In fact, though the resistance lives to criticize the Trump administration, they have been notably quiet – even in favour of – three key issues: The bombing of Syria, the tearing up of the INF treaty and the prosecution of Julian Assange.[1]
U.S. and Western involvement in Syria is for the most vaporous reasons but that does not stop its toll from being measured in the billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of deaths, and devastating urban destruction. Trish Regan will beat the drum for war in Syria like a rented mule but the concerned citizen can only faintly discern from public "debate" the issues of Israel, Iran, Russia, oil or gas pipelines from Qatar (or not from Iran), “terror,” stupid interventionism, pointless deaths, or criminal waste. Searching for a ghost in the basement at midnight during a power outage is easier than figuring out what we’re doing in Syria (or just about any place else in the world).
All I can see is that lots of Syrians need to die because Assad's mean and removing mean people from power is the genius of the American approach to benighted foreign governments. Things always go back together just so afterwards, like a film of a train wreck played backwards.
No doubt there are pressing issues in Niger requiring U.S. muscle and tutelage but no official seems to think the American people should be told what those are. Public "debate" on any issue is, um, incomplete now and it calls to mind Dorothy Parker's witticism that Katherine Hepburn's performance ran the gamut of emotions from A to B. The Democrats' idea of a "debate" on immigration, for example, is to intone the magic phrase "comprehensive immigration law reform." Long pause . . . . And . . . . . . . . .?
The same reticence over treaties pertaining to nuclear weapons. Did they work and what new thinking should replace them? We hear about “neo” this and “neo” that never what the new model of nuclear weapon management is to be. Isn't that odd? It's really an important topic. Perhaps strategic thinkers like LTC Ralph Peters or Mika Brzezinski can give us the low down on that.
And Assange languishes in a de facto jail cell for the unforgivable crime of facilitating the disclosure of embarrassing government information. The various governments of the Western world have long since forfeited any presumption of regularity in their doings. Revelation of their inner conversations is a righteous endeavor and the hostility toward Assange is Exhibit A to the greasy world of insider politics. People like Hillary who resort to fantastical, dishonest explanations for criminal behavior in the handling of official communications skate away (with yeomanlike assistance from James Comey). Concealment of crime and diseased thinking is protected, winked at, and ignored. Revelation of same leads to crucifixion, hostility, and a cruel lying in wait over years. That bastard.
In point of fact, nothing in the West is a subject of honest debate. Pond scum like Frans Timmermans just lays out our future like Moses descending down the mountain. Suck it up, bichez!
Notes
[1] "The Rehabilitation of Robert Mueller." By Kit Knightly, offGuardian, 11/24/18. Mr. Knightly oddly thinks that people who shot at American troops in Vietnam were merely angry farmers, that Vietnam was a “war of conquest,” and that (((Gitmo))) = Treblinka but, that aside, he makes some good points about the Deep State.
No comments:
Post a Comment