The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Andrew J. Bacevich Archive
Angst in the Church of America the Redeemer
David Brooks on Making America Great Again
shutterstock_566284204

Apart from being a police officer, firefighter, or soldier engaged in one of this nation’s endless wars, writing a column for a major American newspaper has got to be one of the toughest and most unforgiving jobs there is. The pay may be decent (at least if your gig is with one of the major papers in New York or Washington), but the pressures to perform on cue are undoubtedly relentless.

Anyone who has ever tried cramming a coherent and ostensibly insightful argument into a mere 750 words knows what I’m talking about. Writing op-eds does not perhaps qualify as high art. Yet, like tying flies or knitting sweaters, it requires no small amount of skill. Performing the trick week in and week out without too obviously recycling the same ideas over and over again — or at least while disguising repetitions and concealing inconsistencies — requires notable gifts.

David Brooks of the New York Times is a gifted columnist. Among contemporary journalists, he is our Walter Lippmann, the closest thing we have to an establishment-approved public intellectual. As was the case with Lippmann, Brooks works hard to suppress the temptation to rant. He shuns raw partisanship. In his frequent radio and television appearances, he speaks in measured tones. Dry humor and ironic references abound. And like Lippmann, when circumstances change, he makes at least a show of adjusting his views accordingly.

For all that, Brooks remains an ideologue. In his columns, and even more so in his weekly appearances on NPR and PBS, he plays the role of the thoughtful, non-screaming conservative, his very presence affirming the ideological balance that, until November 8th of last year, was a prized hallmark of “respectable” journalism. Just as that balance always involved considerable posturing, so, too, with the ostensible conservatism of David Brooks: it’s an act.

Praying at the Altar of American Greatness

In terms of confessional fealty, his true allegiance is not to conservatism as such, but to the Church of America the Redeemer. This is a virtual congregation, albeit one possessing many of the attributes of a more traditional religion. The Church has its own Holy Scripture, authenticated on July 4, 1776, at a gathering of 56 prophets. And it has its own saints, prominent among them the Good Thomas Jefferson, chief author of the sacred text (not the Bad Thomas Jefferson who owned and impregnated slaves); Abraham Lincoln, who freed said slaves and thereby suffered martyrdom (on Good Friday no less); and, of course, the duly canonized figures most credited with saving the world itself from evil: Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt, their status akin to that of saints Peter and Paul in Christianity. The Church of America the Redeemer even has its own Jerusalem, located on the banks of the Potomac, and its own hierarchy, its members situated nearby in High Temples of varying architectural distinction.

This ecumenical enterprise does not prize theological rigor. When it comes to shalts and shalt nots, it tends to be flexible, if not altogether squishy. It demands of the faithful just one thing: a fervent belief in America’s mission to remake the world in its own image. Although in times of crisis Brooks has occasionally gone a bit wobbly, he remains at heart a true believer.

In a March 1997 piece for The Weekly Standard, his then-employer, he summarized his credo. Entitled “A Return to National Greatness,” the essay opened with a glowing tribute to the Library of Congress and, in particular, to the building completed precisely a century earlier to house its many books and artifacts. According to Brooks, the structure itself embodied the aspirations defining America’s enduring purpose. He called particular attention to the dome above the main reading room decorated with a dozen “monumental figures” representing the advance of civilization and culminating in a figure representing America itself. Contemplating the imagery, Brooks rhapsodized:

“The theory of history depicted in this mural gave America impressive historical roots, a spiritual connection to the centuries. And it assigned a specific historic role to America as the latest successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome. In the procession of civilization, certain nations rise up to make extraordinary contributions… At the dawn of the 20th century, America was to take its turn at global supremacy. It was America’s task to take the grandeur of past civilizations, modernize it, and democratize it. This common destiny would unify diverse Americans and give them a great national purpose.”

This February, 20 years later, in a column with an identical title, but this time appearing in the pages of his present employer, the New York Times, Brooks revisited this theme. Again, he began with a paean to the Library of Congress and its spectacular dome with its series of “monumental figures” that placed America “at the vanguard of the great human march of progress.” For Brooks, those 12 allegorical figures convey a profound truth.

“America is the grateful inheritor of other people’s gifts. It has a spiritual connection to all people in all places, but also an exceptional role. America culminates history. It advances a way of life and a democratic model that will provide people everywhere with dignity. The things Americans do are not for themselves only, but for all mankind.”

In 1997, in the midst of the Clinton presidency, Brooks had written that “America’s mission was to advance civilization itself.” In 2017, as Donald Trump gained entry into the Oval Office, he embellished and expanded that mission, describing a nation “assigned by providence to spread democracy and prosperity; to welcome the stranger; to be brother and sister to the whole human race.”

Back in 1997, “a moment of world supremacy unlike any other,” Brooks had worried that his countrymen might not seize the opportunity that was presenting itself. On the cusp of the twenty-first century, he worried that Americans had “discarded their pursuit of national greatness in just about every particular.” The times called for a leader like Theodore Roosevelt, who wielded that classic “big stick” and undertook monster projects like the Panama Canal. Yet Americans were stuck instead with Bill Clinton, a small-bore triangulator. “We no longer look at history as a succession of golden ages,” Brooks lamented. “And, save in the speeches of politicians who usually have no clue what they are talking about,” America was no longer fulfilling its “special role as the vanguard of civilization.”

By early 2017, with Donald Trump in the White House and Steve Bannon whispering in his ear, matters had become worse still. Americans had seemingly abandoned their calling outright. “The Trump and Bannon anschluss has exposed the hollowness of our patriotism,” wrote Brooks, inserting the now-obligatory reference to Nazi Germany. The November 2016 presidential election had “exposed how attenuated our vision of national greatness has become and how easy it was for Trump and Bannon to replace a youthful vision of American greatness with a reactionary, alien one.” That vision now threatens to leave America as “just another nation, hunkered down in a fearful world.”

What exactly happened between 1997 and 2017, you might ask? What occurred during that “moment of world supremacy” to reduce the United States from a nation summoned to redeem humankind to one hunkered down in fear?

Trust Brooks to have at hand a brow-furrowing explanation. The fault, he explains, lies with an “educational system that doesn’t teach civilizational history or real American history but instead a shapeless multiculturalism,” as well as with “an intellectual culture that can’t imagine providence.” Brooks blames “people on the left who are uncomfortable with patriotism and people on the right who are uncomfortable with the federal government that is necessary to lead our project.”

An America that no longer believes in itself — that’s the problem. In effect, Brooks revises Norma Desmond’s famous complaint about the movies, now repurposed to diagnose an ailing nation: it’s the politics that got small.

Nowhere does he consider the possibility that his formula for “national greatness” just might be so much hooey. Between 1997 and 2017, after all, egged on by people like David Brooks, Americans took a stab at “greatness,” with the execrable Donald Trump now numbering among the eventual results.

Invading Greatness

Say what you will about the shortcomings of the American educational system and the country’s intellectual culture, they had far less to do with creating Trump than did popular revulsion prompted by specific policies that Brooks, among others, enthusiastically promoted. Not that he is inclined to tally up the consequences. Only as a sort of postscript to his litany of contemporary American ailments does he refer even in passing to what he calls the “humiliations of Iraq.”

A great phrase, that. Yet much like, say, the “tragedy of Vietnam” or the “crisis of Watergate,” it conceals more than it reveals. Here, in short, is a succinct historical reference that cries out for further explanation. It bursts at the seams with implications demanding to be unpacked, weighed, and scrutinized. Brooks shrugs off Iraq as a minor embarrassment, the equivalent of having shown up at a dinner party wearing the wrong clothes.

Under the circumstances, it’s easy to forget that, back in 2003, he and other members of the Church of America the Redeemer devoutly supported the invasion of Iraq. They welcomed war. They urged it. They did so not because Saddam Hussein was uniquely evil — although he was evil enough — but because they saw in such a war the means for the United States to accomplish its salvific mission. Toppling Saddam and transforming Iraq would provide the mechanism for affirming and renewing America’s “national greatness.”

Anyone daring to disagree with that proposition they denounced as craven or cowardly. Writing at the time, Brooks disparaged those opposing the war as mere “marchers.” They were effete, pretentious, ineffective, and absurd. “These people are always in the streets with their banners and puppets. They march against the IMF and World Bank one day, and against whatever war happens to be going on the next… They just march against.”

Perhaps space constraints did not permit Brooks in his recent column to spell out the “humiliations” that resulted and that even today continue to accumulate. Here in any event is a brief inventory of what that euphemism conceals: thousands of Americans needlessly killed; tens of thousands grievously wounded in body or spirit; trillions of dollars wasted; millions of Iraqis dead, injured, or displaced; this nation’s moral standing compromised by its resort to torture, kidnapping, assassination, and other perversions; a region thrown into chaos and threatened by radical terrorist entities like the Islamic State that U.S. military actions helped foster. And now, if only as an oblique second-order bonus, we have Donald Trump’s elevation to the presidency to boot.

In refusing to reckon with the results of the war he once so ardently endorsed, Brooks is hardly alone. Members of the Church of America the Redeemer, Democrats and Republicans alike, are demonstrably incapable of rendering an honest accounting of what their missionary efforts have yielded.

Brooks belongs, or once did, to the Church’s neoconservative branch. But liberals such as Bill Clinton, along with his secretary of state Madeleine Albright, were congregants in good standing, as were Barack Obama and his secretary of state Hillary Clinton. So, too, are putative conservatives like Senators John McCain, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio, all of them subscribing to the belief in the singularity and indispensability of the United States as the chief engine of history, now and forever.

Back in April 2003, confident that the fall of Baghdad had ended the Iraq War, Brooks predicted that “no day will come when the enemies of this endeavor turn around and say, ‘We were wrong. Bush was right.’” Rather than admitting error, he continued, the war’s opponents “will just extend their forebodings into a more distant future.”

Yet it is the war’s proponents who, in the intervening years, have choked on admitting that they were wrong. Or when making such an admission, as did both John Kerry and Hillary Clinton while running for president, they write it off as an aberration, a momentary lapse in judgment of no particular significance, like having guessed wrong on a TV quiz show.

Rather than requiring acts of contrition, the Church of America the Redeemer has long promulgated a doctrine of self-forgiveness, freely available to all adherents all the time. “You think our country’s so innocent?” the nation’s 45th president recently barked at a TV host who had the temerity to ask how he could have kind words for the likes of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Observers professed shock that a sitting president would openly question American innocence.

In fact, Trump’s response and the kerfuffle that ensued both missed the point. No serious person believes that the United States is “innocent.” Worshipers in the Church of America the Redeemer do firmly believe, however, that America’s transgressions, unlike those of other countries, don’t count against it. Once committed, such sins are simply to be set aside and then expunged, a process that allows American politicians and pundits to condemn a “killer” like Putin with a perfectly clear conscience while demanding that Donald Trump do the same.

What the Russian president has done in Crimea, Ukraine, and Syria qualifies as criminal. What American presidents have done in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya qualifies as incidental and, above all, beside the point.

Rather than confronting the havoc and bloodshed to which the United States has contributed, those who worship in the Church of America the Redeemer keep their eyes fixed on the far horizon and the work still to be done in aligning the world with American expectations. At least they would, were it not for the arrival at center stage of a manifestly false prophet who, in promising to “make America great again,” inverts all that “national greatness” is meant to signify.

For Brooks and his fellow believers, the call to “greatness” emanates from faraway precincts — in the Middle East, East Asia, and Eastern Europe. For Trump, the key to “greatness” lies in keeping faraway places and the people who live there as faraway as possible. Brooks et al. see a world that needs saving and believe that it’s America’s calling to do just that. In Trump’s view, saving others is not a peculiarly American responsibility. Events beyond our borders matter only to the extent that they affect America’s well-being. Trump worships in the Church of America First, or at least pretends to do so in order to impress his followers.

That Donald Trump inhabits a universe of his own devising, constructed of carefully arranged alt-facts, is no doubt the case. Yet, in truth, much the same can be said of David Brooks and others sharing his view of a country providentially charged to serve as the “successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome.” In fact, this conception of America’s purpose expresses not the intent of providence, which is inherently ambiguous, but their own arrogance and conceit. Out of that conceit comes much mischief. And in the wake of mischief come charlatans like Donald Trump.

Andrew J. Bacevich, a TomDispatch regular, is the author of America’s War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History, now out in paperback.

(Reprinted from TomDispatch by permission of author or representative)
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Always desperate to find a silver lining in our predicament, I merely trust that President Trump’s admission that we’re killers, too, might be the first crack in the self-righteous, hypocritical facade that Col. Bacevich depicts?

    Our very first dose of reality therapy?

    Our first confession?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/article/angst-in-the-church-of-america-the-redeemer/#comment-1776839
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Thank you! Great Writing. Great Thinking. Both so-called Red and Blue sides need to READ THIS and NEVER FORGET THE REAL COSTS OF OUR WARS.

    Read More
  3. Anybody can confirm this?
    Paul Craig Roberts claims that CIA yearly budget is one trillion dollars.
    Is Paul getting senile?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
    It is extremely unlikely that Mr Roberts would get any numbers concerning the US government's spending wrong, having served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

    From memory, he added to the acknowledged (and very much understated) official Pentagon budget the total costs, known and estimated, of the 19 (or are there now more? - it's been a few months since I checked) "intelligence" agencies, with some allowance for the "black" money that pays for ISIS and other such trivia. Also such items as "Homeland Security", which is more heavily armed than the armed forces of most nations.
    , @Tom Welsh
    I read most of Paul Craig Roberts' articles, but I can't find him making that precise claim. However I did find this:

    "The scale of US military operations is remarkable. The US Department of Defense has (as of a 2010 inventory) 4,999 military facilities, of which 4,249 are in the United States; 88 are in overseas US territories; and 662 are in 36 foreign countries and foreign territories, in all regions of the world. Not counted in this list are the secret facilities of the US intelligence agencies. The cost of running these military operations and the wars they support is extraordinary, around $900 billion per year, or 5 percent of US national income, when one adds the budgets of the Pentagon, the intelligence agencies, homeland security, nuclear weapons programs in the Department of Energy, and veterans benefits. The $900 billion in annual spending is roughly one-quarter of all federal government outlays".

    From "The fatal expense of American imperialism" by Jeffrey D Sachs, writing in the Boston Globe on October 30, 2016.

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/10/30/the-fatal-expense-american-imperialism/teXS2xwA1UJbYd10WJBHHM/story.html
    , @Wizard of Oz
    How would you tell?
    , @animalogic
    Mr Robert's is not senile. Please employ close reading techniques. Here is the relevant quote:
    "[The] CIA response to the threat to the $1,000 billion annual budget of the military/security complex that desperately needs “the Russian threat”...
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46558.htm
  4. This is a very good analysis. Bacevich has done his homework

    David Brooks is a slick, soft-spoken, centrist neocon. And he is also a very kosher neocon to boot. This explains a lot about David Brooks’ cryptic militarism and hidden agendas.

    But why does Bacevich feel it necessary to take a swipe at our new president?–who he derides as a “charlatan”?

    Can’t Bacevich a least give Trump a few months in office before he starts hurling stones? Why not see what Trump can accomplish before judging his presidency?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Very thoughtful analysis of the devolution of "America's Civic Religion," by Walter MacDougall, based on his book, "The Tragedy of U.S. Foreign Policy: How America's Civic Religion Betrayed the National Interest."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fi0vdrzu8Y
  5. Bacevich is the kind of leftist guy who resents Trump mostly for having said what the Left would have wanted to say (but couldn’t articulate, because of their inner contradictions).
    And he misrepresents the idea of “American Greatness”, as understood by Trump’s voters: it refers to the after-war time with its sound economy and culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveM

    "And [Bacevich] misrepresents the idea of “American Greatness”, as understood by Trump’s voters: it refers to the after-war time with its sound economy and culture."
     
    The Trump voters at Breitbart are frothing in war-monger delight with Trump's militarist Cabinet picks and especially his $54B gift package to the Pentagon. Mad Dog Mattis as SecDef is the last person to suggest a Pentagon audit first to figure out where all of the current slop and waste is sloshing around. And here I thought that being a smart businessman was Trump's forte.

    The U.S. has a shortage of primary care physicians. Trump could have taken $5B of the $54B and used it to fully train up 25,000 additional doctors. It was my now mistaken impression that the Trump voters wanted America First not America the Global Cop First. But nope, "more war" trumps "more doctors".

    Reading the war-monger nut-job comments at Breitbart is almost scary. They have been completely seduced. Trump too. The propaganda of the Security State amalgamation (Pentagon, Corporate Cronies, Think Tank hacks and MSM) right now is omnipotent. Americans are getting hit by Fake News from both the Left and the Right.

    It's all over but the Implosion...

  6. Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal “salvific” mission to immanentize the echelon.

    America “inviting the world and invading the world” to bring worldwide salvation.

    If we just sacrifice enough, open our borders enough, invade enough, we can truly perfect our world and all humanity.

    We are so close to human perfection I can almost smell it, taste it, touch it! We must press on to ultimate victory! It is our duty to the world! Our Sacred Mission from God!

    Tikkum Olam! Now and Forever!

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal “salvific” mission to immanentize the echelon.

     

    "...immanentize the echelon"? Thanks for another new phrase, and thanks to the internet otherwise I'd have never have either heard it or deciphered it. I agree that Bacevich does do a fine job of describing it.

    If we just sacrifice enough, open our borders enough, invade enough, we can truly perfect our world and all humanity.
     
    Additionally, if only we'd listen to our high priests, our "superiors," and trust them and their high IQs enough, and submit to taxing, spending, and concentrating wealth and power enough...

    We are so close to human perfection I can almost smell it, taste it, touch it! We must press on to ultimate victory! It is our duty to the world! Our Sacred Mission from God!

    Tikkum Olam! Now and Forever!
     
    Indeed.
    , @Otto Zeit
    Did you mean "immantentize the eschaton"?
    , @Ickenham
    Minor typographical error, perhaps because the "N" key is adjacent to the "M" key on QWERTY keyboards:

    tikkun olam

    The Wikipedia article can serve as a glossary entry for those readers who may not be familiar with the phrase:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_olam
    , @Ickenham
    Approximate sound-alike, more familiar word substitution.

    immanentize the eschaton

    The Wikipedia article can serve as a glossary entry for those readers who may not be familiar with the phrase:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanentize_the_eschaton
  7. You are too kind to this NeoCon world-destroyer who is capable of having his homicidal head up his ass while smelling only roses.

    Trump might be a similar character but he has yet to prove it. Trump has called for Peace with Russia and an end to foreign interventions. By these words he is, in comparison, a Saint …

    … it doesn’t look like the NYT or, rather, their “deep state” sponsors/owners will tolerate such a reality, however.

    Too disruptive to the globalist project. Oh, and profits.

    The NYT is a bankers’ whorehouse. Just because a whore like Brooks talks pretty doesn’t change this reality one little bit.

    Read More
  8. “Here in any event is a brief inventory of what that euphemism conceals: thousands of Americans needlessly killed; tens of thousands grievously wounded in body or spirit; trillions of dollars wasted; millions of Iraqis dead, injured, or displaced; this nation’s moral standing compromised by its resort to torture, kidnapping, assassination, and other perversions; a region thrown into chaos and threatened by radical terrorist entities like the Islamic State that U.S. military actions helped foster”.

    I think Colonel Bacevic could add to his credibility if, after some thought, he were to re-order that list. Here is a suggested first draft:

    1. millions of Iraqis dead, injured, or displaced;
    2. a region thrown into chaos and threatened by radical terrorist entities like the Islamic State that U.S. military actions helped foster;
    3. thousands of Americans needlessly killed;
    4. tens of thousands grievously wounded in body or spirit;
    5. this nation’s moral standing compromised by its resort to torture, kidnapping, assassination, and other perversions;
    6. trillions of dollars wasted

    The principles behind this proposed re-ordering include the belief that human life matters more than property, money, or prestige; and the belief that someone who viciously attacks someone else should not complain about any harm that he himself may sustain.

    The dead and wounded Americans, the damage to the USA’s “moral standing” (always assuming it has any), and the money wasted are all direct consequences of the criminal war of unprovoked aggression that the US government deliberately chose to launch, knowing full well that its alleged justifications were all lies.

    Someone who likes America and Americans less than I do might even suggest that all the harm to the USA consequent on the Iraqi adventure was thoroughly deserved, and to be considered as (very mild and partial) punishment for the crime of aggression (the supreme international crime, in case anyone has forgotten). Proper and condign punishment would include the hanging of all those responsible; we all know who they are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    You overstate the lies and lying I think. I remember that many people around the world who were being voted for and/or paid to get such things right thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. I remember it particularly because I was rather pleased with myself for having found a weak but supportive argument for the war on the basis that no one wanted people to believe in the WMDs more than Saddam Hussein himself. It gave him leverage even against hos own generals.
  9. The world would be a better place if only President Trump’s “alt facts” were actually alt facts and not a calling-out of the “truth”, varnished or unvarnished, that we are spoon-fed every day.

    Brooks is a paid word-monkey filling a niche role for a dime. Hey, it’s an honest living.

    Read More
  10. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Anybody can confirm this?
    Paul Craig Roberts claims that CIA yearly budget is one trillion dollars.
    Is Paul getting senile?

    It is extremely unlikely that Mr Roberts would get any numbers concerning the US government’s spending wrong, having served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

    From memory, he added to the acknowledged (and very much understated) official Pentagon budget the total costs, known and estimated, of the 19 (or are there now more? – it’s been a few months since I checked) “intelligence” agencies, with some allowance for the “black” money that pays for ISIS and other such trivia. Also such items as “Homeland Security”, which is more heavily armed than the armed forces of most nations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
    I did catch his article on Rense. His article starts with the word Armagedon....
    His number is there 1000 billion annual budget for CIA.
    1000 billion is one trillion.
    Maybe he meant 1000 million, that would be 1billion.
    In any case I am puzzled.
    One number is too high for me, and the other is too low.
  11. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Anybody can confirm this?
    Paul Craig Roberts claims that CIA yearly budget is one trillion dollars.
    Is Paul getting senile?

    I read most of Paul Craig Roberts’ articles, but I can’t find him making that precise claim. However I did find this:

    “The scale of US military operations is remarkable. The US Department of Defense has (as of a 2010 inventory) 4,999 military facilities, of which 4,249 are in the United States; 88 are in overseas US territories; and 662 are in 36 foreign countries and foreign territories, in all regions of the world. Not counted in this list are the secret facilities of the US intelligence agencies. The cost of running these military operations and the wars they support is extraordinary, around $900 billion per year, or 5 percent of US national income, when one adds the budgets of the Pentagon, the intelligence agencies, homeland security, nuclear weapons programs in the Department of Energy, and veterans benefits. The $900 billion in annual spending is roughly one-quarter of all federal government outlays”.

    From “The fatal expense of American imperialism” by Jeffrey D Sachs, writing in the Boston Globe on October 30, 2016.

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/10/30/the-fatal-expense-american-imperialism/teXS2xwA1UJbYd10WJBHHM/story.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Agent76
    Here is a good read on this topic, January 5, 2017 US SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES DEPLOY TO 138 NATIONS, 70 PERCENT OF THE WORLD'S COUNTRIES

    They could be found on the outskirts of Sirte, Libya, supporting local militia fighters, and in Mukalla, Yemen, backing troops from the United Arab Emirates. At Saakow, a remote outpost in southern Somalia, they assisted local commandos in killing several members of the terror group al-Shabab. Around the cities of Jarabulus and Al-Rai in northern Syria, they partnered with both Turkish soldiers and Syrian militias, while also embedding with Kurdish YPG fighters and the Syrian Democratic Forces. Across the border in Iraq, still others joined the fight to liberate the city of Mosul. And in Afghanistan, they assisted indigenous forces in various missions, just as they have every year since 2001.

    http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/38993-the-year-of-the-commando-us-special-operations-forces-deploy-to-138-nations-70-percent-of-the-world-s-countries
  12. “Anyone who has ever tried cramming a coherent and ostensibly insightful argument into a mere 750 words knows what I’m talking about. Writing op-eds does not perhaps qualify as high art. Yet, like tying flies or knitting sweaters, it requires no small amount of skill. Performing the trick week in and week out without too obviously recycling the same ideas over and over again — or at least while disguising repetitions and concealing inconsistencies — requires notable gifts.”

    Andrew, this is the best summary I’ve seen of a major peril of the writing trade. Intellectual exhaustion is a real sumbitch when reputation or a paycheck depends on one not being intellectually exhausted. I’ve written stuff that I knew was crap because I was under pressure, and I lacked important things needed to write what I wanted to write. Important things, such as, sufficient command of the subject matter, good understanding of potential readers, knowledge of my own moral relation to the subject, etc. To add to the weirdness, I’ve been praised for my crap writing, and ignored for stuff I knew to be good.

    Read More
  13. This Bacevich guy knows how to observe and think and how to express it in writing.

    Thank you, UR!

    Read More
  14. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Anybody can confirm this?
    Paul Craig Roberts claims that CIA yearly budget is one trillion dollars.
    Is Paul getting senile?

    How would you tell?

    Read More
  15. @Big Bill
    Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal "salvific" mission to immanentize the echelon.

    America "inviting the world and invading the world" to bring worldwide salvation.

    If we just sacrifice enough, open our borders enough, invade enough, we can truly perfect our world and all humanity.

    We are so close to human perfection I can almost smell it, taste it, touch it! We must press on to ultimate victory! It is our duty to the world! Our Sacred Mission from God!

    Tikkum Olam! Now and Forever!

    Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal “salvific” mission to immanentize the echelon.

    “…immanentize the echelon”? Thanks for another new phrase, and thanks to the internet otherwise I’d have never have either heard it or deciphered it. I agree that Bacevich does do a fine job of describing it.

    If we just sacrifice enough, open our borders enough, invade enough, we can truly perfect our world and all humanity.

    Additionally, if only we’d listen to our high priests, our “superiors,” and trust them and their high IQs enough, and submit to taxing, spending, and concentrating wealth and power enough…

    We are so close to human perfection I can almost smell it, taste it, touch it! We must press on to ultimate victory! It is our duty to the world! Our Sacred Mission from God!

    Tikkum Olam! Now and Forever!

    Indeed.

    Read More
  16. @Tom Welsh
    "Here in any event is a brief inventory of what that euphemism conceals: thousands of Americans needlessly killed; tens of thousands grievously wounded in body or spirit; trillions of dollars wasted; millions of Iraqis dead, injured, or displaced; this nation’s moral standing compromised by its resort to torture, kidnapping, assassination, and other perversions; a region thrown into chaos and threatened by radical terrorist entities like the Islamic State that U.S. military actions helped foster".

    I think Colonel Bacevic could add to his credibility if, after some thought, he were to re-order that list. Here is a suggested first draft:

    1. millions of Iraqis dead, injured, or displaced;
    2. a region thrown into chaos and threatened by radical terrorist entities like the Islamic State that U.S. military actions helped foster;
    3. thousands of Americans needlessly killed;
    4. tens of thousands grievously wounded in body or spirit;
    5. this nation’s moral standing compromised by its resort to torture, kidnapping, assassination, and other perversions;
    6. trillions of dollars wasted

    The principles behind this proposed re-ordering include the belief that human life matters more than property, money, or prestige; and the belief that someone who viciously attacks someone else should not complain about any harm that he himself may sustain.

    The dead and wounded Americans, the damage to the USA's "moral standing" (always assuming it has any), and the money wasted are all direct consequences of the criminal war of unprovoked aggression that the US government deliberately chose to launch, knowing full well that its alleged justifications were all lies.

    Someone who likes America and Americans less than I do might even suggest that all the harm to the USA consequent on the Iraqi adventure was thoroughly deserved, and to be considered as (very mild and partial) punishment for the crime of aggression (the supreme international crime, in case anyone has forgotten). Proper and condign punishment would include the hanging of all those responsible; we all know who they are.

    You overstate the lies and lying I think. I remember that many people around the world who were being voted for and/or paid to get such things right thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. I remember it particularly because I was rather pleased with myself for having found a weak but supportive argument for the war on the basis that no one wanted people to believe in the WMDs more than Saddam Hussein himself. It gave him leverage even against hos own generals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    They only thought so if they had listened to our propaganda, but yet I'm sure few if any nations with their intelligence agencies ever thought for a second that Iraq had any weapons of mass destruction.
    France didn't as I recall nor England either but we sold it their leadership, some with bribes and some with other benefits, and I'm sure that Saddam's generals knew just what Iraq had and didn't have for that comes with the territory of military leadership...
    , @WJ
    Even defining WMSs was a propaganda technique. A mustard gas artillery shell is not the equivalent of a nuclear weapon. Chemical weapons, defined by someone as WMD (our 5,000 pound MOAB bunker buster is not even though it is much more of a mass destruction weapon) posed little if any threat to the US or it's allies. Did any rational adult really believe that somehow Saddam was going to spray an American city with some some kind of chemical agent?

    Did anyone buy Colin Powell's argument that Iraq had fleet of drones to deliver the materials? All that was found in Iraq was a balsa wood model airplane with a lawnmower engine powering it.

    Some people were just a little more perceptive back in 2003. Not that it did any good. I was shouted down as an un-patriotic lefty in an office environment, after I told a group of yuk yuks that the whole thing was a crock of garbage. I didn't enjoy being right over the years.

  17. @Tom Welsh
    It is extremely unlikely that Mr Roberts would get any numbers concerning the US government's spending wrong, having served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

    From memory, he added to the acknowledged (and very much understated) official Pentagon budget the total costs, known and estimated, of the 19 (or are there now more? - it's been a few months since I checked) "intelligence" agencies, with some allowance for the "black" money that pays for ISIS and other such trivia. Also such items as "Homeland Security", which is more heavily armed than the armed forces of most nations.

    I did catch his article on Rense. His article starts with the word Armagedon….
    His number is there 1000 billion annual budget for CIA.
    1000 billion is one trillion.
    Maybe he meant 1000 million, that would be 1billion.
    In any case I am puzzled.
    One number is too high for me, and the other is too low.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
    OK, now I see it. Thanks! The relevant passage seems to be this:

    "The CIA’s media whores knew that the reports were a CIA response to the threat to the $1,000 billion annual budget of the military/security complex that desperately needs “the Russian threat” for its justification".

    You may have read it too quickly, or otherwise misinterpreted it. The CIA is mentioned twice, but not as the recipient of the "$1,000 billion annual budget".

    The budget is attributed to "the military/security complex", which includes those elements I mentioned in a previous comment: '...the acknowledged (and very much understated) official Pentagon budget the total costs, known and estimated, of the 19 (or are there now more? – it’s been a few months since I checked) “intelligence” agencies, with some allowance for the “black” money that pays for ISIS and other such trivia. Also such items as “Homeland Security”, which is more heavily armed than the armed forces of most nations'.

    From memory, the CIA's annual budget (as announced for public consumption) is about $15 billion, and that of all the "intelligence agencies" combined about $52 billion. (About equivalent to the total defence budget of India, the sixth largest in the world).

  18. @Tom Welsh
    I read most of Paul Craig Roberts' articles, but I can't find him making that precise claim. However I did find this:

    "The scale of US military operations is remarkable. The US Department of Defense has (as of a 2010 inventory) 4,999 military facilities, of which 4,249 are in the United States; 88 are in overseas US territories; and 662 are in 36 foreign countries and foreign territories, in all regions of the world. Not counted in this list are the secret facilities of the US intelligence agencies. The cost of running these military operations and the wars they support is extraordinary, around $900 billion per year, or 5 percent of US national income, when one adds the budgets of the Pentagon, the intelligence agencies, homeland security, nuclear weapons programs in the Department of Energy, and veterans benefits. The $900 billion in annual spending is roughly one-quarter of all federal government outlays".

    From "The fatal expense of American imperialism" by Jeffrey D Sachs, writing in the Boston Globe on October 30, 2016.

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/10/30/the-fatal-expense-american-imperialism/teXS2xwA1UJbYd10WJBHHM/story.html

    Here is a good read on this topic, January 5, 2017 US SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES DEPLOY TO 138 NATIONS, 70 PERCENT OF THE WORLD’S COUNTRIES

    They could be found on the outskirts of Sirte, Libya, supporting local militia fighters, and in Mukalla, Yemen, backing troops from the United Arab Emirates. At Saakow, a remote outpost in southern Somalia, they assisted local commandos in killing several members of the terror group al-Shabab. Around the cities of Jarabulus and Al-Rai in northern Syria, they partnered with both Turkish soldiers and Syrian militias, while also embedding with Kurdish YPG fighters and the Syrian Democratic Forces. Across the border in Iraq, still others joined the fight to liberate the city of Mosul. And in Afghanistan, they assisted indigenous forces in various missions, just as they have every year since 2001.

    http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/38993-the-year-of-the-commando-us-special-operations-forces-deploy-to-138-nations-70-percent-of-the-world-s-countries

    Read More
  19. The Pentagon is making all of us poor! August 16, 2016 Pentagon Cannot Account For $6.5 Trillion Dollars

    A new Department of Defense Inspector General’s report, released last week, has left Americans stunned at the jaw-dropping lack of accountability and oversight. The glaring report revealed the Pentagon couldn’t account for $6.5 trillion dollars worth of Army general fund transactions and data, according to a report by the Fiscal Times.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-cannot-account-for-6-5-trillion-dollars/5541244

    Read More
  20. @Wizard of Oz
    You overstate the lies and lying I think. I remember that many people around the world who were being voted for and/or paid to get such things right thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. I remember it particularly because I was rather pleased with myself for having found a weak but supportive argument for the war on the basis that no one wanted people to believe in the WMDs more than Saddam Hussein himself. It gave him leverage even against hos own generals.

    They only thought so if they had listened to our propaganda, but yet I’m sure few if any nations with their intelligence agencies ever thought for a second that Iraq had any weapons of mass destruction.
    France didn’t as I recall nor England either but we sold it their leadership, some with bribes and some with other benefits, and I’m sure that Saddam’s generals knew just what Iraq had and didn’t have for that comes with the territory of military leadership…

    Read More
  21. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    I did catch his article on Rense. His article starts with the word Armagedon....
    His number is there 1000 billion annual budget for CIA.
    1000 billion is one trillion.
    Maybe he meant 1000 million, that would be 1billion.
    In any case I am puzzled.
    One number is too high for me, and the other is too low.

    OK, now I see it. Thanks! The relevant passage seems to be this:

    “The CIA’s media whores knew that the reports were a CIA response to the threat to the $1,000 billion annual budget of the military/security complex that desperately needs “the Russian threat” for its justification”.

    You may have read it too quickly, or otherwise misinterpreted it. The CIA is mentioned twice, but not as the recipient of the “$1,000 billion annual budget”.

    The budget is attributed to “the military/security complex”, which includes those elements I mentioned in a previous comment: ‘…the acknowledged (and very much understated) official Pentagon budget the total costs, known and estimated, of the 19 (or are there now more? – it’s been a few months since I checked) “intelligence” agencies, with some allowance for the “black” money that pays for ISIS and other such trivia. Also such items as “Homeland Security”, which is more heavily armed than the armed forces of most nations’.

    From memory, the CIA’s annual budget (as announced for public consumption) is about $15 billion, and that of all the “intelligence agencies” combined about $52 billion. (About equivalent to the total defence budget of India, the sixth largest in the world).

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Nice work. Roberts is a good guy except for his constant braying about the constitution. I figured he was misquoted but didn't feel like googling it.

    Anyway, lest we forget, the Pentagon manages to screw up the accounting for a lot of its budget. But hey, they're "protecting" us rubes! ;)

    http://personalliberty.com/pentagon-cant-account-for-8-5-trillion-taxpayer-dollars/

    I luv this too.


    Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon

    “The adversary is closer to home; it’s the Pentagon bureaucracy…”

    - Donald Rumsfeld on Sept. 10, 2001

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU
     

  22. The only man to pose an actual threat to the neo-liberal/neo-conservative global order, and of course Bacevich hates him.

    The pundit class derives a great deal of life satisfaction out of bitching and moaning. When somebody comes along and actually promises to upend the corrupt order, it reveals that the pundit is actually quite content with the existing order. The bitching and moaning is just how they make a living.

    In Trump’s view, saving others is not a peculiarly American responsibility. Events beyond our borders matter only to the extent that they affect America’s well-being. Trump worships in the Church of America First

    Why shouldn’t he? The alternative to globalism is nationalism. As a Vietnam vet, you should have particular insight on this issue.

    or at least pretends to do so in order to impress his followers.

    You don’t know that. That is just sloppy, lazy rhetoric. All his actions to date point to his sincerity. He could be on permanent vacation with his stunning third wife and still be the toast of the town while the kids continue to rake the money in. Instead, at age 70, he ran for President with the whole GOPe, Democrats, MSM and every other part of the Establishment against him. He wants the thug reign of terror in the cities to end and Central America to stop dumping its surplus population into the American labor markets and welfare system. He consigned the diabolical TPP to the depths of Hell from which it sprang. In exchange, his opponents call for his impeachment (if not outright assassination and coup d’etat) and political violence against his supporters.

    Unz must keep y’all around just to get a rise out of the iSteve side.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    All his actions to date point to his sincerity. He could be on permanent vacation with his stunning third wife and still be the toast of the town while the kids continue to rake the money in. Instead, at age 70, he ran for President...
     
    At age 70, he should be able to understand that sincerity and ability are two different things.

    Furthermore, anyone who covets the presidency of the pathetically, hopelessly, corrupt bureaucracy at that late age should question his own sanity.


    He wants the thug reign of terror in the cities to end and Central America to stop dumping its surplus population into the American labor markets and welfare system.
     
    While that is admirable as well as desirable, you don't really know what he wants. Talk about sloppy rhetoric!

    Trumpster is not the Savior, Bless his lil heart! Sorry.

  23. @Tom Welsh
    OK, now I see it. Thanks! The relevant passage seems to be this:

    "The CIA’s media whores knew that the reports were a CIA response to the threat to the $1,000 billion annual budget of the military/security complex that desperately needs “the Russian threat” for its justification".

    You may have read it too quickly, or otherwise misinterpreted it. The CIA is mentioned twice, but not as the recipient of the "$1,000 billion annual budget".

    The budget is attributed to "the military/security complex", which includes those elements I mentioned in a previous comment: '...the acknowledged (and very much understated) official Pentagon budget the total costs, known and estimated, of the 19 (or are there now more? – it’s been a few months since I checked) “intelligence” agencies, with some allowance for the “black” money that pays for ISIS and other such trivia. Also such items as “Homeland Security”, which is more heavily armed than the armed forces of most nations'.

    From memory, the CIA's annual budget (as announced for public consumption) is about $15 billion, and that of all the "intelligence agencies" combined about $52 billion. (About equivalent to the total defence budget of India, the sixth largest in the world).

    Nice work. Roberts is a good guy except for his constant braying about the constitution. I figured he was misquoted but didn’t feel like googling it.

    Anyway, lest we forget, the Pentagon manages to screw up the accounting for a lot of its budget. But hey, they’re “protecting” us rubes! ;)

    http://personalliberty.com/pentagon-cant-account-for-8-5-trillion-taxpayer-dollars/

    I luv this too.

    Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon

    “The adversary is closer to home; it’s the Pentagon bureaucracy…”

    - Donald Rumsfeld on Sept. 10, 2001

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU

    Read More
    • Replies: @Agent76
    Here it is directly from CSPAN the government channel. 2.3 TRillion Dollars Missing from DOD Day before 9/11/ 2001

    SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 Defense Business Practices

    Secretary Rumsfeld and other officials talked with reporters about the need to refine the Defense Department’s business practices. An opening ceremony will kick off Acquisition and Logistics Excellence Week. They answered questions from members of the media

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?165947-1/defense-business-practices
  24. @Agent76
    Here is a good read on this topic, January 5, 2017 US SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES DEPLOY TO 138 NATIONS, 70 PERCENT OF THE WORLD'S COUNTRIES

    They could be found on the outskirts of Sirte, Libya, supporting local militia fighters, and in Mukalla, Yemen, backing troops from the United Arab Emirates. At Saakow, a remote outpost in southern Somalia, they assisted local commandos in killing several members of the terror group al-Shabab. Around the cities of Jarabulus and Al-Rai in northern Syria, they partnered with both Turkish soldiers and Syrian militias, while also embedding with Kurdish YPG fighters and the Syrian Democratic Forces. Across the border in Iraq, still others joined the fight to liberate the city of Mosul. And in Afghanistan, they assisted indigenous forces in various missions, just as they have every year since 2001.

    http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/38993-the-year-of-the-commando-us-special-operations-forces-deploy-to-138-nations-70-percent-of-the-world-s-countries

    Thanks, Agent76! Very good piece indeed.

    Read More
  25. @jacques sheete
    Nice work. Roberts is a good guy except for his constant braying about the constitution. I figured he was misquoted but didn't feel like googling it.

    Anyway, lest we forget, the Pentagon manages to screw up the accounting for a lot of its budget. But hey, they're "protecting" us rubes! ;)

    http://personalliberty.com/pentagon-cant-account-for-8-5-trillion-taxpayer-dollars/

    I luv this too.


    Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon

    “The adversary is closer to home; it’s the Pentagon bureaucracy…”

    - Donald Rumsfeld on Sept. 10, 2001

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU
     

    Here it is directly from CSPAN the government channel. 2.3 TRillion Dollars Missing from DOD Day before 9/11/ 2001

    SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 Defense Business Practices

    Secretary Rumsfeld and other officials talked with reporters about the need to refine the Defense Department’s business practices. An opening ceremony will kick off Acquisition and Logistics Excellence Week. They answered questions from members of the media

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?165947-1/defense-business-practices

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Thanks! Sorry for the redundancy but your posts were not visible when I posted that.

    I sure wish us "deplorables" could do something other than make others aware of the corruption and stupidity.

  26. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    David Brooks probably thinks he knows what the future portends and that is not a revival of “American Greatness”.
    Brooks’ own son is now guaranteeing his family’s future “greatness” by serving in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). His service there (and not here) is a sort of insurance policy that will allow his family first dibs on residence there if things go very wrong here in the US. I have no hesitation in claiming that David Brooks actually encouraged this service since he has never claimed anything else.
    Is it only me or have other people realized how an increasing number of American Jewish grandmothers are now saying that they would be proud if their children served in the Israeli military. Log into virtually any synagogue website and you will find constant cheerleading and fund raising for Israel and now the IDF. You will see this promotion both there and in the newsletters emailed out to their memberships. (American (gentile) veterans of the Mideast wars are simply never mentioned.) You would think that these supposed houses of worship are actually now becoming just IDF recruiting centers. Americans serving in the IDF are apparently encouraged to send pictures of themselves in their IDF uniforms so that these pictures can proudly be displayed on these sites.
    This sort of IDF “insurance policy” doesn’t mean of course that participants will actually end taking up full-time residence in Israel. After all, who wants to live full time in that hot, small (at least presently), barren, increasingly theocratic shithole among very aggressive people who often personify some of The Tribe’s worst stereotypes.
    Having served in the IDF is turning out to be a big bonus on resumes. It sure didn’t hurt the new editor of the supposedly liberal The Atlantic Magazine.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Goldberg

    Read More
  27. Brooks makes a living out of recycling the old jew Lippmann. Brooks often gets my blood up and running , better than a cup of Sumatra coffee, and clears out any sleepy cobwebs.

    Here is one just from a couple days ago. Brooks the half truth guy, like the half jew that he apparently is. Of course, the biological half and half gets at least some of the full truth, as opposed to the Krugman who has gone round the bend in his thesaurus thumbing for expletives, fit to print.

    -
    To: Joe Webb
    Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 12:19 PM
    Subject: Fw: NYTimes.com: The Enlightenment Project ( not too enlightening )

    “Hill didn’t say it, but I’d add that anti-Enlightenment thinking is also back in the form of Donald Trump, racial separatists and the world’s other populist ethnic nationalist movements.
    Today’s anti-Enlightenment movements don’t think truth is to be found through skeptical inquiry and debate. They think wisdom and virtue are found in the instincts of the plain people, deep in the mystical core of the nation’s or race’s group consciousness.”

    Then try this one: “Enlightenment figures perpetually tell themselves that religion is dead (it isn’t) and that race is dead (it isn’t)…” This one comes from his White half I guess.

    The 18th C. Enlightenment figures did not claim that race was dead. For example, it was during the said Enlightenment that coined the term “oriental despotism” to cover what they had been enlightened about from travelers to the Orient , etc. Karl Marx, along with other Enlightenment figures, used the term niggers.

    More importantly, the race most remarkably Absent, not even AWOL, from Enlightenment thinking was, you guessed it, the Jews. And, Voltaire had some obsevations about Jews that are, uh, not fit to print. The only jew of which I am aware that can be considered a candidate, was Spinoza, and from an earlier time anyway. Jews have always written very little about themselves or others…so insular have they been. Others don’t exist for Jews, they are only cattle to be bled and butchered. Jehovah said so.

    But Napoleon jerked them out of the ghetto…one of the first disasters of Enlightenment folly.

    Most importantly , the Brooks jew boy does not (as in Jew lies ) mention the large contribution of the Counter-Enlightenment figures, from Burke in England to many more in Germany and France. It was the French Revolution that proved the lunacy of the one-dimensionality of Enlightenment thought. And Voltaire, while first of all a whistle -blower on many negative aspects of the Old Regime and The Church, also is best know for his more or less anti-Enlightenment satire, Candide. He subtitled it, or something: The Optimist.

    So, it is not as if all us Whtie folks were so dumb as to be oblivious to the Blood and Soil biology of homo sapiens. Arguably, the True Self is emerging yet again, much to the dismay of the globalizers, Equality Zombies, and Free Thinkers, and jewish hi-jackers of The Enlightenment generosity…like…yeah, they open up Israel to the wretched of the earth…total opportunism on their part to use the Enlightenment against us…and now that Blood and Soil is back….the jews are crying foul…Hey …only jews get to…. Blood and Soil!

    The other remarkable factor here is that race-realism is actually completely within the compass of Rationality and Enlightenment. Science shows the inequality of races in both intelligence and emotional constitution, temperament. Rationality, not mysticism, points the way to Separation of races, and, for that matter, any folks who do not get along within a particular race. Call it divorce if you like.

    It is true that Racialism has had a utopian/mystical character to a limited degree, but that was before science and biology remedied the matter. No need to get all spiritual and mythological….plain old common sense, rationality, and a certain amount of patience….points the way to Separation of the races.

    Another 6 million Refugees are massing in Asia Minor, etc. to begin the next crusade Against Whites and For Free Money. Get out your thinking caps…and your guns.
    The rationality of self-defense is enlightened. Why? because it saves your kids and your civilization. Any questions?
    Joe Webb

    Read More
  28. reading the comments, poor Bacevich is getting bashed, about 95% of the time.

    Bacevich writes with Balance…try to get on the one hand and yet on the other hand…stuff.

    Brooks is supposed to be Conservative? Like Douthat is Conservative? The only JYT writer that is reliably pretty close to the truth, is the liberal, Edsall, who sticks close also to the facts.

    Brooks as the arch, in JYT Arrogance ,”All You Need To Know” column on the digital edition anyway, All You Need to Know ….that is the jew/Talmudism of all the news that fits the Jew/LIb/Communist/One World Order.

    Tenshunt!! Comes the oracle to Spea-kkk.!

    Joe Webb

    Read More
  29. @Agent76
    Here it is directly from CSPAN the government channel. 2.3 TRillion Dollars Missing from DOD Day before 9/11/ 2001

    SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 Defense Business Practices

    Secretary Rumsfeld and other officials talked with reporters about the need to refine the Defense Department’s business practices. An opening ceremony will kick off Acquisition and Logistics Excellence Week. They answered questions from members of the media

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?165947-1/defense-business-practices

    Thanks! Sorry for the redundancy but your posts were not visible when I posted that.

    I sure wish us “deplorables” could do something other than make others aware of the corruption and stupidity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Agent76
    Thanks jacques sheete. Just be sure and share these everywhere you blog and this is all we can do for now.

    http://38.media.tumblr.com/38f700f0060eacee90cd158302d36b75/tumblr_mo20q3nUex1sty1dfo1_500.gif
  30. @The Anti-Gnostic
    The only man to pose an actual threat to the neo-liberal/neo-conservative global order, and of course Bacevich hates him.

    The pundit class derives a great deal of life satisfaction out of bitching and moaning. When somebody comes along and actually promises to upend the corrupt order, it reveals that the pundit is actually quite content with the existing order. The bitching and moaning is just how they make a living.

    In Trump’s view, saving others is not a peculiarly American responsibility. Events beyond our borders matter only to the extent that they affect America’s well-being. Trump worships in the Church of America First
     
    Why shouldn't he? The alternative to globalism is nationalism. As a Vietnam vet, you should have particular insight on this issue.

    or at least pretends to do so in order to impress his followers.
     
    You don't know that. That is just sloppy, lazy rhetoric. All his actions to date point to his sincerity. He could be on permanent vacation with his stunning third wife and still be the toast of the town while the kids continue to rake the money in. Instead, at age 70, he ran for President with the whole GOPe, Democrats, MSM and every other part of the Establishment against him. He wants the thug reign of terror in the cities to end and Central America to stop dumping its surplus population into the American labor markets and welfare system. He consigned the diabolical TPP to the depths of Hell from which it sprang. In exchange, his opponents call for his impeachment (if not outright assassination and coup d'etat) and political violence against his supporters.

    Unz must keep y'all around just to get a rise out of the iSteve side.

    All his actions to date point to his sincerity. He could be on permanent vacation with his stunning third wife and still be the toast of the town while the kids continue to rake the money in. Instead, at age 70, he ran for President…

    At age 70, he should be able to understand that sincerity and ability are two different things.

    Furthermore, anyone who covets the presidency of the pathetically, hopelessly, corrupt bureaucracy at that late age should question his own sanity.

    He wants the thug reign of terror in the cities to end and Central America to stop dumping its surplus population into the American labor markets and welfare system.

    While that is admirable as well as desirable, you don’t really know what he wants. Talk about sloppy rhetoric!

    Trumpster is not the Savior, Bless his lil heart! Sorry.

    Read More
  31. Jews have gotten a lot of mileage for their particularist goals, under the banner of universalism. Brooks very much included.

    E.g.,

    Under the circumstances, it’s easy to forget that, back in 2003, he and other members of the Church of America the Redeemer devoutly supported the invasion of Iraq. They welcomed war. They urged it. They did so not because Saddam Hussein was uniquely evil — although he was evil enough — but because they saw in such a war the means for the United States to accomplish its salvific mission. Toppling Saddam and transforming Iraq would provide the mechanism for affirming and renewing America’s “national greatness.”

    ***

    What the Russian president has done in Crimea, Ukraine, and Syria qualifies as criminal. What American presidents have done in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya qualifies as incidental and, above all, beside the point.

    I’m sure the Russians have a reciprocal position.

    Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal “salvific” mission to immanentize the echelon.

    I’m not really fluent in Konspiracy Cant, but shouldn’t that be “eschaton?”

    Someone who likes America and Americans less than I do might even suggest that all the harm to the USA consequent on the Iraqi adventure was thoroughly deserved, and to be considered as (very mild and partial) punishment for the crime of aggression (the supreme international crime, in case anyone has forgotten). Proper and condign punishment would include the hanging of all those responsible; we all know who they are.

    That would be dumb. The Americans who wound up 6 feet under or maimed had, at most, almost nothing to do with the decision to invade Iraq. The people who did suffered, at most, almost nothing.

    Read More
  32. “Under the circumstances, it’s easy to forget that, back in 2003, he [Brooks] and other members of the Church of America the Redeemer devoutly supported the invasion of Iraq. They welcomed war. They urged it. They did so not because Saddam Hussein was uniquely evil — although he was evil enough — but because they saw in such a war the means for the United States to accomplish its salvific mission.”

    There IS a touch of ” Church of America the Redeemer” which is rooted in Protestant “City on a hill”, as in Jerusalem, to light the way for suffering Humanity, as long as Humanity does what the rabbis say. This theme is solidly to be laid at a altar of both Jewish Arrogance, AND White Altruism.

    As I reported earlier, the City on the Hill Protestant missionaries got to Araby in 1820 and failed to convert anybody but stayed to build schools and hospitals, etc, mostly in the Syria area. These altruistic pilgrims for Christ had no ulterior motives, particularly US imperialism, and developed a pro-Arab point of view, which Kaplan in his The Arabists, calls localitis, a disease of all foreign service folks he says. These New England City on a Hill folks loved the Arabs and opposed US realpolitik and especially the conquest of Palestine and became good anti-semites, most of them.

    Point: there is a positive side to the City on a Hill
    folks and this guy just bashes them. No historical or reasonable Balance in this case.

    Btw, I was active in the Iraq sanctions movement ca. 2000 forward. Scott whatshis name, the weapons inspector, who lead the rooting around in Iraq for evidence of WMD, said that there Had Been progress toward a Bomb, but that it was ended by about 1996, by the inspectors I guess.

    By the time of the Iraq War I, it was a lie that Iraq had WMD. just for the record. per Scott whatshis name.

    Bacervick blames good white folks for their zeal in going after The Evil One, Saddam. This is a lie.
    Good White Folks were misled by JEWS as everyone on this list knows…the lies of the neocons,, and specifically Wofloblitz and Feith at the Pentagon and many others including the JYT.

    Remember Judith Miller of JYT? .she is still around, another Jew. Miller is almost always a Jew-ish name

    So not a discouraging word about the Jew Factor in this Bacevich piece. He needs to be bashed, real good.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ickenham
    Professor Bacevich [colonel U.S. Army (retired)] mourns his son, Lieutenant Andrew John Bacevich, killed by an IED in a foolhardy, ill-considered, unnecessary, elective, expeditionary war.

    Bacevich writes [emphases mine]:

    1. "Brooks belongs, or once did, to the Church’s neoconservative branch."

    2. "The Church of America the Redeemer even has its own Jerusalem, located on the banks of the Potomac, and its own hierarchy, its members situated nearby in High Temples of varying architectural distinction."

    3. [quoting Brooks] "...America as the latest successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome."

    4. "David Brooks and others sharing his view of a country providentially charged to serve as the “successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome.” In fact, this conception of America’s purpose expresses not the intent of providence, which is inherently ambiguous, but their own arrogance and conceit." [repeating the quotation to criticize "David Brooks and others sharing his view..."]

    "Jerusalem" appears three times, "High Temples" once, "neoconservative" once, and the article is tagged inter alia "Neocons".

    I have no doubt that Professor Bacevich would like to see those responsible for the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan held accountable for the butchers' bill he summarized. The unelected appointees, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, et al to be sure, but I'd wager Professor Bacevich would not absolve Bush, Cheney, Tenet, Rumsfeld, Rice et al of their culpability. If, however, you believe that the Gentile POTUS, VPOTUS, DCI, SecDef, NSA/SecState, scores of U.S. Senators and hundreds of members of Congress were somehow in thrall to a cabal of Jews and lacked any agency or motives of their own, then yes, Professor Bacevich would likely disagree with you. Reality certainly does.

    Professor Bacevich has rightly criticized Donald Trump's near-total lack of knowledge or understanding of defence policy in previous articles. He is not alone, even among America First isolationists, in perceiving Trump to be an ignoramus, ill-prepared, and dangerously out of his depth, imperilling the safety and security of us all.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Bacevich

    I know this to be true: by almost any conceivable measure of virtue, Professor Bacevich is a better man and a greater patriot than I am. I am absolutely certain that Professor Bacevich is a better man and a greater patriot than you are.

    We get it. When you seek the root cause of any and all of the ills of the world, you cherchez les Juifs. I will stipulate that, in the western hemisphere, Jews are likely to be disproportionately overrepresented as promulgators and advocates of ideas good and bad across the whole of the political and philosophical spectrum. The problem with monomaniacally denouncing the pernicious influence of Jews, rather than specifically objecting to policies which are harmful to the interests of our fellow Americans is that it has the paradoxical effect of insulating the objects of your hatred from substantive criticisms of wrongheaded policies. If this is just a safe space for you to express yourself, I support your First Amendment rights to freedom of expression. If you're hoping to win hearts and minds, obsessively demanding that others denounce "the Jews" is unlikely to help you prevail in the struggle against malign ideas and policies.

    Three "Jerusalem"s, a "High Temples", and a "neoconservative". Professor Bacevich would appear to be indicating exactly what he means by "David Brooks and others sharing his view". Lippmann and Albright are also named. But he also recognizes the culpability of William F. Buckley, Jr.; Bill Clinton; Hillary Clinton; Barack Obama; John McCain; Ted Cruz; and Marco Rubio. To restrict one's indictment to the Jews among those responsible for these catastrophic policies is to let the Gentiles higher up the org chart of the hook. Letting the big fish off the hook means that future big fish are likely to repeat the ruinous policies and misadventures, further hastening the decline and fall of America.

  33. nitpicking dept. “You think our country’s so innocent?” the nation’s 45th president recently barked at a TV host who had the temerity to ask how he could have kind words for the likes of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Observers professed shock that a sitting president would openly question American innocence.”

    While Bacevich actually appears to support Trump (while continuing to harp on American Church of whatever). He uses the totally unfair representation of Trump’s remark, which I saw on TV, as “barking.” Trump, far from ‘barking,’ in low volume and open-to questioning attitude, made his low-key remark.

    Thus Bacevich rhetorically praises and damns Trump, having it both ways, to chum his audience. Nice work B. Clever.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
  34. America spins self glorifying stories AND is is super-powerful. Every country has ideologues who spin myths , but only one is as strong as America. I suspect American strength and unspoken adherence to the dictates of power politics realism is the crucial factor, because ts redemptive national narrative is by no means unusual.

    It would be nice if a country could count on being left alone if it didn’t poke its nose into others’ affairs, but countries like individuals never reach a status where they don’t have to worry about what others are doing . Kids in the schoolyard , other journalists, other states. They want all want to be top dog, to take everything from you, and anyone who is allowed to get the wherewithal will try. I’m afraid realism dictates US policy is to get other countries under its thumb, or keep them there.

    Of course under the influence of ideologues like Brooks, countries sometimes bite of more than they can chew while doing things that were realistically unnecessary . Trump is hardly a charlatan for cutting through the bullshit and saying he will only intervene aboard when necessary. It is not necessary to know how ISIS got started to decide whether to annihilate it even if a lot of people in foreign counties (many of them completely innocent) get killed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @denk
    Sean,
    'If we dont get them now they'd get us one of these days'

    Thats the kind of B.S. underpinning three centuries of fukus imperialism.
    Kipling and Mackinder would be proud of you. !

    Luckily the marines got to Grenada 'just in time', before their air force had a chance to bomb Washington ! [1]
    hehehehe

    'Trump is hardly a charlatan for cutting through the bullshit and saying he will only intervene aboard when necessary.'

    This is what he says,
    *We 'd intervine only to defend our national interest*

    If you know anything about murkkan history, thats the carte blanche for a thousand wars since 1785. !

    'It is not necessary to know how ISIS got started to decide whether to annihilate it .'

    Sure thing, playing both sides as usual.
    Designed to fail.
    works like a charm since 911 . [2]
    -----------------------------------------
    [1]
    ' Reagan says the US forces found "a complete base of weapons and communication equipment which makes it clear that a Cuban occupation of the island had been planned. [One warehouse] contained weapons and ammunition stacked almost to the ceiling, enough to supply thousands of terrorists. [Grenada was] a Soviet-Cuban colony being readied as a major military bastion to export terror and undermine democracy, but we got there just in time.'

    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lormand/poli/soa/grenada.htm

    [2]
    http://journal-neo.org/2017/02/24/us-war-on-islamic-state-designed-to-fail/
  35. I’m sure that David Brooks who has a son serving in the Israeli military
    is an independent and neutral observer and reporter on U.S. foreign and domestic policy.

    Ignore the tin-foil yarmulkes.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/09/david-brooks-son-idf-israeli-army.html

    Read More
  36. @Big Bill
    Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal "salvific" mission to immanentize the echelon.

    America "inviting the world and invading the world" to bring worldwide salvation.

    If we just sacrifice enough, open our borders enough, invade enough, we can truly perfect our world and all humanity.

    We are so close to human perfection I can almost smell it, taste it, touch it! We must press on to ultimate victory! It is our duty to the world! Our Sacred Mission from God!

    Tikkum Olam! Now and Forever!

    Did you mean “immantentize the eschaton”?

    Read More
  37. The article reminds me of another loathsome David Brooks. This one sold defective body armor to the US marines.

    David H. Brooks, Defense Contractor Who Spent $10 Million On Daughter’s Bat Mitzvah, Charged With Insider Trading

    David H. Brooks, the founder and former chief executive of DHB Industries, Inc., and Sandra Hatfield, the former chief operating officer, are accused of falsely inflating the value of the inventory of the company’s top product, the Interceptor vest, to help meet profit margin projections. Brooks also is accused of using the company treasury as his own private bank account, spending $5 million on unauthorized expenditures.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/27/dhb-industries-body-armor_n_435920.html

    Read More
  38. @jacques sheete
    Thanks! Sorry for the redundancy but your posts were not visible when I posted that.

    I sure wish us "deplorables" could do something other than make others aware of the corruption and stupidity.

    Thanks jacques sheete. Just be sure and share these everywhere you blog and this is all we can do for now.

    http://38.media.tumblr.com/38f700f0060eacee90cd158302d36b75/tumblr_mo20q3nUex1sty1dfo1_500.gif

    Read More
  39. @Stogumber
    Bacevich is the kind of leftist guy who resents Trump mostly for having said what the Left would have wanted to say (but couldn't articulate, because of their inner contradictions).
    And he misrepresents the idea of "American Greatness", as understood by Trump's voters: it refers to the after-war time with its sound economy and culture.

    “And [Bacevich] misrepresents the idea of “American Greatness”, as understood by Trump’s voters: it refers to the after-war time with its sound economy and culture.”

    The Trump voters at Breitbart are frothing in war-monger delight with Trump’s militarist Cabinet picks and especially his $54B gift package to the Pentagon. Mad Dog Mattis as SecDef is the last person to suggest a Pentagon audit first to figure out where all of the current slop and waste is sloshing around. And here I thought that being a smart businessman was Trump’s forte.

    The U.S. has a shortage of primary care physicians. Trump could have taken $5B of the $54B and used it to fully train up 25,000 additional doctors. It was my now mistaken impression that the Trump voters wanted America First not America the Global Cop First. But nope, “more war” trumps “more doctors”.

    Reading the war-monger nut-job comments at Breitbart is almost scary. They have been completely seduced. Trump too. The propaganda of the Security State amalgamation (Pentagon, Corporate Cronies, Think Tank hacks and MSM) right now is omnipotent. Americans are getting hit by Fake News from both the Left and the Right.

    It’s all over but the Implosion…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Oh, I get it, Hillary wanted to make nice with Russia.

    Obama left the federal government approximately $9,335,000,000,000 deeper in debt than it was when he took office eight years ago, according to data released by the U.S. Treasury.
    The increased debt incurred under Obama equals approximately $76,000 for every person in the United States who had a full-time job in December.
    That debt is far more debt than was accumulated by any previous president. It equals nearly twice as much as the $4,900,000,000.00 in additional debt that piled up during the eight years George W. Bush served as president.
  40. I held my nose and took an anti-emetic so I could wade through Brooks’ sewage, and there is a pot load of laughable material there. What an ignorant pompous ass that piece of work is.

    I found this to be particularly priceless.:

    Today’s anti-Enlightenment movements believe less in calm persuasion and evidence-based inquiry than in purity of will. They try to win debates through blunt force and silencing unacceptable speech.

    Naturally he wouldn’t be referring to the “chosen” exceptions to all the rules…Tsk, tsk.

    Read More
  41. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Anybody can confirm this?
    Paul Craig Roberts claims that CIA yearly budget is one trillion dollars.
    Is Paul getting senile?

    Mr Robert’s is not senile. Please employ close reading techniques. Here is the relevant quote:
    “[The] CIA response to the threat to the $1,000 billion annual budget of the military/security complex that desperately needs “the Russian threat”…

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46558.htm

    Read More
  42. @SteveM

    "And [Bacevich] misrepresents the idea of “American Greatness”, as understood by Trump’s voters: it refers to the after-war time with its sound economy and culture."
     
    The Trump voters at Breitbart are frothing in war-monger delight with Trump's militarist Cabinet picks and especially his $54B gift package to the Pentagon. Mad Dog Mattis as SecDef is the last person to suggest a Pentagon audit first to figure out where all of the current slop and waste is sloshing around. And here I thought that being a smart businessman was Trump's forte.

    The U.S. has a shortage of primary care physicians. Trump could have taken $5B of the $54B and used it to fully train up 25,000 additional doctors. It was my now mistaken impression that the Trump voters wanted America First not America the Global Cop First. But nope, "more war" trumps "more doctors".

    Reading the war-monger nut-job comments at Breitbart is almost scary. They have been completely seduced. Trump too. The propaganda of the Security State amalgamation (Pentagon, Corporate Cronies, Think Tank hacks and MSM) right now is omnipotent. Americans are getting hit by Fake News from both the Left and the Right.

    It's all over but the Implosion...

    Oh, I get it, Hillary wanted to make nice with Russia.

    Obama left the federal government approximately $9,335,000,000,000 deeper in debt than it was when he took office eight years ago, according to data released by the U.S. Treasury.
    The increased debt incurred under Obama equals approximately $76,000 for every person in the United States who had a full-time job in December.
    That debt is far more debt than was accumulated by any previous president. It equals nearly twice as much as the $4,900,000,000.00 in additional debt that piled up during the eight years George W. Bush served as president.

    Read More
  43. @Wizard of Oz
    You overstate the lies and lying I think. I remember that many people around the world who were being voted for and/or paid to get such things right thought that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. I remember it particularly because I was rather pleased with myself for having found a weak but supportive argument for the war on the basis that no one wanted people to believe in the WMDs more than Saddam Hussein himself. It gave him leverage even against hos own generals.

    Even defining WMSs was a propaganda technique. A mustard gas artillery shell is not the equivalent of a nuclear weapon. Chemical weapons, defined by someone as WMD (our 5,000 pound MOAB bunker buster is not even though it is much more of a mass destruction weapon) posed little if any threat to the US or it’s allies. Did any rational adult really believe that somehow Saddam was going to spray an American city with some some kind of chemical agent?

    Did anyone buy Colin Powell’s argument that Iraq had fleet of drones to deliver the materials? All that was found in Iraq was a balsa wood model airplane with a lawnmower engine powering it.

    Some people were just a little more perceptive back in 2003. Not that it did any good. I was shouted down as an un-patriotic lefty in an office environment, after I told a group of yuk yuks that the whole thing was a crock of garbage. I didn’t enjoy being right over the years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I don't know how commendable your thought processes were but I didn't come to any decided conclusion that I didn't have to but noted that several quite serious diplomats and statesmen (like Chirac) seemed to think, possibly from introspection :-) , that Saddam's shiftiness added to his evil acts made it likely that he was into WMDs that might matter. It didn't justify a war that America was not prepared to win even if it made it easier to say Saddam brought it on himself by his unwillingness to disclose fully and early his weakness vis a vis WMDs. My own view tended towards thinking it was Saddam's bluff to keep people believing he might have WMDs.

    Cp. the view I take on global warming. No doubt whatever natural cause of the end of the Little Ice Age continues to warm the planet and it seems highly probable that human causes are adding to the warming somewhat - not least the burning of tropical forests if it is CO2 emissions that count most. But I take the view as an Australian that there is absolutely nothing my country can do to avoid whatever the world's CO2 emissions will do in the way of droughts, floods, heat or rising oceans so our expensive renewables mandates and subsidies should be abandoned in favour of using our money usefully - maybe to help build sea walls round our seaside suburbs or assist Bangladeshis who are flooded out....
  44. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    As well as frightening the Iranians and other neighbours, Saddam Hussein had to treat all his generals other than cousins from Tikrit as potential enemies to his dictatorship. Even in the US most generals would not have an accurate idea of the state of research and development of chemical or biological weapons.

    Read More
  45. @WJ
    Even defining WMSs was a propaganda technique. A mustard gas artillery shell is not the equivalent of a nuclear weapon. Chemical weapons, defined by someone as WMD (our 5,000 pound MOAB bunker buster is not even though it is much more of a mass destruction weapon) posed little if any threat to the US or it's allies. Did any rational adult really believe that somehow Saddam was going to spray an American city with some some kind of chemical agent?

    Did anyone buy Colin Powell's argument that Iraq had fleet of drones to deliver the materials? All that was found in Iraq was a balsa wood model airplane with a lawnmower engine powering it.

    Some people were just a little more perceptive back in 2003. Not that it did any good. I was shouted down as an un-patriotic lefty in an office environment, after I told a group of yuk yuks that the whole thing was a crock of garbage. I didn't enjoy being right over the years.

    I don’t know how commendable your thought processes were but I didn’t come to any decided conclusion that I didn’t have to but noted that several quite serious diplomats and statesmen (like Chirac) seemed to think, possibly from introspection :-) , that Saddam’s shiftiness added to his evil acts made it likely that he was into WMDs that might matter. It didn’t justify a war that America was not prepared to win even if it made it easier to say Saddam brought it on himself by his unwillingness to disclose fully and early his weakness vis a vis WMDs. My own view tended towards thinking it was Saddam’s bluff to keep people believing he might have WMDs.

    Cp. the view I take on global warming. No doubt whatever natural cause of the end of the Little Ice Age continues to warm the planet and it seems highly probable that human causes are adding to the warming somewhat – not least the burning of tropical forests if it is CO2 emissions that count most. But I take the view as an Australian that there is absolutely nothing my country can do to avoid whatever the world’s CO2 emissions will do in the way of droughts, floods, heat or rising oceans so our expensive renewables mandates and subsidies should be abandoned in favour of using our money usefully – maybe to help build sea walls round our seaside suburbs or assist Bangladeshis who are flooded out….

    Read More
  46. @Big Bill
    Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal "salvific" mission to immanentize the echelon.

    America "inviting the world and invading the world" to bring worldwide salvation.

    If we just sacrifice enough, open our borders enough, invade enough, we can truly perfect our world and all humanity.

    We are so close to human perfection I can almost smell it, taste it, touch it! We must press on to ultimate victory! It is our duty to the world! Our Sacred Mission from God!

    Tikkum Olam! Now and Forever!

    Minor typographical error, perhaps because the “N” key is adjacent to the “M” key on QWERTY keyboards:

    tikkun olam

    The Wikipedia article can serve as a glossary entry for those readers who may not be familiar with the phrase:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_olam

    Read More
  47. @Big Bill
    Perfect expression of the neocon/neoliberal "salvific" mission to immanentize the echelon.

    America "inviting the world and invading the world" to bring worldwide salvation.

    If we just sacrifice enough, open our borders enough, invade enough, we can truly perfect our world and all humanity.

    We are so close to human perfection I can almost smell it, taste it, touch it! We must press on to ultimate victory! It is our duty to the world! Our Sacred Mission from God!

    Tikkum Olam! Now and Forever!

    Approximate sound-alike, more familiar word substitution.

    immanentize the eschaton

    The Wikipedia article can serve as a glossary entry for those readers who may not be familiar with the phrase:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanentize_the_eschaton

    Read More
  48. @joe webb
    "Under the circumstances, it’s easy to forget that, back in 2003, he [Brooks] and other members of the Church of America the Redeemer devoutly supported the invasion of Iraq. They welcomed war. They urged it. They did so not because Saddam Hussein was uniquely evil — although he was evil enough — but because they saw in such a war the means for the United States to accomplish its salvific mission."

    There IS a touch of " Church of America the Redeemer" which is rooted in Protestant "City on a hill", as in Jerusalem, to light the way for suffering Humanity, as long as Humanity does what the rabbis say. This theme is solidly to be laid at a altar of both Jewish Arrogance, AND White Altruism.

    As I reported earlier, the City on the Hill Protestant missionaries got to Araby in 1820 and failed to convert anybody but stayed to build schools and hospitals, etc, mostly in the Syria area. These altruistic pilgrims for Christ had no ulterior motives, particularly US imperialism, and developed a pro-Arab point of view, which Kaplan in his The Arabists, calls localitis, a disease of all foreign service folks he says. These New England City on a Hill folks loved the Arabs and opposed US realpolitik and especially the conquest of Palestine and became good anti-semites, most of them.

    Point: there is a positive side to the City on a Hill
    folks and this guy just bashes them. No historical or reasonable Balance in this case.

    Btw, I was active in the Iraq sanctions movement ca. 2000 forward. Scott whatshis name, the weapons inspector, who lead the rooting around in Iraq for evidence of WMD, said that there Had Been progress toward a Bomb, but that it was ended by about 1996, by the inspectors I guess.

    By the time of the Iraq War I, it was a lie that Iraq had WMD. just for the record. per Scott whatshis name.

    Bacervick blames good white folks for their zeal in going after The Evil One, Saddam. This is a lie.
    Good White Folks were misled by JEWS as everyone on this list knows...the lies of the neocons,, and specifically Wofloblitz and Feith at the Pentagon and many others including the JYT.

    Remember Judith Miller of JYT? .she is still around, another Jew. Miller is almost always a Jew-ish name

    So not a discouraging word about the Jew Factor in this Bacevich piece. He needs to be bashed, real good.

    Joe Webb

    Professor Bacevich [colonel U.S. Army (retired)] mourns his son, Lieutenant Andrew John Bacevich, killed by an IED in a foolhardy, ill-considered, unnecessary, elective, expeditionary war.

    Bacevich writes [emphases mine]:

    1. “Brooks belongs, or once did, to the Church’s neoconservative branch.”

    2. “The Church of America the Redeemer even has its own Jerusalem, located on the banks of the Potomac, and its own hierarchy, its members situated nearby in High Temples of varying architectural distinction.”

    3. [quoting Brooks] “…America as the latest successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome.”

    4. “David Brooks and others sharing his view of a country providentially charged to serve as the “successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome.” In fact, this conception of America’s purpose expresses not the intent of providence, which is inherently ambiguous, but their own arrogance and conceit.” [repeating the quotation to criticize "David Brooks and others sharing his view..."]

    “Jerusalem” appears three times, “High Temples” once, “neoconservative” once, and the article is tagged inter alia “Neocons”.

    I have no doubt that Professor Bacevich would like to see those responsible for the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan held accountable for the butchers’ bill he summarized. The unelected appointees, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, et al to be sure, but I’d wager Professor Bacevich would not absolve Bush, Cheney, Tenet, Rumsfeld, Rice et al of their culpability. If, however, you believe that the Gentile POTUS, VPOTUS, DCI, SecDef, NSA/SecState, scores of U.S. Senators and hundreds of members of Congress were somehow in thrall to a cabal of Jews and lacked any agency or motives of their own, then yes, Professor Bacevich would likely disagree with you. Reality certainly does.

    Professor Bacevich has rightly criticized Donald Trump’s near-total lack of knowledge or understanding of defence policy in previous articles. He is not alone, even among America First isolationists, in perceiving Trump to be an ignoramus, ill-prepared, and dangerously out of his depth, imperilling the safety and security of us all.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Bacevich

    I know this to be true: by almost any conceivable measure of virtue, Professor Bacevich is a better man and a greater patriot than I am. I am absolutely certain that Professor Bacevich is a better man and a greater patriot than you are.

    We get it. When you seek the root cause of any and all of the ills of the world, you cherchez les Juifs. I will stipulate that, in the western hemisphere, Jews are likely to be disproportionately overrepresented as promulgators and advocates of ideas good and bad across the whole of the political and philosophical spectrum. The problem with monomaniacally denouncing the pernicious influence of Jews, rather than specifically objecting to policies which are harmful to the interests of our fellow Americans is that it has the paradoxical effect of insulating the objects of your hatred from substantive criticisms of wrongheaded policies. If this is just a safe space for you to express yourself, I support your First Amendment rights to freedom of expression. If you’re hoping to win hearts and minds, obsessively demanding that others denounce “the Jews” is unlikely to help you prevail in the struggle against malign ideas and policies.

    Three “Jerusalem”s, a “High Temples”, and a “neoconservative”. Professor Bacevich would appear to be indicating exactly what he means by “David Brooks and others sharing his view”. Lippmann and Albright are also named. But he also recognizes the culpability of William F. Buckley, Jr.; Bill Clinton; Hillary Clinton; Barack Obama; John McCain; Ted Cruz; and Marco Rubio. To restrict one’s indictment to the Jews among those responsible for these catastrophic policies is to let the Gentiles higher up the org chart of the hook. Letting the big fish off the hook means that future big fish are likely to repeat the ruinous policies and misadventures, further hastening the decline and fall of America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen

    The problem with monomaniacally denouncing the pernicious influence of Jews, rather than specifically objecting to policies which are harmful to the interests of our fellow Americans is that it has the paradoxical effect of insulating the objects of your hatred from substantive criticisms of wrongheaded policies.
     
    Winner! Winner! Lifetime supply of chicken dinners!

    However, I almost missed this outstanding comment because I had to click show comment.
    I have never placed Ickenham on CTI, and if you look at my CTI list, the name is not there.
    Maybe dat Jew, Unz, is censoring the good comments.

  49. To restrict one’s indictment to the Jews among those responsible for these catastrophic policies is to let the Gentiles higher up the org chart of the hook. Letting the big fish off the hook means that future big fish are likely to repeat the ruinous policies and misadventures, further hastening the decline and fall of America.

    Well said. However, due to the past actions of those in power, i.e., consistent abuse of that power, in the US, (goyim as well as Jews and Zionists), I won’t mourn any loss of power they suffer.

    While most of us pride ourselves on the “advanced” state of our societies, it’s pretty apparent that our societal immune systems are barely functional if they exist at all. The societal parasites continue to sicken the host just as they’ve always done.

    There is an obvious and desperate need to find a way to hold the big troublemakers both accountable and impotent. Relatively speaking, there are not that many of them. Unfortunately, neither Gawd herself (only a white female could have created a world such as we have ;) ) nor our “high IQ” betters appear to have an effective answer.

    Read More
  50. @Ickenham
    Professor Bacevich [colonel U.S. Army (retired)] mourns his son, Lieutenant Andrew John Bacevich, killed by an IED in a foolhardy, ill-considered, unnecessary, elective, expeditionary war.

    Bacevich writes [emphases mine]:

    1. "Brooks belongs, or once did, to the Church’s neoconservative branch."

    2. "The Church of America the Redeemer even has its own Jerusalem, located on the banks of the Potomac, and its own hierarchy, its members situated nearby in High Temples of varying architectural distinction."

    3. [quoting Brooks] "...America as the latest successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome."

    4. "David Brooks and others sharing his view of a country providentially charged to serve as the “successor to Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome.” In fact, this conception of America’s purpose expresses not the intent of providence, which is inherently ambiguous, but their own arrogance and conceit." [repeating the quotation to criticize "David Brooks and others sharing his view..."]

    "Jerusalem" appears three times, "High Temples" once, "neoconservative" once, and the article is tagged inter alia "Neocons".

    I have no doubt that Professor Bacevich would like to see those responsible for the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan held accountable for the butchers' bill he summarized. The unelected appointees, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, et al to be sure, but I'd wager Professor Bacevich would not absolve Bush, Cheney, Tenet, Rumsfeld, Rice et al of their culpability. If, however, you believe that the Gentile POTUS, VPOTUS, DCI, SecDef, NSA/SecState, scores of U.S. Senators and hundreds of members of Congress were somehow in thrall to a cabal of Jews and lacked any agency or motives of their own, then yes, Professor Bacevich would likely disagree with you. Reality certainly does.

    Professor Bacevich has rightly criticized Donald Trump's near-total lack of knowledge or understanding of defence policy in previous articles. He is not alone, even among America First isolationists, in perceiving Trump to be an ignoramus, ill-prepared, and dangerously out of his depth, imperilling the safety and security of us all.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Bacevich

    I know this to be true: by almost any conceivable measure of virtue, Professor Bacevich is a better man and a greater patriot than I am. I am absolutely certain that Professor Bacevich is a better man and a greater patriot than you are.

    We get it. When you seek the root cause of any and all of the ills of the world, you cherchez les Juifs. I will stipulate that, in the western hemisphere, Jews are likely to be disproportionately overrepresented as promulgators and advocates of ideas good and bad across the whole of the political and philosophical spectrum. The problem with monomaniacally denouncing the pernicious influence of Jews, rather than specifically objecting to policies which are harmful to the interests of our fellow Americans is that it has the paradoxical effect of insulating the objects of your hatred from substantive criticisms of wrongheaded policies. If this is just a safe space for you to express yourself, I support your First Amendment rights to freedom of expression. If you're hoping to win hearts and minds, obsessively demanding that others denounce "the Jews" is unlikely to help you prevail in the struggle against malign ideas and policies.

    Three "Jerusalem"s, a "High Temples", and a "neoconservative". Professor Bacevich would appear to be indicating exactly what he means by "David Brooks and others sharing his view". Lippmann and Albright are also named. But he also recognizes the culpability of William F. Buckley, Jr.; Bill Clinton; Hillary Clinton; Barack Obama; John McCain; Ted Cruz; and Marco Rubio. To restrict one's indictment to the Jews among those responsible for these catastrophic policies is to let the Gentiles higher up the org chart of the hook. Letting the big fish off the hook means that future big fish are likely to repeat the ruinous policies and misadventures, further hastening the decline and fall of America.

    The problem with monomaniacally denouncing the pernicious influence of Jews, rather than specifically objecting to policies which are harmful to the interests of our fellow Americans is that it has the paradoxical effect of insulating the objects of your hatred from substantive criticisms of wrongheaded policies.

    Winner! Winner! Lifetime supply of chicken dinners!

    However, I almost missed this outstanding comment because I had to click show comment.
    I have never placed Ickenham on CTI, and if you look at my CTI list, the name is not there.
    Maybe dat Jew, Unz, is censoring the good comments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I've had similar experiences with shaded comments by commenters not on my CTI list, though not recently. It didn't seem likely that it had to do with the fictitoous or other email addresses the commenters might have entered.
  51. @Mark Green
    This is a very good analysis. Bacevich has done his homework

    David Brooks is a slick, soft-spoken, centrist neocon. And he is also a very kosher neocon to boot. This explains a lot about David Brooks' cryptic militarism and hidden agendas.

    But why does Bacevich feel it necessary to take a swipe at our new president?--who he derides as a "charlatan"?

    Can't Bacevich a least give Trump a few months in office before he starts hurling stones? Why not see what Trump can accomplish before judging his presidency?

    Very thoughtful analysis of the devolution of “America’s Civic Religion,” by Walter MacDougall, based on his book, “The Tragedy of U.S. Foreign Policy: How America’s Civic Religion Betrayed the National Interest.”

    Read More
  52. @Sean
    America spins self glorifying stories AND is is super-powerful. Every country has ideologues who spin myths , but only one is as strong as America. I suspect American strength and unspoken adherence to the dictates of power politics realism is the crucial factor, because ts redemptive national narrative is by no means unusual.

    It would be nice if a country could count on being left alone if it didn't poke its nose into others' affairs, but countries like individuals never reach a status where they don't have to worry about what others are doing . Kids in the schoolyard , other journalists, other states. They want all want to be top dog, to take everything from you, and anyone who is allowed to get the wherewithal will try. I'm afraid realism dictates US policy is to get other countries under its thumb, or keep them there.

    Of course under the influence of ideologues like Brooks, countries sometimes bite of more than they can chew while doing things that were realistically unnecessary . Trump is hardly a charlatan for cutting through the bullshit and saying he will only intervene aboard when necessary. It is not necessary to know how ISIS got started to decide whether to annihilate it even if a lot of people in foreign counties (many of them completely innocent) get killed.

    Sean,
    ‘If we dont get them now they’d get us one of these days’

    Thats the kind of B.S. underpinning three centuries of fukus imperialism.
    Kipling and Mackinder would be proud of you. !

    Luckily the marines got to Grenada ‘just in time’, before their air force had a chance to bomb Washington ! [1]
    hehehehe

    ‘Trump is hardly a charlatan for cutting through the bullshit and saying he will only intervene aboard when necessary.’

    This is what he says,
    *We ‘d intervine only to defend our national interest*

    If you know anything about murkkan history, thats the carte blanche for a thousand wars since 1785. !

    ‘It is not necessary to know how ISIS got started to decide whether to annihilate it .’

    Sure thing, playing both sides as usual.
    Designed to fail.
    works like a charm since 911 . [2]
    —————————————–
    [1]
    ‘ Reagan says the US forces found “a complete base of weapons and communication equipment which makes it clear that a Cuban occupation of the island had been planned. [One warehouse] contained weapons and ammunition stacked almost to the ceiling, enough to supply thousands of terrorists. [Grenada was] a Soviet-Cuban colony being readied as a major military bastion to export terror and undermine democracy, but we got there just in time.’

    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lormand/poli/soa/grenada.htm

    [2]

    http://journal-neo.org/2017/02/24/us-war-on-islamic-state-designed-to-fail/

    Read More
  53. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Yeah, we were mere minutes away from annihilation by that Grenado-Cuban horde…the hasty action had nothing to do with distracting the public from the 241 Marines blown to bits in Beirut a few days earlier. Reagan warned us also about the massive Salvo-Nicaraguan legions about to sweep through Mexico en route to US. Fortunately the commies watched Red Dawn in time to realize that they would be ultimately wiped-out by spunky New Wave American teens. At least we stopped one war before it started.

    Read More
  54. @iffen

    The problem with monomaniacally denouncing the pernicious influence of Jews, rather than specifically objecting to policies which are harmful to the interests of our fellow Americans is that it has the paradoxical effect of insulating the objects of your hatred from substantive criticisms of wrongheaded policies.
     
    Winner! Winner! Lifetime supply of chicken dinners!

    However, I almost missed this outstanding comment because I had to click show comment.
    I have never placed Ickenham on CTI, and if you look at my CTI list, the name is not there.
    Maybe dat Jew, Unz, is censoring the good comments.

    I’ve had similar experiences with shaded comments by commenters not on my CTI list, though not recently. It didn’t seem likely that it had to do with the fictitoous or other email addresses the commenters might have entered.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    It didn’t seem likely that it had to do with the fictitoous or other email addresses the commenters might have entered.

    At one time I thought this might have something to do with it, but I don't think that anymore.

    The problem has been pointed out several times and apparently Unz doesn't think that it is important enough to fix.

    I guess the only damage would be missing good comments.

    I try to keep a rough memory of my CTI list and click if I don't recognize the handle as being on my list.
  55. Brooks has more balance and brain power than most of his other NYT columnist colleagues like Nicholas Kristof. But he has serious lapses into idiocy. He concluded his review of Ta-Nehisi Coates’s book, Between the World and Me, an anti-white diatribe by an angry black man by asking himself if he, “as a white man has the moral standing to question any part of it?” (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/white-america-dons-the-shroud-of-guilt/article25971483/). He also swooned over the “crease in Obama’s slacks.”

    See: http://fosterspeak.blogspot.com/2015/08/thomas-jefferson-and-grievance-mongers.html

    Read More
  56. @Wizard of Oz
    I've had similar experiences with shaded comments by commenters not on my CTI list, though not recently. It didn't seem likely that it had to do with the fictitoous or other email addresses the commenters might have entered.

    It didn’t seem likely that it had to do with the fictitoous or other email addresses the commenters might have entered.

    At one time I thought this might have something to do with it, but I don’t think that anymore.

    The problem has been pointed out several times and apparently Unz doesn’t think that it is important enough to fix.

    I guess the only damage would be missing good comments.

    I try to keep a rough memory of my CTI list and click if I don’t recognize the handle as being on my list.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Yep. I waste a lot of time these days too (a characteristic of the unemployed and equally the super-mature) :-)
  57. @iffen
    It didn’t seem likely that it had to do with the fictitoous or other email addresses the commenters might have entered.

    At one time I thought this might have something to do with it, but I don't think that anymore.

    The problem has been pointed out several times and apparently Unz doesn't think that it is important enough to fix.

    I guess the only damage would be missing good comments.

    I try to keep a rough memory of my CTI list and click if I don't recognize the handle as being on my list.

    Yep. I waste a lot of time these days too (a characteristic of the unemployed and equally the super-mature) :-)

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution