I keep returning to the asshole well. That’s because it doesn’t run dry.
In my to do list is to finish the goddamn story about how I became a lefty, and I’ve been compiling stories that suggest to me that something big is gonna go down in America, like in a violent way. When (or if) the Republican Party is finally exposed for the criminal organization that it is, I think we’re going to pop off into a civil war-and I want to be ready, although my wife does not want me to be a soldier again.
Anyway, I’m biting at the Tucker bait because I think it’s funny and judging by the amount of people who come here to see what an asshole he is, it’s the sensible thing to write about. I need to give the people what they want.
So, how many of us remember “Ol’ Blood And Guts”?
No, not Patton.
A more current warmongerer is who I had in mind.
Hm. I don’t seem to have any stuff about Colonel Ralph Peters on this blog. That means I haven’t heard from him in over six years. He’s one of Fox News’ “analysts” and go-to guys on all things war, even though the good colonel has never been to one. Ralph’s a cantankerous fella, more old man than old soldier. You can reasonably assume that his appearances and writing will be over the top, and therefore hilarious. Here’s a few of his greatest hits. Kill, kill, kill for peace, hang the traitors by their thumbs and take the booty because it’s the white man’s burden to civilize the world.
Did I mention that Ralph is old? Ralph is so old, he’s a Republican who remembers that t
he Soviet Union Russia is not our friend. And don’t you forget it, sonny, or you’ll get a tongue lashing.
That’s the mistake that Tucker Carlson made, who is young and does not remember fallout shelters and desk drills and being an ass hair from mutually assured nuclear annihilation. Now look-I’m not saying that historical enemies cannot be our friends. But if you think about it, you generally have to waste them to get them to be nice, a la Germany, Japan and even Vietnam in the long run. We never broke Russia to the point where it pledged to be good after we crushed it. And we did the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend thing with them already. When our common aims were achieved, which was ridding the world of the Nazis, we went on hating them and every godless thing they stood for.
Now it could be argued that we are at that place again, this time against ISIS. But really, no one gives a jolly fuck about ISIS but us, partially because we keep picking at a scab called 9/11. That’s the story for the rubes in the United States, anyway. What we’ve actually been up to is trying to control the globe, cynically using our collective fear of terror (and make no mistake, the “terrorists” are today’s Red Menace) as a pretext to gobble up more power. We never stopped trying to hem Russia in while they spiraled into chaos in the 80s. Since then we’ve grown NATO, made buddy-buddy with breakaway soviets, and are moving antiballistic missiles closer and closer to the Russian border. I really think we are still trying to game out getting away with an unanswered nuclear first strike.
Then Vladimir Putin came along. An ex-KGB creep turned technocrat, he embraced capitalism, Christianity, and politically motivated murder while using Russia’s formidable oil wealth to mount a defense of itself. He has crushed rebellions and annexed land as he expands his power. And if you are an enemy of America, he wants to know you.
We are NOT angels, but Vladimir Putin is probably not a good person and not to be trusted whatsoever. We are at cross purposes with him in Syria. He’s pummeling the resistance to Bashar-Al Assad ruthlessly, and setting ISIS back on its heels a little in the process. We’ve had less luck in this area because we are futilely trying to arm the small resistance that has both ISIS and Assad as its nemeses. We’re trying to thread a needle here-because any further aggression against Assad is probably not going to sit well with Putin. We’re already in something approaching a proxy war with him already, and there seems to be no appetite here for a more direct one that could send this whole world to hell.
Anyway, it looks like Putin’s recent skulduggery took the form of trying to curry favor with an entire American political party, particularly one that would work with and protect one President Donald J. Trump and associates in order to advance Russian interests. After the country suffered six months of smoke inhalation, we’ve finally found some still glowing embers of the conflagration that we’re calling collusion. And it’s not going to go away. The American political system has never been tested in this way before-this is “new snow”, as I saw it put once. It’s so new, there might not be laws against it, I fear. But surely there is something odious and unethical at the very least about letting a rival nation ratfuck an American election. Our elections stink of illegal and unethical behavior as it is with caging and allegations of machine hacking. But the reachout to Russia must qualify as something in the “misdemeanor” part of the impeachment clauses, if Herr Trump is indeed red-handed. And that’s just the president-this dragnet could ensnare high ranking Republicans outside of Trump’s inner circle.
But you didn’t come here to listen to me tell you shit you already know. You want the good shit, where your suspicions that Tucker Carlson is an asshole can be confirmed. I don’t know what his producers were thinking when they put Peters, a temperamental cold warrior, on Tucker’s show to discuss how better we can work with Russia because they are achieving one of our foreign policy goals (while undermining another, because not only is Tucker an asshole, he’s a damn fool as well). Here’s the exchange:
You can read a partial transcript here, if you have no patience for how wrongly both of these people see the world before the sparks fly. But basically, Col. Peters said that Carlson was like Charles Lindbergh in 1938 who said he had no issues with Hitler because he hasn’t attacked the United States.
Boom, Ol’ Blood And Guts, boom.
So, is Putin Hitler? I don’t know really know enough about him. But the general rule is Hitler, and only Hitler, is Hitler. Peters is no stranger to hyperbolic thinking, but that doesn’t necessarily make him wrong in being worried about their expansion. The potential is certainly there. Peters is upset that the Russian military bombs indiscriminately. As if we have never done that. He props up vicious dictators like the Assad family. We do that shit all the time. So really, is Russia any more terroristic than we are? Not really. We are two sides of the same coin. But both of us are trying to divvy up the world, and Putin wants a few pieces and Tucker’s like, have at it, Russkies. And we don’t know how far they will go, and that’s why I’ll go with Peters’ assessment before I go trying to shake hands with the country who will try to run the board if we don’t. Personally, I wish we could stop playing Risk but bowing out of the imperial struggle does not guarantee that the other player wants to stop. And that’s where Carlson fucks up, failing to understand that we are two empires in competition and it’s not worth extending Russian reach across the globe in order to advance a narrow, misdirected foreign policy objective partly because we can Never Forget.
I like President Obama most of the time. But I do not approve of him slowly sinking more troops into the Iraqi’s battle against ISIS. We lost two soldiers yesterday at a forward base.
I would very much like to be out of Iraq. I think the president tried as best he could to stop that foolishness. But whoever takes his place is probably going to escalate the ISIS crisis( although in the unlikely event that Bernie Sanders wins that will probably not happen).
Make no mistake: ISIS is a frightening group of people to tango with. Not only are they a fierce army, they are not afraid to use terror as a weapon to spread their tendrils. Their ambitions appear to be primarily local, unless you can count things like San Bernardino and Brussels. International terrorism will never really be wiped out so long as someone is hungry for power and has a cause to die for. We can try to slow its growth, using new anti-terror methods(and dubious ones too: see Guantanamo Bay).
I don’t think there is any rational answer to forces like ISIS and Boko Haram. Short of invading countries and losing thousands of soldier’s lives, we have to do what we can within the bounds of the law(and not surveil Muslim neighborhoods, Ted Cruz). We simply can’t give in to fear by being extreme; I don’t want things like Japanese internment. I don’t want waterboarding and torture to the point of insanity.
As I said, in the end escalation is likely to become policy, the commanders in chief finding no other alternative to beating thse sick fucks. America is getting ready to bleed again.
Are we ready? Is our coalition ready to die for innocents this time, instead of oil? Do we have to destroy the village to save it once again? Time will tell.
Let’s face it; if it weren’t for the oil, we’d have nothing to do with ISIS. We just wouldn’t give a shit. Our tar baby, Iraq, will keep holding us there for years.
ISIS has done nothing to the United States. They never will. They could give a fuck. Their war is one of dominance and power but they aren’t really interested in us as a target of their viciousness. That could change, however, if we keep bombing them. Hard to say. They don’t seem too impressed with our efforts so far.
I spent a year with the Iraqi people. I found them charming, funny, and hospitable. I would love it if we were able to lift them up out of despair and hopelessness. But that is what we brought them. We have subjected them to terror and poverty. If we really wanted to help that country, we could roll up ISIS in a month with overwhelming force. But it begs the question: why the lack of resolve? It’s a well established fact that air power doesn’t win wars. They are a force multiplier, but only when used in conjunction with other assets. Vietnam refused to bow no matter how many sorties we flew. It tends to entrench the enemy, not decimate it. The problem is political in nature; Barack Obama is determined not to break a campaign promise. I kind of respect him for that. But these half-ass measures in Iraq are no better. We either win this thing or fuck off.
But Obama seems to have no problem with a new foreign policy; that of toppling Bashar-Al-Assad in Syria. Currently, we want to have it both ways-we want to hit ISIS and knock over Assad in the process. Obama’s playing hardball. He’s just as much a slave to the type of cynical realpolitik calculations that have gotten us into trouble all over the globe. Why, if I didn’t know any better, I’d go full paranoiac and say that we are letting ISIS operate in Syria because our interests, however diametrically opposed otherwise, converge there. Our so-called “moderates” are hapless, if they even exist.
Enter Russia. As ever, Russia is trying to keep NATO and NATO-aligned countries out of its sphere of influence. They’re doing exactly what we are doing; protecting their turf. But we may have to let the chew toy called Syria go and let the Russians boot ISIS from the area. I bet Russian commanders relish the idea of seasoning its military by doing this. Might be easy. Might not be. Ain’t our bitch. Let’s cut the shit and move on, we’ll do Iraq and they’ll do Syria. Or not. Whatever we are doing now is not going to work. Fish or cut bait.
I am no warmonger. I’m more mad at ISIS for destroying history and ancient artifacts than anything else. But Iraq deserves better than the cancer we gave them. Maybe we can finally make it a war for liberation, unlike the last two times we went. I hate that I am saying we go in one more time. But honest strategists will have to admit that air power isn’t going to fix Iraq’s problems, and their military is simply not capable enough to rid themselves of ISIS. They haven’t been ready since we created them.
Dust off the Powell Doctrine, fuck the Rumsfeld Doctrine. We’re going to be there no matter. Let’s do it right.
This is what Republicans call a frontrunner:
KELLY: Governor Walker, in February you said that we needed to gain partners in the Arab world. Which Arab country not already in the U.S. led coalition has potential to be our greatest partner?
WALKER: What about then (ph), we need to focus on the ones we have. You look at Egypt, probably the best relationship we’ve had in Israel, at least in my lifetime, incredibly important.
I’m gonna put aside the fact that he just said that Egypt is in Israel. But did he even hear the question? I mean, politicians are famous for answering the question they want to answer instead of answering the question they were asked, but Kelly specifically said “allies not already in the coalition”, and Walker replied (sort of) by talking about the ones we have. This is a special kind of hiding in a safe place because someone made you think.
You look at the Saudis — in fact, earlier this year, I met with Saudi leaders, and leaders from the United Arab Emirates, and I asked them what’s the greatest challenge in the world today? Set aside the Iran deal. They said it’s the disengagement of America. We are leading from behind under the Obama-Clinton doctrine — America’s a great country. We need to stand up and start leading again, and we need to have allies, not just in Israel, but throughout the Persian Gulf.”
We’re stuck in the Middle East tar baby more than we ever have been. Does Walker not know we are bombing Iraq? That we are training mercenaries to topple the Syrian government? That we are helping the Saudis crush the Houthi rebellion in Yemen? Or that we still have 10,000 troops in Afghanistan? And these are all strategic decisions from a Democratic administration. I’d hate to see what the war party would cook up to top the current group.
Then Scott Walker was asked about Iran:
“To me, you terminate the deal on day one, you reinstate the sanctions authorized by Congress, you go to Congress and put in place even more crippling sanctions in place, and then you convince our allies to do the same.
This is not just bad with Iran, this is bad with ISIS. It is tied together, and, once and for all, we need a leader who’s gonna stand up and do something about it.”
Iran and ISIS tied together. They fucking hate each other. All revolutions are not alike, dummy. Every problem looks like a nail to America, and I’m sick of it. We don’t need more bluster and intervention. The world will keep turning if we stay out of trouble.
Call Sarah Palin, Scott. She wants her word salad back.
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) said over the weekend that U.S. troops were “ready to go back” to Iraq to fight ISIS.
In an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl that aired on Sunday, Ernst pointed out that she had not yet made a call for ground troops to be redeployed to Iraq.
“I am not ready to put ground troops in, but I think we are coming to a juncture where we will have to make that hard decision,” Ernst argued.
“We haven’t made that determination yet, we will have to make a decision at some point,” the Iowa Republican replied. “But having served in the Middle East, I see a need at some point. If we don’t get this situation under control, ISIS will continue to spread.”
Translation: I’m not saying we need troops. I’m simply saying that troops will be needed.
I think what irks me the most about this little snippet of interview is this:
“But having served in the Middle East, I see a need at some point.”
Grrr. A fucking reservist truck driver, magically transformed into Norman Schwarzkopf. That’s amazing. It’s like me saying I went to high school so I am now qualified to teach it.
Ernst doesn’t think we’ve bled enough for an ignoble cause; oil. We couldn’t give a rat’s ass about ISIS if it weren’t for the fact that they continue to gobble that territory, territory that we fought like hell to annex. It’s gone, baby, it’s gone. It was never really ours.
I’m not saying that Joni Ernst should shut the fuck up. What I am saying is that shutting the fuck up is something she should do.