February 21, 2016
What Is The Purpose Of The "Most Effective Application Of Firepower"?
I think it fair to say that the targeted killing program has been the most precise and effective application of firepower in the history of armed conflict.
To Keep America Safe, Embrace Drone Warfare
Feb 19, 2016 - NYT Op Ed by Michael V Hayden, director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2006 to 2009.
Despite nearly 15 years of U.S. counterterrorism operations after the Sept. 11 attacks, Clapper said, “there are now more Sunni violent extremist groups, members and safe havens than at any time in history.”
At one point, Clapper described his grim presentation, only half jokingly, as a “litany of doom.”
Feb 9, 2016 WaPo report on Senate Intelligence Committee Hearing of the Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr.
If the result Clapper reports reflects the "most effective application of firepower", what is that application's purpose?
Posted by b on February 21, 2016 at 11:06 AM | Permalink
The results that we see were the purpose, no?
Posted by: Penelope | Feb 21, 2016 11:11:23 AM | 1
The US economy is now dependent on a FIRE Ponzi scheme or the MIC. The Ponzi is taking care of itself and its own.
As the MIC has positive employment implications, since Reagan the US has had a growing military Keynesian economy. That portion of aggressive youth we can't attract into the military we put in jail, an associated authoritarian growth industry.
The logical conclusion of military Keynesianism is that all the world's a battle ground. We are perfecting the means to grow into all the possible markets.
Posted by: jsn | Feb 21, 2016 11:32:40 AM | 2
You have applied logic where logic doesn't apply. Two main principles:
1. Drones are the best state-of-the-art killing machines ever.
2. Drones foster exponential growth of humans (targets) to kill.
A Thneed is a highly versatile object knitted from the foliage of a Truffula Tree. According to the Once-ler, it is " A-fine-something-that-all-people need."
I went right on biggering… selling more Thneeds.
Posted by: fast freddy | Feb 21, 2016 11:53:32 AM | 3
To generate the "enemies" required to justify the program. If you have no enemies, then you need no weapons to defend yourself. That was the rationale of the 1930s Neutrality Acts--to keep the USA from having any enemies to warrant the existence of the Merchants of Death and their various military brides.
Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 21, 2016 11:56:53 AM | 4
My comment points to the original post and not the comment by jsn at 2.
I concur with the points made by jsn.
That two great economic models are concurrently in effect: FIRE - The Finance Insurance and Real Estate Ponzi. It was a great idea to repeal the Glass Steagall Act so that collusion between these entities could create fast loans, a red-hot market, MERS recording, bogus financial instruments such as Collateralized Debt Obligations and Credit Default Swaps. These enabled the greatest financial fraud in world history wherein trillions were made on the short positions.
That two viable career choices exist for America's non-wealthy C students. Join the Military or go to a private club.
Between 2006 and 2012, Florida's prison population increased by 11 percent to 100,928. Over that time, Florida’s private prison population grew 88 percent from 5,369 to 10,078. That includes the construction of two new facilities operated by private companies.
Posted by: fast freddy | Feb 21, 2016 12:18:36 PM | 5
You should see what things might have been like if we had not been droning wedding parties, old people and children. Why there may have been hundreds of violent extremists.
Posted by: Lefty | Feb 21, 2016 12:44:26 PM | 6
In the language of Royalty Speak, collateral damage is whatever-it-takes to maintain the status of King. Just another exorbitant privilege.
Posted by: your highness | Feb 21, 2016 1:09:04 PM | 7
Hellfire missiles are a product of General Dynamics. General Dynamics is 89% owned by the Crown family. Lester Crown and the Crown family have been the principal backers of Barack Obama since before he was a state senator. This is Chicago politics and nothing but Chicago politics.
Posted by: Oldhippie | Feb 21, 2016 1:44:27 PM | 8
ditto @2 jsn and @3 fast freddy..
mutually assured destruction of everything.. weasels at the top running things..
Posted by: james | Feb 21, 2016 1:50:39 PM | 9
ot - i just want to make sure i have this right...
terrorist attacks inside syria - homs and damascus - means syria is not allowed to seal it's borders..
terrorist attacks inside turkey - ankara - means turkey is allowed to cross over into syria any time they want... the response from the usa-nato is : turkey has a right to protect itself and syria does not have a right to want to control it's own borders...
and the other thing... terrorists attacks in syria will not be reported in the msm.. terrorist attacks in turkey will be reported in the msm and blamed in syria... the fanatical sunni cult of wahabbism has nothing to do with suicide attacks..
how am i doing so far?
Posted by: james | Feb 21, 2016 2:11:56 PM | 10
@9 I don't think you need to peer that deeply. Drone war gives CIA its own military wing, more power, more funding. Everything else is icing on the cake.
Posted by: Cresty | Feb 21, 2016 2:22:52 PM | 11
litany of doom
that Clapper's one eloquent fellow!
Posted by: john | Feb 21, 2016 2:39:13 PM | 13
how am i doing so far?
Posted by: james | Feb 21, 2016 2:11:56 PM | 11
Same as usual. Pointless and irritating (thanks for asking).
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 21, 2016 2:39:28 PM | 14
Lavrov, Kerry Conversation for Syria Ceasefire
Lavrov, Kerry discuss conditions for Syria ceasefire | RT |
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry have spoken on the phone about the Syrian crisis, the Russian Foreign Ministry said. They talked about ceasefire conditions that would exclude operations against groups "recognized as terrorist by the UN Security Council," the ministry added.
Sergey Lavrov and John Kerry continued to discuss the cessation of hostilities in #Syria | MFA Russia |
Voices of propaganda from Washington DC, more at:
Posted by: Oui | Feb 21, 2016 2:55:28 PM | 15
The open embrace of assassination programs is fascistic and illegal under international law and even American law. That the NYT would allow op-ed space for weak justification of criminal programs demonstrates the complete breakdown of the Establishment into grey mediocrity. The intelligent among us should recognize this, and find means of moving on.
Posted by: jayc | Feb 21, 2016 3:23:39 PM | 16
@ b: "what is that application's purpose?"
As example to the ones who don't "tow the line", and fall in line. U$A uber alles.
Posted by: ben | Feb 21, 2016 3:26:03 PM | 17
The comments on the NYT article are atrocious and extremely disheartening. They're mostly of the 'can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs' variety. "Would you rather drone strikes or imprecise fleets of B-52s carpet bombing?" How about we not do any bombing at all? Is that an option? Apparently not.
Are any of these people aware of the fact that, aside from being wildly illegal, the US drone program is insanely inefficient? As in 98% of the people killed aren't the intended target and are mostly civilians. We're creating more new enemies than we're actually killing. So much for the erudite liberal readership of the NYT...
Posted by: Plenue | Feb 21, 2016 4:49:20 PM | 18
It's hard to workup the energy to comment on news along the line of the official narrative in the USA, the timewarp between the perception of what's suddenly become news there and what was news a year or more ago in the rest of the world leaves me cold.
The aim of US terrorism world wide is to ensure enemies enough for the permanent war, the now collapsed raison d'être for the United States Government, to ensure that death, devastation, and destruction remain its premiere exports, to ensure the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, to ensure similar descriptions of results along every other socioeconomic dimension. The USSA has become the evil empire that Ronald Reagan disidentified as the USSR ...
Posted by: jfl | Feb 21, 2016 4:54:41 PM | 19
The application's purpose is to maintain a constant stream of new terrorists (because drone strikes have proven to be a powerful jihadi recruiting tool) and profits for the MIC. If you're a national security/neocon psychopath, what's not to like?
Posted by: D | Feb 21, 2016 5:04:53 PM | 20
@15 hw.. thanks.
Posted by: james | Feb 21, 2016 5:08:07 PM | 21
Clapper's statement quoted above reminds me of a quip that appeared a few years ago. This is not an exact quote, but one that brings up the sentiment to date:
Right after 911 the US estimated that al Qaida membership was about 4000 fighters. The US decided to destroy them. They killed 3000 of them and then there were only 5000 left. Then in 2004 the US decided to destroy them yet again and then there were only 12,000 left. Next the US went all out in 2010 to destroy those remnants and then there was only 20,000 left. After these survivors segued into ISIS the US got really serious and killed another 10,000. Today there are only 60,000 left.
This is called the successful war on terror.
Posted by: ToivoS | Feb 21, 2016 5:42:19 PM | 24
The purpose is to spread Saudi-controlled Wahabbism. Because societies under that cult's control don't hassle Israel, have little popular legitimacy, and let the Americans do/take what they want at bargain prices.
As Penelope said in #1 ... Look at what has actually happened in the greater Middle East over the last 15-25 years. Not just in general, but the specifics.
Posted by: fairleft | Feb 21, 2016 6:37:31 PM | 26
Fast Freddy @3 is right. Logic can't be applied to the aims and purposes of the targeted drone killing program.
I think so much of what drives programs in the Pentagon like this one is corporate greed and profit. The Pentagon buys technology from companies based on marketing and inflated claims and applies it without question. As long as it gets results (and some are better than none), the Pentagon will continue to use it and the companies continue to profit.
No-one takes a long-range view or considers the consequences because no immediate profit or advantage can be gained from such a view and there is pressure on people to toe the line and shut up. Plus who cares about what brown-skinned people in faraway countries think and feel?
And sometimes it's hard not to escape the impression that there are people in the Pentagon and the companies that supply the drone technology who think fighting wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria is the same as playing video and computer games. You pick one side to win some and then you pick the other side to win some. Again, no-one thinks there might be consequences of continually switching from one side to the next and back again, apart from feeling like God in manipulating ants.
Posted by: Jen | Feb 21, 2016 6:45:36 PM | 27
in re 25
So anyone that uses this phrase in any context is an apologist for Israel? And so officially banned from any use by the right-thinking Barflies.
Don't overthink the drone program, kids. It's an easy, inexpensive way to kill lots of people with little immediate risk. It's a killer app in a world of killer apps. Video game meets reality television, as the geeks play soldier.
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 21, 2016 7:21:21 PM | 28
Breeding resentment makes America safer?
In what form of illogic is this called logic?
Posted by: roger erickson | Feb 21, 2016 7:24:23 PM | 29
Well, it makes ongoing plans for Militarised State Capitalism safer... So very effective use of firepower yes...
Posted by: MadMax2 | Feb 21, 2016 8:20:26 PM | 30
what is that application's purpose?
CHAOS. at which these programs has been stunningly successful.
Posted by: alkomv | Feb 21, 2016 9:59:20 PM | 31
in re 34, 33 --
Looks like you "anti-Zionists" have another recruit.
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 21, 2016 10:28:46 PM | 32
That is a good question b.
In the short term, it is to avoid the errors of the past made by the mic when their war in Vietnam was cut short due to civil discontent attributed largely to the number of casualties, (i.e. bodybags and funerals) visible to the American public. When W invaded Iraq, this was the first instance where reporters were being embedded purportedly for their own safety. The reality was to control the flow of information. Also for the first time, footage of coffins being returned to the U.S.A. was banned from the media.
It is not that they care about American soldiers being killed, it is the public backlash that they must avoid in order to continue their war mongering.
I've said many times and places before, it has been too long since America has come face to face with the horror of war. Protected by two oceans and receiving highly filtered facts about what is actually occurring 'overseas' is what contributes to the American public's cavalier, vainglorious attitude towards war.
IMO it is going to take a lot of bodies in bags being returned to the U.S.A. or quite a few burning cities on the North American continent to make people pay attention. They have managed to limit the number of body bags, so guess which option I think more likely if the world is to survive without falling into the capitalist's trap?
FUN FACT: More U.S. soldiers have committed suicide after returning to U.S.A. than have been killed in battle since 2001.
In the long term, this is just practice as high finance and mic develop more weapons to further their control of any populace that dares to live as if they are free to pursue their own visions.
Posted by: b4real | Feb 21, 2016 10:40:44 PM | 33
@36 rufus magister
I don't know what a commenter has to do around here to get a following like the anti-Zionists but there are more of them that I read than those that concur with my focus on eliminating private finance, neutering inheritance world wide and limiting the private ownership of "property" to 99- year leases.
I think my focus makes more sense than anti-Zionism but hate of specific ethic groups sells better still.....sad
To the question of the posting, the purpose of the most effective application of firepower is human genocide and the control of fear that it maintains over society.
Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 21, 2016 10:46:08 PM | 34
Reading that NYT article is like stepping into an alternate universe, just as he would probably feel if he read MOA ..... IF..... he believed his own lies. I often wonder whether these people are aware of the Machiavellian game they are playing and slip up every now and then. By his logic "Keeping Americans safe" means drones everywhere on the planet.
Posted by: Nobody | Feb 21, 2016 10:54:54 PM | 35
psycho at 38 --
I prefer workers' control of the means of production. But an end to inheritance and the conversion of finance into a public utility would be good transitional steps.
How to get a following here? -- go Trump style; as you say, hate sells, sadly. ID the prejudices of your target audience, and relentlessly pander to them. Avoid facts, go hard on the hyperbole. You'll be thought "original."
I don't have much of a following, having long ago chosen honesty over popularity. A clear conscience and the respect of the wise are far more valuable than the fleeting admiration of fools.
The only effective application of firepower is one that causes the enemy to abandon their positions or objectives while obtaining or retaining your own, with the minimum loss of blood and treasure. It's been quite some time since the US military applied firepower effectively. Korea, in a more or less conventional war, and of course, our very effective "dirty war" in conjunction with Latin American juntas against their leftist opponents.
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 21, 2016 11:16:17 PM | 36
Fascistech, those Jews who truly believe that the ME is sacred ground where the ancient prophets walked and gave wisdom should be allowed to stay, provided they adhere to the commandments they have been charged to hold to, pay their taxes, and make themselves available to the country which sustains them in an emergency. The rest ought to go back to the real world and assimilate, just like everybody else.
Posted by: ruralito | Feb 21, 2016 11:31:44 PM | 38
Looks like you "anti-Zionists" have another recruit.
Do you mean anti-Bolshevik ? if so I know many ;)
Posted by: alkomv | Feb 22, 2016 12:38:28 AM | 39
I prefer workers' control of the means of production
History tells me that 'worker control' leads to failure on a massive scale.
Posted by: alkomv | Feb 22, 2016 12:42:48 AM | 40
@45, what history? Stalingrad tells me that 'worker control' leads to success on a massive scale. Ditto Mao vs the Kuomintang. Ho Chi Ming vs the US Wehrmacht. Cuba etc. I guess you mean History-that-tells-me-what-I-want-to-hear.
Posted by: ruralito | Feb 22, 2016 1:00:36 AM | 41
@43, I was trying to be sensible. Spare me the Dungeons and Dragons crap.
Posted by: ruralito | Feb 22, 2016 1:08:12 AM | 42
Not often mentioned are the serious problems in the Drone Pilot program. The suicide rate is the highest for any military in any war to date. Also, the career path for professional officers finds drone pilots being passed over for promotion as they aren't "really" pilots and not competitive. The early pilots were F-16 pilots promised that their careers would be intact yet none were selected for promotion thus being a drone pilot is a career killer. Now they are moving it into enlisted ranks hoping the career emphasis is reduced.
The problem is no one wants to be a drone pilot and retention is terrible. Perhaps it is because the pilots see exactly who it is they are killing and cannot stomach it? The long term effects we are already seeing with the suicide and mental illness rates being the highest in any skill of the US military in history. The only other group that comes close is Special Forces operators which again, tells you the inherent moral problems with these wars. Americans have a big problem dealing with the fact that we have in a sense become the Nazi Germany of today. We are the invaders, we are the killers of mothers, daughters, and sisters, and we have no apparent conscience about any of it. This will not end well and Clapper is one evil SOB. HRC will be yet another 8 years of Bush (now we have had 16 years of Bush policies already). Americans need to wake up but apparently are sound asleep on these issues. But, terrorism is coming our way soon through those porous borders and lack of any kind of immigration control. We will reap what we have sown.
That leaves us wit Trump, arguably a megalomaniac with no apparent common sense, as the only hope of escaping this cycle and preventing a catastrophe. Things are not looking good for the USA.
Posted by: Old Microbiologist | Feb 22, 2016 1:36:54 AM | 43
@48 Old Microbiologist
I agree that we will reap what we have sown.
I also agree with your sentiment that things are not looking good for the USA but would extend that to the world because the USA are not good losers.
I disagree with your opinion that Trump is the only hope of escaping the Bush cycle and preventing a catastrophe. I consider electing Trump as assuring a catastrophe whereas continuing the Bush cycle just continues the existing catastrophe. I see the only cycle breaking change coming from electing Jill Stein of the Green party. I hope she can get Bernie to run with her after he gets screwed by the Dems out of their nomination.
Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 22, 2016 1:54:20 AM | 44
Old Microbiologist | Feb 22, 2016 1:36:54 AM | 48
A very well put post. Agree 100% with everything you said.The collapse of this empire is particularly ugly and vicious.
Controlled demolition is probably more apt than collapse though; because it's the only accurate way to describe what's going on internally in the U.S..
Posted by: V. Arnold | Feb 22, 2016 1:55:49 AM | 45
@48 Isn't there a parallel CIA drone program? No problems with "being passed over for promotion" there, since the CIA isn't one of the Armed Forces Of The United States of America. The guy flying the drone is a civilian, even tho he is engaged in combat.
That always struck me as the most problematic part of the USA's use of drones i.e. there is no question that a USAF officer who is piloting a drone fits the criteria for a "legal combatant:
He wears a uniform
He carries his weapon openly
He takes his orders from a person responsible for his subordinates
He is obliged to fire those hellfire missiles "in accordance with the laws and customs of war".
He's not sitting in a cockpit and so his job isn't seen to be as sexy by his superiors. Sure, I can see how that could happen, and I can see how that would be irksome to him.
But in every other respect he is just what he has always been: a military pilot flying a combat mission.
Now take that (ex)USAF pilot and put him to work for the CIA, and then ask yourself how many of those criteria now applies to him?
One, as far as I can see: he carries his weapon openly.
Posted by: Yeah, Right | Feb 22, 2016 2:05:04 AM | 46
Precise is a relative term. Even the smallest of the drone warheads is on the order of 20 pounds of military grade high-explosives, with a lot of shrapnel to be distributed. If your target is a tank and your warhead is a tank killer type, there won't be much of a blast radius outside the tank -- but only because tanks are steel-hulled and the warhead is meant to kill the tank crew with shrapnel after penetrating.
On the other hand, if your target is a car, or you're using anti-personnel warheads, the blast radius can do a lot of "collateral damage", particularly in urban areas. By comparison, the pressure cooker bombs used at the Boston Marathon contained perhaps five to eight pounds of low power black powder explosive.
Bigger drones can carry 1,000 pounds or more of munitions.
And those are just drone strikes. Consider all the bombs dropped in Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere.
I don't know why Obama says that Gitmo is the biggest propaganda/recruitment tool that the jihadists have. They circulate the most explicit kind of photos of civilian casualties (injuries and deaths) imaginable, with captions pointing out that this is what the West does to Muslims on a casual and ongoing basis. These are widely circulated not only on jihadist websites but in the popular media of Muslim countries. When they don't recruit jihadists or terrorists, they raise funds and other support.
But aside from the civilian casualties, the strategy is much the same as in the so-called war on drugs, or organized crime, where arrests and incarceration take the place of assassination (most of the time).
Eliminating the leadership (often mid-level) gives aspiring thugs a clear rung on the ladder to move up.
The case of Islamic State is a bit different. Even a self-styled caliph has to possess qualities and qualifications that an ordinary terrorist or jihadist doesn't. While the idea of succession isn't impossible, the organization isn't the seamless whole sometimes presented in the media. IS has actually absorbed a variety of groups who have overridden factional differences in pursuit of a caliphate embodied by its charismatic and organizationally competent leader. Taking him out could dissolve the glue that binds the rest: all the more so because in the might makes right, Allah favors those who undertake to carry out his will world of IS, the ignominious removal of the caliph of a "caliphate" that is already controversial everywahere else in the Muslim world, would be like a visible sign of disfavor.
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | Feb 22, 2016 2:11:06 AM | 47
Keynes has never been taught in US universities, just a bastardized interpretation by people who never bothered to read his book. You don’t know what you are talking about.
Posted by: MRW | Feb 22, 2016 2:38:47 AM | 48
You’re either an asshole or doing oppo warfare. If the latter, you’re not very good at it.
Posted by: MRW | Feb 22, 2016 2:41:50 AM | 49
Looks like Israel’s Ministry of Information is here in full force trying to create dissent.
Posted by: MRW | Feb 22, 2016 2:44:19 AM | 50
There is no such thing as "jewish attitudes in foreign policy". There are Jewish Democrats and Jewish Republicans; Jewish liberals and Jewish conservatives; Jewish Zionists and, yes, Jewish anti-Zionists; Jewish capitalists and Jewish socialists; Jewish militants and Jewish pacifists. (The terms Zionist and anti-Zionist are much misused, often in a fashion that is, frankly, embarrassing.)
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | Feb 22, 2016 3:26:33 AM | 51
Actually, jsn in Comment #2 has a point, at least about Reagan. He ran large budget deficits while ramping up military spending, which included technical sectors in the military industrial complex which pay high wages and salaries for specialized skills. The net increase in demand (private and public sector) unquestionably had a stimulative effect on the U.S. economy. "Military Keynesianism" is a useful and accurate neologism.
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | Feb 22, 2016 3:37:03 AM | 52
I computing, we have a "struggle" between increasingly efficient hardware and increasingly inefficient software. There it works nicely because a computer that is few years old cannot cope with basic applications so consumera have to buy new ones. (And the applications HAVE to be updated, so this is a truly fail-safe system.)
Weapons are tools of war, and war is a method of politics. Increasingly efficient hardware cannot make for increasingly inadequate policies. We engage most brilliant minds in hardware design (that is debatable, the market pays more for designing strategies for automatic trading or tax avoidance, but still, military research has a lot of very competent people), while policy design is corrupted by "think as they pay you for" system of think tanks.
For starters, domestically we lost the concept of sustaining an economy that delivers improvements in lives of the majority. And that is even worse abroad. Can we advise how Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt, Mali, Ukraine etc. can improve the lives of their people? My impression is that in aggregate, the advise delivered by our agencies and NGOs/think tanks is worse than useless, and as a result, "liberal, pro-Western" thinking is far less attractive than 30 years ago. My favorite example is that equitable economic progress in Pakistan could counteract radicalization affecting that country, one of the main targets of our drone program. One of the bottlenecks is production of electricity, and that could be most reliably and quickly boosted by completing the pipeline from Iran. And USA spend enormous energy to thwart that completion, with smashing success. Then Pakistanis died by hundreds because of a heat wave in Lahore, their main industrial center. But when the weather is better, the inadequate electricity slows down the growth of industries, and for those that do grow do it with hellish conditions for workers. Of course, Pakistan has other problems as well, the point is that our influence ranges from useless to toxic.
The second main targets of drone program was Yemen. I just do not recall ANYTHING ever contemplated to boost their economy.
On military level, drone program perhaps made certain problems worse by creating the illusion that positive results can be achieved even when the cooperation with humans of the respective countries is crappy. My favorite example is a recent civil war in Mali where Americans had an extensive program for training military officers. Some students were more diligent and some not so much. "Take it easy" crowd took over the government, and the diligent students joined the rebels, ultimately under ISIS label. Luckily, since the diligent students were from an ethnic minority, they took over their part of the country, the north, with ease, but could not take over the populated south, so the West could make a relatively rapid response the the crisis (less than a full year, wow!) and push the rebels into the desert (Sahara) where they roam even now.
Training programs for the military in the developing countries seems to have totally sinister tradition and very checkered results, with Afghanistan being Exhibit One.
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 22, 2016 4:19:50 AM | 53
Re: 56 (Re: 33), Emil wrote
There is no such thing as "jewish attitudes in foreign policy". There are Jewish Democrats and Jewish Republicans; Jewish liberals and Jewish conservatives; Jewish Zionists and, yes, Jewish anti-Zionists; Jewish capitalists and Jewish socialists; Jewish militants and Jewish pacifists. (The terms Zionist and anti-Zionist are much misused, often in a fashion that is, frankly, embarrassing.)
Without agreeing with all that Fascistech wrote, I would observe that citing "Jewish Democrats and Jewish Republicans, Jewish liberals and Jewish conservatives" as the example of diverse effects of Jewish influence on American politics is not convincing at all. "Jewish pacifists and Jewish anti-Zionists" are hated by Israeli majority with passion which is cheerfully copied by our Establishment. "Helping Hezbollah in destroying IDF" is a wacko postulate, but taking them off the list of terrorist organizations would have a very positive effect. Example of not putting PYD on that list is instructive, they are essential in the fight against ISIS, but likewise are Hezbollah. Even better would be a military aid to Lebanon, but no, "bipartisan Jewish liberal/conservative influence" would have nothing of it as Israel does not like it.
In fact, the disastrous policies toward the conflict in Syria have the root in the pro-Israel perspective that made a toxic fusion with the "Sunni axis" on that issue.
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 22, 2016 4:49:34 AM | 54
"What is our purpose? Why, Chaos, Mr. Bond, Chaos!"
Dah, dah, dit-dah, dit-dah-dah...
Posted by: Chipnik | Feb 22, 2016 5:12:00 AM | 55
@34: OT, but everybody except Afrikaners seem to know what Apartheid was really all about. It's got to be one of the most falsely represented political systems ever. Convenient for those with poor, non-specific argumentation or ulterior motives.
Posted by: tri | Feb 22, 2016 5:53:13 AM | 56
"The net increase in demand (private and public sector) unquestionably had a stimulative effect on the U.S. economy."
Spoken like a true Zionist. The difference between me and you is I lived through Creeping Reaganism, working on Star Wars during the day to feed our kibbutz, and running with the Yippies at night to feed our community.
You obviously didn't.
The 1st Reagan Period was the worst US recession since the Dust Bowl era. I lived through that, and don't want to relive it here, or ever. It is impossible to describe in words.
The 2nd Reagan Period was Reagan's total capitulation to laissez faire capitalism and Dark Empire...the Star Wars swindle, the rise of the police and prison state, nuns pushed out of helicopters, crack cocaine pouring over the borders, Greenspan, Cheney, and S&L lootings that set the stage for a G-L-B neutron bmob which destroyed the Dream 10 years later.
Every day I went to work in those Star Wars factories as a contractor and watched the Chosen of Mil.Gov, the Reaganaut gerbils, happily tweeting each other at their grotesque Bonfire of Hundreds of Billions. The Exceptionalists, they said. The Blue Team. Not one of those 'space weapons' deployed. Not one. Just a massive, massive swindle.
You had your crappy Commodore 64, but They had mainframe computers and text-based internet, long before that. They made fat salaries with uplift and life pensions. You were lucky to afford a surfboard. There was no 'demand', that's the Reaganaut Big Lie. It was just stayin' alive. Barely.
In fact it was Creeping Reaganism vox capitalae marketing that split America for the first time into a caste system. Just Say No. Heel to toe. Big Blue. Boom shakalaka, boom.
Today we're going into a Clawing Reaganism Era on steroids, both parties, IMF/WB, the EU, the Third Way of the Third Reich that never died, until Reagan resurrected its skull and bones. I hope you live long enough to eat your shoes.
"My fellow Americans, tonight we are launching an effort (sic) which holds the promise of changing the course of human history. (e.g. the Zionist New American Century). There will be risks, and results take time. But I believe we can do it. As we cross this threshold, (to the 5th circle of hell) I ask for your prayers and your support. Thank you, good night and God bless you."
What a lying-shyte globalist spox. Reagan turned out all the invalid, elderly and insane onto the street, for G-d's sake! You think Greek refugees were bad? You missed The Big Show!! Use the eyes that God gave you! What do you SEE!? ¿Demand?!
Posted by: Chipnik | Feb 22, 2016 5:59:28 AM | 57
The English economy is now dependent on cock sucking pedophiles or the MIC. The Jimmie Savile fans is taking care of themselves and their own at the expense of everybody else.
As the MIC has positive bend-over implications, since hard-core gay sex in the US has had a growing military Keynesian economy. That portion of aggressive gang-bangers and librarians we can't attract into the military we put in jail, an associated authoritarian fuck industry.
The logical orgy of military Keynesianism is that all the why the fuck am i writing this? We are penetrating the means to get our asses bigger all the possible markets. Oh, shit i´m not quite well today, or dddrunk i don´t know uh.....
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 22, 2016 6:11:33 AM | 58
Just a massive, massive swindle.
Exactly Mr Watson and it continues to this very day. Easy to get away with the swindle when the over-analysis of simple problems is so prevalent and divisiveness in societies and countries is encouraged by Unseen Hands.
CHAOS rules ;)
Posted by: alkomv | Feb 22, 2016 6:23:45 AM | 59
In 58 I wrote: "The net increase in demand (private and public sector) unquestionably had a stimulative effect on the U.S. economy."
To which Chipnik (63) replied in part: "Spoken like a true Zionist."
What a bizarre non-sequitur. Followed by a self-indulgent orgy of hyperactive verbiage that was almost entirely irrelevant to the topic at issue. Yes, there was a recession in 1982, which was influenced by the Federal Reserve raising interest rates in an attempt to end inflation: but by 1984 the real rate of GDP growth was 7.3%.
None of which is praise for Reaganomics or his political policies, merely an acknowledgement of the stimulative effect of what another commenter rightly referred to as military Keynesianism.
Rant away, but I won't waste time responding to The Chipnik Show.
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | Feb 22, 2016 6:48:47 AM | 60
Re 60 (Pyotr Berman wrote): " Without agreeing with all that Fascistech wrote, I would observe that citing "Jewish Democrats and Jewish Republicans, Jewish liberals and Jewish conservatives" as the example of diverse effects of Jewish influence on American politics is not convincing at all. "Jewish pacifists and Jewish anti-Zionists" are hated by Israeli majority with passion which is cheerfully copied by our Establishment."
Attitudes that are prevalent among most members of Congress, or for that matter most of the American electorate, do not support your attempt at rebuttal, since Jews are a minority of both bodies. If you want to criticize congressional Middle East policy, or if you must make generalizations about the views of the American public at large, that's one thing. I draw the line when neo-Nazis show up, bandying meaningless phrases like "Jewish attitudes in foreign policy", whose only utility is to drum up thoughtless hatred toward practitioners of a particular religion or members of a supposed ethnic background. There is no such thing as "Jewish attitudes in foreign policy". There are American attitudes prevalent among both Jews and non-Jews. And there is wide variation in those attitudes as well as dissent of varying kinds and degrees from them, again among both Jews and non-Jews.
Lets also not forget that a Likud dominated political coalition has not always governed in Israel.
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | Feb 22, 2016 7:09:53 AM | 61
I can see I have annoyed someone; like Oui, I am being impersonated at 64. The language, you will note, is a little bluer than I usually deploy. I seem to recall a troll many months ago who went heavy with taunts on pedophilia and Saville.
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 22, 2016 7:47:46 AM | 62
Piotr at 60:
Without agreeing with all that Fascistech wrote, I would observe that citing "Jewish Democrats and Jewish Republicans, Jewish liberals and Jewish conservatives" as the example of diverse effects of Jewish influence on American politics is not convincing at all.
But your attack can only be made by not quoting the rest of what Emil said: "Jewish Zionists and, yes, Jewish anti-Zionists; Jewish capitalists and Jewish socialists; Jewish militants and Jewish pacifists." If you can't attack someone without excluding most of what he said, why make the attack? To 'defend' the obvious hasbara troll Fascistech?
"Jewish pacifists and Jewish anti-Zionists" are hated by Israeli majority with passion which is cheerfully copied by our Establishment.
So now you're equating "Jewish" and "Israeli"? ... Just fall right into that hasbara troll trap!
Posted by: fairleft | Feb 22, 2016 7:51:12 AM | 63
in re 44-5
Thanks, as an American, I know plenty of anti-communists already.
The Bolsheviks knew that they lacked the industrial infrastructure to achieve communism. When the German Social-Democrats snuffed out the Spartacists, with the aid of the army and its proto-fascist Freikorps, the world revolution they counted on to aid them was not in the cards. Hence, "socialism in one country."
And despite this, as ruralito notes at 46, the deformed workers' state was sufficiently robust to defeat fascism. It took a medieval society into the modern, industrial era practically overnight.
"Socialism or barbarism." Now, more than ever.
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 22, 2016 7:58:57 AM | 64
It took a medieval society into the modern, industrial era practically overnight.
Unfortunately that 'Modern Industrialism' didn't extend into the late 80's and my childhood in a village behind the wall. All I saw was poverty for many and a failure to provide for a Nation. I'll point we had to fight that battle again thanks to drunken fool and now again, we find ourselves with the wolf at the gate..please excuse my bitterness and hatred for said Bolsheviks.
Posted by: alkomv | Feb 22, 2016 8:17:56 AM | 66
What I wanted to right is that the political impact of "Jewish Democrats and liberals" and "Jewish Republicans" on foreign policy is very aligned with their pet political parties in Israel, functionally indistinguishable, and much stronger than their percentage of the American voters etc. The most visible figures on those two "sides" are Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson, but there is plenty of other "generous donors". Political impact of other strains like "Jewish pacifists" is very minor, they are locked "outside of mainstream". They do have their activists, magazines and websites, but they do not belong to "major Jewish organizations" which is like a major league in baseball, with official membership ("Presidents of major Jewish organizations").
This over-sized and one-sided impact on American policies leads to "simplistic and hostile generalizations", but those generalizations are not entirely baseless, since "Presidents of major Jewish organizations" exists partially to explain to all non-Jews that heretical and "minor" Jewish organizations should be ignored. And they are still ignored if not outright purged. To give an example, what types of public political statements can get a university professor fired or suspended? Answer: badmouthing NRA (rarely) or Israel (more frequently).
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 22, 2016 8:21:02 AM | 67
Why complicate the obvious? ... Do you feel some perverse pleasure in dancing to the tune of the hasbara?
Political impact of other strains like "Muslim pacifists" is very minor, they are locked "outside of mainstream". They do have their activists, magazines and websites, but they do not belong to "major Muslim organizations" which is like a major league in baseball, with official membership ...
Political impact of other strains like "Jewish pacifists" is very minor, they are locked "outside of mainstream". They do have their activists, magazines and websites, but they do not belong to "major Jewish organizations" which is like a major league in baseball, with official membership ...
Political impact of other strains like "Catholic pacifists" is very minor, they are locked "outside of mainstream". They do have their activists, magazines and websites, but they do not belong to "major Catholic organizations" which is like a major league in baseball, with official membership ...
Political impact of other strains like "Protestant pacifists" is very minor, they are locked "outside of mainstream". They do have their activists, magazines and websites, but they do not belong to "major Protestant organizations" which is like a major league in baseball, with official membership ...
Posted by: fairleft | Feb 22, 2016 9:31:27 AM | 68
alkomv @74 Not so fast WHAT? The usual question: are you clueless or hasbara? This ain't complicated: the Aussie legislator was accused of anti-Semitism because he's pro-Palestinian and had attacked many of Israel's ugliest policies and actions. So I agree with him and you agree with his accuser? I.e., you equate 'anti-Israel' with anti-Jewish?
Posted by: fairleft | Feb 22, 2016 9:36:21 AM | 69
US Supreme Court Justice Scalia dies unattended. NO AUTOPSY. Immediate embalming and burial.
Nothing to see here volks. Just move along.
Posted by: ALberto | Feb 22, 2016 9:43:37 AM | 70
OT: Uh oh, the tail that wags the dog is wagging:
"Russian intervention has tilted the scales, and Jerusalem is concerned of [sic]a regime victory, which would be victory for Iran as well. To prevent that, Israeli officials believe West must intervene in favor of moderate [i.e., head-chopping Salafist lunatic] rebels."
Posted by: fairleft | Feb 22, 2016 9:49:40 AM | 71
PB @ 59 said.."For starters, domestically we lost the concept of sustaining an economy that delivers improvements in lives of the majority."
Yep, absolutely true, and all by design.
chipnik @ 63: Good anti-Reagan rant. Well deserved.
I see the trolls are back...
Posted by: ben | Feb 22, 2016 10:09:21 AM | 72
So I agree with him and you agree with his accuser?
No, I also agree with him.
I.e., you equate 'anti-Israel' with anti-Jewish?
Not I, But that is what we are to find out. The word is 'Precedent' i.e a loss for the legislator will set a legal precedent with regard to what constitutes antisemitism in Australia, it's not that hard to see where this might lead elsewhere.
Posted by: alkomv | Feb 22, 2016 10:10:07 AM | 73
I didn't post Comment 68 and I ask the blog owner to delete it for the cowardly piece of impersonation and trolling that it is.
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | Feb 22, 2016 7:40:44 AM | 69
Very multi-facetted ... adopting a role of denying one obvious fact, but then stating another, thereby confirming the mission. Ineptitude or fatigue?
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 22, 2016 10:22:00 AM | 74
20;As an American,anti Zionism is our only hope to escape the clutches of these monsters,the victims of the false narrative of WW2,which has made their minds total mush,and unhinged their humanity.
Posted by: dahoit | Feb 22, 2016 10:25:10 AM | 75
alkomv @82: We all know the Israel Lobby lie (equating anti-semitism and an anti-Israel/pro-Palestine stance) has had success and will have more in pro-Israel media/political settings. So what? That doesn't make the lie any more true.
Posted by: fairleft | Feb 22, 2016 11:04:24 AM | 76
Sometimes there is nothing much to be found behind such words. They are just jumbled snippets from corporate-speak. Much of what such bozos say makes absolutely no sense - babble, not crafted with any purpose in mind, just the genre. In this case, the speaker can’t openly say “drones are cheap as dirt n cool as sh•t and a mind-blowing tool for targeted killings.”
The Wa Po article also included:
U.S. officials also said they have seen no indication that Iran is violating any aspect of a multinational agreement reached last year to dismantle aspects of its nuclear program in return for relief from economic sanctions.
Iran n drones, reminds me, Iran has constructed a drone that drops an inflated life jacket, to save ppl lost at sea. Looked for link - not a life jacket exactly. 4 mins.
Drones are a great boon in other countries. Where I live they *save* lives. And more.
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 22, 2016 11:04:31 AM | 77
@54/55 mrw... that was my thought too..
Posted by: james | Feb 22, 2016 11:57:49 AM | 78
way off topic, but can you give me a link to Yves Smith confessing to being a neo-Reaganite please? you mention this elsewhere and I quoted you, and now I'm in trouble :-)
Posted by: Mischi | Feb 22, 2016 11:58:31 AM | 79
Mohammed Alloush, senior member of the Riyadh-based High Negotiations Committee (HNC) reports that terrified by the the Saudi-Turkey threat of ground attack, ISIS spontaneously withdrew from Syrian villages.
This is the "brilliant" level of the guy who is supposed to negotiate with the Syrian envoy in Geneva. Pathetic.
ISIS withdrawing from the villages came as a result to the Saudi-Turkish warnings on sending ground troops into Syria. Alloush told Asharq Al-Awsat that there is news on ISIS willing to give up Raqqah city, which is ISIS’s Syrian headquarters, to the regime.
Alloush also added that ISIS giving up on the villages and handing them over to the Assad administration suggests the presence of security cooperation between the two.
Posted by: virgile | Feb 22, 2016 11:59:54 AM | 80
February 22, 2016
YOU CANNOT MAKE THIS UP BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD BELIEVE IT
"Turkish PM Ahmed Davutoglu said the government expects Russian tourists to come despite tensions between Ankara and Moscow, as shrinkage in the sector was “unexpected.” Russia earlier urged tourists not to visit Turkey, citing security concerns."
SOURCE - https://www.rt.com/business/333257-turkey-russian-tourists-return/
Posted by: ALberto | Feb 22, 2016 12:53:44 PM | 81
Posted by: ALberto | Feb 22, 2016 12:53:44 PM | 91
One more attack this time in Antalya and Davutoglu can say a final goodbye to the summer touristic season in Turkey.
Posted by: virgile | Feb 22, 2016 1:22:13 PM | 82
@rufus magister - #70 ; @Emil Pulsifer - #69 ;
Indeed, in previous thread the impersonating started here at posts #85-#86
Later another was added: post #106 (next page)
Some crazy is putting in a lot of effort, thrilled to be targeted ... moment of fame. :-(
Adrian aka Oui
Posted by: Oui | Feb 22, 2016 1:25:07 PM | 83
y, Russia’s Defense Ministry announced the deployment of a new batch of fighter jets and combat helicopters to an air base outside the Armenian capital, Yerevan, 25 miles from the Turkish border.
Blowback from the Syrian war in the form of a string of suicide bombings in Istanbul and Ankara, most recently on Wednesday, has brought fear to Turkish streets and dampened the vital tourist industry.
SOURCE - https://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/02/22/corporate-media-shilling-at-the-washington-post-on-turkey/
Posted by: ALberto | Feb 22, 2016 1:41:41 PM | 84
Interesting Washington Post article comment with which I happen to agree ...
Here is a comment near the top of the WP article:
10:10 AM EST
“When the Russians invade, it will be a perfect time to demand the Turkish evacuation of Cyprus. Eastern Turkey will go to the Kurds and Armenians, Cyprus to the Greeks. Christians throughout what’s left of Turkey must be given freedom of worship. If the Turks resist, let the Russians occupy the whole country. The Turks created ISIS, and were never our allies; not in WW1 or 2. We should have finished them off after WW1. Asia Minor is a European country.”
Posted by: ALberto | Feb 22, 2016 1:44:30 PM | 85
"Yves Smith confessing to being a neo-Reaganite"
Ahahahahahaha. Oh man, what. Yes, the woman who writes constantly in negative terms about the neo-liberal takeover of American politics and economics is a Reagan fan. Eeyup. Totally plausible.
Posted by: Plenue | Feb 22, 2016 5:53:22 PM | 86
"People were thoroughly, maybe even excessively, contrite."
Posted by: Peter VE | Feb 22, 2016 7:45:24 PM | 87
So let me see if I understand this. No one who is “anti-zionist” is anti-Semitic, it’s all just made up, some fiendish Mossad plot? Doesn’t pass the smell test, IMHO, though it is said to be the Orthodox opinion here.
I certainly detect more than a whiff of that odor from time to time. I would cite the remark at 84 about “monsters,” with their “the false narrative of WW2,” and the seeming equation of Judaism with Communism (made by the German fascists) strikes me a fairly pungent as well.
And so no one gets their panties in a knot, let me remind you of my oft-stated opposition to the settlements and support for the boycott movement. Not that this will matter, of course.
alkomv, 67 –
Please do not blame the collapse of life expectancy and the mafiyazation of society wrought by Yeltsin with Bolshevism.
I was a grad student in Soviet history at the time, and the prospect of dealing with the regression and decay put me off going there for dissertation research, so you have my sympathy for having to deal with it. Most if not all of it was intentionally caused by US/IMF policies of privatization and re-issuances of the currency. A weak nation under a drunken clown who was a front for the oligarchs suited DC fine.
A recent survey reported most Russians would prefer to return to the planned economy. Putin seems to handle the Soviet legacy quite effectively parsing "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly."
in re 79 –
I knew it was only a matter of time before the Scalia “murder” conspiracy plot turned up. One court, one folk? Another whiff? Or maybe a stinky joke? Me, I would never....
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 23, 2016 1:29:16 AM | 91
........but then again, i´m just an old fart soaked in lubricants, what would i know? You tell me guy´s. Give me an answer, just anything......hello?
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 23, 2016 1:47:30 AM | 92
The news range from grim to grimmer, but at least there are moments of humor. I just opened
The Best Worst Quotes of 2015
The top 20 bloviations, lies, and just plain dumb lines from U.S. government officials and politicians this year.
By Micah Zenko
December 29, 2015 [Foreign Policy]
Many of the top bloviations (or actually sensible statements) concern our topics of interest.
Contrasting views of Ted Cruz and Paul Rand:
3-year-old Julie Trant: “The world is on fire?!”
Cruz: “YES! Your world is on fire. But you know what? Your mommy’s here, and everyone’s here to make sure the world you grow up in is even better.”
You may ask yourself: how to top "the world on fire" to make it even better? Perhaps the things should "go swimmingly"? Yes!
Paul Rand: “It was a mistake to be in Libya. We are less safe. Jihadists swim in our swimming pool now! It’s a disaster! We should have never been there!”
Jihadists in our swimming pool are indeed even better than the world on fire. Or they jump into the pools to avoid worldwide conflagration?
Gen. Lloyd Austin, commander of Central Command:
“I don’t currently know the specific goals and objectives of the Saudi campaign [in Yemen], and I would have to know that to be able to assess the likelihood of success.”
Dubai got rid of a rather troublesome prince who got killed by a Tochka, but this was serendipidity rather than one of "goals and objectives". In any case, the war prompted the Gulfies to place order to our MIC to the tune of 30 billions and counting, and if it is not enough to support the campaign, I do not know what is. Israel is not against it (that simplifies decisions in hard cases like that).
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 24, 2016 7:42:38 AM | 93
in re 94 --
There they go again.... Some noble anti-zionist, no doubt.
Posted by: rufus magister | Feb 24, 2016 7:49:17 AM | 94
Re 75: "Very multi-facetted ... adopting a role of denying one obvious fact, but then stating another, thereby confirming the mission. Ineptitude or fatigue?"
What a funny, paranoid universe you seem to live in; and what baroque labyrinths of unreason you have elaborated by way of paths and signposts. Reminds me of a Stanislaw Lem novel, Memoirs Found In A Bathtub; or perhaps a Kafka farce.
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | Feb 26, 2016 7:24:23 AM | 95