Tag Archives: foreign policy

Why the Left can’t fight terror: they don’t even understand it.

So John McCain (D, AZ) has once again added his unrequested two cents to the War on Terrorism. Now you probably thought he couldn’t have done more after campaigning for Obama in 2008 or taking pictures with members of Al-Qaeda just a few years ago. But he just came out and said that speaking against radical Islam will turn radical Muslims against us. Yeah, because a culture that has been attacking US interests for so long that they are actually the first overseas conflict we had to be engaged in, is only now hating us because we don’t like them.

 

John. Just shut up and go away. You’re not helping. You are never helping. Even on those rare occasions when you’re right, your very presence hurts the cause. Go away.

But don’t worry, liberals are picking up the slack on this. Leftist economists are saying that it’s inequality that is causing Muslims to turn to violence. The fact that most of the people who are radicalized in the West are well educated, middle and upper middle class men. Or the fact that head of ISIS has a Ph.D. and the Bid Laden family is filthy rich has no bearing on the fact that liberals like to blame everything on inequality. Inequality. For the left it causes everything. Slow economy? Inequality is to blame. Terrorism? Inequality is to blame. Massive Debt? Inequality is to blame. Bad acne is probably caused by inequality. There is pretty much nothing the left doesn’t blame inequality for…except maybe global warming….

 

Which, by the way, our dear idiot-in-chief thinks that global warming (not seen since the turn of the century) is to blame for terrorism. Despite the fact that even if global warming was even partly responsible for drought in the Middle East, it’s not like they weren’t rolling in money, had access to ports, and Israel as an example of how to efficiently desalinate sea water for agriculture. No, the refusal to actually deal with your problems in an intelligent fashion has nothing to do with culture and everything to do with the boogey man of global warming.

 

So do they hate us because we hate them? Because of inequality? Because of global warming? Do liberals even try to have any logical consistency in any of this?

Nope. They just want some kind of excuse where it is the fault of the West and no blame be put on the culture of death itself.

So what does cause them to hate us? Because let’s be honest here, it’s certainly not any of the liberal BS…they hated us before we questioned the long-term practicality of taking in Syrian refugees, they hated us before we invade Iraq, they were gathering support against Classical Liberalism before Israel was ever formed, hell the Barbary pirates were attacking the West before America even existed. If you think US actions in any way, shape, or form are the cause of radicalizing Muslim extremists, I would suggest you join the cult of the Anti-Semites that follow Ron and Rand Paul (they too would like to put blame on America for 9/11 and all other acts of terror).

So what is the cause?

111988_original.jpg

The desire to control all of this (and much more after that) is not caused by Global Warming, Inequality, US actions abroad or any other liberal drivel.  There are evil people out there.  They must be fought and their ideas must be fought. 

Well, I propose it comes down to three things, none of which on their own might be too difficult a problem to tolerate—but together they spell disaster.

The first is a culture of death and violence.
Judaism was founded on a single guy making a deal with God. Christianity on an act of sacrifice. Buddhism on a guy sitting under a tree. Hinduism’s roots are so far back it’s hard to nail then down but it’s a religion based on meditation so…meanwhile when you have a religion that started with “hey, let’s rob from and then kill people we don’t like, and oh, those Jews that didn’t want to back us in our acts of theft and murder, they can all die too.” Amazing that when you’re a child raping, genocidal lunatic writeing down the voices in his head he mistakes for God you get a religion not exactly grounded in love and compassion. Every religion has it’s dark points, every religion has it’s prophets that were crazier than others….but when your religion has only one prophet and he a bloodthirsty nut job obsessed with conquest, there aren’t exactly any countering voices in scriptures to offer any balance.
And lo-and-behold this leads to a culture a little more open to violence as a method of conflict resolution…and not just as an option of last resort, but more of an opening gambit.
You can whine all you want about the myth that it’s a religion of peace, but the fact is that, Islam praises violence over and over again in the Koran, unlike every other religion on Earth it does not grant intrinsic value and divinity to the human soul, and also unlike every other religion it actively denies reason. And being that static encourages them to never evolve or improve themselves as people or as a culture. And worse the ethics implicit in this culture are ones that lead to not just tyranny but a fascist form of tyranny.

Does this mean that most people in the Muslim world are violent? Nope. Like most people in the rest of the world earning enough to put food on the table for the family is a far more important factor than religion. But ideas have consequences. And the ideas of Islam, especially modern Asharaite Sunni Islam, have serious consequences.

The second reason is that teenagers are stupid.
You’ll notice that most of these people are young or get started in these ideas when they’re young. Probably because, biologically, your brain is not developed until you’re about 26 and you’re fairly brain damaged until that development stops. Just spend some time with teenagers—In any culture they’re morons, most of the time lovable little bastards, but morons nonetheless. Some are ahead of the curve, most are not horrifically stupid, but as a group not the exactly the group known for long-term thinking. From the Hitler Youth to stupid teenagers in the ’60’s adopting various forms of violence in the U.S., to the Occupy scum, to idiot young people going to join ISIS, teenagers are morons, and statistically some of them will do incredibly violent things because they’re stupid. Ideally your culture allows outlets for these morons to be morons that are at least less destructive (like college or joining some hippie commune)…but as we’ve seen you can be raised in a culture that doesn’t glorify violence and young people will still be stupid enough to seek it out. Granted it’s not only young people attracted to this kind of stupidity (see Jonestown) but youth had the predominance of morons out there.

 

And because they’re stupid they do hate us for our liberties. Because if there is one thing that kind of stupid is looking for it’s a simple, plain, easy explanation of the universe, the world and life. Liberty offers none of that. Liberty comes with chaos…and worst of all personal responsibility. The idiocy of youth hates those things, they like black and white stability and the will lash out against anything that jeopardizes it (doesn’t matter if their lashing out leads to more chaos than liberty could ever produce, that understanding is exactly the kind of long term thinking they’re not capable of.)

Okay so let’s be honest there is pretty much nothing we can do about these first two points. History isn’t going to change, and biological facts are also pretty stable.

So let’s look to the third reason.
As I suggested before you want your culture to have alternative voices. And ever since the pro-reason Mu’tazalite Muslims were slaughtered about 800 years ago there haven’t been many pro-reason Muslim groups…individual yes, movements not so much. So we need to stop that. We need to stop looking for “moderates” and start looking for people who actually want to reform this religion and bring it out of the sixth century, that position is fairly radical and would never be considered moderate.

Honestly when we were in a conflict with those radical Germans back in the 1940’s did we reach out to the moderates at the time, those self proclaimed “Good Germans” who had an amazing ability to not know what was going on right in front of their faces…no I’m pretty sure we first reached out to German underground and looked for intel and ways to put high explosives and Der Fuhrer in the same room.

But there are real reformists…a few at least…

…and we should support these people and make sure they have the means to get their message out to the entire Muslim world. We need to dig out those old Arabic translations of Plato and Aristotle (and update them with Farsi, Pashto and every other major language of the era) and see a rebirth of Mu’tazalite ideas that once created the golden age of Islamic civilization).

And we need to do this because while we, should and must kill the ones who have already embraced the evil of terrorism, you’re not going to stem the problem until you start attacking the ideas.

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, Uncategorized, War on Terrorism

The futile nature of foreign policy under cowards and idiots.

“Evil is an outreach program.”—P.J. O’Rourke

 

These are the hardest moments for neocons and sane people (but I repeat myself).  You realize that in Venezuela, in Ukraine, in Syria, in Turkey, in South Sudan, and a dozen other nations there are terrible things going on.  That any rational understanding of natural rights and that they apply to all people equally (regardless of what country you live in) and ethics (and the basic tenet that you have to help people when you know about their suffering and are in a position to help them) tells us that we need to do something…
Flexibility-copy

…but reason also tells us that we can’t do anything. Not because there is nothing to do, but because with the leadership we have now any intervention would not only be pointless it would likely make things worse(as occurred with the Arab Spring).

 

And that’s the problem, there are things to do, things that can improve the situation everywhere, but the idiots we currently have can only muck things up and it may be best to let these atrocities work themselves out.  Which is terrible.

 

It was bad when you have a life long cowardly isolationist (from a family of worthless cowardly isolationists)  like Bush try to adopt the mantle of a neoconservative on foreign policy…but not bother to understand the part about long term planning to help build, rebuild and establish functioning constitutional republics that defend the rights of their people.  Nope, like all Bush’s, W. didn’t seem to understand long term thinking (like daddy didn’t understand the truth of supply-side realities, and W. also didn’t grasp that tax cuts have to be permanent to have any lasting effect).  No let’s just ignore that it was long term involvement, planning and slower turning over of control to the local governments that made Germany and Japan a success…no, let’s just assume that a functioning democratic-republic will just spring up in a couple years (to hell if it took the US over a decade and two Constitutions to get it right). It was bad when this non-neoconservative gave neoconservatives a black eye.  But at least we were trying.   And even with the complete cluster—- that Iraq and Afghanistan have become there are fewer governments and tyrants actively funding terrorism.  There are at least silver linings in these screwups.

 

But even though Bush was a moron, at least he left things better than they were before (not good by any means, but marginally better than when he got on the scene), he was a genius compared to Obama who makes everything worse.  Give Iran money to build nukes.  Stop actually gathering needed intelligence on terrorists (while oddly focusing really hard on American citizens…maybe if we tell him that Al-Qaeda is thinking of starting a SuperPAC he might actually go after them).  Not backing Britain in their dealing with socialist Argentina.  Back stabbing Israel at every single turn because the fact is that with the exception of Ron Paul followers there is only one party I can think of more anti-Semitic than Obama and his Democrats.

 

Yeah I know everyone is using the excuse that Bush let Putin have parts of Georgia in 2008…but let’s be honest when that happened Bush was entirely out of political capital to use on foreign affairs (not saying he would have done the right thing if he had any chips to play, but we should at least admit realities)…but, as a particular commentator likes to correctly point out “Bad behavior doesn’t excuse other bad behavior.”tumblr_n1w40gdLBs1qaoso9o1_500

 

Let’s ignore the thousand and one things we could have done over the past 6 years that would have prevented all these things (and make no mistake a strong and intelligent US foreign policy could have prevented all of it).

 

We could easily impose harsh sanctions against Russia and open every form of oil and natural gas production in the US. This would devastate the Russian economy, keep Europe relatively stable, and work as a shot of adrenaline to the US economy. But we really can’t do that because if we did push for sanctions Obama would probably idiotically engineer sanctions that only annoy Russia and fail to open up US production of energy that would leave Europe even in worse shape than they currently exist.

 

We could honor our treaty with Poland (you know the one Obama broke) and help them defend themselves.  And we could offer to extend that defense treaty to all those other nations that were once part of the Eastern Block we have no intention of doing so. But as experience tells us, Obama would rather give guns to the villains instead of  our allies.

 

We could send arms and support (training, advisors, infrastructure) to Ukraine as a clear sign we are drawing a line in the sand which you will not cross…but we know what happens when Obama draws foreign policy lines.

 

Hell…we could even be going to the UN asking for meaningless peacekeepers be sent to Crimea to observe the situation.  It would be pointless, and would likely be vetoed by Russia, but at least it would be more than rolling over for dead as Barry and Michelle  go on separate vacations while the world falls apart.

 

spineless-posterWe could do a lot of things…and we could do it for a lot of nations…because we do have a moral obligation to see liberty and human rights defended and spread over the whole world.  But as long as this moron is in charge nothing will get done and pushing to have anything done will only result in even a worse situation occurring because he is too cowardly to do what needs to be done and too stupid to even know what that is or the conspirisists are correct and it is what he wants –one or the other no in-between.

 

There is a silver lining to this at least in the Ukraine. The fact is that while we should be leading a movement to band the nations of Eastern Europe together, they will probably do that on their own. Also, despite the fact that everyone likes to say that Obama is playing checkers while Putin is playing chess…the fact is that in reality Obama is drooling on himself while Putin is playing tic-tac-toe poorly. This may be a short-term goal for him, but it will strain his already strained economy, and it will likely make Russia not just the target of Islamic radicals in Chechnya but inflame and put Russia right in the crosshairs of al-Qaeda
.   I think we speak from experience that al-Qaeda is a bitch to deal with when you attack the nations they claim to be from…it will be a complete nightmare for Russia when they even lack the moral and ethical high ground that the US had.  Let me know how your population problem is going in ten years Vladimir when you’ve had to sacrifice every young man to holding the nations you’ve invaded to try and reestablish the evil empire.  And like Stalingrad, I will be actually quite happy with Russia and al-Qaeda wasting time, money and lives killing each other…it really doesn’t matter who wins so long as both sides lose.  Long term, we are lucky that evil may be an outreach program but it also always includes the seeds of its own destruction.

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, Long Term Thinking, NeoConservative, Obama

Russia’s Future brought to you Heritage

I am beginning to have serious issues with Heritage’s internal policy recommendations (or at least their heavy handed strategy in supporting that policy…Jim you really don’t know how to run an organization like this).  That said, they still seem spot on in their foreign policy advice.

Which leads us to:

Implosion: The End of Russia and What It Means for America

It’s an hour long lecture.  I highly recommend you listen…but the short short version is that Russia is screwed long term…and that’s not as good for us as it sounds.

Let me give you one highlight.  2050 will see half of Russia being Muslim.

 

I would point out that there is one possible flaw to his analysis.  He assumes that China will be in a position to move in on Russia.  This ignores that the fault lines in China are as bad, if not worse, than in Russia.

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, Long Term Thinking

The Problem of Syria

 

 

Someone (we’re not sure who, Obama and Kerry say Assad, the UN says the rebel—I don’t trust either, so who knows) used chemical weapons in Syria.

 

Now it’s really funny how the left suddenly thinks that chemical weapons in the hands of a Mideast dictator is a bad thing that needs to be stopped.

 

Some might argue that we should punish those who have done so.  That we need to go in to save lives.

 

But they’re looking at it wrong.  While we do as decent people have a responsibility to stop genocide, that isn’t enough, we have to make sure we can actually improve the situation.  The question shouldn’t necessarily be is Assad (or the rebels) killing people, it should be, can we stop the killing?  In Germany, Iraq, and Afghanistan there were either prodemocracy forces (and in those last two I will fully admit we botched any attempt to rally those forces and form a real government)…and in Japan we had the wherewith-all to stay in charge for over a decade to ensure a stable government was left in place.  The problem with Syria is that it’s a choice between Assad and his Iran/Hamas terrorists backers and the Rebels (read Al-Qaeda)…if either side wins, they’ll use the chemical weapons and kill the people of Syria and probably other nations…and America at this point (even if we had a leader and not an idiot in charge) doesn’t have the resolve to stay the time needed and spend the money required to take over Syria and build a system that will end the killing of people.  The fact is that no matter what we do, people are going to die.  If we help people die, if we don’t help people die.  There is no way out of this that can stop the killing.

 

Kerry Syria

Kerry was against intervention over chemical weapons before he was for it…and he was for it before he was against it…

Now some people, whose opinions I respect, suggest we should go in and just bomb Assad’s ability for air dominance, level the playing field and let the rebels and Assad fight it out on equal terms.  I can see the wisdom in this…but this assumes a leader who knows what do to and how to handle such a campaign.  And here’s the problem if you had such a leader my NeoCon side might just say, why half-ass it?, go in occupy the nation and set up a democracy…but lacking such a leader I don’t know if I can even trust the idiot we have now to level the playing field…honestly has he done anything else right in foreign policy?  Which again leads me back to it’s best to stay out of this mess.

 

The silver lining to not doing anything at the moment is that this is Hamas and Al-Qaeda killing each other…which saves us the time and trouble of doing it.

 

But let’s talk about what we should do if reality had no bearing on this (or, say, if we had done the intelligent thing and elected a leader and good man and not a buffoon and corrupt hack).  Now Syria would present it’s own challenges but I think the best way we should do with Syria, if we were going to get involved is to look at our two most recent mistakes, Iraq and Afghanistan, and see where we screwed up there.

 

Now let’s first deal with some of the points of why we went.  We went to take out terrorist threats (and both nations did present such a threat), we went to do the ethical thing and stop genocide, and we went to spread democracy.  All could have been accomplished if Bush and/or Obama had had even half a brain between them…but Obama likes to grovel and apologize for America’s virtue and Bush was an isolationist (just look at his debate with Gore where he said he didn’t want to engage in nation building…so stop blaming NeoConservatives for Bush’s idiocy, he was never one of us and never will be).  It was the right war to fight.

 

It was also fought well.  The military is not the part to blame, it is the diplomats and politicians who screwed the occupation up, not the war itself.

 

Now let’s review what we should have done but didn’t.  And, in terms of full disclosure, I honestly thought we would have been bright enough to do these things when I gave my support for these wars…I thought that even if Bush was dumb enough to not know to do these, his advisors would at least be bright enough…boy was I wrong.

 

Obama moron

Do you trust this man to do anything right? Do you even trust to not make it worse?

The first thing we should not have done was turn over Iraq and Afghanistan to Iraqi and Afghani control so soon.  We were in control of Germany for year (and only gave them independence to gain their alliance in the Cold War) and were in complete control of Japan for nearly a decade.  We should have remained in political and military control of Iraq and Afghanistan for nearly a decade as well.  It takes time to rebuild the infrastructure of a nation, it takes time to get the culture used to the principles of rule of law and a democratic-Republic, it takes time to properly write a Constitution.  All of these were rushed for political convenience.  And that is partly what ultimately made these situations so terrible.

Someone should have gone to Congress to first get an act of war declared and second to get Congress to lay out in writing and law what defines success and when we can legally leave.  Right now we can leave whenever, whether we’ve finished the job or not, and it is largely up to the president and the president only. These are powers that Congress should have, and they should not have been given up, nor should any president have grabbed them.

The nations should have been broken up.  Their current borders are arbitrary creations of colonialism and forced numerous ethnic and religious groups that loathe each other.  Pluralism is also superior, but it grows best naturally when two group both doing well see each other as equals that both can grow and learn from, not from being forced together.  Iraq, should have been three nations (Kurds, Sunni, Shia)…Afghanistan should have likely been broken into a Southern and Northern part (although I’ll admit my knowledge of the breakdown of clans, ethnicities and religious divisions in Afghanistan is not as deep as it could be).  My point here being that smaller less diverse areas are easier to administrate, easier to work with, easier to maintain stability it…and if there is terrorist activity in one it does not mean that destabilizes the whole operation (for instance Kurdistan would have likely been stable, and possibly even economically prosperous very quickly which would have led to more stability in the whole area and an ally we can count on).

We should have never let the armies disband as quickly as we did.  We should have kept them as POWs vetting every single one of them before releasing them.  This would have delayed the terrorists attacks.

I agree completely with the surges, only disagreeing that they should have been done earlier and probably to an even greater degree.

We should have burned each and every poppy field in all of Afghanistan to the ground and shot any drug lord who complained.  The terrorists live off the funds of the drug trade and one of our first goals should have been to deny them any and all funds.

The Peace Corp should have been recalled for training in Arabic, Farsi, Pashto, Dari, (and anything else we needed) and then sent to Afghanistan and Iraq.  There is no point in having a Peace Corp in helping in social and economic development if you’re not going to use it where it was needed most.

Border walls.  As we have learned in the US, there is nothing so important as a border wall…more so when dealing with terrorists.  We should have been building walls on the border of every single nation, starting with the borders of Iran, Pakistan, Syria.  If we had done this the terrorist activity would have been drastically reduced (as most of it came from Iran, Pakistan and Syria)…and if there had been a division of the nations we should have had walls between them as well to help stop the spread of terrorism.

With staying longer, our first responsibility should have been building up roads, water, electricity, schools, hospitals and the basic of industry…the infrastructure needed to support a republic of law.  Training the military and police should have been a distant second (because when you rush that, you let the terrorist infiltrate easily and attack us from within, as we’ve seen all too well) as the military can handle that for a longer period as we’ll be there for a while.

There is no way we should have ever left Iraq without gaining a permanent military base and the same goes for Afghanistan. One of the only reasons why these invasions made sense in the long run from a tactical stand point was gaining foot holds to ensure stability in the area (would Syria be as violent as it is right now if there was a permanent US base with missile launch capability just a few minutes from it’s borders?)

Massacre of Syrian Christians

This is a picture of the handy work of Obama’s allies in Syria…the massacre of Christians for no other reason than their religion. Yes we should help these people.

Among stronger women’s right pushes than we made, we should have made it a requirement that both nations add full rights to women and some version of our burning bed justifications (which more or less makes it justifiable for a woman who is afraid of her husband beating or murdering her to kill her husband…and then we should have probably armed every woman as we could have). This would hopefully have cleared out a lot of the worst bastards we would have to worry about, and the scum who objected should have just been summarily shot as well because you know they’re shit who would be nothing but a blight on humanity. (And I can hear some liberal whiny about it’s their culture who are you to judge.  I’m a human being with a brain, that’s who.  Any man, any law, any religion that says women are inferior to men is shit and deserves to be wiped off the Earth with extreme prejudice.)  We should probably also have installed a lot of women in positions of power, those who objected can be shot.  (This is more to quickly identify the terrorist scum and quickly eliminate them).

We should never have stopped it being a major function of the military and CIA to gather intelligence.  We should be capturing terrorists leaders and water-boarding every last piece of information out of them.  The problem with drones isn’t their use or their death toll…it’s that they’re being used in lieu of gathering intelligence which actually (causes more death in the long run) kills even more people in the long run.

(On a side note) We should have backed, supported and armed the revolution that started in Iran.  Conversely we should not have given moral support to the largely terrorist led Arab Spring.

We should have gone in and still should be going in with the mentality that first and foremost this is a war.  If you are dealing with rational people then negotiate with them, but otherwise there is no retreat, no fallback, no quarter and all that is acceptable is either complete and unconditional surrender or every member of your opposition dead.  No negotiations with the Taliban, no playing nice for Iran and Pakistan.  This is a war, we are in the right (or at least we could have been) and we will not stop until every tyrant is dead or in jail and every innocent citizen enjoys full human rights.

 

Now, while Syria presents it’s own challenges and idiosyncrasies, but it is these general principals that should guide the occupation and rebuilding of any nation.  And the question you need to ask is, do you think Obama has the spine and intelligence to do any of this?  Do you think he even has the brains to carry out attacks on Assad’s military targets?

For me the answer is simple.  No.  I would love to spread liberty and end genocide everywhere…but from what I have seen of this nation, and especially Obama, we don’t know how to do it, we don’t have the patience it takes to do it, and right now we certainly aren’t in an economic position to do it.  In an ideal world intervention is what we should do, but the realities of the present state that our current situation will only lead to making things worse.

Leave a comment

Filed under Afghanistan, Congress, Conservative, Evils of Liberalism, Foreign Policy, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, liberal arrogance, Long Term Thinking, NeoConservative, Obama, People Are Stupid, politics, Tyranny, War on Terrorism