ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, May 30, 2014

A call for permawar

David Brooks openly calls for "constant garden-tending", or in other words, an ongoing state of aggressively militaristic global policing by the United States:
As Robert Kagan shows in a brilliant essay in The New Republic, for the past 70 years, American policy makers have understood that underreach can lead to catastrophe, too. Presidents assertively tended the international garden so that small problems didn’t turn into big ones, even when core national interests were not at stake. In the 1990s, for example, President George H.W. Bush and President Clinton took military action roughly every 17 months to restrain dictators, spread democracy and preserve international norms.

This sort of forward-leaning interventionist garden-tending will be even more necessary in an age of assertive autocracies. If the U.S. restricts intervention to “core interests,” as Obama suggests, if it neglects constant garden-tending, the thugs will grab and grab and eventually there will be horrendous conflagrations. America’s assertive responses will not need to be military; they rarely will be. But they’ll need to be simple, strong acts of deterrence to preserve order.
This is insane and this is wrong. The reason that "the number of countries that moved in an autocratic direction has outnumbered those that moved in a democratic one" has been because the supposedly democratic countries have demonstrated to all and sundry that they are not democratic at all. The United States, Italy, Greece, Ukraine, Ireland, France, the UK, and above all, the European Union, have proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that their "democracy" is a sham.

Switzerland is the only genuinely democratic country in Europe. It is the only country where the will of the people can actually, at times, override the will of the government elite. The government there has voted twice to join the EU. The people voted it down twice and that is why Switzerland is not in the EU. Contrast that with, for example, the UK, where the people have never voted to join the EU and the government has repeatedly lied to them and denied them the opportunity to decide for themselves if they wish to belong to it. Or Ireland, where they voted down the Lisbon Treaty, then were forced to vote again until the will of the Irish elite had been accomplished. Or the USA, where one of the largest invasions in human history - 50 million strong - was aided and abetted by the three branches of government.

The concept of representative democracy has failed abysmally. It is no wonder that people are now trying other options. It's hard to believe that Brooks is crazy enough to demand the US engage in national sovereignty-violating military action twice every three years. This is the madness of the neocons reaching terminal velocity.

Labels: ,

118 Comments:

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 9:07 AM  

Lies and speakcrime! A "call" to permawar implies that we are not *already* at permawar, and every goodthink duckspeaker knows that we have always been at war with Eurasia.

Anonymous Athor Pel May 30, 2014 9:15 AM  

It's like telling everybody in your neighborborhood that you're going to invade one of their houses every few months, destroy some of their property and maybe kill some of their family members. If your neighbors have any smarts at all they're going to set a trap for you at least or preemptively attack you at worst. In the end they will kill you.

Anonymous Salt May 30, 2014 9:23 AM  

This is the madness of the neocons reaching terminal velocity.

And the Bilderbergers are meeting, again. How many words need be spilled stating what is beginning to become evident to even those who previously benefited from globalist policies? The Great Divorce is happening and it shall not be stopped, but the PTB shall try, ensuring the ugliness to come.

Anonymous dh May 30, 2014 9:28 AM  

Athor--

And if they don't do that because you still big and bad, they certainly aren't going to listen to your egg nogg recipes or meatloaf secret sauce tips!

Anonymous Anonymous May 30, 2014 9:33 AM  

Brooks is typical of that breed called the neocon. They can think of so many good reasons to send other men to war. It helps them so much that they have never been in the military and never even been close to anyone who has fought in a war. Ignorance of war makes starting them much more fun.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 9:37 AM  

>This is the madness of the neocons reaching terminal velocity.

Sometimes it takes a very smart person to believe some things so stupid. Neocons (Trotskyists all) are generally brilliant, I'm sure, but they are either truly the Devil's Henchmen on Earth or nuttier than squirrel turds.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia May 30, 2014 9:37 AM  

VD:
OT but of interest,

"Sterling found 'mentally incapacitated,' clearing way for sale"
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24576535/report-sterling-found-mentally-incapacitated-clearing-way-for-sale

Welcome to the USSA comrade.

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 9:37 AM  

There's never a wrong time for the goyim in this country to fight the goyim in that country.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 9:38 AM  

These clowns so in love with war; I treasure the firearms I own, but I'd happily hand one to one of these chicken-shits, along with (difficult to find) ammo, so he can put his butt when his mouth is instead of the other way around.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 9:40 AM  

>It's like telling everybody in your neighborborhood that you're going to invade one of their houses every few months, destroy some of their property and maybe kill some of their family members. If your neighbors have any smarts at all they're going to set a trap for you at least or preemptively attack you at worst. In the end they will kill you.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/a-country-where-police-burn-infants-in-their-cribs/

Blogger David May 30, 2014 9:42 AM  

Oceana has always been allied with Eurasia against Eastasia...and before that, Oceana has always been allied with Eastasia against Eurasia....and so on.

Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four is PoliSci 101 through 451 in a single book. Everything else every published about political science is bullshit.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 9:44 AM  

Slouching into World War Three (or Four, depending on perspective).

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/ukraine-asks-for-lend-lease-from-u-s/

Blogger buzzardist May 30, 2014 9:46 AM  

But that permanent state of war justifies and enables everything else that they want! How can we possibly not be at war every few years?

Anonymous karsten May 30, 2014 9:47 AM  

Madness? Not at all. It makes perfect sense - if your kosher allegiance is to a certain country in the Middle East and you consider the rest of the world and all of its people to be expendable in serving its interests.

Evil, breathtakingly evil, yes.

Mad, no.

Anonymous Huh? May 30, 2014 9:48 AM  

American policy makers have understood that underreach can lead to catastrophe, too.

They have? When was underreach ever American policy?

Unless "underreach" is defined as "not enough overreach", I guess.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 9:48 AM  

>The concept of representative democracy has failed abysmally

From: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/kirkpatrick-sale/the-real-truth-a-z/

Listed under "A:"
aristocracy, n.—the rule of a state by its ablest and usually richest people; where this is not allowed, as has happened in the U.S. since the popular election of the Senate and the formation of the civil service, there is established the unshatterable illusion, since disproven by experience, that anyone is fit to govern.
Listed under "C:"
capital, n.—1. the prime seat of government, as of a state or nation, usually situated as far as possible from the largest city and most populous areas, in the hopes that most people will not know and have little influence on what goes on there, and the rubes in the neighborhood will not understand. 2. the primary coinage by which the capital functions, usually distributed with acute generosity to those in charge there, including the lawmakers as well as the lawwriters, who meet in the lobby.

(LRC is having a good day, full of quality stuff.)

Blogger Glen Filthie May 30, 2014 9:54 AM  

"This is insane and this is wrong. The reason that ..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

No, it's not. 911 should have been enough to learn that doing nothing is insane or wrong. What will it take to convince? An atom bomb going off in New York, London, or Tel Aviv? There are credible, capable groups working on this right now. An alarming amount of weapons grade fissile material has gone missing over the last couple decades. Given the budget, any high school kid or moslem mudflap can build a nuclear weapon. We cannot give these groups the first shot - because they will take it, and the result will be devastating.

What has to change is the way we wage war against these pigs. Not one squaddie should have run a patrol in Iraq or Afghanistan. All we need is one fortified and well defended air base and perhaps a couple teams of elite operatives. It is no secret who these people are that are arrayed against us. They should be taken out with drones, hit teams and paid assassins. Rinse and repeat for their replacements. We shouldn't waste time with hearts and minds, or worry about collateral damage. We should wage war on them the exact same way they wage it on us: with surprise attacks when they are relaxed and defenceless. Once they are dead, we should pack up and leave.
This shouldn't be the sole responsibility of the US either; Saddam Hussein was in violation of 21 of the conditions of his earlier surrender - any one of which would justify further military intervention. All the countries signed it, all agreed to the violations - and only the US stepped up.
Politics is not a zero sum game. Sitting on your hands and refusing to play doesn't guarantee that you aren't going to lose.

Anonymous Bill May 30, 2014 9:57 AM  

If your neighbors have any smarts at all they're going to set a trap for you at least or preemptively attack you at worst. In the end they will kill you.

In related news, China announces its desire to enter into a security agreement with Russia and Iran.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/china-calls-for-new-security-pact-with-russia-iran/

If you believe, as I do, that the US and its allies are now or soon will be incapable of defeating this alliance in conventional war in Eurasia, then you have to see this as the beginning of the end of US dominance in Eurasia.

Anonymous Hunsdon May 30, 2014 9:58 AM  

For some reason I'm remembering The Outlaw Josey Wales, with that sunburned, squinty little Redlegs captain saying, "Doing right ain't got no end."

Anonymous VD May 30, 2014 9:59 AM  

No, it's not. 911 should have been enough to learn that doing nothing is insane or wrong.

Don't be stupid, Glenn. Not permitting Muslims to enter the USA would have stopped 9/11. Invading other countries is self-destructive, because the USA always provides refuge to millions on the losing side, hence the 1.7 million Vietnamese residents and the growing number of Iraqi and Afghani residents.

You can't prevent other countries from obtaining existing technology. But you can keep the people inclined to use it outside your borders.

Anonymous Bill May 30, 2014 10:01 AM  

Glen Filthie said . . .
It is no secret who these people are that are arrayed against us.

You're right, it's no secret. It's us and our Al Quaeda allies against every Christian in the world. If we don't hurry up and finish killing them all, they might eventually decide to fight back.

Anonymous Stilicho May 30, 2014 10:02 AM  

Sometimes it takes a very smart person to believe some things so stupid. Neocons (Trotskyists all) are generally brilliant, I'm sure, but they are either truly the Devil's Henchmen on Earth or nuttier than squirrel turds.

Yes, but does it help the bankster-industrial complex? Isn't that the only question that matters to them? In today's global financial markets, is there any legitimate doubt that the big banks will happily lend to both sides in any war and that they'll find a way to do it via proxies if necessary? Warring governments always need loans.

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 10:03 AM  

Why stop there? Why not just drop four score and seven nuclear bombs on the largest 25 Muslim cities, land the Marines in Saudi Arabia and stay till you suck the oil wells dry, and let the Europeans deal with the collateral refugees?

Better idea - don't let them in. Don't let migrate, don't let them visit, don't let them do bugger all in our zone. They don't produce anything beyond oil, so with any sort of national will there's no reason to worry about cargo ships coming in from Alexandria or Dubai with a nuclear bomb on board.

Seriously, if the United States could just get off the Arab oil, the money would go less towards acquiring a nuclear bomb to use against the infidel, and more towards holding back the tide of discontented camel herders seeing what bread and circuses they have going down the drain.

Anonymous Krul May 30, 2014 10:05 AM  

"Garden-tending", eh? Because people who disagree with me about how to run their countries and live their lives are "weeds".

the thugs will grab and grab and eventually there will be horrendous conflagrations.

I'm not a thug like them, I'm a "Gardener". I don't "grab and grab", I "harvest". Huge difference.

Blogger Tommy Hass May 30, 2014 10:10 AM  

"An atom bomb going off in New York, London, or Tel Aviv? "

Why on earth would anybody care about Tel Aviv being bombed to smithereens? Same with Londonistan or Jew York.

Are you Irish by any chance?





(it means "do you have schizophrenia". Geddit?)

"Given the budget, any high school kid or moslem mudflap can build a nuclear weapon. We cannot give these groups the first shot - because they will take it, and the result will be devastating."

One only needs to apply this logic to actual people to realize how much this turd resembles a schizophrenic serial killer who slaughters bum because a demon told him that the sky would fall on his head otherwise.

"This shouldn't be the sole responsibility of the US either; Saddam Hussein was in violation of 21 of the conditions of his earlier surrender - any one of which would justify further military intervention."

That's not how non-mentally retarded people think, Filth. Unless those people attack you, or your allies, you have no justification. I mean, you can still do it, but it's not any different than your average "youf" robbing a liquor store.

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 10:10 AM  

They're also idiotic farmers.

Who tries to reap the harvest during the (arab) spring!?

Blogger Brad Andrews May 30, 2014 10:17 AM  

I immediately thought of the "domino theory" used to justify our involvement in Vietnam. Can't let one domino fall because many more may fall.

Now we are trying to knock each domino down before a chain is setup in the first place, as if that was possible.

We have lived in such a paradise with all this ongoing war anyway, right?

Glen, a big flaw in your argument is that the bad guys don't all wear black hats. "Killing them all" would entail killing many who really are innocent except for living in the wrong area. That is not going to happen in today's political climate. It also largely failed in Vietnam, which had a similar problem. You can't just kill everyone who looks wrong.

You may be able to keep them out of your country, though I am not as convinced that stupid ideas can always be kept out, but you definitely can't kill them in a foreign land with sufficient accuracy.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 10:17 AM  

It's always instructive to find those who can't imagine how easily they are worked like sock puppets. "Everyone wants to kill us, so we must slaughter them with drones and, if necessary, nuclear fire....riiiiiiiiiiight." (sarcasm-off)

Lest we forget:

“Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

― Hermann Göring

Anonymous Huckleberry - est. 1977 May 30, 2014 10:17 AM  

Why on earth would anybody care about Tel Aviv being bombed to smithereens? Same with Londonistan or Jew York

Refugees.
They'll just go and ruin some other place, and then what have you gained?

Blogger Brad Andrews May 30, 2014 10:19 AM  

Alexander, I have heard we now produce more oil internally than we use because of shale oil.

Anonymous Dr. Kenneth Noisewater May 30, 2014 10:19 AM  

Why stop there? Why not just drop four score and seven nuclear bombs on the largest 25 Muslim cities, land the Marines in Saudi Arabia and stay till you suck the oil wells dry, and let the Europeans deal with the collateral refugees?

I figure a custom virus that only attacks particular haplogroups and affects only males would be cleaner and more effective, and it would leave the females and property (such as it is) behind.

Anonymous Anonymous May 30, 2014 10:24 AM  

On the one hand, policing the world costs the U.S. greatly in blood and treasure while creating moral hazard in other countries that come to rely on the Pax Americana. This, in exchange for us getting our way and exerting influence.

OTOH, isolationism of some degree will cost less and decrease moral hazard, but we lose influence. Left to their own devices, the rest of the world will become a more dangerous place, in all likelihood (especially considering that "democracy is a sham" in most countries). I read that as the gist of U.S. non-involvement prior to WWI and WWII. The cost of cleaning up the mess might be greater than "garden tending."

OTOOH, we might be fooling ourselves as to the extent of our purchased influence. And distorting the incentives/disincentives for other countries to act responsibly is probably not a good idea.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 10:27 AM  

Unless one intends to kill every man, woman and child...AND obliterate any seeds of their beliefs in "your own" populace, the offensive-violence plan is doomed to failure.

We are re-entering the age of Fourth Generation Warfare where weakness is strength and strength is weakness. David beats Goliath in the long run, and even while Goliath is slaughtering Davids by score, surviving Davids are producing sons like buck rabbits in my backyard.

Utopia is not an option. Just as domestically we have occasional mall shootings as a side effect of citizen liberty for self-defense, US citizens may occasionally get hit by extremists even if the US stops kicking hornets' nests across the globe.

The truth is, however, that ceasing the kicking of hornets' nests is a critical component to slowing the decline and fall of the USA and the West in general (dealing with the immigration issue is another). Neither, sadly, will be pursued.

The USA will continue to invade the world, and continue to create one big prison system for its citizens domestically, until the finances fail.

Anonymous Anonymous May 30, 2014 10:30 AM  

Maybe even more importantly, the neocon position lacks epistemological humility. How do we even know that our actions are the right ones to take?

In light of that, I'm gonna have to come down on the side of non-intervention. We should act only where there is a clear interest to the U.S.

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 10:32 AM  

Brad Andrews,

That may be true - and is a welcome development if it is the case - but then something doesn't quite add up. Granted 'oil' isn't entirely fungible - what one uses for an airplane does not fuel a Honda - but my point is less on production values and more on our import of oil from the M.E.

As long as we are including the Arabs in our market, we are giving them an entry-point into our country and keeping their economies (such as they are) afloat so as to have time to make mischief outside their borders.

Anonymous Salt May 30, 2014 10:33 AM  

The deputy commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Brig.-Gen. Hossein Salami said that the US’s status in the world has deteriorated and that its collapse is near.

“Today nowhere in the Muslim world” does anyone pull out “a red carpet for American officials and that’s why [US President Barack] Obama secretly” showed up at Bagram military base in Afghanistan without first letting President Hamid Karzai know, said Salami according to a report by Iran’s Fars news agency.

“And this shows that the US empire is coming to an end,” he said.




Anonymous CLK May 30, 2014 10:33 AM  

"Don't be stupid, Glenn. Not permitting Muslims to enter the USA would have stopped 9/11. Invading other countries is self-destructive, because the USA always provides refuge to millions on the losing side, hence the 1.7 million Vietnamese residents and the growing number of Iraqi and Afghani residents."

Actually I don't think Glenn is all that stupid ... or perhaps I am stupid as well. Either way :) But I think the root causes of 9/11 go much deeper than immigration and I am sure if I looked back in the archives we would see that VD agrees... - if not a plane into WTC it would have been something else. When 9/11 happen quite a few people got dinged for the sentiment that 9/11 was "the chickens coming home to roost" but that fact is that there a clear path in american foreign policy staring after WWII (and maybe an argument can be made WWI or even the start of the century) centered around access to mideast oil and containment of communism (which really wasn't about communism but rather the negative effect that communist policies might have on capitalism)... We supported a whole cast of really severe rulers in order to maintain access to the middle east... and people were oppressed as a result ... now I am not saying this was the wrong thing to do but the facts are that after beating up a whole bunch of people for 50+ years does it really surprise that someone decides to throw a punch or two back...

The problem however is that for the first 60 years this foreign involvement was done to the benefit of the American people as a matter of national interest... and I guess right or wrong that's a justifiable reason. Now for some time things are now being done for multinational-ism and multinational corps and are often to the detriment of the American people.

I think we are no longer the good guys here ... not quite the worse bad guys but certainly we cant wear a white hat anymore.

Anonymous zen0 May 30, 2014 10:34 AM  

The most succinct statement about how governments get their people to support war came from Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg trials after World War II:

Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.



Anonymous rienzi May 30, 2014 10:36 AM  

Since Mr, Brooks is so concerned with the importance of continuing "garden-tending", I suggest that he join up, and volunteer for the pointy end of the spear. Yeah, right. Ain't gonna happen. Just another lily-livered chickensh*t with their: "Lets you and him fight!"

Anonymous The other skeptic May 30, 2014 10:40 AM  

Maybe they can get all those non-democratic peoples to spend some time Hacking in the Hood and take their minds off being autocratic.

Anonymous Mike M. May 30, 2014 10:41 AM  

Depends on what you consider "garden-tending".

Let's start with basics. The United States is a trade power. We profit from trade, and therefore have a vested interest in keeping the sea lanes clear. We are also a cultural hegemon - Heaven forgive us, we have conquered the world with Mickey Mouse and Mickey D's, and there are people who hate our guts for this.

Keeping the sealanes clear and smacking down terrorists is therefore a requirement of our national security.

Where we run into problems is the desire to Save The World. This is a particular problem because the United States has a serious strategic limit...we've got a short attention span. Through over 200 years of history, support for wars has collapsed 36 months after major combat operations have begun. This implies that a fast, hot war is feasible. A punitive raid is feasible. A long counterinsurgency campaign is not going to work well, especially when there is not a clear national security requirement.

Better to stick to Theodore Roosevelt's dictum. Speak softly, carry a big stick...and if you have to use it, hit as hard as possible.

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 10:43 AM  

British Empire revisited. First you control the seas, then you control the ports... and then suddenly you need to control every tin and diamond and oil mine from Cairo to Capetown.

Blogger James Higham May 30, 2014 10:43 AM  

The hawks are definitely in power behind the scenes.

Anonymous Azimus May 30, 2014 10:44 AM  

Brooks:
This sort of forward-leaning interventionist garden-tending will be even more necessary in an age of assertive autocracies. If the U.S. restricts intervention to “core interests,” as Obama suggests, if it neglects constant garden-tending, the thugs will grab and grab and eventually there will be horrendous conflagrations. America’s assertive responses will not need to be military; they rarely will be. But they’ll need to be simple, strong acts of deterrence to preserve order.


This is the EXACT strategy of how the Aztec Empire maintained hegemony and domination of most of Central America. They poked and prodded and provoked their vassals to premature, easily crushed uprisings whose prisoners of war fed their (human) sacrificial alters to their evil gods. This worked great, just great, for a very long time.

Then one day about a thousand heavily armed, violent Spanish youth with nothing better to do landed on their coast, and the nucleus was provided for the Empire's quick and complete fall - and mighty was it's fall. And while the Spaniards themselves were more interested in the loot than outright slaughter - the hundreds of thousands of Indian allies that over-ran the Aztecs that year were only interested in revenge.

So, yeah, this will work real well, til a small, disorganized group of fighting men with nothing better to do shows up and provides the nucleus for the Empire's downfall, and all the peoples the Empire has suppressed over the years line up behind them for the slaughter - Al Qaeda?

Blogger Nate May 30, 2014 10:45 AM  

This is like an unemployed 30 year old man explaining why buying 20 pounds of coke every month is absolutely necessary.

Not only can he never even dream of paying for it... if a small fraction of it would kill him anyway.

Anonymous dh May 30, 2014 10:46 AM  

Given the budget, any high school kid or moslem mudflap can build a nuclear weapon.

This is such a stupid lie. What you mean is, given some explosives, any idiot can take fissle material, strap it to an amateur grade bomb, and spread fissle material over civilian areas.

That's not fun, it's a huge mess, people will die, but it's not a 100 kiloton thermonuclear self-sustaining air-burst bomb detonating over a major metro area.

It is a constant exaggeration that any terrorist group can build a nuclear weapon. Your latest lie that "any high school kid" can do it given the budget is also a lie.

Their are serious chemical, physics, and engineering challenges required to produce a nuclear weapon. Producing a true thermonuclear weapon, with high-order explosive detonation triggering a self-sustaining super critical fusion reaction is non-trivial, there are perhaps 500 scientists in the world capable of designing such a device. From the working design, there are almost no engineers who are capable and have the requite tools, knowledge, time and money to construct such a device. Then, given a potentially working prototype, there are zero groups who can conduct a test and analyze the results, to then build a working device.

Dedicated state-based actors, working within the confines of a legal, above board, knowledge sharing environment, with large budgets and access to the various fissle materials still take decades and result in failures. For example, it took France 14 years to develop and test a thermonuclear device after it's first successful detonations.

Recap: "Dirty Bomb" in NYC? Quite a bit worse than a regular bomb, but hardly the end of civilization as we know it. Potentially less toxic and harmful than the twin towers environmental contamination. Thermonuclear device by a terrorist organization? Tom Clancy stuff.

Anonymous Anonymous May 30, 2014 10:48 AM  

You're right, it's no secret. It's us and our Al Quaeda allies against every Christian in the world.

Exactly. If our interventionist, imperialist military goal were to prevent another 9/11, we'd bomb every Muslim-controlled airport and harbor in the world, to confine them to their own territories and make sure no more of them can get here to attack us. But we're doing just the opposite. Invariably, we're helping Muslims, either in direct conflict with Christians, or to increase their power so they can go on to oppress Christian minorities in their countries. And in the process we import even more of them under the guise of refugees, practically inviting them to commit jihad on our own soil. It's suicidal, since they wouldn't be able to threaten us without our help.

Anonymous Robert in Arabia May 30, 2014 10:49 AM  

One has to be intrinsically stupid and beyond redemption to believe that 911 was not an inside job.

Blogger Old Rebel May 30, 2014 10:53 AM  

"neocons reaching terminal velocity"

Know hope!

Anonymous John Regan May 30, 2014 10:53 AM  

I'd have to agree that "representative democracy" is a deeply flawed concept. I figure constitutional monarchy is a better idea, but I'm open to suggestions.

Anonymous Anonymous May 30, 2014 10:54 AM  

If I could ask people like Brooks one question, it would be: Can you name one place in the world where the United States has no pressing national interest? In other words, is there any place where, if the people were to start killing each other in large numbers, you would say, "Well, that's unfortunate, but it's really none of our business"?

I suspect he wouldn't be able to think of one. You could offer the most remote place, some island off the tip of South America or somewhere, and he'd start rationalizing a national interest because of the effect on shipping lanes or global warming over the Antarctic or who knows what.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2014 May 30, 2014 10:54 AM  

War is peace ............... Winston Smith, for the Ministry of ....

Synagogue of Satan,,,,,, All Israel will be saved,,,,,,,, Not all Israel is Israel..... [Its all there VD, if you can unscrabble that omelette, newspapers might again be readable/ worthy of loose change]

Dark Days Winston, & 4 eclipses yet to come.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 10:59 AM  

dh.

Thank You!

Too many sock puppets recite the "FOX's '24'" scripted lines. Colin Powell spouts an absolute absurdity about mushroom clouds over NYC, GWB is forced to concede that SH had nothing to do with 9/11, yet some folks still....STILL....believe the tripe.

Blogger Duane Oldsen May 30, 2014 11:00 AM  

It isn't madness.

Its terror.

And its too late.

Brooks and his patrons on the Left are starting to realize how far out of control the world is spiraling under the "inspired and considerate leadership from behind" of Barack Hussein Obama. They're finally learning terror.

But its too late.

Barack Hussein Obama will be remembered as the combined second comings of Neville Chamberlain, Jimmy Carter, and Richard Milhous Nixon. Two helpings of transcendental global geopolitical incompetence, one helping of cosmic domestic corruption. All in one sexykewl wrapper than simultaneously channels JFK, Woodrow Wilson, Martin Luther King and your favorite atheist academician on the KMT's staff during its last days of evacuation from the mainland in '49.

This planet is on a road to a meltdown of the global order on two fronts - in Europe, and in East Asia. This will mean blood, it will probably mean war, though cyber may well trump the control circuitry in 50,000 Cold War legacy nukes. As well as the control circuitry for all the infrastructure the modern world depends on. The window on the violence is anywhere from 1 month to 10 years from now. The remainder of Obama's term is the prime time for interested parties (Russia and China, most notably) to move to shatter the global order, but the instabilities put in place under Obama's regime will continue to reverberate long after Barack is gone.

Sadly, I do NOT agree with Vox about this being an age of the waxing of the nations. This is the age of the waning of nations, and what we are seeing now is one final crescendo before they lay down and die for this cycle of history. My perspective is Spenglerian, and Kultur is on the tipping point into Zivilization. The nations will melt into Empire, but the EU is not that Existential Empire. The United States is the only candidate left to be imperial core for the Empire of the West. Europe will terrify itself once more, perhaps facing the new Carthage that has not quite yet been broken of its dreams of small-e empire (Russia). It will then submit itself to the Imperial Core and the nascent Empire of the West, just as its predecessor of Hellas did with Rome.

Tho Carthage will needs must be broken before the Empire can formally arise. The Imperial Core's march to Caesarism has been advanced under Barack Hussein Obama. That advance will sadly not be reversed. Not sure how the East China Sea games will play out with the New Persia (China). Some think the Empire of the West will subsume the globe, I think it takes in only the lands dominated by the cultural West (Europe, the Americas north and south, and Australasia; maybe Japan as well). But certainly East Asia will be one of the major theaters in the coming wars Obama has inspired. Or will be remembered as enabling, just as Neville takes the blame for WW2.

Anonymous VD May 30, 2014 11:04 AM  

"An atom bomb going off in New York, London, or Tel Aviv? "

You say that like it's a bad thing. Throw in LA and Washington DC and you've got yourself a million-dollar Kickstarter.

Actually, it would be funny to see how much money could be raised on Kickstarter for nuking those cities. "And if we hit our $15 million stretch goal, we'll release irradiated man-eating super rats in Portland!"

Blogger The Anti-Gnostic May 30, 2014 11:06 AM  

"(LRC is having a good day, full of quality stuff.)"

Those days are getting kind of sparse. Lew and his writers go on and on about FASCISM and have to do backflips to pretend that it's not actually the State which keeps sexual deviants from being driven out of town and illiterate, unassimilable negroes from starvation.

The State rests on easy credit and powerful human preferences for hierarchy and order. When the money runs out or the State's credibility erodes, State power disappears like a puff of smoke. The police and military all leave to protect their families and then it's all about blood, not the Constitution.

We have a lot of really good examples of what happens when the civil order breaks down, and Lew and his writers won't touch them.

Anonymous Dr. Kenneth Noisewater May 30, 2014 11:07 AM  

Keeping the sealanes clear and smacking down terrorists is therefore a requirement of our national security.

Keeping the sealanes clear at taxpayer expense allows for a lot of global free-riding. Better to index the cost of the USN to tariffs so that the relationship between service and price is explicit. I also prefer to keep a force geared towards vengeance/"retaliatory safeguard", so that reprisals can be so fast, thorough and horrible that we'd only have to use it once per size-class: daisy-cutters and drones for terrorists, sympathizers, and all their loved ones, saturation nuking for 'rogue nations'.

Anonymous Azimus May 30, 2014 11:08 AM  

Duane Oldsen:
"Barack Hussein Obama will be remembered as the combined second comings of Neville Chamberlain, Jimmy Carter, and Richard Milhous Nixon"

...

"The Imperial Core's march to Caesarism has been advanced under Barack Hussein Obama."


So which is it? Did he bungle the fortunes of the empire or did he advance them cunningly? These two threads of thought seem contradictory to me

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 11:12 AM  

Keeping the sea lanes clear can be done privately, between letting merchant shipping arm itself to the gills, and providing pirate-baiting cruises to modern day safari enthusiasts looking for bigger game.

Privateers: What's old is new again!

The US Navy can then concern itself with nation-state size threats.

Anonymous Mullah Omar Cheddarman May 30, 2014 11:19 AM  

The infidel Swiss who generally mind their own business and bother no one, are an affront to Islam and the Prophet Mohammed, and must be destroyed.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 11:19 AM  

>Those days are getting kind of sparse.
I agree, for different reasons. Lew and his peeps share an internally inconsistent worldview. You can't really marry a market order with Catholicism, because the Catholic Church is a state.

In this regard they suffer the same problem as the L.P.

Also, since a lot of funding over the years came from gold sellers, it is largely forbidden to question the dogma of "death by inflation." This is not to mention the period when LRC became the Ron Paul Show.

True (political) anarchism does not appeal to a wide enough cohort to sustain a site like LRC. Make the tent bigger, but it requires ideological impurity which induces cognitive dissonance in anyone who pays attention.

Man may be a political animal, but that doesn't mean you can call something that is politics by another name and make it so.

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 11:20 AM  

All know that swiss is the heretical cheese, so say the prophets of cheddar.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 11:21 AM  

@ Anti-gnostic,
try this author's LRC archive: http://www.lewrockwell.com/author/david-calderwood/

Blogger Duane Oldsen May 30, 2014 11:35 AM  

Azimus:
So which is it? Did he bungle the fortunes of the empire or did he advance them cunningly? These two threads of thought seem contradictory to me

Both.

He has accelerated the end of the Republic, the Republic's transition into Existential Empire, and he has ensured the coming of the Republic's concluding, significant wars.

No genius is involved. Only sloth.

The effects of WW2 on the global geopolitical order were profound. No one sings praises to the wit and wisdom of Neville Chamberlain for enabling those changes. Slothful cowards do not get odes to their glory. But they can have massive effects on the tides of history.

Anonymous Giraffe May 30, 2014 11:38 AM  

saturation nuking for 'rogue nations'.

Professor Hale calls that "nuclear carpet bombing".

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 11:40 AM  

That's unfair to Neville.

Neville was the head of a people who did not want war. He went to Munich with nothing, and came back with nothing.

But where he *could* act, he did. The shadow factories were his scheme and were vital to the war effort. Contrast that with Churchill, who was responsible for the perpetual rolling of the ten year rule.

Chamberlain knew what was coming, and had the wherewithal to actually do something in his country's own interest to meet the coming storm. He may have not acted as boldly, as honorably, as cleverly, as he should have; but he was not devoid of these qualities.

Obama?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother May 30, 2014 11:52 AM  

OT:

last night while watching the news, I saw on CNN that Donald sterling has agreed to sell the team to Steve Ballmer, who made the winning bid and that Donald sterling has been declared mentally incapacitated by somebody.

Blogger David May 30, 2014 11:52 AM  

>Professor Hale calls that "nuclear carpet bombing".

The Pentagon still has full color movies recorded in Hiroshima and Nagasaki just days after the bombs were dropped.

To this day they are kept away from the press and everyone else. Can you imagine why?

Because politicians from Truman on all knew that if the horrors they reveal were to land on the public conscience, popular consent for the government would evaporate under the collective guilt of the people.

Those who espouse the use of nuclear weapons stand apart from the masses of men. If they think themselves serving Christ's Divine Will, surely they are the most deluded of all living men.

Anonymous Bill May 30, 2014 12:14 PM  

Azimus May 30, 2014 11:08 AM

So which is it? Did [Obama] bungle the fortunes of the empire or did he advance them cunningly? These two threads of thought seem contradictory to me

He sat and watched Sportscenter. He played golf. He went on vacation. The idea of Obama as a driver of world events is too bizarre even to contemplate.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother May 30, 2014 12:20 PM  

OT: I was watching CNN last night and I saw that Steve Ballmer had made the winning bid to buy the Clippers, and that Donald sterling has been declared mentally incapacitated.

Anonymous scoobius dubious May 30, 2014 12:23 PM  

"One has to be intrinsically stupid and beyond redemption to believe that 911 was not an inside job."

When you imply it was an inside job, do you simply mean that Al Quaeda were not the perpetrators and it was somebody else, or do you mean you think you know exactly who was responsible and what their motives and rewards were. If the latter, can you tell us your theory?

Blogger IM2L844 May 30, 2014 12:26 PM  

It's not surprising that there are those who don't see the inherent contradictory nature of imposing their particular concepts of freedom and equality on the rest of the world through coercion and militaristic force if necessary. They are collectivists and globalists even if they don't realize it themselves. And it's equally true for both right and left wing ideologies.

Greed runs the world whether for power, money or both. There is no humanly created "fair" system of governance that is immune to corruption at the highest levels except in theory. In practice, it invariably never works for long because human nature is involved and it eventually gets manipulated and twisted beyond recognition from the original concepts.

The democratic republic of The United States of America is a prime example. It looks good on paper, but a short couple hundred years and it's just another piece of paper that has been something more than simply refined. It's now a neo-democracy and the republic part has been all but forgotten.

I would bet my paycheck that any randomly selected publically schooled child you ask in America today has absolutely no idea of how to differentiate a democracy from a democratic republic. /rant

Anonymous Dr. Kenneth Noisewater May 30, 2014 12:28 PM  

Those who espouse the use of nuclear weapons stand apart from the masses of men. If they think themselves serving Christ's Divine Will, surely they are the most deluded of all living men.

I doubt the folks who died in the Dresden or Tokyo firestorms cared much that their deaths looked a lot less horrific than those of their fellow citizens in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. In fact, better to die so quickly that you vaporize before your neurons can register pain than to suffocate or burn to death in agony.

I don't espouse war. I only say that if there is to be war, then let it be overwhelming, decisive, violent, and as brief as possible. Use any and all weapons required for total victory, such that the vanquished surrender all hopes of defiance. If defiance stirs deep down in their heart, then that is where you must tear it out and burn it.

Anonymous Noah B. May 30, 2014 12:30 PM  

OT: I was watching CNN last night and I saw that Steve Ballmer had made the winning bid to buy the Clippers, and that Donald sterling has been declared mentally incapacitated.

So they're essentially punishing a man for the crime of being senile. Monstrous.

Blogger Duane Oldsen May 30, 2014 12:37 PM  

Alexander:
That's unfair to Neville.

Neville was the head of a people who did not want war. He went to Munich with nothing, and came back with nothing.

But where he *could* act, he did. The shadow factories were his scheme and were vital to the war effort. Contrast that with Churchill, who was responsible for the perpetual rolling of the ten year rule.

Chamberlain knew what was coming, and had the wherewithal to actually do something in his country's own interest to meet the coming storm. He may have not acted as boldly, as honorably, as cleverly, as he should have; but he was not devoid of these qualities.


Yes, its unfair to Neville.

Such is life. He was the fool who came back waving toilet paper and yelling “peace! Peace in our time!” Even in death, Neville Chamberlain has never lived that down. He never will, and he never should.

Some mistakes are so egregious that we remember them for all time as object lessons for the generations to follow. Munich is one such apocalyptic disaster. Neville has been the Pyrrhus of our time. Obama at least has been bright enough to avoid waving the toilet paper prominently.


Obama?


Obama was everything the Left had dreamed of for 50 years. Or thought it was dreaming of. He looked like the reincarnation of President Sexykewl (JFK) in the pleasantly updated wrapper. More, he looked like the fictional President Josiah Bartlett from the tv show “The West Wing” - finally for the first time since Wilson, a PROFESSOR in the White House! And a sexykewl one to boot!

Obama is the closest approximation to those desires the modern world allows.

Oops.

Anonymous cheddarman May 30, 2014 12:48 PM  

" Let's start with basics. The United States is a trade power. We profit from trade, and therefore have a vested interest in keeping the sea lanes clear. We are also a cultural hegemon - Heaven forgive us, we have conquered the world with Mickey Mouse and Mickey D's, and there are people who hate our guts for this." - Mike M.

We rack up a 15 trillion dollar deficit in part to pay for the largest navy in world, so that we can maintain a 540 billion dollar annual trade deficit, China can swamp our markets with cheap goods and destroy our manufacturing base and middle class, and the bankers make megabucks by having the U.S. dollar as the worlds reserve currency. That is a shitty deal for the average American, Mike M.


sincerely

cheddarman

Anonymous Dan in Tx (shalom) May 30, 2014 12:51 PM  

"As Robert Kagan shows in a brilliant essay in The New Republic..."

That opener right there is your forewarning that you are probably going to hurl your lunch. Robert Kagan, hmmm isn't he Victoria (Nudelman) Nuland's husband? Yet another dual citizen from Talmudistan who is no doubt, looking out for America's best interest.

Anonymous Stilicho Al Saud May 30, 2014 12:52 PM  

The infidel Swiss who generally mind their own business and bother no one, are an affront to Islam and the Prophet Mohammed, and must be destroyed.

Keep your goat-fuddering hands off of our bankers or you will learn first hand how far you can run without any money.

Anonymous GG May 30, 2014 12:54 PM  

"The concept of representative democracy has failed abysmally."

I completely disagree. We have representative democracy in the US, it's just that many of us don't like what's being represented. That's not a failure or a flaw of democracy itself. We are frequently ruled by our lowest common denominator, which unfortunately is usually the will of the people. It is what it is.

Anonymous Stilicho May 30, 2014 12:54 PM  

So they're essentially punishing a man for the crime of being senile. Monstrous.

Feel free to punish me with $2 billion as well.

Anonymous dh May 30, 2014 12:56 PM  

cheddarman--

Let's be clear though, we could fully fund the Navy, finish building all the new gen. ships, and the Marines for 150 billion.

That's a lot of money, but only about 4% of the budget.

Anonymous Frank Brady May 30, 2014 1:05 PM  

No, it's not. 911 should have been enough to learn that doing nothing is insane or wrong.

It has been my observation that invading and bombing a country that has not attacked us and killing tens of thousands of their civilians for no defensible reason tends to leave the survivors more than a little pissed off.

There may be something more disgusting than a pack of neoconservative girly-men who have never worn the uniform or heard a shot fired in anger but who are, none-the-less, prepared to fight until the last drop of somebody else's blood but nothing comes to mind.

FJB

Anonymous Alexander May 30, 2014 1:23 PM  

GG,

So you do not consider a system that defaults to the rule of the lowest common denominator as being an abysmal failure of a concept?

Anonymous cheddarman May 30, 2014 1:47 PM  

"cheddarman--

Let's be clear though, we could fully fund the Navy, finish building all the new gen. ships, and the Marines for 150 billion.

That's a lot of money, but only about 4% of the budget. "


DH, the point i wanted to make was that the average american does not derive any benefit from the U.S. military.

The US military is the collection agency of the banksters. further, the banksters are actively undermining the various working classes of Americans through outsourcing jobs and in-sourcing non-americans.

Anonymous 11B May 30, 2014 2:12 PM  

What has to change is the way we wage war against these pigs. Not one squaddie should have run a patrol in Iraq or Afghanistan. All we need is one fortified and well defended air base and perhaps a couple teams of elite operatives. It is no secret who these people are that are arrayed against us. They should be taken out with drones, hit teams and paid assassins. Rinse and repeat for their replacements. We shouldn't waste time with hearts and minds, or worry about collateral damage. We should wage war on them the exact same way they wage it on us: with surprise attacks when they are relaxed and defenceless. Once they are dead, we should pack up and leave.
This shouldn't be the sole responsibility of the US either; Saddam Hussein was in violation of 21 of the conditions of his earlier surrender - any one of which would justify further military intervention. All the countries signed it, all agreed to the violations - and only the US stepped up.


I always notice that immigration is never mentioned on a neocon's to-do list.

Anonymous Dr. Kenneth Noisewater May 30, 2014 2:23 PM  

Let's be clear though, we could fully fund the Navy, finish building all the new gen. ships, and the Marines for 150 billion.

For $150 billion, the US could also convert all of its power generation to LFTRs and PRISMs. Probably within 10 years.

In other words, there are things far more useful to the American people, and which would improve its security just as much, as improvements to the Navy, nice though the Navy is.

Anonymous Salt May 30, 2014 2:35 PM  

Obama at least has been bright enough to avoid waving the toilet paper prominently

Have to know what that is to wave it.

Anonymous Noah B. May 30, 2014 2:39 PM  

Feel free to punish me with $2 billion as well.

After reading the details of what happened, it doesn't sound bad at all.

Blogger Brad Andrews May 30, 2014 2:41 PM  

> That's not a failure or a flaw of democracy itself.

Yes it is. It is a HUGE flaw because that is what democracy will always degrade into.

Anonymous Porky May 30, 2014 2:47 PM  

We have representative democracy in the US, it's just that many of us don't like what's being represented.

Lol!

GG... here's a math problem for you.

535 / 300,000,000 = ?

Blogger ScuzzaMan May 30, 2014 2:48 PM  

Brooks is a palace courtier. In every age intellectuals have been willing to prostitute their ability to invent plausible-seeming rationalisations for the existence and necessity of the throne, and our duty to genuflect before it.

The prime conceit of our age is that it is different from all those before it.

We presume that Harvard-educated WASPs in 5,000 dollar suits cannot possibly be as bloodthirsty in their pursuit of power as was Ghengiz Khan (but they are).

We presume that the magic word "democracy" has put an end to autocracy (but it hasn't, only driven underground).

We presume that we are the pinnacle of a constantly rising linear progression (but we're not), that can never reverse (but it can, has, does, and will).

We presume too much, and the job of the Brooks' of the world is to rationalise our presumptions so we dont begin to question them, examine their shaky foundations, or ever imagine rejecting them.

Anonymous kh123 May 30, 2014 3:12 PM  

"(it means "do you have schizophrenia". Geddit?)"

No no, Tommy, the choices - depending on if you're Unionist or Loyalist - are either coprophilic or Stockholm Syndrome.

Anonymous 11B May 30, 2014 3:28 PM  

We presume that Harvard-educated WASPs in 5,000 dollar suits cannot possibly be as bloodthirsty in their pursuit of power as was Ghengiz Khan (but they are).

You presume they are WASPs. At least in Brook's case, that is not true.

Anonymous Mullah Omar Cheddarman May 30, 2014 3:49 PM  

"We presume that Harvard-educated WASPs in 5,000 dollar suits cannot possibly be as bloodthirsty in their pursuit of power as was Ghengiz Khan (but they are)." Scuzzaman

wrong tribe, Scuzzaman. Brooks is of Jewish descent, according to wikipedia

Anonymous WaterBoy May 30, 2014 4:15 PM  

Alexander: "All know that swiss is the heretical cheese"

No it isn't...on account of it's 'hole-y' cheese.

*ba-dump-bum*

Blogger Sean Carnegie May 30, 2014 4:35 PM  

@ Alexander

I wonder how you get to the "Chamberlain knew what was coming..." part. If he knew what was coming, what purpose is it to let him allow the annexation of Sudentenland? Is it simply to buy time at others' expense to allow the buildup to continue? Those few months weren't exactly long enough. If he knew what was coming, why allow Germany that extra time to further *their* buildup when they were, US notwithstanding, the most industrious nation in the world under Hitler's direction? Why not just roll dice at that point?

Blogger CO80401 May 30, 2014 4:45 PM  

The US still imports almost half its oil. The day the US becomes self selfsefiecent is the day we become a third world county

Blogger Glen Filthie May 30, 2014 5:27 PM  

How do you propose to keep moslems out in this political climate, Vox? If it were possible I would be all for it - but we both know that political correctness forbids it in the real world.

I also don't know if America has the intellectual wherewithal to remain truly neutral. These are the same idiots that voted Obama into office - twice! Most of them aren't smart enough to balance a check book. Maintaining a neutrality is actually harder, IMO, than taking sides in such conflicts.

Anonymous rycamor May 30, 2014 5:31 PM  

Glen, that's like saying "Well the house is already on fire, so I may as well pour gasoline on it to put out the fire."

Anonymous paradox May 30, 2014 5:37 PM  

John Wright

Hm. Did your friend know that Isaac Newton, arguably the greatest scientific mind of all time, wrote wrote over a million words of notes regarding his study of the Bible, which he read daily and thoroughly? That is a pretty deep closet.


Meh... don't know if I would consider Newton a Christian. He denied the Trinity and was into Kabbalah. At worst a Gnostic, at best a theist, who studied the Bible.

Now John Polkinghorne would be a good example of a Christian scientist.

Blogger Baloo May 30, 2014 7:01 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Baloo May 30, 2014 7:03 PM  

Very effective. Reblogged and quibcagged here:
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2014/05/democracy-shmemocracy.html

Anonymous 11B May 30, 2014 8:13 PM  

How do you propose to keep moslems out in this political climate, Vox? If it were possible I would be all for it - but we both know that political correctness forbids it in the real world.

Glen, please take a look at what you are saying. On one hand you advocate for military confrontation around the world to defend America, yet you want no part in confronting the very real threat that has taken a hold of America, and is actively destroying it from within. It doesn't make any sense. What is more damaging to America, Al Qaeda or cultural marxism? It seems to be a no brainer that political correctness, cultural marxism, leftwing progressives or whatever you wish to call it is the greatest threat. Yet you want no part of it.

If it really has come to the point where political correctness is too entrenched to defeat, then what is the purpose of spending our blood and treasure around the world to serve it?

From my point of view, what is the point of doing the heavy lifting of maintaining peace and order around the world, when I in effect have been evicted from my home?

I am not saying confronting PC is going to be easy. But I believe it is a lot easier than fighting a potential war with Russia. In the first place the PC brigade has no guns. They wield power through the bully pulpit of the media and use that platform to deny dissenters employment opportunities.

Blogger bethyada May 30, 2014 8:29 PM  

Any perspective on this opinion.

He is a political scientist but he seems to disagree with much US opinion? Sample

Thus, while their reasons differ, scholars as varied as G. John Ikenberry, Robert Jervis, and William Wohlforth, have seen eye to eye on the possibility of an extended period of Great Power peace. However, this view is misplaced, and a faulty one on which to base policy.

Politics and history typically return with a vengeance.

A survey of recent developments in world politics is instructive.

In Europe, Russia has reacted to the overthrow of the corrupt, but democratically-elected, Viktor Yanukovich regime in Ukraine by asserting a long-standing interest in what has historically been its sphere of influence.

Moscow has dispatched troops to the Russian-Ukraine border, and repeatedly violated its neighbour's sovereignty, not least in aiding and abetting the pro-Russian, anti-Kiev opposition in Eastern Ukraine.

Moreover, the Russians have taken these actions despite the fact they are taking a beating in the global financial markets and incurring a variety of international sanctions.

Yet, for all the hysteria emanating from the US and European press, much of it focused on the severely public relations-challenged Russian leader Vladimir Putin, a dispassionate analysis suggests that in pursuing its policy, Moscow has limited political aims and acted with relative restraint.

Anonymous Anonymous May 30, 2014 8:29 PM  

How do you propose to keep moslems out in this political climate, Vox?

Obviously, in this political climate we can't. But likewise, in this political climate we can't use military adventures to damage their ability to attack us either. Our foreign interventions which you support have served to increase Muslim power abroad, not reduce it.

Whether you think that's on accident or by design is another question. But if the political climate were such that we could attack Muslim power overseas, we could also prevent them from infiltrating our country, which would be the better strategy.

Thought experiment: imagine that we had a president who was secretly Muslim and wanted to help Muslims kill and oppress Christians and establish power bases from which to launch terrorist attacks on the US and Europe. What would he have done differently than Bush and Obama?

Blogger jacopo.saracini May 30, 2014 8:48 PM  

Somebody must be whispering "Syria" into Brooks's ear. I don't think it's a coincidence that Syria is back in the news even though nothing of significance has happened there lately. Syria will be the gift that keeps on giving for the MIC. The regime will be toppled, then we will get to assist the "moderates" in a civil war with the immoderates.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus May 30, 2014 10:56 PM  

bethyada: "Any perspective on this opinion."

On one level: "Duh!" Any fan of John J. Mearsheimer's offensive realism could tell you the same.

On another level: "who cares?"

Realism (offensive or not) has a massive hole in it because of America's relationship with Israel. There is nothing like it in the world or in history.

John J. Mearsheimer has tried to explain this away with The Israel Lobby, as he is theoretically obligated to do. (And as all theorists of international relations are intellectually obligated to do, if they had any integrity.) His explanation is, as it has to be, that the Israel lobby is as American as apple pie, completely above board, all OK, loose, friendly, patriotic, and in no way conspiratorial or dominating. (And he and Stephen M. Walt still get called antisemites for this.)

This explaining away can't do much to this bottom line: Jewish influence can generate exceptions to anybody's theories of how nations should act, and these exceptions have no upper limit as to their size, duration or importance. And nobody else has such power.

Basically "the rules" are now rules for gentiles; there are others who don't have to play by these rules, and are above them. And when "the rules" are being broken in a massive, consistent and global way, there is only one obvious candidate for the cause.

So when you see Israel's golem not doing what it should theoretically be doing (balancing against Red China) and doing what it should not be doing (such as grinding down any white country that is not committed to the agenda of non-white mass immigration and forced assimilation, and the rest of the cultural Marxist agenda), you can look the other way and wait for reality to resume; or you can shrug off what is happening as just happenstance and random stupidity (happening all across the world in a highly consistent and coordinated way for decade after decade), which is what John Mearsheimer does; or you can match what is happening to what organized Jewry wants, and if the match is good you can just say: "that's the obvious explanation, and that behavior will continue while that elite is in power."

From that last point of view, America behaving in ways that would be insane if America was still self-governing, which it is not isn't news. And Red China being treated like a horse that is being prepared for a new rider (which will be necessary in the post-white world) is simply reasonable.

And the openness with which Jews are now starting to talk about the natural affinity of Jews and Chinese people is funny. Chinese people should enjoy this flattery and seduction while it lasts. Later phases of the Jewish relationship with a subordinated host aren't nearly so much fun.

Anonymous Anonymous May 30, 2014 11:03 PM  

--wrong tribe, Scuzzaman. Brooks is of Jewish descent, according to wikipedia--

What a surprise...

- Schlomo

Anonymous The other skeptic May 30, 2014 11:30 PM  

That's not fun, it's a huge mess, people will die, but it's not a 100 kiloton thermonuclear self-sustaining air-burst bomb detonating over a major metro area.

Let's cut the crap. There is no need to go for a complicated fusion-boosted fission device when a simple fission device would be enough and would be beyond the means of pretty much all high school students and Muslim mudflaps. Shit, even the Iranians are having problems with a fission device.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus May 31, 2014 12:55 AM  

@ bethyada,

Given that America has a new ruling elite with different interests and traits, it is reasonable to take that into account. Just projecting one's own traits on the ruling elite of one's country may work to some extent with rulers of one's own ethnic group, but it's not going to work with people that are fundamentally different.

Among other things, the new ruling elite is superior to WASPs in future time orientation and aggressiveness.

That means, when it would have been appropriate to ask with a WASP elite, "how are they going to react to this?" with the new elite that's simply not the question.

They won't be reacting like (relatively) flighty whiteys to the latest moves from China or wherever. They'll be imposing their own, highly aggressive and self-generated strategy, and it will have a long-term character that will, on the key points, be insensitive to current events. Sure people will respond intensely on any emotional level. (That's another superior trait of the new ruling elite - an intimidating degree of intensity.) But on a fundamental strategic level, they have a strong shared sense of the sort of things they want. They're not going to get deflected.

If permawar is the strategy, that's what must be, and how China acts this year has very little to do with it.

Blogger Whiskey May 31, 2014 3:21 AM  

B rooks is both an idiot in one respect and probably accurate in the other.

It is wise, as Machiavelli noted, to nip problems in the bud. Dealing with Kruschev BEFORE he escalates to Missiles in Cuba, is a wise idea. Similarly, had the British and French simply marched in and deposed Hitler when he remilitarized the Rhineland in violation of the Treaty of Versailles, they could have done so easily as then the German military was very weak (it did not remain so for long). [German high command survivors recounted after the War they were amazed that the French police did not act -- the former was more well armed than the German Army at that point.]

BUT ... and here is the BUT ... Machiavelli points out that it takes extreme wisdom to act early, using the doctor/patient metaphor. The Doctor (the Prince) must determine early what is the matter and act swiftly while much pain can be avoided. But even worse than inaction is wrong-action: taking the exact wrong course that makes the State weaker.

What's wrong with Brooks? No you morons, this is not a "Jewish Plot," this is the natural result of the Cold War and fears of a nuclear holocaust that inhibit every action by policy makers of all stripes since 1948 when Stalin got the bomb.

ANY real confrontation with the Soviets (later Mao) ran the risk of triggering a global nuclear war wiping out Western Civilization if not life on Earth. Thus not one, not two, but three generations of elites and policy makers were conditioned to avoid any real confrontation and engage in endless proxy wars.

With extremely limited conditions for fighting (so we would not go to war directly with the Soviets or Mao) and the idea of proxy attrition warfare.

This is probably not how Obama (a Third World Radical in character) thinks, but it certainly how his people think. Including Power, Rice, Hillary, Kerry, etc. It was how Bush and his people, particularly Cheney and Rumsfeld, thought.

It is pretty ALIEN to Western traditions going back to the Greeks: find the enemy, make sure they can't run away, and engage in a giant battle to kill them ALL so we can all go home. That's pretty much the history of Western Warfare until nuclear weapons.

Nukes changed all that, so everyone was desperate to avoid any direct conflict with the USSR or Mao. Hence all these endless Third World Wars in Africa, in SE Asia, in Central America, in South America, in the ME, etc. America's elites are trapped in the Cold War proxy-attrition strategy, hence drone strikes, arming all sorts of nasty Islamists because they're against, for now, the Russians and Iranian team up. And a zillion other stupid things.

Even the Gulf War, was run like this -- total victory over Saddam was avoided to keep him in play as useful proxy agent against the Iranians.

Again the reason for this is sheer force of habit. Mental adjustments and ways of thinking that ran from 1948 to 1991 are hard to break.

America SHOULD keep a lid on things, as much as practically possible and where America has compelling interests. None of which suggests much in Africa btw. Keeping a lid will have to rest ultimately on military strength, which means real sea-borne supplying of troops who come in and break some regime, and then ... leave. Point being made and thus allowing diplomacy which without threats of force that are credible, are useless, to persuade various nations and leaders to behave in ways more to the advantage of the United States and less to its disadvantaged.

None of this has any relation to morality or justice or anything other than security and peace for the people of the US, which is based on force of arms and nothing else in the end. Ugly and sad but that is much of life.

Anonymous Unce May 31, 2014 5:38 AM  

Why don't we just import them all and then they'll open ethnic restaurants and become freedom and peace loving because 'Murika'.

Blogger Galt-in-Da-Box May 31, 2014 8:33 AM  

That is standard, mackeral-snapping spiritualism applied to politics: Since 1868, the Roman CULT has endeavored to expand its empire via American militarism on the right, bribery on the left, & various combinations thereof. The Whore whoring out to Roth$child BanKHAZAR$ in 1997 merely accelerated the process.
The joke is on them, for The One they CLAIM to worship & serve shall shortly deal with them & all other worldly political "authority" usurping His own!

Anonymous fnn May 31, 2014 8:58 AM  

What is more damaging to America, Al Qaeda or cultural marxism? It seems to be a no brainer that political correctness, cultural marxism, leftwing progressives or whatever you wish to call it is the greatest threat.

You're only allowed to call them what they call themselves. They control the discourse. Above all, don't call them Jews.

Not that they're all Jews, but those who set the intellectual agenda are very disproportionately Jewish.

Anonymous fnn May 31, 2014 9:05 AM  

You're only allowed to call them what they call themselves. They control the discourse. Above all, don't call them Jews.

Similarly, you're no longer allowed to call the neoconservatives by the name they gave themselves. That's considered anti-Semitic. Anyway, they've taken over the entire "conservative" movement-which is now almost wholly cultural Marxist. Ted Cruz is posing as the lone holdout of any significance. Sessions is close to a nonperson.

Anonymous map May 31, 2014 11:29 AM  

Whiskey,

How does importing Somalis, Chechens, Mexicans, Muslims and others "keep a lid on things"? Yeah, I'm sympathetic to the Cold War technique of war by proxy to avoid nukes, but much of security problems are internal to who we open are doors.

Anonymous 11B May 31, 2014 2:28 PM  

No you morons, this is not a "Jewish Plot," this is the natural result of the Cold War and fears of a nuclear holocaust that inhibit every action by policy makers of all stripes since 1948 when Stalin got the bomb.

And how did Stalin get the bomb?

Blogger Tommy Hass May 31, 2014 5:43 PM  

"None of this has any relation to morality or justice or anything other than security and peace for the people of the US, which is based on force of arms and nothing else in the end. Ugly and sad but that is much of life."

Reading this post is a perfect case study how high verbal IQ can fuck over the minds of men. His co-tribalists similarly possess high verbal IQ so you see how they managed to trick people into ludicrous bullshit.

If a bunch of kikes continuously call for perpetual war against countries that haven't done anything to harm Americans nor have the capacity to do so, and if you have Israeli leaders repeatedly stating that America is on their string and trying to get them to attack various Islamic countries, you tend to connect the dots.

Seriously though, why exactly is Iran supposed to be such a mortal enemy to the USA? I mean, aside from the asinine "HURRR, muh hostage crisis" argument.

If the US government said that Iran and America are no longer enemies, this entire "rivalry" would disappear in thin air. It is exclusively one direction.

The only REAL "crime" that Iran is guilty of is not becoming a vassal of America and not strong enough to destroy/seriously harm them like Russa/China.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts