This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Foreign Policy

  • A Sad State of Affairs

    Indeed it is when I find myself lending more credence to Vladimir Putin than I do this dithering, incompetent cowbird the Democrats put in our White House. One charge you most certainly cannot lay on the serving President of Russia is incompetence and our clueless Prez is about to learn that lesson first hand when he travels to Moscow this week for the G20 Summit. I wonder what lines the Vegas odds makers are laying on our permanent campaigner/dedicated duffer coming away from that conference with anything more than his tail, and, by extension, America’s, between his legs. Think about that matchup: we send a former community organizer to lock eyeballs with a former KGB colonel. Good grief! Talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight! And it’s a liberal-approved, school-safe, rubber knife at that.

    Don’t kid yourself that there aren’t plans afoot in the Kremlin to take every advantage of Barack Obama’s crumbling credibility and by now globally recognized ineptitude. Russians have long experience in how to deal with an inexpert opponent who foolishly ventures onto the thin ice. Worse, there is probably feverish planning going on in world palaces and foreign ministries all round the world, from major allies to tinhorn despots, seeking ways to exploit the bumbling, fumbling disaster that is the Democrat foreign policy as expounded by Obama, Hillary and Kerry. It’s enough to make you want to push your index finger right in the collective face of the Democrat power structure and scream, “See? See what you get when you sacrifice good governance of our country for pure political expediency?”

    I’m almost to the point of wondering if we might not be wise to run John McCain again in 2016. Let Hillary landslide bury our own RINO bumbler and inherit the mess that Obama will most assuredly leave to whoever follows. Let Hillary deal with the crumbling economy, the disaster of Obamacare and America’s third-rate diplomatic status compared to Russia and China on the world stage. Give Hillary four years to make things even worse with her own discredited socialist programs and then run a strong, conservative Republican in 2020 to set things right once again. It’s the old “Give ’em enough rope…” ploy. And make no mistake, the Democrats with their unworkable socialist policies are committing a slow form of political suicide.

    Let’s just hope they don’t kill our country in the process…

    Thereby threatening Israel’s existence.

    And possibly plunging the planet into global war.

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • You’re wrong and you should know better

    There is nothing I hate more than anyone disrespecting flag of the United States of America, or the uniform of it’s armed services.  From the hipster that wears the OD fatigues with patches as an “ironic” way of showing their disdain for the military to the idiots that act the fool while in uniform nothing makes my blood boil faster.  I can accept open disagreements with how the military should be employed, I can even accept ignorance of what the military actually does, but I simply can not accept any disrespect.  I can not accept any politician using the troops as a prop for political gain, nor can I accept any troops using their uniform, rank or position to affect the political climate with anything not directly affecting the business of their service.

    We’ve seen it happen before.  Maybe it started with Jon Kerry tossing his medals, then going before congress and lying about the “testimony” he got from “veterans” during the Winter soldier fiasco.  Maybe it was exacerbated by Danny Choi, who constantly uses his uniform to play dress up and get attention.  Maybe that douchebag Marine Sergeant that kept posting anti-Obama stuff all over Facebook (despite lawful and direct orders not to) has a hand in the continuing climate too.  I know for a fact that the narcissistic valor thieves can’t wait to get their slice of the action.

    So with all that said I think it’s pretty clear I loathe such people.  Imagine how I felt when I came across this little gem.

    navychiefpoliticalstatement
    Not to be outdone some other joker posing in Marine dress blues had to out do him.

    Marinepoliticalstatement
    Before I get into the fact that both an E-5 and an E-8 should KNOW better, or the possibility that these are valor thieves, let’s stop a second and point out that these men are cowards.  They put on the uniform with all their attendant medals, and make a political statement about what they didn’t join the military to do, but hide their face.  If you do something like that at least have the courage to show your face.  More than that don’t wear the uniform while saying it.  If you’re on your own time and feel butt hurt that you might be deployed to Syria, by all means you can talk about it in private.  You can shout and scream about it for hours to anyone you please, but when the time comes you put on your uniform and go where they tell you because that’s your duty.

    You think someone who joined the Air Force in say 1959, wanted to end up in Vietnam?  How about they guys that joined in the late 90’s and ended up in Iraq.  It sucks, and you can never tell where you’ll end up.  That’s part of the job.  You probably didn’t join for “area beautification” or getting stuck on a Sergeant Major’s detail when your LT sends your platoon into an ambush in the field.  I didn’t join to put tubes in men’s urethra’s.  There’s a whole lot of fine print when you join.  One thing that should be abundantly clear is that you swore to “Obey the orders of the President and the officers appointed over me according to the uniform code of military justice.”  Until the President gives an illegal order (say “I want you to kill all first born sons”) you are legally, orally and ethically bound to FOLLOW THOSE ORDERS. Regardless of how we feel about the missions we’re handed down, we’ve got to suck it up and do them.  When you raise your right hand you lose your “rights” as an American Citizen and fall under a whole new set of rights and privileges.  One of those regulations states very clearly that you may not use that uniform for any political speech.

    The troops are not and can not be a part of the political process.  The military has untold power at its fingertips.  and if unchecked could run rampant.  If a General were to get the idea that he could be a Caesar, and that the Mississippi was the Rubicon, what’s to stop him?  Only the solemn knowledge that his troops would never follow his orders, and most would actually put him in the brig if he tried to march on Washington (Rome).  There is a very fine, and dangerous line that separates us from every two bit banana republic, or half assed Junta.  The fact that our military is completely subservient to the Will of the People through their duly elected Representatives is really the ONLY check against some crackpot general from just kicking in the doors of the White House and “fixing” Washington.  The populace might actually cheer such a thing, but it would be totally wrong in every way imaginable.

    I think Iraq was a mistake.  A costly one.  But when I got the call I did my damnedest to ensure that my small piece of that mission was successful. I think Syria is a mistake.  I think we shouldn’t get involved, but if we do the Soldiers Sailors Airmen and Marines had better be Johnny on the spot or they’re going to get their buddies killed.  These two clowns are beneath my contempt.  It doesn’t matter if I happen to agree with what they’re saying they are absolutely wrong, and they should be found busted down in rank and perhaps even drummed out.  But then, I take disrespecting the uniform more seriously than some people do.

    UPDATE:

    I wasn’t even finished writing this post when this ass clown popped up on my facebook feed.

    Soldierpoliticalstatement
    I swear these idiots are coming out of the woodwork.  Maybe Obama’s forthcoming purge of the military might actually be a good thing. . .
    [Editor’s note: Doc was joking, of course he doesn’t want the military purged, I’m guessing]

    Update 2: I hadn’t even finished that update when this clown shows up.

    Sailorpoliticalstatement
    I give up.  I’m sure at least one of these clowns is a valor thief but I’m willing to bet not all are.  Good thing I’m not still in.  I would most certainly like to bring back wall-to-wall counseling with these idiots.

     

    Update 3: Sooo. . . apparently some on the OTHER side of this issue have gotten in on the act.

     

    Marinecounterstatement

     

    Can’t see the rank on this guy, but judging from the tats and the KIA bracelet as well as the wording of the sign I would say this guy is legit (as opposed to the somewhat questionable clowns above).  So. . . this is probably about to go full retard PDQ.

  • John Kerry; chemical attack by Assad regime “undeniable”

    According to Fox News, our new secretary of state, John Kerry declared to the media today that the evidence of a chemical attack in Syria is “undeniable” and some rather nebulous words about “real” and “compelling” whatever the Hell that means;

    The secretary of State addressed the allegations from State Department headquarters. He pointed a finger squarely at the Assad regime, sharply questioning any suggestion that the weapons could have been deployed by the opposition, or that the attack could have been staged. He called the strike a “moral obscenity” and accused the Syrian government of trying to destroy the evidence.

    Shortly afterward, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney echoed the remarks, saying the evidence of an attack is “undeniable” and there’s “very little doubt” that the Assad government was behind it. Carney said it is now “profoundly” in the interest of the U.S. and international community to respond.

    I’m just saying that this “real and compelling” doesn’t answer any of my questions and it feels like we’re being told we’re going to war instead of being convinced that we need to go to war. While I agree that the use of chemical weapons is egregious and should be responded to by the community of civilized nations, I’m not sure that anything we do militarily would be effective in that regard. The two sides are pointing fingers at each other as the perpetrators, and the rebels would have the most to gain by a Western intervention at this point. Snipers shot at the UN weapons team today, that doesn’t sound like something the government would do.

    I think we’re being set up and the incompetent boobs who have been rushing for the exits in Afghanistan for the last four years are now running for the entrance in Syria. Like I said earlier today, it all feels like the Johnson Administration’s Gulf of Tonkin Incident as an excuse to put combat troops into Vietnam.

    And Kerry is talking in Joe Biden words, like he understands something that he really doesn’t. I think they’re just doing the opposite of what they did in Libya hoping that works.

  • Even a Stopped Clock . . . .

    Apparently reality is finally beginning to impact thinking in the Pentagon regarding the civil war in Syria.

    In a 19 Aug letter to Rep. Eliot Engel of New York, GEN Martin Dempsey – CJCS – indicates reluctance at this time to begin US military involvement in Syria.  The stated reason is that the Syrian rebels are not today willing to support US interests.

    No joke, General. That’s been obvious for some time.

    Some media outlets are touting this as Administration “opposition” to US military action in Syria.  That is an overstatement.  The letter is worded as are most bureauratic or diplomatic documents, and has IMO more “wiggle room” than a 6-year-olds loose tooth the day before it falls out.

    In particular, it does not categorically rule out US military involvement in the current Syrian conflict.  It merely says that “Syria today is not about choosing between two sides but rather about choosing one among many sides. It is my belief that the side we choose must be ready to promote their interests and ours when the balance shifts in their favor. Today, they are not.”  Should that change, future intervention is not excluded.

    Still – IMO it’s a breath of fresh air, given previous statements from the Administration implying willingness to become involved militarily.  It’s just a pity it took so long for reality to register.

  • Obama snubs Putin over Snowden

    Chief Tango and Ex-PH2 send us links to the news that Obama plans to skip his one-on-one meeting with Vlad the Putin ahead of the G20 meeting next month.

    Authorities in Moscow last week granted temporary asylum to Snowden, who is wanted by U.S. authorities for leaking classified intelligence information to newspapers.

    That decision infuriated Washington. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called on the U.S. “to fundamentally rethink our relationship with Putin’s Russia.”

    In a statement Wednesday, the White House noted cooperation in some areas, such as policies toward Afghanistan and Iran, but said Moscow’s decision to help Snowden was “disappointing.”

    I thought about this real hard, but I decided that whether Obama went to the meeting or skipped it, I was going to call him a “pussy” so he really couldn’t win either way. I think that’s the way most of the Right saw this – a “no-win” for Obama. But mostly only because his foreign policy team headed by John Kerry couldn’t convince Putin to turn over Eddie Snowden. So yeah, I really blame Kerry, but Obama gets the “pussy” label because he picked that buffoon Kerry as his Secretary of State, probably just to make Hillary Clinton look good.

    So instead of going to Moscow, Obama will go to Stockholm, because I guess Sweden hasn’t done anything to embarrass this administration yet. From the Washington Post (Amazon Post?);

    “Sweden is a close friend and partner to the United States,” Carney said in a statement. “Sweden plays a key leadership role on the international stage, including in opening new trade and investment opportunities through the U.S.-EU Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, advancing clean technologies, and promoting environmental sustainability.”

    Besides, there are more Muslims in Sweden, anyway, it’ll feel more like home to the President. I’m sure John Kerry can piss them off before he gets there without even half-trying.

  • About the Lockerbie Bomber’s Release . . . .

    Well it looks like it might not have been some kind of under-the-table commercial oil deal that caused the folks in Scotland to suddenly become “kinder, gentler” jailers and opt to release the Pan Am 270 bomber, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, after all.  Recent news report indicate multiple deals may have been involved – including one for arms.

    The British government, of course, still contends there was no quid pro quo regarding al-Megrahi’s release.

    Yeah, right.  Sounds more like “that’s our story and we’re sticking to it” to me.

    Hell, I don’t know of too many people who ever bought the “compassionate grounds” story as the real reason for al-Megrahi’s release in the first place. You’d think the governments of Great Britain and Scotland would have figured out by now that everyone with a working brain knows the score already.

    Whatever.

  • Lindsey Graham; the new Jimmy Carter

    I remember in 1980 that our grand strategy for defeating the Soviet Union after their invasion of Afghanistan the year before, was to boycott the Moscow Olympics. Remember how well that worked? Yep, it hit the Soviets so hard that they were forced to withdraw from Afghanistan eight years later. It was a close won thing, but our perseverance in the face of adversity triumphed.

    Well, of course, I’m kidding. The boycott hurt the Soviet Union not a whit, in fact, they took a lot more medals than they would have if we’d showed up, and some young athletes had wasted years of preparations for a weak political point.

    So, according to the Washington Times, Lindsey Graham is proposing that we boycott the upcoming Olympics again over the Eddie Snowden discussion;

    “I would [consider a boycott]. I would just send the Russians the most unequivocal signal I could send them,” the South Carolina Republican said in an interview with The Hill newspaper. “It might help, because what they’re doing is outrageous. We certainly haven’t reset our relationship with Russia in a positive way. At the end of the day, if they grant this guy asylum, it’s a breach of the rule of law as we know it and is a slap in the face to the United States.”

    Just think of the potential outcome – eight years from now, Russia might turn over Snowden. Yay! Another win in the “never learn from history” column. Of course, drawing on Jimmy Carter’s legacy is what this administration does best.

  • John Kerry and the promises he can’t keep

    I guess the Obama Administration is finding their new Secretary of State a bit problematic, since he’s been jetting around the world making promises that the Obama Administration isn’t willing to keep, says CBS News;

    Since succeeding Hillary Rodham Clinton as America’s top diplomat, Kerry has issued several as yet undelivered — and perhaps undeliverable — pledges to allies and rivals alike, proving a source of concern for Obama’s policy team. It is trying to rein in Kerry somewhat, according to officials, which is difficult considering Kerry has spent almost half his tenure so far in the air or on the road, from where his most dissonant policy statements have come.

    The White House quickly distanced itself from both Kerry’s North Korea remarks and has now, since President Barack Obama’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Northern Ireland this past week, seen up close the strength of Moscow’s resistance to Kerry’s Syria strategy.

    So, who is surprised? Certainly not me. John Kerry has been making promises since he went to Paris to talk to the North Vietnamese while he was still a commissioned officer in the Navy Reserve and tried to negotiate with the enemy to release prisoners of war – making promises he couldn’t keep. He’s not new at this.