Yawp! Help!!
Does anyone know what’s going on in this country, and if so, can they please explain it to me?
I’m speaking specifically about the apparent vacuum of leadership that has replaced “change we can count on.” I haven’t counted on the government for anything since I was a pup, but today’s headlines are rushing past with a speed that makes me want to reach for the duct tape to keep my head from exploding. Double doses of Zantac™ are doing nothing to calm my stomach as I try to figure things out. My troubling gift of disparate prescience is playing hell with my perceptions of reality; in other words, I can’t believe what I’m seeing.
Let’s start a few years back, and take some liberal assumptions into consideration.
Okay, assumption Number One: the war in Iraq was a bad idea. It was undertaken for noble motives; to liberate an oppressed people. It was commenced in the heat of the moment following the horror of 9/11.
America has liberated millions of oppressed people, and oppressed very few in return. Our track record wasn’t always the best, but we did more good than harm. 9/11 was another Pearl Harbor; even more malign than the bumbled Japanese scheme to establish hegemony in the Far East. I’m conversant with the conspiracy theories that FDR let that attack happen so we could be drawn into War II. It has been postulated that the Iraq war was payback for Saddam Hussein’s putting a bounty on Bush 41’s head after Desert Storm rescued Kuwait. For the sake of liberal argument, let’s say that was a tacit motivation for cranking up the American war machine.
The jury’s still out on our nation-building experiment in the aftermath of Operation Iraqi Freedom. There have been high and low points. At the very least, we have a sizeable strategic force pre-deployed on the western border of Iran for the fourth war in the Middle East. I think we spent too much “blood and treasure” for too little return—although watching Saddam take the drop like a common thief was cathartic, and the world is a better place without him.
During the insurgent reaction to our liberation of Iraq, there were a number of “jihadist warriors” who traveled there to become “glorious martyrs to Allah” and repel the “crusaders.” If you look at a bar graph of Middle Eastern countries identified as providing suicidal terrorists to oppose our troops in the field, the longest bar belongs to Libya. They take their Holy War seriously in Kadaffy-duck’s caliphate.
Can someone please explain to me why we are now re-arming Al Qaeda? These people are our sworn enemies; if you don’t believe me, just ask them. There are “flickerings” in the intelligence community that the myrmidons of the Arab League flashing peace signs and shouting about “democracy” are about nothing more than establishing the global caliphate. We armed jihadists in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation at the end of the Cold War; one of those we armed and trained was a fellow named Osama Bin Laden. I think we know how that turned out in the long run.
America is an exceptional nation. (Someone took a poll on this question recently; 87% of those participating agreed that we are unique in history.) Ever since the beginning of the last century, when the lights start going out in the world, and things are at their worst, people look to America to step in and solve the problem.
However, no matter how many times we cast ourselves in the role, we are not the world’s policeman. We are not the moral arbiters of sovereign nations beyond our own, nor do we practice a theological superiority over others. Our position of leadership is based upon setting the best example, not upon imposing the will of kings on those less powerful than us.
I don’t know if it’s being the devil’s advocate on liberal perspectives to point it out, but there is a lesson from our Iraq adventure that cannot be ignored: we cannot interject our way of life into feudal, tribal societies and expect a positive outcome. The nations of the Middle East are based upon 16th century theology, tribal territorialism, and cargo-cult expectations. Sure, they have skyscrapers, computers, and the most modern conveniences, but where did they come from? Besides the oil they were sitting on for generations until the nations of the West uncovered it, what do these nations in turmoil have to offer? Putting it in the hip vernacular, what have they done for us lately?
One last liberal assumption: Bush 43 lied to us about the WMD threat in Iraq. I don’t believe it for a second; the intelligence services of France, Great Britain, Russia, and our own CIA all agreed there was something there. If Saddam was being scammed by his own people, who might have told him they were building a viable nuclear program while skimming millions to their own bank accounts, then they did a dandy job. (I think we ought to be digging up the Syrian desert just across the border, and waterboarding some folks named Assad, but, that’s just me…)
Be that as it may, there was a rationale for invading Iraq; one based on the stipulation of the War Powers Act that specifies we may only act with unilateral military force when there is an imminent threat to our national security. George W. made his case to the United Nations; more importantly, he went to Congress for approval of his “cowboy” actions before they were undertaken. The Constitution has been gutted, and congressional power ceded, since FDR became the last president to request a declaration of war from Congress. Still, Bush made a token attempt to comply with the law, and there appeared to be a threat of international proportions with regard to the WMD. There was an arguable case to be made that Saddam’s Iraq posed a clear and present danger to Israel, America, and his own people.
Okay, so taking the liberal, peacenik point of view, invading Iraq wasn’t such a good idea. I don’t think we got too much return on the investment, and two seconds after our last troops leave the country, tribal war will break out anew, and Iran will occupy the oil fields that liberal propaganda postulated were our sole motivation for the war.
One of the unforeseen consequences of our invasion of Iraq was that we scared the crap out of Moamar Qadaffi, and like the French, he surrendered at the first saber rattle. He renounced state-sponsored terrorism, abandoned his nuclear development program, and generally tried to rejoin the civilized nations of the world. He took steps to become one of “our” dictators, instead of one of “their” dictators we opposed so vigorously during World War III; the Cold War.
Like it or not, Libya is a sovereign nation. Yes, they have been ruled for 40 years by a nutcase who has sheltered terrorists, been implicated in bombings and hundreds of deaths abroad, and rules his pirate’s roost with ruthless abandon. I actually agree with Osama Bamalama in principle: Qadaffi must go.
And here I fall out of synch with the power vacuum in the White House. Our president has chosen sides in another country’s civil war. He has stated publicly that “regime change” is not the goal of our intervention in that country’s affairs, but he mixes the message by saying “Qadaffi must go.” Go where? Then he gives over leadership of whatever “humanitarian effort” he claims to support, relying on the bureaucratic largesse of the UN, and the leadership of the cheese-eating surrender monkeys of France to establish a “no-fly” zone. Citing a “moral obligation” to prevent “genocide,” he throws the weight and military power of the United States behind a collection of questionable characters who may be planning worse purges than the madman currently occupying the palace in Tripoli, should they gain power.
Meanwhile, he completely ignores Congress in favor of the nebulous Arab League, dissembles on TV, and outright lies about “boots on the ground” while CIA negotiates with whatever rabble is wandering around the Qattara Depression. Anyone who watches the Military Channel for 30 minutes knows “FAC” means “Forward Air Controller.” When you see all that dynamic footage of Libyan tanks going “BOOM!” who do you think is on the ground painting those targets with laser designators so those smart JDAMS can turn them into rubble? (Hint: it ain’t that disorganized “rebel rabble” clogging the roads with their “technicals” [AAA gun trucks] and spouting rhetoric at the CNN and FOX reporters.) And by the way, has anyone seen a tank fly lately? What does a $550 million “no-fly” zone have to do with ground-pounders?
And also by the way, that F-15 that went down in Libya last week costs $60 million a copy. Your tax dollars at work; at least the crew was rescued.
I guess King Bobama can do whatever he wants, and damn what we think about it. I developed my political consciousness during the Nixon era, and agreed with Hunter S. Thompson that Nixon tried to steal the Constitution, mistakenly thinking it was stored in the DNC HQ at the Watergate hotel. I’ve since become horribly jaded and cynical about what our supreme political leadership is capable of.
Let me go completely melodramatic and rhetorical for a moment. When the class warfare in Wisconsin and Ohio becomes a national crisis, and people start dying in the streets, do you want the Canadians or the Mexicans to intervene with their armed forces for “humanitarian” reasons? Do you want the French Foreign Legion patrolling our streets, or the RAF bombing our National Guard units as they try to restore order?
Like it or not, that is the situation in Libya. If Kadaffy-duck can re-establish his strongman power for a few more years, then we’ll have to deal with it, and him. If the rebels somehow manage to quit wasting ammunition and overcome the entrenched ruling powers, then we’ll have to hope they mean half of what they’re saying about “democracy.” [And never forget, “democracy” in its purest form is just mob rule, i.e. a lynch mob.]
Someone remarked the other day that Bobama has dropped more bombs than any other Nobel Peace Prize winner. I fell out laughing. Gitmo remains open, there was no recantation of the surge in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan continues apace, and now we have wandered into a third war, this time supporting Muslim partisans.
The fourth war is coming, and in the immortal words of Fred Sanford, this is going to be “the big one, Elizabeth!” We are going to have to fight Iran, and it’s going to be nuclear. Destroying our economy and dispersing our armed forces is a key part of The Manchurian Candidate’s agenda, but it may not have succeeded entirely.
I’m speaking specifically about the apparent vacuum of leadership that has replaced “change we can count on.” I haven’t counted on the government for anything since I was a pup, but today’s headlines are rushing past with a speed that makes me want to reach for the duct tape to keep my head from exploding. Double doses of Zantac™ are doing nothing to calm my stomach as I try to figure things out. My troubling gift of disparate prescience is playing hell with my perceptions of reality; in other words, I can’t believe what I’m seeing.
Let’s start a few years back, and take some liberal assumptions into consideration.
Okay, assumption Number One: the war in Iraq was a bad idea. It was undertaken for noble motives; to liberate an oppressed people. It was commenced in the heat of the moment following the horror of 9/11.
America has liberated millions of oppressed people, and oppressed very few in return. Our track record wasn’t always the best, but we did more good than harm. 9/11 was another Pearl Harbor; even more malign than the bumbled Japanese scheme to establish hegemony in the Far East. I’m conversant with the conspiracy theories that FDR let that attack happen so we could be drawn into War II. It has been postulated that the Iraq war was payback for Saddam Hussein’s putting a bounty on Bush 41’s head after Desert Storm rescued Kuwait. For the sake of liberal argument, let’s say that was a tacit motivation for cranking up the American war machine.
The jury’s still out on our nation-building experiment in the aftermath of Operation Iraqi Freedom. There have been high and low points. At the very least, we have a sizeable strategic force pre-deployed on the western border of Iran for the fourth war in the Middle East. I think we spent too much “blood and treasure” for too little return—although watching Saddam take the drop like a common thief was cathartic, and the world is a better place without him.
During the insurgent reaction to our liberation of Iraq, there were a number of “jihadist warriors” who traveled there to become “glorious martyrs to Allah” and repel the “crusaders.” If you look at a bar graph of Middle Eastern countries identified as providing suicidal terrorists to oppose our troops in the field, the longest bar belongs to Libya. They take their Holy War seriously in Kadaffy-duck’s caliphate.
Can someone please explain to me why we are now re-arming Al Qaeda? These people are our sworn enemies; if you don’t believe me, just ask them. There are “flickerings” in the intelligence community that the myrmidons of the Arab League flashing peace signs and shouting about “democracy” are about nothing more than establishing the global caliphate. We armed jihadists in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation at the end of the Cold War; one of those we armed and trained was a fellow named Osama Bin Laden. I think we know how that turned out in the long run.
America is an exceptional nation. (Someone took a poll on this question recently; 87% of those participating agreed that we are unique in history.) Ever since the beginning of the last century, when the lights start going out in the world, and things are at their worst, people look to America to step in and solve the problem.
However, no matter how many times we cast ourselves in the role, we are not the world’s policeman. We are not the moral arbiters of sovereign nations beyond our own, nor do we practice a theological superiority over others. Our position of leadership is based upon setting the best example, not upon imposing the will of kings on those less powerful than us.
I don’t know if it’s being the devil’s advocate on liberal perspectives to point it out, but there is a lesson from our Iraq adventure that cannot be ignored: we cannot interject our way of life into feudal, tribal societies and expect a positive outcome. The nations of the Middle East are based upon 16th century theology, tribal territorialism, and cargo-cult expectations. Sure, they have skyscrapers, computers, and the most modern conveniences, but where did they come from? Besides the oil they were sitting on for generations until the nations of the West uncovered it, what do these nations in turmoil have to offer? Putting it in the hip vernacular, what have they done for us lately?
One last liberal assumption: Bush 43 lied to us about the WMD threat in Iraq. I don’t believe it for a second; the intelligence services of France, Great Britain, Russia, and our own CIA all agreed there was something there. If Saddam was being scammed by his own people, who might have told him they were building a viable nuclear program while skimming millions to their own bank accounts, then they did a dandy job. (I think we ought to be digging up the Syrian desert just across the border, and waterboarding some folks named Assad, but, that’s just me…)
Be that as it may, there was a rationale for invading Iraq; one based on the stipulation of the War Powers Act that specifies we may only act with unilateral military force when there is an imminent threat to our national security. George W. made his case to the United Nations; more importantly, he went to Congress for approval of his “cowboy” actions before they were undertaken. The Constitution has been gutted, and congressional power ceded, since FDR became the last president to request a declaration of war from Congress. Still, Bush made a token attempt to comply with the law, and there appeared to be a threat of international proportions with regard to the WMD. There was an arguable case to be made that Saddam’s Iraq posed a clear and present danger to Israel, America, and his own people.
Okay, so taking the liberal, peacenik point of view, invading Iraq wasn’t such a good idea. I don’t think we got too much return on the investment, and two seconds after our last troops leave the country, tribal war will break out anew, and Iran will occupy the oil fields that liberal propaganda postulated were our sole motivation for the war.
One of the unforeseen consequences of our invasion of Iraq was that we scared the crap out of Moamar Qadaffi, and like the French, he surrendered at the first saber rattle. He renounced state-sponsored terrorism, abandoned his nuclear development program, and generally tried to rejoin the civilized nations of the world. He took steps to become one of “our” dictators, instead of one of “their” dictators we opposed so vigorously during World War III; the Cold War.
Like it or not, Libya is a sovereign nation. Yes, they have been ruled for 40 years by a nutcase who has sheltered terrorists, been implicated in bombings and hundreds of deaths abroad, and rules his pirate’s roost with ruthless abandon. I actually agree with Osama Bamalama in principle: Qadaffi must go.
And here I fall out of synch with the power vacuum in the White House. Our president has chosen sides in another country’s civil war. He has stated publicly that “regime change” is not the goal of our intervention in that country’s affairs, but he mixes the message by saying “Qadaffi must go.” Go where? Then he gives over leadership of whatever “humanitarian effort” he claims to support, relying on the bureaucratic largesse of the UN, and the leadership of the cheese-eating surrender monkeys of France to establish a “no-fly” zone. Citing a “moral obligation” to prevent “genocide,” he throws the weight and military power of the United States behind a collection of questionable characters who may be planning worse purges than the madman currently occupying the palace in Tripoli, should they gain power.
Meanwhile, he completely ignores Congress in favor of the nebulous Arab League, dissembles on TV, and outright lies about “boots on the ground” while CIA negotiates with whatever rabble is wandering around the Qattara Depression. Anyone who watches the Military Channel for 30 minutes knows “FAC” means “Forward Air Controller.” When you see all that dynamic footage of Libyan tanks going “BOOM!” who do you think is on the ground painting those targets with laser designators so those smart JDAMS can turn them into rubble? (Hint: it ain’t that disorganized “rebel rabble” clogging the roads with their “technicals” [AAA gun trucks] and spouting rhetoric at the CNN and FOX reporters.) And by the way, has anyone seen a tank fly lately? What does a $550 million “no-fly” zone have to do with ground-pounders?
And also by the way, that F-15 that went down in Libya last week costs $60 million a copy. Your tax dollars at work; at least the crew was rescued.
I guess King Bobama can do whatever he wants, and damn what we think about it. I developed my political consciousness during the Nixon era, and agreed with Hunter S. Thompson that Nixon tried to steal the Constitution, mistakenly thinking it was stored in the DNC HQ at the Watergate hotel. I’ve since become horribly jaded and cynical about what our supreme political leadership is capable of.
Let me go completely melodramatic and rhetorical for a moment. When the class warfare in Wisconsin and Ohio becomes a national crisis, and people start dying in the streets, do you want the Canadians or the Mexicans to intervene with their armed forces for “humanitarian” reasons? Do you want the French Foreign Legion patrolling our streets, or the RAF bombing our National Guard units as they try to restore order?
Like it or not, that is the situation in Libya. If Kadaffy-duck can re-establish his strongman power for a few more years, then we’ll have to deal with it, and him. If the rebels somehow manage to quit wasting ammunition and overcome the entrenched ruling powers, then we’ll have to hope they mean half of what they’re saying about “democracy.” [And never forget, “democracy” in its purest form is just mob rule, i.e. a lynch mob.]
Someone remarked the other day that Bobama has dropped more bombs than any other Nobel Peace Prize winner. I fell out laughing. Gitmo remains open, there was no recantation of the surge in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan continues apace, and now we have wandered into a third war, this time supporting Muslim partisans.
The fourth war is coming, and in the immortal words of Fred Sanford, this is going to be “the big one, Elizabeth!” We are going to have to fight Iran, and it’s going to be nuclear. Destroying our economy and dispersing our armed forces is a key part of The Manchurian Candidate’s agenda, but it may not have succeeded entirely.
posted by Robert at 4:57 PM
7 Comments:
I'm sure you know about Obama's connection to Qaddafi...and what is so surprising about a guy named Hussein arming jihadis, anyway?
I waver between the concept of "hey, he's the Prez and criticizing him is a national pastime" and "Glen Beck is right"! Most of the time, I guess I see him as the most Leftist of Presidents, with the least actual experience for the job and I say, "What did you expect"?
Jack--I'll take that as sarcasm. I expect the worst these days, and I'm never disappointed. Surprised? Hell, I'm almost fully enrolled in the tin-foil-hat brigade. I see conspiracies within conspiracies, although my mental acuity slapped me around last night when I saw a commercial for a 2011 Ford, and couldn't remember what year this is. (I had a senior moment, and wondered if I've been writing "2010" on my checks.)
Beerme--I used to have a wonderful tee-shirt that said "Ignore Alien Orders." Questioning authority is as much a national pastime as baseball, and God help us if we ever cease to do so. From his Lincolnesque birth in a mud hut in Kenya, Bobama, like Willie the Zipper, has never worked a day in his life. Reiterating what I just said to Jack, I expect the worst, and I'm never disappointed.
I enjoy Mr. Beck's civics lessons, but he's preaching to the choir at The Possum Den. He's doing good work, but I fear for his safety. If I wasn't trapped in a wheelchair in Georgia, I'd float a prospectus at him regarding some serious security reviews and consultations. New York is tough, but I hope he has a carry license.
We're fortunate that most potential assassins are of the Leftist persuasion. I'm sure FOX HQ has an adequate security staff.
We can solve Bobama's Libyan conundrum in 72 hours, beginning with the stroke of a pen.
Simply rescind that 1973 Presidential Order proclaiming "Thou shalt not assassinate heads of state...", get some Spec Ops on the job, and wait a while. Results are gauranteed.
I don't think this would significantly increase the workload for the Secret Service. Their overtime protecting Bobama must make up 50% of the national deficit already.
Hey Possum,
Sorry that I'm late to the party... again! I've gone from being unemployed with plenty of time on my hands, to a 10-hour a day job (with a 45-minute commute on each end). On top of that, I'm living alone in TN with my wife in NJ, so I've got to cook, clean, shop, wash clothes, etc. in whatever time I have left over.
It's kind of grueling, but I keep reminding myself that it won't be forever. In a few years I'll retire and have a chance to sit back and really "BLOG ON!" 'Til then, I may be a bit more absent than I was previously.
In any event, I think your post is "SPOT ON". I agree with everything. I couldn't have said it better myself, and wish that I HAD said it myself.
I DO read everything you post, but forgive me if I don't always comment as I have in the past. I'm just tryin' to stay on top of things as best I can in the limited amount of time available.
(:D) Best regards and...
Keep up the good work,
Jim (aka Hawkeye)
Wow, is this how you guys really think? Occam's Razor, Iraq & Libya are and were all about money. There is plenty of evidence that the Bush Administration had the CIA cook up info on Iraq and Chalabi even admitted his info was BS. What more do you need? So Iraq was about 3 things, IMO; ripping off their oil and securing our oil flow (contracts for big oil), feeding the Military Industrial complex, and de-toothing Saddam for Israel's sake.
I voted for Obama and am not that happy with him about a few things, like Afghanistan. I feel Obama made deals with the Big Six in order to get elected. He's covered BP's ass, he went harder into Afghanistan for what reason?
Personally I think that once a president gets elected, they are told how things are going to be or they will end up JFK'd. Hey Obama you can go golf now we got it from here.
I despised Bush while in office. Now I see what Obama has done and it is similar, until Libya. He did Libya right, got international support with NATO and participated and then turned it over to them. He did this so we wouldn't own it like Iraq and Afghanistan.
I disagree with you Robert, we are the world's police force. Because the the big money in the world is in multinational corporations. They don't care about any one particular country, the want commerce to continue to flow around the world and in order to do that we need a strong Navy prowling the Oceans. And our manufacturing done in countries where there is basically slave labor. Who cares about the American worker when you can get a Chinese worker to do it for $2/hr? It's all about profits. It's all about the rich getting richer. You either have or have not. So put that in your tinfoil pipe and smoke it Robert. I will join ya ;)
I don't know who "you guys" are. I have little to be proud of, but every word I write is the product of what's left of my mind, and the sole reasoning thereof.
I remember Ned Beatty's speech to Peter Finch in "Network" about the unified, global family of the dollar, and how that supersedes all other considerations. Unfortunately, he was right, and Paddy Chaevsky was very prescient for 1976.
Maybe I'm showing my age, but Obama is worse than Nixon, Carter, and Clinton morphed into a single entity. I know they get the loose-leaf "briefing book" about 20 minutes after the inauguration, and all the campaign rhetoric changes, but this "historical first" has changed into the saddest failure of leadership in American history.
I only hope Bobama doesn't go the way of "Howard Beale." Too many people are mad as hell, and not going to take it any more.
Post a Comment
<< Home