<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Defense Department</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/defense_department/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 13:44:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Pentagon officials: Drone War on Terror is endless</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/pentagon_official_drone_policy_should_remain_for_at_least_20_years/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/pentagon_official_drone_policy_should_remain_for_at_least_20_years/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 13:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aumf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al-Qaida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on Terror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13301294</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At Congressional hearing, Defense officials defend AUMF and the boundless war-waging powers it grants]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>During a Congressional hearing Thursday on drone strikes carried out by the military, senior defense official Michael Sheehan admitted that the War on Terror is one without end or boundary. The assistant defense secretary told the Senate Armed Services Committee that U.S. military operations against al-Qaida and associated forces "is going to go on for quite a while... beyond the second term of the president. . . . I think it’s at least 10 to 20 years.”</p><p>Sheehan's remarks served as a defense of the military's current drone strike policy. While the majority of U.S. drone strikes are carried out by the CIA and authorized by the president directly, the Pentagon oversees strikes in Pakistan and <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/cia_may_lose_drone_program/">will take increasing control of U.S. drone programs</a>. Sheehan also defended the current structure of the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Act (AUMF), passed after 9/11, which, in its present iteration, grants the president wide-ranging powers to wage drone wars. “At this point we’re comfortable with the AUMF as it is currently structured,” said Sheehan. He admitted that there was no expiration date or geographic boundary to the War on Terror.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/pentagon_official_drone_policy_should_remain_for_at_least_20_years/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/pentagon_official_drone_policy_should_remain_for_at_least_20_years/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How drones deceive us</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/09/how_drones_deceive_us/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/09/how_drones_deceive_us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United Nations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Targeted killings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yemen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13293345</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The advantage of technologized warfare is also its most worrying: The perception of decreased risk to the aggressor]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the brave new world of technologized warfare, every week seems to bring a new sci-fi-movie-worthy revelation about America's ongoing drone operations. This past week was no exception. From the <a href="http://m.guardiannews.com/world/2013/may/02/us-drone-strikes-guantanamo">lawyer</a> who first outlined White House policy on drone attacks, we learned that the government is likely using such attacks instead of capturing alleged terrorists, all to avoid the thorny legal issues that come with prisoner detainment. From the <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-point-of-no-return-should-robots-be-able-to-decide-to-kill-you-on-their-own-20130430">United Nations</a>, we learned that the world may be closer to seeing its first self-directed Terminator-style killing machines -- technically called "Lethal Autonomous Robots" -- than many may have previously thought.</p><p>These kind of stories will continue for one big, if unstated, reason: robotic warfare seems to hold the promise of making many things easier, cheaper and less risky, at least for the countries that operate the drones. But the operative word is "seems," for drones involve a problematic illusion that distorts our perception of the risks we face.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/09/how_drones_deceive_us/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/09/how_drones_deceive_us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CIA may lose drone program</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/cia_may_lose_drone_program/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/cia_may_lose_drone_program/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Targeted killing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterterror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disposition Matrix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13246876</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Targeted killing program would move to Pentagon, controversies largely in tow]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The CIA's controversial targeted killing program may be coming to an end, according to three senior U.S. officials who <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/19/exclusive-no-more-drones-for-cia.html">spoke to the Daily Beast</a>. The spy agency may gradually stop overseeing the "disposition matrix" that determines who is targeted by armed drones, and the program would shift to the Pentagon's control. The same concerns about unfettered executive power to determine life or death with drones strikes would, however, remain. But according to the Daily Beast's Daniel Klaidman, transitioning the program "could potentially toughen the criteria for drone strikes, strengthen the program’s accountability, and increase transparency."</p><p>As part of <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/24/obama_administration_has_expanded_kill_lists_to_a_matrix/">a pattern</a> traced for some months (particularly by the Washington Post's Greg Miller), in shifting the drone program from the CIA to the Pentagon, the Obama administration would codify shadow wars as fully integrated into modern U.S. warfare -- the stuff of Defense Department oversight. Klaidman reported:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/cia_may_lose_drone_program/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/cia_may_lose_drone_program/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pentagon agrees to publish Manning rulings</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/27/pentagon_agrees_to_publish_manning_rulings/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/27/pentagon_agrees_to_publish_manning_rulings/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bradley Manning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ccr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WikiLeaks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13214013</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Journalists and human rights groups call the move long-overdue, demand greater transparency]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Following multiple FOIA requests from journalists and pressure from human rights group, the Pentagon Wednesday published 84 judicial orders and rulings from the court-martial proceedings for Bradley Manning.</p><p>Up until now the only access to these documents has come second-hand. As the Guardian's Ed Pilkington described it, the refusal to publish the documents, "has led to an <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/22/bradley-manning-wikileaks-1000-days-detention">Alice in Wonderland world</a> where  [presiding military judge Denise] Lind has read out documents in court, which are then reported in the media."</p><p>Via <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/27/pentagon-releases-bradley-manning-documents">Pilkington:</a></p><blockquote><p>The 84 documents released by the army include court rulings on defence and government motions, and orders that set the scheduling of the trial that is currently earmarked to begin on 3 June. But the batch constitutes only a tiny portion of the huge mountain of paperwork that has already been generated in the proceedings, including some 500 documents stretching to 30,000 pages.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/27/pentagon_agrees_to_publish_manning_rulings/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/27/pentagon_agrees_to_publish_manning_rulings/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More GOP Hagel hypocrisy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/more_gop_hagel_hypocrisy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/more_gop_hagel_hypocrisy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 23:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chuck Hagel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[James Inhofe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Filibuster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13201997</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The senator leading the charge against Hagel on Israel had some kind words for Hamas in 2006]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Senate Republicans blocked Chuck Hagel’s confirmation to be secretary of Defense this afternoon by voting against a cloture motion to end debate and move to a final vote, they insisted it was not a filibuster. “This is not a filibuster. I realize that's the headline the majority leader would like the papers to write,” Texas Sen. John Cornyn said on the Senate floor while filibustering Hagel.</p><p>The cloture motion fell two votes short, securing only 58 of the 60 votes Democrats needed to break the GOP obstruction. Republicans had 40 votes against cloture, and in the crazy rules of the Senate, that wins.</p><p>The hold or filibuster, or whatever Cornyn would call it, came as conservatives buzzed about a speech Hagel gave to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination League (ADC) in 2007. A <a href="http://freebeacon.com/report-hagel-said-state-department-controlled-by-israel/">conservative blog today claimed</a> that Hagel suggested in the speech that Israel controlled the State Department. The former Republican senator has come under fire from Republicans for being critical of Israeli policy in the past and referring to the “Israel lobby,” so the State Department quote would be problematic, if true.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/more_gop_hagel_hypocrisy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/more_gop_hagel_hypocrisy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Time to revisit filibuster reform?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/time_to_revisit_filibuster_reform/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/time_to_revisit_filibuster_reform/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Filibuster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chuck Hagel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harry Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senate rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13201504</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[GOP hold on Hagel leads to talk of further rules reform]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last year, facing unprecedented Republican obstruction to the president's agenda, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid came to the Senate floor <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/harry_reid%E2%80%99s_filibuster_rage/">with a big admission</a>: "These two young, fine senators said it was time to change the rules of the Senate, and we didn't. They were right. The rest of us were wrong -- or most of us, anyway. What a shame ... I am almost embarrassed,” he said, referring to two Democrats who wanted to curb the power of the filibuster.</p><p>That was in May of 2012. Now, 10 months later and facing unprecedented Republican obstruction of Chuck Hagel’s appointment to be secretary of Defense, Reid may be wishing he had heeded his own advice a bit more, and forged a stronger package of filibuster reforms.</p><p>"Are there chickens in Nevada? Because unfortunately, our friend Harry Reid's filibuster-reform chicken is coming home to roost,” quipped Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which advocates for stronger filibuster reform.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/time_to_revisit_filibuster_reform/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/time_to_revisit_filibuster_reform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hagel&#8217;s fight unprecedented</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/13/the_beginning_of_the_end_of_the_hagel_fight/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/13/the_beginning_of_the_end_of_the_hagel_fight/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chuck Hagel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Filibuster]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13200477</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Harry Reid files cloture to break the GOP filibuster, forcing a vote by Saturday]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If there’s any doubt remaining that we’ve ventured into uncharted territory on the use of the filibuster, this should put it to rest.</p><p>Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid this afternoon filed a cloture motion to break the Republican filibuster and end debate on the nomination of Chuck Hagel to head the Department of Defense.</p><p>“This is the first time in the history of our country that a presidential nominee for secretary of defense has been filibustered. What a shame. But that's the way it is,” Reid said on the Senate floor.</p><p>The move, while unprecedented, was not unexpected. It means that Democrats now need 60 votes to get Hagel confirmed, which could be a tall order, as only two Republicans have said they’ll vote for their former Senate colleague. But as Steve Kornacki <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/12/the_sore_loser_exception/">pointed out</a>, Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain may vote on cloture to help Dems get to 60, even though he will probably vote “no” on the final confirmation vote. Others senators concerned about the dangerous precedent set by the Hagel filibuster may join him.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/13/the_beginning_of_the_end_of_the_hagel_fight/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/13/the_beginning_of_the_end_of_the_hagel_fight/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Leon Panetta: We wanted to arm the Syrian resistance</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/08/pentagon_wanted_to_arm_the_syrian_resistance_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/08/pentagon_wanted_to_arm_the_syrian_resistance_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 19:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GlobalPost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leon Panetta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13195292</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The defense secretary told Congress on Thursday that this was the plan before Obama nixed it]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>U.S. defense chiefs told Congress Thursday they backed the possibility of arming Syrian rebels.<br /> <a href="http://www.globalpost.com/"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://images.salon.com/img/partners/ID_globalPostInline.gif" alt="Global Post" /></a></p><p>Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told lawmakers they recommended arming Syria's rebels.</p><p>President Obama ultimately decided against the move, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/07/us-usa-syria-pentagon-idUSBRE91613A20130207">said Reuters</a>, instead providing non-lethal aid to rebels.</p><p>It is believed that anti-government rebels are being armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar.</p><p>At a hearing in Congress Thursday, Republican Sen. John McCain asked Pentagon leaders: "How many more have to die before you recommend military action?"</p><p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9856382/Leon-Panetta-supports-Hillary-Clinton-plan-to-arm-Syrian-rebels.html">The Telegraph reported</a> that McCain pressed the leaders on the issue asking: "Did you support the recommendation by then-Secretary of State Clinton and then-head of CIA General Petraeus that we supply weapons to the resistance in Syria?"</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/08/pentagon_wanted_to_arm_the_syrian_resistance_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/08/pentagon_wanted_to_arm_the_syrian_resistance_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hagel emerges with solid Dem support for Pentagon</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/01/hagel_emerges_with_solid_dem_support_for_pentagon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/01/hagel_emerges_with_solid_dem_support_for_pentagon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 13:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[From the Wires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chuck Hagel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senate Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Secretary]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/2013/02/01/hagel_emerges_with_solid_dem_support_for_pentagon/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Democrats hold a 14-12 advantage on the Senate Armed Services Committee]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WASHINGTON (AP) — Bruised and battered, Chuck Hagel emerged from his grueling confirmation hearing with solid Democratic support for his nomination to be President Barack Obama's next defense secretary and relentless opposition from Republicans who repeatedly challenged their former GOP colleague.</p><p>Mathematically, Hagel has the edge as he looks to succeed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as the nation's 24th Pentagon chief. Democrats hold a 14-12 advantage on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said the panel could vote as early as next Thursday, contingent on Hagel's prompt response on some lingering questions.</p><p>Levin expressed optimism about Hagel's prospects and praised his performance in nearly eight hours of testimony Thursday.</p><p>"I think his answers were honest and forthright and he did very well," Levin told reporters. "I hope that there will be some, who maybe were skeptical but who are undecided before this hearing, will maybe now look at him in a more favorable light. But I think there are a whole lot of folks who basically decided before the hearing that they were going to vote against him."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/01/hagel_emerges_with_solid_dem_support_for_pentagon/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/01/hagel_emerges_with_solid_dem_support_for_pentagon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Guantanamo death was suicide, US finds</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/29/guantanamo_death_was_suicide_us_finds/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/29/guantanamo_death_was_suicide_us_finds/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2012 21:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guantanamo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adnan Latif]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Suicide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big story you missed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13110550</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Adnan Latif took an overdose of psychiatric medication in September, Defense Department confirms]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) -- An autopsy has found that a Guantanamo Bay prisoner who died in September committed suicide, a U.S. military official said Thursday.</p><p>Adnan Latif, who was found unconscious in his cell in a disciplinary wing of the prison at the U.S. base in Cuba, took an overdose of psychiatric medication, according to a senior Defense Department official.</p><p>The official said it had not yet been determined how Latif, who was from Yemen and had a history of mental illness and clashes with guards, managed to collect enough medication to kill himself. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the autopsy results have not yet been released and the case remains the subject of an investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.</p><p>The U.S. military does not intend to disclose the results of the autopsy or discuss the case in further detail until after Latif's remains are returned to his country, said Army Col. Greg Julian, a spokesman for the U.S. military's Miami-based Southern Command, which has jurisdiction over Guantanamo. The remains are at the Ramstein Air Base in Germany.</p><p>His death was the seventh suicide at the prison, where the U.S. now holds 166 men. The deaths of two other prisoners were determined to be from natural causes.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/29/guantanamo_death_was_suicide_us_finds/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/29/guantanamo_death_was_suicide_us_finds/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Four generals who can&#8217;t shoot straight</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/13/your_war_may_in_trouble_if/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/13/your_war_may_in_trouble_if/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2012 17:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gen. Stanley McChrystal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Petraeus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gen. John Allen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13071017</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A look at the startlingly poor track record of Afghan war commanders in the Obama era]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. is supposed to be in Afghanistan for at least another two years, but you know the war effort may be struggling when this is the track record of its commanders over the past four years:</p><ul> <li><strong>Gen. David McKiernan</strong> was appointed to lead coalition forces in June 2008, but lasted less than a year in Afghanistan before being <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124206036635107351.html">fired for incompetence</a> in May 2009.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked for McKiernan's resignation after he lost confidence in his leadership over the deteriorating war effort. Asked if the move would end Gen. McKiernan's 37-year military career, Gates said at the time, "probably." The move was seen as highly unusual, and was the first time since the Korean War that a four-star commanding general was relieved of his duties in the middle of a war. Unfortunately, it would prove to be less of an aberration than it looked.</li> </ul><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/13/your_war_may_in_trouble_if/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/13/your_war_may_in_trouble_if/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Congress left our embassies exposed</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/how_congress_left_our_embassies_exposed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/how_congress_left_our_embassies_exposed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya embassy attack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Stevens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State DEpartment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13010275</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One reason our embassies are unable to protect themselves? Congress has been slashing their funding for years]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Responding to mob attacks on a U.S. embassy and consulate in Egypt and Libya, Sens. John McCain, Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham <a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2012/09/libya_attack_arab_spring_not_d.html">said</a> the following: “[W]e now look to the Libyan government to ensure that the perpetrators are swiftly brought to justice, and that U.S. diplomats are protected.” Well, if the senators want to better protect American diplomats, they will have to convince their colleagues. The Benghazi consulate where Ambassador Christopher Stevens was murdered had no Marines surrounding it, no bulletproof glass and no reinforced doors. Libyan security officials were partly in charge of securing the building.</p><p>Among the worst trends in U.S. foreign-policy making in recent decades is the decline of the State Department and the corresponding rise of the Defense Department. State is responsible for American diplomacy — the hard work of negotiating and maintaining relations with other countries; Defense (formerly the Department of War, a more honest designation) looks after war-making and protecting national security. Few things reflect America’s skewed foreign-policy priorities more than the funding discrepancies between the two departments. Consider the numbers:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/how_congress_left_our_embassies_exposed/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/how_congress_left_our_embassies_exposed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
