Wednesday, October 26, 2016

Our Masters Want Another War

You've heard the drumbeat.  Hillary blames them for everything, Obozo blames them for everything, and the War Party Pubbies blame them for everything, too.   

The New (Again) Permanent Enemy is The Russians.  And Our Masters want war.

What considerations should the United States take in its approach to Syria?   ...if there's one thing that unites the Washington foreign policy establishment right now, it's that we need another regime change campaign: this time in Syria, an unnecessary, dangerous escalation. I used to worry we were sleepwalking towards war with Russia. Now we seem to be outright lunging.

Syria's Assad is backed by The Russians.  So do the math.

...As one anonymous senior foreign policy official told the Washington Post, "You can't pretend you can go to war against Assad and not go to war against the Russians." Joint Chiefs Chairman General Joseph Dunford said outright that attempts to control Syrian airspace "would require us to go to war against Syria and Russia."...

Kremlinologists understand that politically, Russian dictators needs the US as an enemy.  Those politics have been successful at least since the Cuban missile crisis for all the Russian leaders.  So the US is 'Oceania' to the 'Eurasia' of Putin & Co.  The major Russian proxies have been Eastern Europe, Palestine, and (to a lesser degree) Vietnam--and currently, Syria.

Since GWBush, US policy has been wavering.  We took on the Russian proxies in Afghanistan, Palestine, and Iraq, and then body-checked the Russians with NATO in Eastern Europe.  None of those actions resulted in a direct shooting match with the Bear.

But with the White House now occupied by SCOAMF (an idiot), and Hillary in desperate need of a Cause, and with the War Party Establishment Republicans sharing Hillary's need, things are deteriorating rapidly.  Putin needs a 'win' to offset the loss of Eastern Europe, so he's pushing buttons and is near to getting a response.

...Russia's interests in the Syrian conflict are weightier than ours are, from the Tartus naval facility to the possibility of a lucrative oil pipeline to Putin's need for an overseas conflict that will keep his people in line. The Tartus base is especially relevant: it's one of Russia's very few foreign military installations and its only naval refueling point in the Mediterranean....

Much as I despise Trump, he may actually 'get it' better than all the others.  If he is actually running against The Establishment, which hankers for war, he knows that the US electorate is not willing to drop 30,000 troops into Syria.

You can hope so, anyway.  Ingraham has more on the topic at this link.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Yup. Podesta see WWIII as a Nuclear War
Date: 2015-07-15 19:33 Subject:
Re: you call it


On Jul 15, 2015 5:21 PM, "John Anzalone" wrote: >

“This agreement condemns the next generation to cleaning up a nuclear > war in the Persian Gulf… This is the greatest appeasement since Chamberlain > gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler.” > > —

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL),