Ooobie on Everything

Trump Sucks Up to Mad Man McCain

Let me open with this announcement: I don’t believe that Assad (much less Russia) carried out a chemical weapons (cw) attack in Syria. This was an act of provocation, with or without US involvement, that was carefully calculated to draw the response it did. I believe that this action was based on a judgment that Trump was a foreign affairs neophyte whom his domestic and other foes could push to a rash and poorly considered action to prove his boasts of toughness and his leadership. Faced with an endless and ugly barrage of fake news and false accusations, he fell for whatever he was being sold and grabbed the chance to assert himself as president.

This latest US violation of international law happened only days after the announcement by Trump’s highest reps that unseating Assad was not our primary goal in Syria. We wanted only to defeat ISIS and the jihadists. I thought, sanity prevails. But John McCain was beside himself, or outside himself, or wherever people beyond all utility hang out. I’ve heard he flew to Syria to consult with his tiny proxy army. If so, who knows what wise advice this old white guy gave to those “rebels” living in a complex of tunnels in the side of a mountain. All we know is soon afterwards, an attack by the Syrian Air Force occurred at the same time chemical weapons were released on the ground. (The US insists it was aerial release, but as former Ambassador to Syria Peter Ford said, “[there is] “no proof that the cause of the explosion was what they said it was” and that for Assad such an attack would be “totally self-defeating.”

Here’s what I do believe: Trump, tough guy in business, doesn’t have the political judgement of gravel outside of an appeal to the voters. He should have hung tight and continued to reject the Russian Fairy Tale in which the Witch, Vladimir Putin, gets the innocents (DNC and Clinton Campaign) into his ovens and then serves up Trump; he should have fought those who think the Russian Bogeyman can cover up the crimes of our political class. Instead we have had the recusal of Sessions (innocent of any crime or misbehavior whatsoever and with no earthly interest in helping Russia); the recusal of Nunes who revealed the heinous surveillance by Obama of political opponents; the removal of Bannon from the NSC; and the promise to work with the Dems to get some piece of crap supposedly better than the current piece of crap called Obamacare. Trump obviously isn’t getting politics. And frankly, I’m not getting him, either.

And now this incredible blunder and horrible crime. A nation not at war with the US, not even posing a threat to the US, is once again being assaulted by the United States. Why? I’ll venture this. Because Trump is getting all shook up over the assault he is being subjected to by our own Commies. He can’t fight internal enemies and external enemies, too, and external is easier. Obama promised to honor an idiotic red line, so Trump will make good on the promise. Precisely as his political enemies calculated. And now he gets his reward, in Pavlovian style, which is CNN opining that he’s finally president. All it took was the start of WWIII.

Trump would never erect a building without all the facts about the job. So how could it be that he committed an act of war on the basis of an unproven claim of responsibility? How could he fall for such a ruse by the enemy? If we end up at war with Russia, and China and Iran, will anybody remember it was the Democrats pushing him there?

But hold on. Let’s take a closer look and offer information on Syria from other sources that the USG will not give you.

“Russia’s defence ministry has argued that Syrian planes were destroying chemical weapons, not deploying them, and said the airstrikes targeted a rebel storage depot for toxins.”

Absurd, say the Americans.

“Khan Sheikhoun, where the attack happened was a hewn mountain with tunnels and impenetrable bunkers. Definitely a major hiding place for manufacturing weapon supplies for the Islamist rebels on a major scale. It is a “warehouse used to both produce and store shells containing toxic gas” as Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Major-General Igor Konashenkov said.”

Why aren’t the western media showing the photos that make clear this attack was on a military target, not a simple village living peacefully? And why is nobody looking at the opposition? Here is what UN rep Carla del Ponte said in 2013 about the results of the UN investigation into the use of cw in specific attacks in Syria:

Ms Del Ponte, a former Swiss attorney-general and prosecutor with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), did not rule out the possibility that troops loyal to President Bashar al-Assad might also have used chemical weapons, but said further investigation was needed. “I was a little bit stupefied by the first indications we got… they were about the use of nerve gas by the opposition,” she said.

Ms. del Ponte’s seasoned judgment was spurned by “most western governments” who insisted it was all the work of the Assad government. The final report laid all the attacks at the government’s doorstep by insinuation without actually having the evidence to do so, as it admitted.

Today’s America seems to be hurtling toward some apocalyptic scenario of war abroad and at home. So far I lack any confidence that Trump will hold the line on his campaign promises for a new American foreign policy. So far it looks like he is so desperate to be loved that he plays the eager sap for the warmongers and the military-industrial complex. So far, I’m concerned he is going to take us to the brink of a massive conflict. Russia now and urgently is going to seriously beef up Syrian air defense systems with Russia’s latest hardware and technology, so the next time a jet flies over a Syrian airbase they will probably come down in flames. Then what will happen?


Jigsaw Puzzles: The US Putting in the last Piece

I have been hammering away at this theme for a long time now and my instinct tells me we are near endgame (in so many ways). US “foreign policy strategists” have walked our government through the paces necessary to bring America to a point where we Americans might be duped into going for forced regime change in Syria. (For those growing up on Jupiter: this used to be called invasion and occupation). There was an essential miscalculation of timing here. Far too long passed between when our government began mulling over another war in Syria and the present, when our country’s entire complex of war hawks have congregated around the vile Mrs. Clinton like vultures. Into the abyss of opportunity lost fell our advantage. Russia saw the need, saw the challenge and took the chance. On all fronts, the signs are of WWIII, with an arrogant US demanding Russia and Syria and Iran kneel. It ain’t gonna happen. I’m not going to get into China and affronts to its power within its region. And then we come to “what next?”

Americans are afraid and they should be. Just imagine that every person we have killed by drone, direct invasion, proxies or bombs at 35,000 feet springs up into a family of 30 or 40 or 400 who wish the US active harm. That’s a lot of hate and revenge.

The Russians have a right to both fear and be mad at Islamist murderers, who not that ago took over an elementary school and murdered hundreds of persons in Russia. Then there was the jihadist take-over of the Moscow theater where the hit musical “North-West” was playing. In the house there were the young, the old, the rich, the poor, the good and the bad. When the Russians decided that the people wearing suicide bombs might be nearing the end of their physical resistance and the moment when the bombs would go off, the Russians used a gas to subdue them. Then they sent in their own Spec Ops teams to kill each and every terrorist, male and female, where they lay snoozing next to knocked-out hostages. Unfortunately, as a German doctor interviewed told one news outlet, in order to insure that not one adult terrorist survived to trigger a device, it was inevitable that those taking the theater would sacrifice the very young and the very old and ill. Russia had a hard choice to make and Russia made it. It always does.

The same thing happened in Syria, where Russia was not itching to get into a fight. But just as the rest of us did, the Russians wondered what the hell was going on when the US was inert in the face of growing ISIS power and control of territory. Why wasn’t the US, up to its eyeballs in the Syrian civil war, going after ISIS and its affiliates and those of Al Qaeda in that country? ISIS was stealing oil and shipping it through Turkey to finance its operations; Turkey did nothing. It got a commission. The US did  nothing. All they wanted was to weaken Assad. Screw the rest of the issues. It wasn’t until Russia made public the aerial footage of the oil convoys heading to the Turkish border that the US decided it had to act or tell the truth regarding its intentions. Today it brags how stalwart it is against ISIS. Believe it at your peril.

Now thanks to Mr. Assange (note for future historians: a genuine and early global political prisoner. end note.) and Wikileaks  we know that in 2006, our hero GW Bush was being advised by a lot of the same folks who are now advising Hillary Clinton on the subject of how to undermine Assad and the stability of Syria via sabotage, infiltration and subterfuge. The advisers have all been big shots in the USG and players in the military-industrial complex.

Anybody out there, if somebody tries to tell you Russia should be before a Human Rights Tribunal because of Syria, you refer them to that fact. It was the US that started the Syrian civil war for its own dirty purposes long before the visible results appeared. Russia is only there because the US is totally lost in its own corruption and unable to guide the world. The Russians are the single most important factor in the beating back of ISIS in Syria, in which the US has played chiefly a negative role through our arming and training and support of terrorists. “Alt-terror.”

So, here’s where we are. The US is getting tired of the upstart Russia, with Iranian help, blocking US power in Syria. It wants done. How will it do it? Enter: human rights charade. Aleppo is just the ticket. Russia Today (RT), the most hated of media outlets due to its enormous global popularity and its willingness to disclose the dirt hidden away by our governments, reports that eastern Aleppo doesn’t house just innocent civilians, but a whole slew of American-backed terrorists (Al Nusra) using these people as human shields. But the US does not consider going after Al-Nusra to be a priority per Admiral James Kirby aka diplomatic spokesperson. They want to go after Assad. But dang, the “bad guys” are using their lawful power in the UNSC to block the US from another war.

Ah-ha. Go to the bogus UN human rights committee, which has no veto power, and get a resolution calling what Russia is doing an “atrocity” and a “human rights catastrophe.” Outlaw any action in Aleppo, where the US can’t win, but hopes to carve out an area of operations from which to launch further actions against Assad. Hey, isn’t that what the international legal system is for? That’s what the federal legal system is for in the US.

 

I’m sure it’s all ho-hum by now. We have an election on hand with the choices being Dopey or the Evil Queen.

I always loved Dopey.

 

 


Vote the War Party! Vote Hillary!

I am largely resigned to all the things that I fear are to come. These start with an effective one-party takeover of the USG, the rewriting of all laws and rules (including those governing changes to the Constitution) to make them ideologically correct, and legislative and judicial branches marching in step with the Executive in foisting on us a State Political Philosophy. The processes already begun by the left will go at a faster pace — from the spread of mandatory unionism to vast State control over the media (including and especially the internet), from mandatory voting to suppression of religious expression. There will be no demurring from the State position, as both the legislature and the judiciary will be firmly under the control of the far left. Ruth Bader Ginsberg could give you a lecture on how “n’sync” the lefties on the Supreme Court are with the world’s progressives. These new justices don’t care if you know they have already decided cases not before them, just as the faux journalists don’t care if you call them propagandists. Biased, and proud of it!

The other worry that I fear will be realized is that a Clinton presidency would lead to heightened conflict and even war with Russia, in Syria certainly and perhaps in Ukraine, as well. The USG has already trained and armed Kiev’s special forces who only recently tried to infiltrate saboteurs into the military facilities in Crimea, in the course of which they lost their lives. The US and Kiev of course denied it all, calling it a provocation by Russia. The incident ratcheted up tensions in eastern Ukraine, with Russia’s proxies fighting the US proxies; and it also expedited Moscow’s delivery of state-of-the-art anti-air systems and other sophisticated military hardware to the peninsula. Like it or not, Russia owns Crimea and within a few short years, it will be a major military port bristling with all sorts of armament and technology. Anybody who plans to wage battle in the Black Sea should be prepared for total war.

Kiev’s provocations, just like those of Georgia, are oil poured on an already volatile situation. And it is this kind of reckless behavior that the US is encouraging and facilitating. (I still think the Georgian president was nudged to take action in S. Ossetia by the American military.) Our course is fraught with danger, but it does not deter the unholy alliance of the neocons and the corrupt Clinton camp in pushing for Ukraine membership in NATO. After all, it was her husband who made the fateful decision to enlarge NATO, why should she not be the one that takes it right to Moscow’s doorstep and over it into war? Expect Mrs. Clinton to deepen US-Ukraine military collaboration in ways that are directly threatening to Russian national security and, as a result, to our own.

In Syria, rumor has it that Madame’s first order of business will be to undertake regime change, Russia be damned. If this is true, we should all take to the streets to make our strenuous disagreement palpable. (But it won’t happen.) Russia is not going to back down even in the face of NATO aggression (and of course there will be no UNSC resolution legitimizing US aggression). Moscow will reinforce its military at Latakia and increase its air sorties. The Syrians have already given Russia use of a second base, and now the Chinese are getting more involved, as well. They will be working overtime to bring under the control of Damascus as great a swath of Syrian territory as possible, bombing anything that moves and that includes Americans. It would then be a shooting war.

Hillary Clinton wants a war. She wants to pull off a victory somewhere, this American cowgirl, that would dwarf anything Obama did. Alas for all of us, the places that are easy to bomb and take over with proxies have already been bombed and taken over. They are the rubble you see strewn across the Middle East. What remains are the nations that created nuclear arsenals precisely to prevent an aggressor from attempting, directly or indirectly, an assault on their sovereignty. Those nations include China and Russia and (probably) Iran, all regional powers that have resisted US dominion and demands. In the real world, one would think, “how can we reconcile our needs and interests so as to avoid war?” But I don’t think Hillary operates in the real world. She operates wherever it is that she communes with Eleanor Roosevelt.

And how could I not mention that weasel-faced jerk Mike Morrell, formerly of the CIA and now a Hillary adviser. (This is a good fit, as both the CIA and Hillary Clinton absolutely require that employees have the ability to lie glibly and sell any story as the truth.) Morell formerly condemned Hillary for such negligence in handling of classified information that he was absolutely certain the illegally-used server had been hacked by multiple sources. Now he thinks she’d be a steady hand at the helm. Of course, here’s what Morell thinks about icing our supposed foes and actual rivals:

“What they need is to have the Russians and Iranians pay a little price,” Morell said. “When we were in Iraq, the Iranians were giving weapons to the Shia militia, who were killing American soldiers, right? The Iranians were making us pay a price. We need to make the Iranians pay a price in Syria. We need to make the Russians pay a price.” Morell said the killing of Russians and Iranians should be undertaken “covertly, so you don’t tell the world about it, you don’t stand up at the Pentagon and say ‘we did this.’ But you make sure they know it in Moscow and Tehran.”

Judge for yourself. Who is a greater danger to continued life on the planet? Donald Trump who wants to collaborate with Russia to defeat ISIS in Syria; who wants to toss that disastrous Utopian fantasy, nation-building, overboard; who thinks that conflict is the last resort, not the first? Or a woman who has surrounded herself with the worst of the war hawks and the military-industrial complex, in which the lackey Morell is but a small cog? The latter group is drooling at the chance to go to war against Russia, and I predict they will try a two-prong approach in both Syria and Ukraine. I think they are incredibly thick and arrogant and I also think they are extremely dangerous. Thanks to the Dems and the GOP elite, both in bed with the war industrialists, we have a military so light and fast that it can destroy anything. What we don’t have is a competent diplomatic corps, a wise or truthful government, or any clue what the hell we are doing. How many countries do we have to destroy and leave destroyed for decades to come before we come to our senses?

Trump needs to push Clinton on her plans for Syria, and ask whether the rumor of a planned January 2017 war against Assad is correct. He needs to press her on her plans for further expansion of NATO. He needs to demand to know what weaponry has been shipped to Ukraine and what training we are providing. He needs to ask if the US military or NATO military are advising Ukraine on its military provocations against Russia. He needs to expose all the corrupt ties between certain Democrats and the Ukrainian US-imposed regime. These are all critical matters and the Psychopathic Liar should not be allowed to skate without warning us what she has up her sleeve.


More drama and excitement than I can bear

It sure is looking difficult for Hillary Clinton to make even the Democrats love her. As far as I can discern, the spine of her fandom is the forever spinster female clump worried about pretty much everything and looking for a safe space with the Queen of Corruption. Go figure. But an awful lot of the increasingly powerful far-left base of the Democrat party hate Hillary Clinton as much as we of the center-right do. I think they’d rather eat horse poop than vote for the self-righteous and vicious Mrs. Clinton, who would stop at nothing to be president of this US of A. (Aside: how much do you think each Clinton thigh is weighing in at that it requires  thousands of dollars of fabric to cover?)

I don’t think this means the left will vote Trump. But some of the more determined, discerning and delinquent of the Dems will vote for Trump, seeing his victory as the only way to bring down the Clinton/Obama machines and open the way for the real socialists, The People. (See Sarandon, Susan.) Many others will stay home or vote for an acceptable ideological alternative, such as Jill Stein. Jill not Hill. The not-Hillary votes hurt Hillary even if they don’t directly help Trump. (And by the way, same holds true for the Northeast Republicans and Trump.)

It’s clear to me that the Democrat party is about to morph into an official socialist party. It isn’t going to happen under Hillary Clinton, who is owned by Wall Street and big finance. As long as the base of that party follows the official script, there will be no change in direction or philosophy. But a defeat in this election engineered by the far left of the party base pretty much guarantees that they will take control. The Clintons know this too. (The Obamas, sly scoundrels, will make themselves icons of this movement. Move over, Sanders.)

To the rebels in the Democrat camp: take a gander at the stuffy old GOP and learn something. Rise up. Punish your party by voting the corrupt oligarchy controlling it out of power, giving YOU a chance to organize and overthrow. Pull out both your Alinksy and Lenin dicta (oops! which is which?) and hone your skills. I’m sure that sooner rather than later you are going to eviscerate the Clinton machine and replace it with that of The People.

Trump is holding firm on his maverick foreign policy stance, in defiance of every hawk and participating member of the military-industrial complex, headquartered in Virginia. (Is it any surprise Virginia is pro-Clinton?) I like it. He can’t be prodded into supporting the gung-ho, get-Russia, rah-rah patriotism of the people enriched from the money generated in US/NATO military adventurism. And he has support from the men and women actually fighting and dying in our endless wars. In that vein, I note that this is another Wall Street Journal obsession: Trump’s challenging of the trans-Atlantic mythology embodied in NATO. The latest idiocy — arising from the very assumption that American voters are nincompoops — is the charge from the corrupt Hillary camp (among which I count the Wall Street Journal) that the Russians are helping Trump by releasing stolen DNC emails that allow American voters see how stinkingly corrupt the Democrat party has become during the Clinton-Obama years. The Dems’ aim is to deflect people from contemplating the rot inside the DNC in favor of quivering at the prospect of a Russia so omnipotent that it has stolen sacred (dirty) information and is now using it to help (gasp) Donald Trump.

And moving to Trump. His press conference on Wednesday was a huge (yuuuuuge) hit. I couldn’t believe it. I was humbled. I thought Trump was a bozo. I was so wrong.

He took Hillary Clinton by the throat and shook her good, like a Jack Russell terrier with a rat. He answered — I mean, ANSWERED, all the questions put by a hostile press. That included those emanating from Katie Couric who has segued in old age from America’s Sweetheart to Extremely Plain But Powerful and Intelligent Reporter Rooting for The People.  We were allowed the spectacle of one in-the-tank reporter after another urging Trump to admit that Putin was intervening on his behalf. Trump never “moved on” from or “evaded” the questions. He answered. No interests in Russia. No contacts with Putin. But he is open to collaborating with Russia to defeat ISIS. ISIS. An acronym the DNC couldn’t pronounce until Trump ridiculed their lapse. (And Hillary prefers the highly deceitful name “radical jihad” — as if there is a moderate Holy War? She still can’t force herself to implicate Islam in the bloodshed and madness that is engulfing us all.)

I especially liked Trump’s demand that the obedient left-wing press ask that Hillary do likewise and take all the hard questions and provide answers, too. It was a very good touché to the self-righteous and boringly One Think journalists who tried to change the focus from a dirty DNC to Putin. It doesn’t work. The average American can’t get past Putin as a kind of Windows Icon for villainy. What they know is that plotting to undo somebody because he’s a Jew is pretty anti-Semitic. And that doesn’t even take into account the Taco Bell comment. Que pendejo.

I thought Trump wouldn’t pivot. I worried about his grasp. But his grasp of the American spirit of discontent is better than mine. We are all sick of being spun and misled and lied to. We are tired of being taken for granted and counted by what is between our legs or the color of our skin or our party affiliation. We want an end to this suffocation by government bureaucracy and Saul Alinsky.

Trump isn’t a Republican. I like that. I am not a Republican anymore either. But we took what was becoming a useless political appendage, and hopefully we can turn this movement into a viable political entity.

God willing.

 

 


US Foreign Policy: A Cry for Help

I’ve been working on a piece on domestic political inanity, but am taking a detour to comment on the latest news from DC regarding Russia. Whatever happens at home doesn’t matter if it doesn’t affect what is happening abroad, where we have lost our marbles. The only politician making sense on foreign policy at present is Rand Paul. All the rest, and Mrs. Clinton in first place, are macho posturers who think they can still push other major powers around with impunity and that not threatening Russia in its own backyard is weakness. What has set me off this time is the announcement that the White House is considering getting even tougher on Russia to make sure it behaves itself in Europe. To justify the action, NATO asserts some non-existent Russian threat to NATO countries on NATO’s “far eastern” fringe. There is nothing to suggest this, of course, but that’s the glory of propaganda: a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.

The newly-imagined NATO militarization program involves upgrading all the regional armies (magnificent arms sales!), and even stationing missiles. We have already sent military advisers and military hardware to Ukraine, a country not a member of NATO that is sinking under the waves of ineptitude and division, and rumor is rife that the US is funding a mercenary army for Ukraine to fight against Russia and Russia’s own proxy army in eastern Ukraine. NATO also declared one of its new missions (and apparently newly discovered authorities) is to weed out corrupt governments in Europe. I have already watched with amazement the replacing of Ukrainian government officials with foreigners, no matter what the public wants — whose hand is behind this incredibly disrespectful attitude to national interests, do you think? The One World’ers, the ones now declaring the right to weed out somebody else’s government, anywhere in Europe. And how does the weeding out occur? Through Color Revolutions? Pre-planned and deliberate disruptions of public order to achieve a much larger goal? Violent ousters of the “corrupt government”? Is weeding out anything like what we did in Syria? Could Hungary be in for some weeding out, and the Czech Republic, too? The Hungarian prime minister is a pragmatic man who prizes Hungarian independence; even under the Soviet regime Hungary was known to be rather independent in its economic dealings with the west. Now the Hungarian president is being told by the US/EU what to do in both foreign and trade policy. It rubs the wrong way. And the Czech president has banned the US ambassador in Prague from ever going to the presidential palace after the latter insulted the former by telling him what to do vis-à-vis Russia. Sounds like corruption to me.

Before my patriotic readers cheer on US provocations in eastern Europe, consider this: the last time we tried putting missiles in Europe, we had a huge anti-war movement in all the west European countries. Nobody wants to be in the missile cross-hairs of the Russians, and certainly not on behalf of the Poles, who just hate the Russians on principle, or the Latvians with their neo-Nazi sympathies. And they would be in those cross-hairs if the Americans put missiles in their backyards. Many western and even eastern Europeans also reject the US rationale that it is only making Europe safer. Most people in western Europe don’t care what happens to Ukraine unless it involves a lot of refugees, but so far the refugees are going almost exclusively to Russia. Anybody with even one eye in his head can see that all the military armament over a twenty some year period has been flowing eastward, not westward. It was flowing eastward when Russia was barely able to keep its Army together. Pull out a map and look at foreign military bases belonging to the US and Russia. And yet it is obvious that Russia would never attack NATO short of a NATO attack on Russia. What’s the real goal of all this? Containment, disarming, “weeding out.”

I read an article today that warned that we have entered a New Cold War period. I shot back that the commentator should get serious, it isn’t a Cold War, it is the prelude to WWIII. Many west European commentators, including Le Pen in France and Farage in UK, are increasingly worried by the militant US position on relations with Russia and object to it. They blame NATO and EU actions for ushering in the opening phase of WWIII. This is a nuclear war we are discussing and people are beginning to sit up and take notice. As one west European recently wrote, if the US is reverting to its expansionist era, then the Europeans have a right to know of the new policy and adjust their own accordingly. Vladimir Putin has already ridiculed US plans, asserting that “only in a madman’s dream would Russia attack NATO.”

All of what we have been seeing in the development of a policy of confrontation with Russia coincides with the unfolding of the new and bigger US propaganda effort led by Cold War hounds Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty and Voice of America. The US government was concerned about the burgeoning success around the world of Russia Today, a Russian state-controlled news outlet. I myself read and watch it on-line, not only for news on Russia, which is predictably skewed, but for news on my own country. You can always bank on finding the bad news stories that have been spiked in the US press, and they are all one hundred percent true. That’s why others read it, too — to hear the other side of the story, and the things their own governments are hiding. Really, who would have thought that one day propaganda would have a use?

In the past, of course, such propaganda would have been only for purveyance to the ignorant world and prohibited for distribution within the US, lest the American citizen also be influenced by untruths. Nowadays, there is no exemption from propaganda for the supposedly naive world or the US citizen. One of the clearest examples was the recent performance of our Ms. Potato Head press spokesperson at the US State Department. Despite OSCE monitoring reports showing that there are equal numbers of Minsk agreement violations in Ukraine by each side, Marie Harf insisted that “we know” that the “vast majority” of the incidents were by the “Russian-backed rebels” and only “a tiny minority” by Kiev’s forces. She absolutely refused to acknowledge the facts as reported by the European monitors and instead spread blatant disinformation. She briefly tried to justify any violations, however few, by Kiev by asserting that Kiev was fighting to defend its country and thus was morally right. She was forced back to issue by a Russia Today reporter, who put her down deftly with a little dig on US moral superiority, but the reporter got nothing for her efforts. Harf wasn’t budging and that’s that. Harf can follow simple instructions, like “deny deny, deny.”

In any case, here’s what I think. I think that the Russian propaganda and disinformation system is now ramping up to meet the US ramp-up; I think that Russians will meet any placement of US missiles in Ukraine and Eastern Europe by putting nuclear weapons in Kalingrad and Crimea and targeting them on European capitals and economic regions. They are also rapidly developing their own advanced anti-missile missile system. I predict a rebirth of the anti-war protest movement in Europe, where the left is already geared up for their usual anti-G7 antics. The addition of the more reputable anti-war elements will significantly raise the pressures on governments. Tensions within NATO between those looking for accommodation of Russian national interests and those determined to screw Russia will likely be exacerbated by growing tension between east and west. Chafing at the imposition of US interests over those of Europe will not help tempers.

I also predict that if there is not a serious reconsideration of the growing militarization of our foreign policy, we are looking WWIII in the face. At these close quarters, with the US pushing into Russia’s front door, accidents happen. And sometimes others provoke accidents for their own stupidly short-sighted purposes.

And I didn’t even mention our similar provocations of China, or the emerging Sino-Russian military cooperation and coordination of positions. The multi-polar world has emerged full-blown. No longer that stable bi-polar world, or the incredibly heady days of unipolar power for America, but one where powerful nations are asserting their rightful position in global decision-making. We need to recalibrate. We need to rediscover diplomacy.

 


Not a Pretty Picture

I could be referring to so many things: excess plastic surgery; gross obesity and death-camp “svelte;” Boy George; Hillary Clinton.

I saw today in the National Enquirer that Hillary is a “confirmed” lesbian and travels with girlfriends including The Hoom aka Huma Abedin. Scoff if you will, but the National Enquirer is one of the most accurate gossip magazines in the US and always scoops the others on big news. It used to be far less reliable until Carol Burnett sued the pants off the gossip rag. Ever since then, if something scary and utterly bizarre, like Bruce Jenner turning into a hideous woman, has appeared in National Enquirer, it inevitably ends up on the mainstream front pages. In fact, Politico.com is running a series of photos of the two women together with the title, “how close are Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton?” Nothing at all racy in the photos, but that question made me wonder if they, too, were insinuating something. In fact, a search of the internet shows this to be the topic du jour. But to quote some shrill harridan, “what difference does it make?” I’m going to make a giant assumption that Hillary’s alleged sexual appetites won’t turn off her fans in the almost entirely Democrat lesbian community or among the generally de-sexualized or over-sexualized and certainly anal retentive left.

On the other hand, surely she’s about to be given the hook and hauled off to prison for:

a) hiding subpoenaed records in her own personal closet forever before being outed by a female assistant who obviously was not taken by Mrs. Clinton’s charms;

b) successfully defending a pedophile rapist in her first idealistic youth and then gloating  about what a cake walk it was;

c) lying to her superiors on the Watergate Committee while trying to remove Richard Nixon from the Presidency for lying;

d) profiting knowingly from narcotics activity and drug-money laundering, in Arkansas and beyond;

e) corrupt trading;

e) wiping out four years of official U. S. Government records concerning the affairs of the United States Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in clear violation of the law, and after those communications had been subpoenaed by Congress;

f) all of the above and much, much more.

It doesn’t look that way. It appears that Mrs. Clinton is waaaaay above the law, up there with her husband and Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi and that verminous weasel Harry Reid (The Good Mormon). I’m still counting on Trey Gowdy to be the outstanding prosecutor he is and zap her on the feloniously deleted government records. I sense a kindred spirit there.

The exterminator came by today, waging the endless battle against Florida insects. This guy and I always chat about politics. He’s what I consider a true centrist, a stubborn guy who likes to consider things and make up his own mind. He said Rand Paul, my favorite, will never get elected by the Republicans and my broken heart and I agree he is probably right. He wondered what I thought about Hillary’s chances of getting the nomination. I said it looked that way, but one never knows. One lefty chiropractor acquaintance with whom the Bug Guy engages in barter trade (“roaches for realignment”) had said he was voting for Hillary, who was just what the country needed, a woman. It was her right to be president as a woman. The exterminator asked him if that meant that using sex as a criterion was good or bad, or if it maybe was only good when it served your larger interest and not that of the other guy? Good one, I offered. Of course it didn’t sway the argument. The same guy thought Obama had a right to be president because he was black. Not honorable, uncorrupted, knowledgeable and fair-minded, not even a demonstrable US-born citizen, but black. Same for Hillary. Who cares if she’s an unindicted felon?! What’s the difference?

Now we hear that Mrs. Clinton, her morally lax husband, their homely daughter, and IN PARTICULAR their very own money-making Foundation are going to continue taking foreign donations. Hell, no, they’re not killing the golden goose. Those Foundation funds are beautifully easy to expunge after they accidentally get commingled with those of the Hillary campaign. It’s entirely possible that all records could disappear. The Clintons threw the public a crumb, agreeing to say a polite “no more, for now” to the Saudis and to everybody but a small number of very rich countries, some of them actually Socialists, as is Mrs. Clinton. I’m impressed, aren’t you? The only good thing is Norway’s income is way down with the falling oil prices. They won’t have so much  money to funnel to her via the Foundation. (The wife of a Norwegian military official once told me the rest of the world ought to get to vote in US elections since the US told everybody else what to do. I’m sure she would send in her five euros.)

The Republican field is pretty good aside from their uniformly bellicose foreign policy. (Well, we can’t yet throw in Rand Paul.) They all spout the usual nonsense about carrying the flag for civilization, democracy, freedom, and Niceness. The problem is the “little” wars are multiplying and the Big War, the One that is really going to End All Wars, threatens on multiple fronts. The deeper we involve ourselves in other peoples’ wars, the more impossible it is to withdraw. And needless to say, the money and power interests get bigger and fatter, too, feeding on all this endless conflict. The old military-industrial complex that Eisenhower spoke of. (If you live in the DC area you’ll get it — the place has burgeoned and grown like a tick off the taxpayers’ blood. Every retired General has at least an office there and increasingly the metropolitan population lives off the government.)

As for the GOP candidates’ domestic platforms, I am still waiting to hear what those are. Nobody seems to be making Obamacare much of an issue. I do applaud the House repeal of the estate tax, let’s hope the Senate acts quickly so we can all enjoy another self-righteous bit of blather from The Empty Suit about “fairness” (highway robbery) as he vetoes the bill.

One last word on another picture that’s not so pretty, this one the latest blast of Cold War hysterics from the US Pentagon: our military leaders have expressed to the Russians and the world their indignation that the Russians acted dangerously and provocatively and aggressively when US spy planes were flying “in the Baltic” in international waters. What isn’t stated is that the US spy planes were spying on Russia along its adjacent border, as we assume we aren’t spying on Latvia. NATO considers Russia to be rude in telling NATO jets unambiguously to buzz off. But here’s a question: when Russia is, say, steaming through the English channel en route to its own war games in the North Atlantic, a la NATO in the Black Sea, why do NATO and its leading member-state hawks fan the flames of hysteria and portray Russia’s passage as threatening? If it is truly threatening, then just think how Russia feels about US spy  planes, sent from half a world away, patrolling its borders. Threat or no threat?

 

 

 

 


Barack Hussein Obama: President, Peace Prize Recipient, and Assassin

pope prays“This evening, I ask the Lord that we Christians, and our brothers and sisters  of other religions and every man and woman of good will, cry out forcefully:  Violence and war are never the way to peace!” 

So spoke Pope Francis in calling on the world to step back from the brink of war in Syria to which we in the US and the world are being dragged, kicking and screaming, by US president Barack Hussein Obama. This fabricated man rode a wave of anti-war sentiment into the presidency and has maimed, killed and destroyed in other people’s countries on a steady basis ever since. Today the global assassin with the Peace Prize is about to embark on another killing spree and how ironic that many on the left, those professional anti-war protestors, remain silent. I don’t even bat an eye when The Lennie Riefenstahl Brigade pushes the State line, dupes like Chris Matthews and Ed Shultz. Liar is their name, propaganda is their game. But pray tell — where is Cindy Sheehan? Where is Code Pink? Where are the Occupy Wall Street loonies? Same place they were when Obama and Hillary Clinton bombed Libya and murdered Qaddafi by proxy; same place they were when they empowered the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt; same place they were when the bombs rained down on Serbia for three months. Staring in their mirrors in silent admiration, I’d guess. I hear that the homely Mrs. Clinton is going to visit the White House today to egg Mr. Obama on. Two war-mongers chatting over tea. Please pass the polonium, somebody, please!

If the left has lost its voice, we on the right have found our own. This confounds America’s radicals who can muster no argument to justify Obama’s incessant reliance on force to show off his power, but whine instead that the right wing’s opposition is somehow illegitimate because they supposedly never saw a war they didn’t like.  I’d put that differently: the right-wing has always before felt obligated to support their president, even in all the wars begun by the Democrats. That would be WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and in what the current president told us all was his war: Afghanistan, where now the Obama regime is making kissy-face with the Taliban who murdered 3000 Americans in mere minutes. The conservatives were far less accommodating when GW Bush blundered into Iraq at the advice of men who wanted to do what the President’s father would not, remove Saddam Hussein. In the end Americans’ disgust with the carnage and lack of coherence delivered a crushing blow to the GOP and ushered in the current Empty Suit, who spends at least several hours a day scuffing his shoes all over the historic furnishings at the White House to make his view of this country clear. We weren’t all that keen on Libya, either, and I hope that my fellow conservatives were as repelled as I was at the sight of America’s proxy forces executing Qaddafi while he was on his knees pleading for mercy. Then came Benghazi, which the regime in DC refused and still refuses to admit was just a half-assed and criminally negligent operation intended to deepen our involvement in Syria.

And where were the morally superior leftists when Obama boasted of choosing targets for assassination by playing with a special deck of cards made just for him, as apparently everything is just a game to him anyway? Silent is where they were. That is not morality, it is called cowardice, duplicity, hypocrisy and aiding and abetting. And all those traits are in full view today, as many of the president’s most fervent admirers hold their famous tongues about the evils of war-mongering. They still don’t get it: regime change is thoroughly illegal, even if we wish some external force (perhaps extra-terrestrials?) would swoop down and effect regime change in the US. It is also the worst possible rationale for war and we have had ample opportunity to see how poorly it works over the long-term.

I’m afraid that the US under the Democrats have treated other countries they way they treat people who don’t agree with them here at home: with contempt, lies, and violence. Our US bombers are playing the role of SEIU thugs beating up Tea Party’ers, or USG agencies persecuting “domestic enemies,” or black people waging race war at the implicit urging of their president and attorney general. The Democrats have treated Russia with sneering contempt while pretending to want only the best for the Russian people, and that might be because the Russian people decided to jettison the Democrats’ favorite system of oppression, communism. Unfortunately for our armchair Marxists, Russia today looks sane and sensible and our own country looks brutal and stupid and false.

Catholic nuns who left the safety of Italy to work in Syria for people of all faiths have spoken loud and clear to the world, crying out against America’s urge to war. In addition to the moving and beautiful and painful things they wrote, they cited the words of a psalm that sadly refers to America:

Rebuke the Beast of the Reeds, that herd of bulls, that people of calves. Oh God, scatter the people who delight in war. The Lord has leaned down from the heights of his sanctuary, has looked down from heaven to earth to listen to the sighing of the captive, and set free those condemned to death. Listen, God, to my voice as I plead, protect my life from fear of the enemy; hide me from the league of the wicked, from the gang of evil-doers. They sharpen their tongues like a sword, aim their arrow of poisonous abuse. They support each other in their evil designs, they discuss how to lay their snares. “Who will see us?” they say. He will do that, he who penetrates human nature to its depths, the depths of the heart. Break into song for my God, to the tambourine, sing in honor of the Lord, to the cymbal, let psalm and canticle mingle for him, extol his name, invoke it. For the Lord is a God who breaks battle-lines! . Lord, you are great, you are glorious, wonderfully strong, unconquerable.

If only our president believed in God, instead of believing he is God, perhaps those words would have the power to move him. May his actions call down on his head what he deserves.

 

 

 

 

 


We, Robots

God is with Us

God is with Us

The Wall Street Journal today carries an article by Maj. Gen. Robert Latiff and Patrick J. McCloskey on drone warfare, or more accurately, robot warfare, that should be obligatory reading for every thinking American. It raises some of the concerns I have expressed in past blogs about the use of drones, at home and abroad, but adds fodder for more worry with the warning that we are moving toward a world in which the robots will choose what and whom to destroy, with little or no human input.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324128504578346333246145590.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

massed militaryI remember when I was still sitting behind a desk in the State Department, in the Bureau of Political and Military Affairs.  It was the 1990s and the great debate in the military at that time was small and fast or big and slow. Briefly, it was a debate between the advantages of a smaller, more mobile military force that could be moved around rapidly in response to threat development, versus those of a larger, better-equipped, more numerous force that was slower moving, but able to do the job more thoroughly. That debate was finally hashed out in Iraq, where the small and fast school of thought championed by such men as General Eric Shinseki won, leading to the disastrous pillaging and bloodshed in the post-invasion period when we had too few men and too little equipment to do all the jobs that needed to be done.

At the time of this debate, pre-Iraq, I had serious doubts about small and fast. The Pentagon had plenty of arguments to support one view or the other, but proponents were arguing (quite rightly) the military merits of their positions. I, on the other hand, was the political part of Pol-Mil and I looked at things through a different prism. I argued with anybody interested in listening (not many) that the fast part was inherently pernicious because it would present politicians with an almost irresistible temptation to deploy its military too often and carelessly to achieve short-term fixes to long-term and complex problems. Big and slow forced decision-makers to consider the costs of proposed actions and gave time for serious debate. Small and fast precluded all of that. What politician, save the rare statesman, can resist the splashy victory, the bragging rights, the short surge in poll numbers, the feeling of being the toughest guy on the block? In short, I argued, the relatively easy use of force would inevitably lead to an abuse by politicians of our military might that over time would erode the prestige of the US and its honor without commensurate payoffs. I would contend that the United States reached that point some few years ago.

Arobot warriorsnd now, as the authors of the WSJ article point out, we have arrived at the age of The Robot Warrior. Now not only can we wage war (by any name we choose to call it) small and fast, we have actually reduced the use of force to its easiest and least risky form, war-making that requires little beyond the investment in research and development. Furthermore, robots are relatively cheap, much less expensive than human beings, and are thus all the more attractive. Robot warriors are the ideal solution for a country in economic decline, but still bound and determined to have its fingers in everybody else’s pies. Here is an excerpt from the authors’ vision of the future:

These machines will bring many benefits, greatly increasing battle reach and efficiency while eliminating the risk to human soldiers. If a drone gets shot down, there’s no grieving family to console back home. Politicians will appreciate the waning of antiwar protests, too…The problem is that robotic weapons eventually will make kill decisions on the battlefield with no more than a veneer of human control. Full lethal autonomy is  no mere next step in military strategy: It will be the crossing of a moral Rubicon. Ceding godlike powers to robots reduces human beings to things with no more intrinsic value than any object.

I don’t have any hope that the men and women who make our national security decisions, whether the president or the most junior member of Congress, will reconsider what we are doing and where we are leading the world. I don’t expect a correction of course, and no doubt it is already too late to change this country’s trajectory or try to put the genie back into the bottle. We are addicted to the use of force and to the unlimited exercise of power. We will continue to batten on the misery of other nations, brought to them by our small, fast and inexpensive robot forces, until such time as we are stopped in our tracks.

We created nuclear weapons because they could be created and they could be used and they could give us a quick solution to what was genuinely a terrible problem that was inarguably our own. The nuclear threat was a good solution while it lasted, and it lasted a lot longer than anything lasts in our modern world, but eventually the dike burst. Today we watch impotently as the world’s most erratic, unstable countries join the growing list of those that are already stockpiling nuclear weapons or are rushing to create them. Similarly, and without any sign that we learned the lessons of history, we created robot warriors because they could be created and they could be useful and they could give us quick solutions to problems. Unfortunately, we now use our deadly machines to solve problems that are not ours at all and that would better addressed through other means. But launching the machines is so easy to do and the mayhem they cause is such an immediate gratification that we are as likely to refrain from our next strike as the heroin addict is to kick the monkey off his back.

captured droneTaking into consideration the various lunatics who have the nuclear button at their fingertips, I think it’s a pretty good bet that sooner rather than later one of them is going to launch against a perceived enemy. But before we see the mushroom cloud, it’s another good bet that any number of countries ill-disposed to us will have reproduced our robot technology, thus dramatically reducing the risks and costs of waging war. My only question is: who will launch their deadly drones against us first — Iran, North Korea, China or the US government?

Not a joke, no matter what Lindsey Graham believes.