in Europe leaves you on the sidelines. Trust me, when it’s time for promotion, all else being equal, them’s that done the time get the bennies.
Ric, I agree with you that some expats loathe the embassy, but it would also be the first place they would go if something serious went down. The first job of an embassy is to look after the affairs of Americans in country – but you would be amazed what people think the embassy can and should be doing for them. Buy me a beer sometime and I’ll tell my war stories, but let’s just say that too many people think the embassy is some sort of magic wand that can solve life’s problems. However, if Americans abroad get ill, or in trouble, the embassy is still the first place you want to go.
Mickey – Spot on. 1) State has no natural constituency and suffers for it. In country Defense, Commerce, and Ag seem to have limitless resources. 2) There exists a breed of FSO smarter and more betterer at foreign stuff than you or me. In my experience they have remarkably similar backgrounds, which is why I supported the department’s diversity initiatives.
Political appointees are a fact of life, unfortunately. Some good, some bad, but nearly all sent to places where they can do the least amount of damage.
American Foreign Service Association said a recent poll conducted by the union found that only 12 per cent of officers believe that ‘Condoleezza Rice is fighting for them.’
Oh oh.
Sounds like Bush is trying to politicize the State Department.
Being a FSO assigned to Baghdad is far less dangerous than being a police officer in Philadelphia.
It’s funny to see the leftists here feel like they must comment, but they really don’t know what to say.
JD,
I’ll go along with that. Addition through attrition.
happyfeet,
That’s been a longstanding problem at Foggy Bottom, and it’s a failing of the administration that tolerates it. I strongly advocated a robust “If you don’t like it, get the fuck out.” approach. It needs more Bolton and less Naland.
Again, consider the source:
What else would you expect? And did they ask whether the members feel that it’s Condi’s job to “fight for them”? It’s little more than push polling.
I’m sure if you asked FSOs if Colin Powell fought for them the answer would be above 90%. Too many SecStates forget that the job has two parts: being the President’s foriegn policy advisor and running an organization with thousands of employees in 100+ countries. Colin Powell took the latter quite seriously, and after almost anyone would look worse.
XD, your State Department is showing a very curious lack of ambition I would have to conclude. How to explain?
Why are State Department employees unionized, anyway? Do they need protection from their government?
“Comment by Andrew on 11/2 @ 10:17 am #
To reiterate, the death figures for FSO’s in Baghdad is exactly 2, right?
Tempest, here’s your teapot. It’ll be a squeeze, but you should fit right in.”
One, actually – the other was a security officer killed in Mosul. Both were in 2004.
Ex-Dip: I want to see about cloning the DoS official who was with the Parwan PRT when I was there. She was 4’11” and knew passable Dari/Pashto and excellent Russian. I saw her rock the the Parwan Governor back on his heels for some small stupidity (she dressed him down in Russian – he was a Russian educated engineer, heh. Oh, and he is now the Interior Minister, yow!). Finally, I thought the assembled provincial bigshots were going to bawl like babies when she mentioned she was transferring to another Central Asian locale…
Could you look up some old DoS comrades and have Michelle cloned, say, 200-300 times? Thanks!
One of the reasons I left the service was 46 year old officers. By 46 in the FS, you are either on track to Ambassador, DCM, or at least counselor status if not already there. Those that aren’t are some of the most bitter people in the world because they feel stuck. Too old to start a new career, afraid they have limited skills valuable to outside employers (although I managed to get a job), kids in college, need the money, etc. I don’t miss them.
46 is a bitch the world over.
AFSA is a strange bird, part union, part professional association, part advocacy group, part public relations. Union in that they will help you if you are getting screwed, professional association group in that they will file briefs against their own members in admistrative tussels. Strange.
Pablo and JD – the problem with any of those union conducted polls are (1) did they send the poll to every one? Sending the poll to the selected few will get you the answer you want.
(2) Did everyone respond to the poll? Those who have better things to do than answer a poll likely circular-filed it. Those who did respond are quite likely those who happen to have an axe to grind.
In short, such polls tend to be self-serving and are utterly useless for discovering the beliefs of the members of the union – but are useful for revealing the positions of the union leaders.
Sounds like me. Only I’m not bitter, because I have a modicum of internet celebrity.
Major John – sounds like a senior US official known to my counterparts as the Dragon Lady. I once had drinks with a jr. official who started talking about when he should schedule his vacation. Turns out he wanted to know when she was next coming so he could be anywhere else.
It’s absolutely wrong by the way to attempt to portray the State Department in a sympathetic light. Nothing personal, and I know there are good people there, honest and true. About 200 of them in fact. But your ongoing apologia, while suitable perhaps in peacetime, is inert and unpersuasive in a time of war. These are the times that try men’s souls and all that and also it’s really hot over there and there’s no theater to speak of except for weird icky religious stuff and just try being in Iraq and staying on Atkins. The State Department has been found wanting, and it’s not my resume that gets impacted by that. John Naland is not your friend, sir.
208 – not at all! I loved working with her, and the Afghans even moreso. Even Zarar had to smile after she finished chewing him out…
Yes Dan, and also things happen very fast out here when you are not in the employ of a simpering and cowardly institution with no moral compass and an aversion to goal-oriented thinking. 2008 is going to be a great year, I’ll have you know. The possibilities, they are endless.
Happyfeet – I’m sure the 200 sainted souls in Baghdad are pleased that they have earned your approval. I’m equally sure you’ve simply forgotten to mention the hundreds of FSOs in Kabul, Syria, Pakistan, Saudi, most of Africa, etc who also might have be taking a few risks right in the moral compass?
Or not? Cause, you know, they’re probably just the same as those sitting in the auditorium at Main State complaining about leaving Falls Church.
You are so pointing that the wrong way Mr. Not A Diplomat No Mores. When America is at war your colleagues have failed the test. Really quite abysmally really. They failed the test and then performed a skit about it and recorded it and proudly showed the world what puerile overprivileged little cunts they are. You, as well as the FSOs stalwart brave and true that you cite, should be speaking out against the cowards and hangers-on, not trying to minimize them.
Ex-Dip at #212 (I think). My experience is that those who are out in the field sucking it up and getting dirty generally despise those who complain about being ordered into the field. My guess is those FSO’s you mentioned in Pakistan, Saudi, and other quaint, foreign hell-holes are probably more gung-ho for a mass firing than happyfeet is.
There is nothing that builds up esprit de corps like having to carry someone else’s load and listen to him whine while you do so. Wait, did I say ‘esprit de corps’? I meant ‘homicidal rage’. Sorry about that; I make these little grammatical slips from time to time.
Mikey: Bingo! Thanks for making my point better than I could. I think I’m done with this topic for a while. Back to being an anonymous, simpering, puerile overprivleged little cunt without a moral compass. Fun!
ED, I’m sorry about the venom, but you’re welcome here anytime.
I am not venomous. I am spirited. And also I am right.
And that whole appeal to authority thing doesn’t really change the fact that an institution is failing really quite shamefully at a task that goes to the very heart of its reason for being and is, in fact, actually dissuasive and underscores how truly rotten to the core our little State Department has become.
‘feets, I don’t think those on the ground in Iraq are failing, and I for one am glad they’re there doing what they’re doing. You’re right about a lot of things, but you’re using too broad a brush.
The 200 that are there? I love them. I haven’t said an unkind word but that they shouldn’t be apologizing for their craven peers and should, in fact, scorn them. But the 11,500 that can’t find 48 of their number to serve? That’s an institutional failing, and excusing their fecklessness as an institution is not helpful. You don’t negotiate with terrorists.
‘feets doesn’t need me to communicate for him. But I’m not reading him to say those on the ground in Iraq (or Pakistan, or Afric) are failing. I understand him to be saying he’d like ex-Dip and other Dips to loudly condemn the people that whined in the meeting, that whined to the paper, and for whom Juan Cole picked up that baton.
It isn’t enough to quietly watch them complain. That’s the same thing the CIA did while the politically-motivated anti-Bush faction whinged to the press that Bush was putting political pressure on them. Without challenge, that became the narrative. Soon, Bush lied us into war.
The poor behavior has to be challenged (and condemned) loudly, or it becomes the narrative.
And Mr. XD – his argument about people currently serving in hardship posts does not track. They could easily transfer to Iraq and let one of the little princesses in Washington take over their duties in Nether Cholera, if there were not quite a bit more going on in this fiasco than Mr. XD wants to cop to.
Well, I did get sapped in Burma once. Hurt like hell when I woke up.
I’d much rather be tasered, bro.
MayBee thanks – you said that way better than I’ve been able to, and the CIA comparison is I think an almost exact parallel. Now I am going to take New Girl to lunch cause I’m a team player like that.
CHICKENDIPLOMATS
The irony of this is pretty amusing, Iraq is doing so much better now even papers like the Washington Post and New York Times are admitting it (granted, buried on page A14, but it’s there). Civilian and military deaths are plummeting in numbers, viole…
The problem is that in any large organization like the State Department you have your Goldbrickers, you have your Blue Falcons, and you have your Toadys. And then you have a large number of people who go on and actually do the work. The problem is that those first three dysfunctional types are not getting eradicated from State and that the impression educated, intelligent, and informed citizens have is that they are running the place. Replace ‘State’ with ‘CIA’ and you could write the same thread.
For some reason there seems to be no focus on getting those people out of the department or at least stuffing them somewhere they cannot do any harm. State needs to seriously deal with those dysfunctional types (there may be programs in place that are doing this – I don’t know) before outside forces produce a more drastic winnowing. All that is needed is a drastic cock-up, massive public outrage, and a bi-partisan investigative committee, and State will be gutted.
If such an event happens the axe will fall on the good hard workers and the place-seekers, and there will be little to no sympathy for anyone connected with the department. Therefore, it is in the interest of the good workers that Ex-Dip was mentioning, in their own self-interest, to work to make it so the dysfunctional ones go away quickly.
The outrage that is seen towards those who made these complaints (I first saw mention of this at AoSHQ last weekend) and the fact that the outrage is still ongoing should be a cause for reflection by those in the State Department. The blogosphere has been worrying this like a dog gnawing on a bone. Any other outrages of a like nature are going to resurrect this call to purge the state Department, and it isn’t going to get quieter – it will get louder until heads do roll.
Again, for their own sake, the good ones need to start cleaning house now while they have some say in who gets to go – because if they do not police themselves someone will police them, and they will not like that one bit.
Yesterday, on the way home from work, I caught some whiny diplomatic type almost sobbing on the radio about an assignment to Iraq being tantamount to a death sentence, and indicating that he would not go.
I don’t know what the Foreign Service Officer, but I’ll be it’s something like this: “I solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter, so help me God.”
I’d have fired the guy immediately.
Ex-Dip you bring up some good points, but I think Happyfeet has a point with his idea about lack of advancement. Sure, serving in scary places looks great on a resume, but the problem is you have to face bosses who are throwbacks to the Clinton administration who loathe President Bush and think Iraq is a horrific mistake that stains you for even having been a part of it. That can hurt your advancement in the State Department, particularly if there’s a movement to stymie the President by refusing to serve there.
I have reconsidered my prior post. Were I President Bush, I would assign all able-bodied eligible FSO’s currently in the US to Iraq immediately. Any public outcry from the FSO’s or their union would be clear and convincing evidence of their not living up to the oath taken, and would summarily be fired, with all benifits being cut off immediately, and no severance available. We would find out which side they are on fairly quickly.
I strongly disagree that the State Department doesn’t have a natural constituency. It does. There are many, many Americans who travel overseas, for business or pleasure, each and every one a potential constituent, even booster, of State if the Department was acting to assist them.
I’m not talking about egotistical dumbbunnies who want an introduction to the Führer or think the FSO ought to collect their debts for them; I’m talking about simple stuff, like knowing where to start in the host country’s bureaucracy, and slightly less simple stuff, like how to get legal representation in case of disputes with the local or even going to bat for Americans in a strange land. My experience, and that of many others, is that State will not do that if they have the slightest inkling that the American’s purpose is commercial.
The result is the apparently-purposeful alienation of what ought to be a strong constituency: Americans who want to trade with other countries. The locals have their own heroes and won’t support US institutions, and at any rate have little or no influence with the U.S. Congress, and if State won’t or can’t represent Americans in their dealings with foreign countries those Americans have no reason to ask their Congresscritter to support State. If they’re lost and afraid, be sure that they did, in fact, manufacture the world they’re in from raw materials.
Regards,
Ric
They aren’t organized, Ric and they do not lobby congress on behalf of the State Department like Amalgamted Grommet and Gear Manufacturers can lobby on behalf of Transportation/Defense/etc. That is a natural constituency for the purposes of budget battles, and State thus does not have one. I agree that State could have one if they acutally made the effort to put it together. Between travel agents, tourists, and chambers of commerce they could create a consituency to bring some pressure on Congress.
But perhaps that isn’t seen as being the proper and dignified role of a diplomat, and is therefore not pursued. I don’t know – I’ve never served in the State Department, but I have served in various local and state level government jobs since high school, so I can extrapolate a little from my experience with that creature homo bureacratus.
Ric – Unfortunately, in the Foreign Service Act of 1980 Congress told State to give up commercial operations to the Department of Commerce and created the Foriegn Commercial Service. State would dearly love to have it back, but Commerce fights desperately to keep their mini-FS. My experience is that State 1) really doesn’t know who might help US companies, because they don’t move in those worlds anymore and if they do FCS jumps on it fast. 2) in a classic example of nose-spite-face State actively doesn’t help businesses because, after all, that’s Commerce’s job 3) too few State officers have real world business expereince and don’t understand commercial opportuniteis when they get bit. Much easier to calculate GDP and balence of payments stuff. So, upshot is Commerce gets the love from the US Chamber et all and State loses a constituency.
BJTexas in 185 – I’m pretty sure this was the sort of guy happyfeet was refering to. He should be sent on a one man post in Sudan.
Indeed to “Save Darfur!” How could he possibly turn that down?
@happyfeet,
“So we’re talking about less than 50 people. Meaning, of the full complement in 2008, less than 20% will have been “shanghaied.â€Â
There are 11,500 eligible employees. 200 volunteered. So something over 98% of State Department employees are in the game for something other than to serve their country. This explains much.”
No.
Only FSOs who’re currently bidding on their next assignment were involved. Bidding takes place twice annually, most assignments are for three years although some are for only one year (as in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other unaccompanied assignments) or two years. There are about 6,500 FSO generalists total. Somewhat more of each years bidders participate in the “summer cycle” of bidding, which this bidding cycle is.
The math is left as an exercise for the student.
When the decision to begin directed assignments began, there were 252 jobs at the embassy in Baghdad and on Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT) in Iraq which had to be filled, for which there 204 were already filled by qualified volunteers. Every State job in Iraq up to this point, over 2,000 of them (again, from a total corps of 6,500) had been filled by a volunteer officer.
So they were, finally, after several years of this, 48 volunteers short. As of this morning, another 15 additional qualified FSOs had stepped forward to volunteer, leaving 33 (and counting) jobs which will require someone receive a directed assignment. Some 2-300 qualified FSOs have been identified and notified they were “prime candidates” for those jobs. Nobody has resigned, threatened to resign, nor jumped out of any windows.
The 11,500 figure you quote (not the correct figure for this, but it’s in several news pieces that also got it wrong) includes Foreign Service Specialists, such as Diplomatic Security special agents, diplomatic couriers, nurses, office managers, &tc. Their assignment system is somewhat separate and I don’t think any of the 252, 48, or 33 jobs are FSS vacancies.
Ex-Dip: I knew that. What’s missing in your statement is the fact that State’s attitude long predates the Act. It was the frustration of the business community with State’s unwillingness and/or inability to deal with commercial and business activites that motivated the creation of the FCS under Commerce in the first place.
State not only “doesn’t actively help businesses”, it often acts to frustrate them; I am sure that from their point of view what they are doing is frustrating their rivals at FCS, but from the side of the businessperson the difference is barely if at all detectable. What we want to know is what the locals are up to and how to get in touch with the appropriate folks, and whether the ID card says “State” or “Commerce” is pretty damned irrelevant.
Regards,
Ric
@happyfeet #20,
“So we’re talking about less than 50 people. Meaning, of the full complement in 2008, less than 20% will have been “shanghaied.â€Â
There are 11,500 eligible employees. 200 volunteered. So something over 98% of State Department employees are in the game for something other than to serve their country. This explains much.”
No.
Only FSOs who’re currently bidding on their next assignment were involved. Bidding takes place twice annually, most assignments are for three years although some are for only one year (as in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other unaccompanied assignments) or two years. There are about 6,500 FSO generalists total. Somewhat more of each years bidders participate in the “summer cycle” of bidding, which this bidding cycle is.
The math is left as an exercise for the student.
When the decision to begin directed assignments began, there were 252 jobs at the embassy in Baghdad and on Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT) in Iraq which had to be filled, for which there 204 were already filled by qualified volunteers. Every State job in Iraq up to this point, over 2,000 of them (again, from a total corps of 6,500) had been filled by a volunteer officer.
So they were, finally, after several years of this, 48 volunteers short. As of this morning, another 15 additional qualified FSOs had stepped forward to volunteer, leaving 33 (and counting) jobs which will require someone receive a directed assignment. Some 2-300 qualified FSOs have been identified and notified they were “prime candidates” for those jobs. Nobody has resigned, threatened to resign, nor jumped out of any windows.
The 11,500 figure you quote (not the correct figure for this, but it’s in several news pieces that also got it wrong) includes Foreign Service Specialists, such as Diplomatic Security special agents, diplomatic couriers, nurses, office managers, &tc. Their assignment system is somewhat separate and I don’t think any of the 252, 48, or 33 jobs are FSS vacancies.
@Fat Man #21,
“You are much to hard on our FSOs, they joined so they could serve our country by living in Paris tax free.”
FSOs pay federal (and state, depending on their home state) income taxes regardless of where in the world they are assigned.
The only time I’ve been tax-free has been when I was in various Middle Eastern war zones as a military member.
Get your facts straight next time before making blanket statements that are flat-out wrong; that way at least you will know whether you’re a liar or just plain ignorant.
Comment by Consul-At-Arms on 11/2 @ 2:35 pm,
That makes more sense. Thanks for the details. And thanks to 15 new volunteers as well as the 204 previous. May they all do us proud.
@Major John #64,
“The only two DoS employees who have died in Iraq were Foreign Service Officer James Mollen and Diplomatic Security Officer Edward Seitz – in 2004.”
Your accounting is missing at least two names, both of whom I knew personally. One was a DS agent who had previously served in Afghanistan (the camp where the Kabul embassy Marine guards live is named after him) and the other did not wish any publicity when he died. The DS agent died in an IED strike on his vehicle and the FSO of unspecified natural causes.
Well, ex-Dip, I was an expat and I have to say that I never felt this:
The first job of an embassy is to look after the affairs of Americans in country .
I always assumed the first job of an embassy is to look after the affairs of America in country. I never felt they were there to particularly support American citizens in country– aside from passport services and some tax-related information. It always seemed very separated from the community.
While I know many people have unrealistic expectations about what the embassy can/should do for them (I’m thinking of those wanting to be evacuated from Lebanon last summer), the American embassy in Japan was very clear what they couldn’t do, such as provide shelter post-earthquake.
I had no disdain for the embassy or its staff- in fact I took great pride in walking past the buildings and seeing the flag. But if you’re looking for a natural constituency, I would say they (formerly we) are out there, but nobody is reaching out and creating the impression the embassies want them.
ps. I did get the funny advice that I shouldn’t let teenagers hang out with embassy teenagers, because embassy teenagers knew they had diplomatic immunity.
Re: 11,500 diplomats, 200 heroes in Bagdahd, fighting terrorists, pussies, etc. and what I am or am not saying about my former colleagues.
First, some fun facts about the State Department bidding and assignment process (caveat here: its been awhile since I participated in this exercise).
All officers in the State Department are rotated on 2 or 3 year cycles, or 1 year in extreme posts such as Baghdad. In between tours officers are sent to language school and other training as necessary, depending on the needs of the position. The German, Spanish and Italian classes, for instance, assumes you can become reasonably fluent in 4-6 months. Officers assigned to Arabic, Chinese, Russian and other hard languages usually have a full year of training and often as much as two years. Yes, two years to learn a language at full salary doing not much else at the department’s language school. A huge investment in people.
Most first tour officers are assigned 2 year consular posts adjudicating visas in places like Mexico City, Moscow, Manila and others where there is no Visa Waiver Program. During this post they rotate into functional jobs in one of the “cones”: Political, Economic, Management, or Consular. The Management officers run the embassy physical plant, motor pool, local hires, etc. Here they start to get useful expereince in the day to day work of diplomacy. Eventually they tend to develop functional expertise in one or more areas; financial markets, education, whatever.
Let’s link this back to the 11,500 officers at State. As I mentioned in my first post, some percentage have health issues that preclude hardship posts, some family issues, some whatever. They’re out for Baghdad even if they volunteered.
If I recall correctly, Baghdad is a one year or 18 month tour, as is Afghanistan, and is a non-dependent post. The family stays with Grandpa and Grandma in Bad Axe or Mobile. We have 250 positions in Baghdad and probably a similar number in Kabul. It follows then that since 2003 there have been at least three and probably four bid cycles featuring 300-500 jobs in Iraq/Afghanistan per cycle, which means that between 900-2000 FSOs have served there “fighting the terrorists” to the approval of Happy.
But you don’t have to be in Iraq fighting the terrorists. I argue that the jobs done by our diplomats in other places are equally important to fighting the terrorists. Someone has to keep the Saudis, Kazahkis, Kuwaitis and others on board, someone has to interact with Poland, the Philippines, and Fiji to keep the troops there, and some lucky soul in Paris has to interact with the Financial Action Task Force to set banking rules that keep money out of terrorist’s hands. These jobs take experience and skill to get done, I think we can all agree and contribute to fighting the terrorists.
We’ve got 50 unfilled jobs in Baghdad after the last cycle. Some officers new or restricted from serving there, other officers SELECTED by State to do the jobs they do best fighting terrorists from FAFTA in Paris. Others either in language school or in the midst of a three year job for which it took them 2 years to learn the language. You can best be sure that State doesn’t pull people out of hard language jobs once they are there, often even if the officer volunteers. It’s just too hard and expensive training them up. Other officers are already in shitholes where it’s tough to keep people around for two years.
That’s why it’s unrealisitic to say that 11,500 officers are pure cowards to not volunteer for Iraq. They have. Or they can’t. Or State won’t let them. Or, in reality, they are better served in Paris than Kabul.
Don’t forget that the 250 jobs in Baghdad are not interchangable. Happyfeet is in marketing, I’m sure that no one in his company wants him to run a factory or whatever. Same goes for embassies: bodies that don’t match needs are next to worthless.
My suspicion is that there are specific jobs going unfilled because officers with adequate skills are not bidding. hence the promise to begin “direct assignments” or putting people into jobs that didn’t appear on their bid lists (which is 6-8 posts if I recall correctly, and some percentage must be hardship if you have not served a hardship in some number of years). While “direct assignments” have always been part of the administrative framework of assignments they were used sparingly enough that few officers have been so assigned.
I also believe that senior officials have pulled officers aside they beleive to be gaming the system, or worse, ignoring the call to serve in iraq and have directed them to bid on Iraq to no avail.
This leads us to the complainers in the meeting:
Maybe they are bidding on other hardship posts to stay away from Iraq.
Maybe they are pure and simple cowards.
Maybe they think they didn’t sign up for this stuff.
Maybe they disagree with the war, the Bush Administration, Secretary Rice, fear political retribution from their colleagues.
Maybe all of the above.
I think that there are individual officers in the State Department that fit in one or all of these categories. How many is difficult to say but there are at least 50 are going to be singled out as one of the above. They are mendacious fools unworthy of the oath they willingly accepted.
So, that’s the complete story. Happy, if you want to continue to wave your broad brush around my colleagues. Some deserve it. But please do not cheapen my service or the service of my colleagues any longer. You look like a fool.
Ex-Dip – True or false. Of the folks at Foggy Bottom, there is a large majority that actively/passively is attempting to subvert President Bush’s policies.
Again – happyfeet is not talking about those that fufilled their oaths. He is specifically referencing those cowards that are whining about possibly being sent to their deaths in Iraq.
They are mendacious fools unworthy of the oath they willingly accepted.
Will somebody say it? Will some FSO write a WaPo op-ed denouncing them? That’s the concern here that you seem to be ignoring. That the mendacious fools have the microphone and get to control the narrative because everyone else is too polite to publicly correct them.
JD: I am not qualified to answer that question. It’s been too many years since I’ve been in Foggy Bottom.
However, from my experience I can tell you that the majority of FSOs are probably Democrats. For what that’s worth.
MayBee: After a quick run thru of Consul-at-Arms blog, I think someone is already doing it.
How much of that is owing to the media? Is the WaPo going to run a “Quit sniveling. You’ve got an oath to fulfill” piece? Look at what sort of play a disgruntled/dissenting military guy will get in the MSM vs. one that believes in the mission.
Fox is running some footage from the meeting, including a woman who has returned from Iraq and states that the Iraqis are wonderful people and that her service there was the most fulfilling work of her life.
She got a standing O.
Don’t fall for WaPo framing the narrative.
By the way, I once met Mr. Cole in Ann Arbor. Amazing prick, indeed. Something we can all support.
MayBee: After a quick run thru of Consul-at-Arms blog, I think someone is already doing it.
Where? I mean, I looked at his blog. But where’s the big, visible push-back against the WaPo’s narrative? What a disappointing response from you.
Ah, well…I see Pablo says the good old mouthpiece of the administration is showing more of the story. Thank goodness.
Speak for yourself. :-)
On Topic: a very illuminating thread.
MayBee: Sorry. Better answer: not likely anybody, which is too bad. Those that are not on the sidelines are buried in work and probably disillusioned with the press anyway. Hard to amend the narrative when you are working 15-18 hour days in country.
Ex-Dip – The lack of pushback is almost as annoying as the whiners are that are the subject of this thread. And yes, we can all agree that Cole is an ass.
Baldilocks – I enjoy your blog, but do not subject you to my commentary.
I just went over to his page for the first time in several years. When did Juan Cole get a glamour shot?
MayBee,
For the record, the administration sucks at pushing back on this crap, like they suck on pushing back against, well, everything.
I’m merely noting the response in the room full of FSO’s from the videotape. And I’m guessing you won’t be seeing it on CBS or PMSNBC…
Happyfeet I think just thought that a calm reasoned tone was inappropriate. You have definitely helped him see the situation as more complex than it appears in the press, and Consul has helped him feel somewhat better with respect to the State Department perhaps being a salvageable institution. In fact, it sounds remarkably as if this whole situation could have been resolved by adults behaving like adults, and that perhaps it was not even necessary to involve the press.
And that’s the deal. And that’s why an analytical approach to this fails. State Department employees took it upon themselves to adduce this issue as part and parcel of an unceasing anti-war propaganda campaign. It’s not my broad brush, XD – it’s your State Department colleagues that show up at meetings with canned pseudo-Shakespearian oratory, a tape recorder, and an overnight envelope addressed to the Washington Post. If you want to shoot the messenger, that’s who you need to aim for.
It’s not happyfeet who should be pissed here – it’s you. At the very least you should review your Christmas card list.
Oh please. Try and sound more like Joe Wilson.
Ex-Dip:”I often counsel friends and acquaintences wanting to enter the foreign service, and demand they think about implementing Republican policies if they are liberals and Democrat policies if they are conservative.”
To which, if they’ve looked at the last 7 years, they replied, “Oh, that’s OK. If I don’t agree with the policy, I’ll subvert it either actively (Joe Wilson) or passively (leaks to the NYT). If I get called on it by the Presidential appointees (those who have to get confirmed / can be held accountable thru the Presidential election every 4 years), I’ll use the Civil Service laws and union rules to avoid getting fired, or, hey, I’ll claim to be a covert agent or a whistleblower and run to the ‘Loyal Opposition’ in Congress for protection. Maybe they’ll get a special prosecutor appointed and put someone in jail for not remembering the same things as a reporter who doesn’t have total recall either. Meanwhile, I should be able to get quite a windfall thru lectures, book deals, spreads in Vanity Fair, culminating in a fat stipend from George Soros’ money laundering think tanks. Sounds like a deal!”
For the record, the administration sucks at pushing back on this crap, like they suck on pushing back against, well, everything.
I agree. Although sometimes it would be nice to see them get some help from the others involved. Some that could be seen as a neutral party. Maybe.
I believe that most FSOs take their job seriously and do it well. Part of their job, though, should be to protect their department from the partisans that want to drag their particular story to the media. As we saw with the CIA, silence = confirmation.
I’m merely noting the response in the room full of FSO’s from the videotape. And I’m guessing you won’t be seeing it on CBS or PMSNBC…
I really appreciate it, and my snide comment about Fox wasn’t directed at you. It wasn’t even directed at Fox. It’s just distressing that yes, as you said, we won’t see it on MSNBC or even in the WaPo.
MayBee @ #243:
The phrase you might want to look at is “Blue Falcon”. Uncle Jimbo at BlackFive described what a Blue Falcon was, in relation to John Kerry back in the 2004 campaign.
It is unfortunate that with all of the embassies the USA has, with all of the consulates, that the Blue Falcon types dominate the news.
Perhaps, I don’t know, the Foreign Service slots need a government academy, and four year enlistment reviews. Perhaps it should be like a military officer, to enplace the idea that this is a service, and no, it may not be a happy service. That may be the way to get the languages and the necessary anthropology courses that many universities seem to discourage those with a desire to serve the USA from pursuing (or discouraging those who pursue those courses/studies from serving the USA).
A diplomatic ROTC also? I can see businesses wanting that person, and it gives the depth to flood an area if it becomes necessary. Just speculating.
I.E.; in my opinion, Joe Wilson is a Blue Falcon. He put his Monument to Me above his duty.
Good God, happyfeet is channeling something truly suspicious. I see heads twirling and green pea soup spewing. Back away; it’s teh sockpuppet possession!
happyfeet heard that
Mostly happyfeet just has a headache. New Girl is just draining.
Oh, never mind; business as usual. I agree that the targeted diplomats should go where they’re told. I do maintain that the miserable conditions in Iraq obtain. And I don’t blame people for their fears, but we desperately need diplomats with specific skills and abilities. The question us whether or not there are even any more FSO’s with those qualifications.
cynn, but what do you think about the melodrama they staged for the press? XD and Consul have pretty much eviscerated the story as it has been presented by Cole (several hundred has become three dozen or so in the course of this thread), so how does this strike you from a propaganda perspective?
Mikey at #258 answers your last question by the way.
Oh please. Try and sound more like Joe Wilson.
Extra large white chocolate mocha all over my monitor, happyfeet. Thanks. Is New Girl easy on the eyes, or does she have any redeeming qualities?
I do maintain that the miserable conditions in Iraq obtain.
Care to explain this one, cynn? I tried, but could not come up with anything. Maybe if I started drinking again …
New Girl is pretty but not gorgeous and mostly very professional looking and also she has cleavage, which is ok but a little troubling in that I couldn’t tell her that the people she will meet when she goes to hq to introduce herself are going to notice that and not be very nice behind her back and that’s ok but I’m not really convinced she has really a whole lot else she’s bringing to the table and and I’m afraid they’ll notice that too. I will do all I can so that this does not end badly but she really is draining. Hopefully Other Guy will step up so she’s not really on my plate so much cause she’s not even in my department and caring about things not in my department is a lot of strain on me – both to do it and also to look sincere at the same time.
Well, at least she has 2 redeeming qualities ;-)
happyfeet – Did you understand that comment from cynn?
I didn’t get the business as usual part – the rest of the comments sort of tracked but I don’t think they go very deeply to the heart of the matter. This is much more a media-manufactured story than a genuine examination of State Department personnel policy I think. I also think that that should really be a great big duh but there’s a lot in this thread that suggests a lot of people don’t see it that way.
It’s like having army deserters lecture us from Canada while officers in Iraq assure us that they will take their views under advisement.
Such is life in wartime and oh no it looks like there’s going to be a writer’s strike. Why are they striking and what will this mean for you? And how is this related to the meltdown at the State Department? We’ll have that story for you and more coming up at ten.
Oh. That should be writers’ strike I think.
I often use my wife as a sounding board on these issues. When I tried to explain this to her, she rolled her eyes. I doubt many people will care to learn about it, much less be outraged, as the MSM simply will not cover this kind of action. The only way it would get real coverage is if President Bush ordered the opponents of his policies to be transferred to Iraq, immediately. Then, the media would run story after story after story where they interview crying wives, husbands, and children talking about how their Mommy or Daddy is going to die because of President Bush.
JD, I’m not really sure I understood cynn’s last few comments except that happy feet is now the star of a web-text version of The Exorcist, and that cynn agrees that those FSO’s that are assigned to go somewhere should go – with reservations that necessary local skills may be lacking.
Oh, and Iraq sucks as a place to go to – but I’m sure Major John has already pointed out the ‘sucks like a Hoover’ aspect many times.
Mikey NTH is tired and is going to go to bed – after walloping on some bad guys in Oblivion. Funny – there you know who the bad guys are.
Ok, I give up. I salute the brainards and thank the brave soldiers for their service. You guys were at one time well worthy of engaging, if not converting, a lefty. Hoping for the best for you, all inclusive.
At minimum I think it’s a safe call that we will see “tattered morale at Justice/tattered morale at State” bandied about as received wisdom.
New Girl sucked all the engage-worthiness out I think.
From what spring does their received wisdom bubble up from?
The Washington Post?
Sounds like New Girl has more skills than you let on previously, happyfeet.
Would it were. I hardly ever do the I feel like I need a drink thing but if a workout doesn’t help I think that’s where this is headed.
Ok I will try another pot of coffee first cause I have duties tomorrow.
Ok sometimes it’s just that I have a hard time making eye contact with her especially when she’s talking cause it’s like staring into a mesmerizing pool of stupid. Like I should tell her I’m borderline autistic or something but Other Guy would so not back me up on that.
Thanks for listening.
A mesmerizing pool of stupid. I was already ahead of you and thought you were going to say that you were mesmerized by her cleavage, and then you go and throw a sharp breaking curveball.
Is there a direct correlation between people with the last name of Cole and people that are aggressively ignorant?
Geez JD. I know you play golf, and I know you bet on golf. So why in THE hell are you drinking extra large white chocolate mochas? You might as well wear the footies with the little fuzzy balls on the heels.
I’m kidding. DON’T HIT ME!!
I’m cool with that. And since not one of your damn posts ever resembled another, much less made any damn sense on its own, I’m hoping for the best for you too, all inclusive.
For the record, the administration sucks at pushing back on this crap, like they suck on pushing back against, well, everything.
The President is one of those who rarely, if ever, will push back. He believes to do so is “un-presidential”. Fine.
But if he has instructed his cabinet secretaries to do not push back publicly, then he has done everyone a grave disservice. Where has, for instance, the treasury secretary been in combatting the “soup-line America” rhetoric of the Democrats?
al – You kill me.