The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 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
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / By Greg Grandin
 All Comments / By Greg Grandin
    In April 2014, ESPN published a photograph of an unlikely duo: Samantha Power, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and former national security adviser and secretary of state Henry Kissinger at the Yankees-Red Sox season opener. In fleece jackets on a crisp spring day, they were visibly enjoying each other’s company, looking for all the...
  • @rabbitbait
    The author of this article fails to mention the influence of Israel even once despite the fact that it was the primary proponent of both Iraq wars.

    Another interesting event that the very politically correct Tom's Dispatch author fails to mention is that during the 1973 Arab Israeli war, Kissinger essentially became the defacto president of the United States. According to historian Robert Dallek, Kissinger took over the entire foreign policy of the USA during this period by essentially bypassing and ignoring President Nixon and his Secretary of State William Rogers ans thereby totally determining the US's response to this war. He did this by totally stripping military units in Europe and the US of their military equipment and shipping it en mass to a beleaguered Israel. There is also the continuing rumor that active duty US military pilots were assigned by Kissinger to fight on the Israeli side during this conflict but only after their planes' insignias were painted over and replaced by Israeli insignias. If the USSR had suddenly decided to attack the US during this period it would have encountered a now stripped US military so deficient in basic military supplies that it wouldn't have been able to resist. Do I also have to mention that Israel rewarded the US for this largess by selling he newly acquired equipment to pariah countries like South Africa. Israel was only able to do think because Kissinger had by this point deposed the prior Secretary of State was was more than willing to look the other way when Israel decided to enrich itself instead of returning these now excess material to its rightful owners, the US taxpayers).

    When it came out as to what Kissinger had done, Henry claimed that he did this because Nixon was was incapacitated because he drinking too much because of the every expanding Watergate investigation. He has been unable so far to also explain why he had also kept the then current Secretary of State Rogers just as much out of the loop.

    Kissinger couldn't have done this all by himself. He could only have subverted the entire political hierarchy of our elected government during this period by also having a coterie of fellow Zionists within the White House and state department that were so well entrenched within the power structure that they were able to form what amounted to a secret parallel government on what amounted to instant notice.

    1973 was an interesting year. Israel gets attacked and the ongoing hubbub about Watergate allows Kissinger to totally push aside Nixon and assume dictatorial control of our government. . This might make a cynic think that Watergate and the 1973 Arab Israeli war were somehow intertwined. I wonder if Nixon signed his own death warrant by previously voicing reluctance about supporting Israel in an upcoming war he undoubtedly already knew about because of the legendary porousness of Arab intelligence.

    Reporter Carl Bernstein (of Woodward and Bernstein fame) in particular would have especially relished deposing Nixon because Bernstein had been a "red diaper baby" whose Stalinist parents had a particular enmity towards "the rabid antisemite Nixon" because of his early anti communism activities. These very same blacklisted parents were, interestingly enough, apparently avid supporters of Israel by the time of the 1973 war.

    All of these factors make me believe that Henry Kissinger, not Mark Felt, was "Deep Throat." After all, only Kissinger got away from Watergate absolutely blame free. Cui bono.

    “Kissinger couldn’t have done this all by himself. He could only have subverted the entire political hierarchy of our elected government during this period by also having a coterie of fellow Zionists within the White House and state department that were so well entrenched within the power structure that they were able to form what amounted to a secret parallel government on what amounted to instant notice.”

    Is has become impossible for the “chosen” to claim victimhood. When having the chance & means, the “chosen” behave in no way different than the savages of any other ethnicity (or maybe worse). The blackmailing (and other deeply immoral things) will continue uninterrupted, but the claims on special status derived from victimhood and from some special moral qualities, have effectively become invalid. The loudest tribe, that used to quetch about its special sufferings and used to receiving, for a long time, the sympathy of the civilized world, is now looked upon universally with disgust. Very sad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @SolontoCroesus

    What a powerful refutation of the idea that an amorphous and faceless government is behind decisions to bomb other countries. Those decisions are made by individuals, and the responsibility, or the guilt as the case may be, is personal and not collective.
     
    I disagree, Giuseppe.

    See Gerry1211's comment @6.

    Kissinger did not introduce carpet bombing to the US war making psyche.

    USA is spending this 70th anniversary year engaging in yet another round of self-congratulations on its triumphs in WW2.

    Here's a discussion about what Americans should teach their children about that evil enterprise:

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?325914-1/discussion-teaching-world-war-ii-schools#

    In introductory remarks, the moderator praised Gen. Zhukov for his courage in conquering Berlin. (No mention of the rapes of 2 million German women incited by Ilya Ehrenberg and carried out by Zhukov's men, nor of Zhukov's practice of driving his troops until they dropped in their tracks, and of shooting any of his soldiers who did not fight to Zhukov's demands."

    @30 min in the video, David Kennedy, a highly regarded historian, began his talk this way:

    Aug 17 1942, first all- US strategic bombing mission, over Rouen France — 12 B17s US Army Air Corp left England & bombed a marshaling yard. It was the first all-American air raid on Nazi-occupied Europe. It was a Successful raid, no damage to planes or crew, targets hit.

    [This date is] Important because it marked the implementation of a decision made about a decade earlier, in the early 1930s [for the chronologically impaired, that would be ~1932 - 1933: Stalin was killing people by the millions; Hitler was "quelling physical violence against Jews." NSDAP was busy building worker's housing, roads, cars, and planning an Olympics. Germany did not begin arming in earnest until ~1937. ] that in the event of a future war the US would place its principle bet on creating and using a new weapons system, a whole new form of warfare, strategic bombing. A doctrine developed by Italian Julio Douhet after WWI, idea is new air technology promised to work a revolution in the nature of warfare, the ability to “deliver your blow not against the enemy’s troops in the field or at sea but instead against his civilian heartland.”
    This accomplished two objectives: so disrupt the enemy’s economy and infrastructure that he could no longer sustain his force in the field, and, Douhet thought, “so terrorize --Douhet's word --the enemy's civilian population that they would sue their government for peace and the war would be over in a hurry."
     
    That is to say, even before war was contemplated by NSDAP (tho it was being planned and prepared for by Jews & other American elites as early as a "fortnight after der Fuhrer assumed the chancellorship", according to Louis Brandeis & Rabbi Stephen Wise), the USA had already made the strategic decision to 'win' a war by incinerating the adversary's civilians.

    US strategists have not yet come to grips with the fact that:

    --USA played the coward's role in WW2

    --terrorizing a civilian population to force capitulation -- or to use the more sanitized term, regime change, does. not. work. It never has. Human nature suggests that it never will.

    ---

    Why keep harping on this, and keep putting it out there that the goddamm holocaust is a fraud and a hoax?

    Because the USA & Anglo-zionists keeps repeating the strategy.

    Jeffrey Engel researched George H W Bush's decision-making process in taking US to Kuwait to "oust Saddam." Here's what Engel said about the key drivers of that decision, and also, why G H W Bush did not march to Baghdad to take down Saddam:


    I ARGUE BUSH TOOK THE DRAMATIC STEP into the Gulf Crisis BECAUSE HE Saw IT AS A BRIDGE TO A BETTER WORLD. HIS New WORLD ORDER, a phrase unveiled in response to Hussein’s invasion, WAS NOT JUST A CATCHY PHRASE; it was rather THE CULMINATION OF LONG AND DIFFICULT JOURNEY of intellectual discovery. . . .

    Bush saw in the Gulf War AN OPPORTUNITY as well as in invasion, a point that I will make by way of conclusion. .. He saw within it a chance to demonstrate that Washington would continue to lead. Leading it in particular towards the kind of world promised to His generation as their reward for service in World War II. It would be a world he said, Quote “Where the United Nations freed from Cold War stalemates is poised to fulfill its historic vision of its founders” End Quote
    Ultimately this vision of a new world order based on sovereignty and stability is what drove his thinking when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. In a similar vein he said, “The prospect of a global peace continues to depend on an American forward presence. " End quote." . . .
     
    [and to the second question, Why did Bush 41 NOT go to Baghdad?]

    BUT there’s a very important distinction here which I would like to make which I think was a REVELATION TO ME within the archives and THAT THERE has always been a question when the decision comes — when the study of the decision comes up about whether or not AMERICAN FORCES SHOULD HAVE CONTINUED ON TO BAGHDAD in 1991. This was not a discussion within the White House FOR a VERY IMPORTANT REASON: THE ULTIMATE GOAL or one of the the ultimate goalS BEYOND THE LIBERATION OF KUWAIT WAS THE REMOVAL OF SADDAM HUSSEIN FROM POWER. THERE WAS A 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY on the part of high level American officials THAT THIS was going to HAPPEN ANY WAY.
    Saddam HUSSAIN had been EMBARRASSED; HIS OWN PEOPLE rising up against him, HIS OWN ARMY was out to get him. If he lived weeks it would have been a shock instead of days. 999 TIMES OUT OF 1,000 I think THAT IS exactly HOW THINGS WOULD HAVE PLAYED OUT, THAT Saddam WOULD NOT HAVE SURVIVED.

    Unfortunately FROM THE Bush administration’s PERSPECTIVE, GEORGE H. W. BUSH’s perspective, Saddam rolled the dice and made it. But I think that GIVEN THE QUESTION AND Those ODDS again I suspect THEY WOULD TAKE THE SAME bet again.
     

     
    USA and Anglo-zionist ghouls have used economic destabilization; starvation; planned and remotely-conducted attacks on civilians, all with the purpose of forcing the capitulation of a government that does not comply with US wishes, or that, having been set up by the Znglo-zionist sphere -- as Saddam was, and as bin Laden was, and as it is argued elsewhere that Hitler was, has outlived his usefulness and must be taken out.

    The same scheme is being deployed against Assad and against Iran.

    ---

    If the American people hope to save their nation, it is a moral imperative that they refute the lie of the holocaust, the smokescreen that for nigh on a century has hidden the truth of Anglo-zionist crimes against humanity.

    I don’t think you understand the idea I was trying to get across, if you even bothered to read it, that there is no such thing as a “government generic entity” that can be blamed collectively. Government functions through the actions of individuals, and each one is individually responsible.
    Therefore, Kissinger is guilty of his war crimes, they cannot be erased in the fog of government as it were. They rest of your response is just all over the place without a coherent trajectory other than extreme right looniness, although not without it’s few cogent points.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @SolontoCroesus

    What a powerful refutation of the idea that an amorphous and faceless government is behind decisions to bomb other countries. Those decisions are made by individuals, and the responsibility, or the guilt as the case may be, is personal and not collective.
     
    I disagree, Giuseppe.

    See Gerry1211's comment @6.

    Kissinger did not introduce carpet bombing to the US war making psyche.

    USA is spending this 70th anniversary year engaging in yet another round of self-congratulations on its triumphs in WW2.

    Here's a discussion about what Americans should teach their children about that evil enterprise:

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?325914-1/discussion-teaching-world-war-ii-schools#

    In introductory remarks, the moderator praised Gen. Zhukov for his courage in conquering Berlin. (No mention of the rapes of 2 million German women incited by Ilya Ehrenberg and carried out by Zhukov's men, nor of Zhukov's practice of driving his troops until they dropped in their tracks, and of shooting any of his soldiers who did not fight to Zhukov's demands."

    @30 min in the video, David Kennedy, a highly regarded historian, began his talk this way:

    Aug 17 1942, first all- US strategic bombing mission, over Rouen France — 12 B17s US Army Air Corp left England & bombed a marshaling yard. It was the first all-American air raid on Nazi-occupied Europe. It was a Successful raid, no damage to planes or crew, targets hit.

    [This date is] Important because it marked the implementation of a decision made about a decade earlier, in the early 1930s [for the chronologically impaired, that would be ~1932 - 1933: Stalin was killing people by the millions; Hitler was "quelling physical violence against Jews." NSDAP was busy building worker's housing, roads, cars, and planning an Olympics. Germany did not begin arming in earnest until ~1937. ] that in the event of a future war the US would place its principle bet on creating and using a new weapons system, a whole new form of warfare, strategic bombing. A doctrine developed by Italian Julio Douhet after WWI, idea is new air technology promised to work a revolution in the nature of warfare, the ability to “deliver your blow not against the enemy’s troops in the field or at sea but instead against his civilian heartland.”
    This accomplished two objectives: so disrupt the enemy’s economy and infrastructure that he could no longer sustain his force in the field, and, Douhet thought, “so terrorize --Douhet's word --the enemy's civilian population that they would sue their government for peace and the war would be over in a hurry."
     
    That is to say, even before war was contemplated by NSDAP (tho it was being planned and prepared for by Jews & other American elites as early as a "fortnight after der Fuhrer assumed the chancellorship", according to Louis Brandeis & Rabbi Stephen Wise), the USA had already made the strategic decision to 'win' a war by incinerating the adversary's civilians.

    US strategists have not yet come to grips with the fact that:

    --USA played the coward's role in WW2

    --terrorizing a civilian population to force capitulation -- or to use the more sanitized term, regime change, does. not. work. It never has. Human nature suggests that it never will.

    ---

    Why keep harping on this, and keep putting it out there that the goddamm holocaust is a fraud and a hoax?

    Because the USA & Anglo-zionists keeps repeating the strategy.

    Jeffrey Engel researched George H W Bush's decision-making process in taking US to Kuwait to "oust Saddam." Here's what Engel said about the key drivers of that decision, and also, why G H W Bush did not march to Baghdad to take down Saddam:


    I ARGUE BUSH TOOK THE DRAMATIC STEP into the Gulf Crisis BECAUSE HE Saw IT AS A BRIDGE TO A BETTER WORLD. HIS New WORLD ORDER, a phrase unveiled in response to Hussein’s invasion, WAS NOT JUST A CATCHY PHRASE; it was rather THE CULMINATION OF LONG AND DIFFICULT JOURNEY of intellectual discovery. . . .

    Bush saw in the Gulf War AN OPPORTUNITY as well as in invasion, a point that I will make by way of conclusion. .. He saw within it a chance to demonstrate that Washington would continue to lead. Leading it in particular towards the kind of world promised to His generation as their reward for service in World War II. It would be a world he said, Quote “Where the United Nations freed from Cold War stalemates is poised to fulfill its historic vision of its founders” End Quote
    Ultimately this vision of a new world order based on sovereignty and stability is what drove his thinking when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. In a similar vein he said, “The prospect of a global peace continues to depend on an American forward presence. " End quote." . . .
     
    [and to the second question, Why did Bush 41 NOT go to Baghdad?]

    BUT there’s a very important distinction here which I would like to make which I think was a REVELATION TO ME within the archives and THAT THERE has always been a question when the decision comes — when the study of the decision comes up about whether or not AMERICAN FORCES SHOULD HAVE CONTINUED ON TO BAGHDAD in 1991. This was not a discussion within the White House FOR a VERY IMPORTANT REASON: THE ULTIMATE GOAL or one of the the ultimate goalS BEYOND THE LIBERATION OF KUWAIT WAS THE REMOVAL OF SADDAM HUSSEIN FROM POWER. THERE WAS A 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY on the part of high level American officials THAT THIS was going to HAPPEN ANY WAY.
    Saddam HUSSAIN had been EMBARRASSED; HIS OWN PEOPLE rising up against him, HIS OWN ARMY was out to get him. If he lived weeks it would have been a shock instead of days. 999 TIMES OUT OF 1,000 I think THAT IS exactly HOW THINGS WOULD HAVE PLAYED OUT, THAT Saddam WOULD NOT HAVE SURVIVED.

    Unfortunately FROM THE Bush administration’s PERSPECTIVE, GEORGE H. W. BUSH’s perspective, Saddam rolled the dice and made it. But I think that GIVEN THE QUESTION AND Those ODDS again I suspect THEY WOULD TAKE THE SAME bet again.
     

     
    USA and Anglo-zionist ghouls have used economic destabilization; starvation; planned and remotely-conducted attacks on civilians, all with the purpose of forcing the capitulation of a government that does not comply with US wishes, or that, having been set up by the Znglo-zionist sphere -- as Saddam was, and as bin Laden was, and as it is argued elsewhere that Hitler was, has outlived his usefulness and must be taken out.

    The same scheme is being deployed against Assad and against Iran.

    ---

    If the American people hope to save their nation, it is a moral imperative that they refute the lie of the holocaust, the smokescreen that for nigh on a century has hidden the truth of Anglo-zionist crimes against humanity.

    And I thought your parents taught you to like Jews…. :)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Excellent analysis, but Grandin overlooked Kissinger’s enormous treason of his persuading Nixon to abandon of hundreds of American POWs held by Hanoi. Johnny McInsane (McCain) to this day is complicit in this horrendous crime. God Bless the souls of the brave men they betrayed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Thanks, SolontoCroesus, but I’ve known of Douhet’s ideas for decades. I’m downright baffled that his thinking ever made it past a frat-house bull-session level of examination by military and political thinkers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The author of this article fails to mention the influence of Israel even once despite the fact that it was the primary proponent of both Iraq wars.

    Another interesting event that the very politically correct Tom’s Dispatch author fails to mention is that during the 1973 Arab Israeli war, Kissinger essentially became the defacto president of the United States. According to historian Robert Dallek, Kissinger took over the entire foreign policy of the USA during this period by essentially bypassing and ignoring President Nixon and his Secretary of State William Rogers ans thereby totally determining the US’s response to this war. He did this by totally stripping military units in Europe and the US of their military equipment and shipping it en mass to a beleaguered Israel. There is also the continuing rumor that active duty US military pilots were assigned by Kissinger to fight on the Israeli side during this conflict but only after their planes’ insignias were painted over and replaced by Israeli insignias. If the USSR had suddenly decided to attack the US during this period it would have encountered a now stripped US military so deficient in basic military supplies that it wouldn’t have been able to resist. Do I also have to mention that Israel rewarded the US for this largess by selling he newly acquired equipment to pariah countries like South Africa. Israel was only able to do think because Kissinger had by this point deposed the prior Secretary of State was was more than willing to look the other way when Israel decided to enrich itself instead of returning these now excess material to its rightful owners, the US taxpayers).

    When it came out as to what Kissinger had done, Henry claimed that he did this because Nixon was was incapacitated because he drinking too much because of the every expanding Watergate investigation. He has been unable so far to also explain why he had also kept the then current Secretary of State Rogers just as much out of the loop.

    Kissinger couldn’t have done this all by himself. He could only have subverted the entire political hierarchy of our elected government during this period by also having a coterie of fellow Zionists within the White House and state department that were so well entrenched within the power structure that they were able to form what amounted to a secret parallel government on what amounted to instant notice.

    1973 was an interesting year. Israel gets attacked and the ongoing hubbub about Watergate allows Kissinger to totally push aside Nixon and assume dictatorial control of our government. . This might make a cynic think that Watergate and the 1973 Arab Israeli war were somehow intertwined. I wonder if Nixon signed his own death warrant by previously voicing reluctance about supporting Israel in an upcoming war he undoubtedly already knew about because of the legendary porousness of Arab intelligence.

    Reporter Carl Bernstein (of Woodward and Bernstein fame) in particular would have especially relished deposing Nixon because Bernstein had been a “red diaper baby” whose Stalinist parents had a particular enmity towards “the rabid antisemite Nixon” because of his early anti communism activities. These very same blacklisted parents were, interestingly enough, apparently avid supporters of Israel by the time of the 1973 war.

    All of these factors make me believe that Henry Kissinger, not Mark Felt, was “Deep Throat.” After all, only Kissinger got away from Watergate absolutely blame free. Cui bono.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kiza
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "Kissinger couldn’t have done this all by himself. He could only have subverted the entire political hierarchy of our elected government during this period by also having a coterie of fellow Zionists within the White House and state department that were so well entrenched within the power structure that they were able to form what amounted to a secret parallel government on what amounted to instant notice."

    Is has become impossible for the "chosen" to claim victimhood. When having the chance & means, the "chosen" behave in no way different than the savages of any other ethnicity (or maybe worse). The blackmailing (and other deeply immoral things) will continue uninterrupted, but the claims on special status derived from victimhood and from some special moral qualities, have effectively become invalid. The loudest tribe, that used to quetch about its special sufferings and used to receiving, for a long time, the sympathy of the civilized world, is now looked upon universally with disgust. Very sad.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @JackOH
    Never quite understood so-called strategic bombing, which, as I understand it, is bombing without military invasion and conquest imminent or in near prospect, and decoupled from ground operations. America enjoyed and enjoys air supremacy (or nearly so) in Gulf I and II, in Afghanistan, in drone strikes over at least a handful of countries. Are there victories there, or did I miss that memo?

    The Marine Corps pilots I served with in the 1970s had a high regard for the NV fighter pilots and NV anti-aircraft batteries. Marine Corps aviation is tactical. The millions of tons of bombs dropped by strategic B-52s---did they result in an American victory?

    I know a woman who narrowly escaped death as a baby in Germany when her pediatrician's office was hit by American bombs. Her mom had been running late for the appointment. So her town was then occupied by the American conquerors? Nope, the NE German city was surrendered to the Soviets.

    My point, of course, is that the whole doctrinal basis of strategic bombing really ought to be looked at to see if there's something there that actually detracts from successful military operations.

    Never quite understood so-called strategic bombing, which, as I understand it, is bombing without military invasion and conquest imminent or in near prospect, and decoupled from ground operations.

    As Jörg Friedrich explains here and here, the point of firebombing of civilians is to use their suffering to force the capitulation of their leadership

    – just as Georg H W Bush and his team were convinced that the Iraqi population would overthrow Saddam and welcome US liberators (see Jeff Engel quotes, above),

    and just as Ed Royce and numerous other US Congresscriminals have declared that the point of sanctions against Iran is to cause so much suffering among the Iranian population that Iranian citizens will overthrow their government.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Giuseppe
    What a powerful refutation of the idea that an amorphous and faceless government is behind decisions to bomb other countries. Those decisions are made by individuals, and the responsibility, or the guilt as the case may be, is personal and not collective. He cannot hide behind government, Kissinger is personally responsible for bombing the hell out of SE Asia, causing the deaths of at least a hundred thousand civilians, and loving it, personally loving it for the deep craters that were made. He writes columns for the WSJ today. In another place or time he would be behind bars, or executed for war crimes.

    What a powerful refutation of the idea that an amorphous and faceless government is behind decisions to bomb other countries. Those decisions are made by individuals, and the responsibility, or the guilt as the case may be, is personal and not collective.

    I disagree, Giuseppe.

    See Gerry1211′s comment @6.

    Kissinger did not introduce carpet bombing to the US war making psyche.

    USA is spending this 70th anniversary year engaging in yet another round of self-congratulations on its triumphs in WW2.

    Here’s a discussion about what Americans should teach their children about that evil enterprise:

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?325914-1/discussion-teaching-world-war-ii-schools#

    In introductory remarks, the moderator praised Gen. Zhukov for his courage in conquering Berlin. (No mention of the rapes of 2 million German women incited by Ilya Ehrenberg and carried out by Zhukov’s men, nor of Zhukov’s practice of driving his troops until they dropped in their tracks, and of shooting any of his soldiers who did not fight to Zhukov’s demands.”

    @30 min in the video, David Kennedy, a highly regarded historian, began his talk this way:

    Aug 17 1942, first all- US strategic bombing mission, over Rouen France — 12 B17s US Army Air Corp left England & bombed a marshaling yard. It was the first all-American air raid on Nazi-occupied Europe. It was a Successful raid, no damage to planes or crew, targets hit.

    [This date is] Important because it marked the implementation of a decision made about a decade earlier, in the early 1930s [for the chronologically impaired, that would be ~1932 - 1933: Stalin was killing people by the millions; Hitler was "quelling physical violence against Jews." NSDAP was busy building worker's housing, roads, cars, and planning an Olympics. Germany did not begin arming in earnest until ~1937. ] that in the event of a future war the US would place its principle bet on creating and using a new weapons system, a whole new form of warfare, strategic bombing. A doctrine developed by Italian Julio Douhet after WWI, idea is new air technology promised to work a revolution in the nature of warfare, the ability to “deliver your blow not against the enemy’s troops in the field or at sea but instead against his civilian heartland.”
    This accomplished two objectives: so disrupt the enemy’s economy and infrastructure that he could no longer sustain his force in the field, and, Douhet thought, “so terrorize –Douhet’s word –the enemy’s civilian population that they would sue their government for peace and the war would be over in a hurry.”

    That is to say, even before war was contemplated by NSDAP (tho it was being planned and prepared for by Jews & other American elites as early as a “fortnight after der Fuhrer assumed the chancellorship”, according to Louis Brandeis & Rabbi Stephen Wise), the USA had already made the strategic decision to ‘win’ a war by incinerating the adversary’s civilians.

    US strategists have not yet come to grips with the fact that:

    –USA played the coward’s role in WW2

    –terrorizing a civilian population to force capitulation — or to use the more sanitized term, regime change, does. not. work. It never has. Human nature suggests that it never will.

    Why keep harping on this, and keep putting it out there that the goddamm holocaust is a fraud and a hoax?

    Because the USA & Anglo-zionists keeps repeating the strategy.

    Jeffrey Engel researched George H W Bush’s decision-making process in taking US to Kuwait to “oust Saddam.” Here’s what Engel said about the key drivers of that decision, and also, why G H W Bush did not march to Baghdad to take down Saddam:

    I ARGUE BUSH TOOK THE DRAMATIC STEP into the Gulf Crisis BECAUSE HE Saw IT AS A BRIDGE TO A BETTER WORLD. HIS New WORLD ORDER, a phrase unveiled in response to Hussein’s invasion, WAS NOT JUST A CATCHY PHRASE; it was rather THE CULMINATION OF LONG AND DIFFICULT JOURNEY of intellectual discovery. . . .

    Bush saw in the Gulf War AN OPPORTUNITY as well as in invasion, a point that I will make by way of conclusion. .. He saw within it a chance to demonstrate that Washington would continue to lead. Leading it in particular towards the kind of world promised to His generation as their reward for service in World War II. It would be a world he said, Quote “Where the United Nations freed from Cold War stalemates is poised to fulfill its historic vision of its founders” End Quote
    Ultimately this vision of a new world order based on sovereignty and stability is what drove his thinking when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. In a similar vein he said, “The prospect of a global peace continues to depend on an American forward presence. ” End quote.” . . .

    [and to the second question, Why did Bush 41 NOT go to Baghdad?]

    BUT there’s a very important distinction here which I would like to make which I think was a REVELATION TO ME within the archives and THAT THERE has always been a question when the decision comes — when the study of the decision comes up about whether or not AMERICAN FORCES SHOULD HAVE CONTINUED ON TO BAGHDAD in 1991. This was not a discussion within the White House FOR a VERY IMPORTANT REASON: THE ULTIMATE GOAL or one of the the ultimate goalS BEYOND THE LIBERATION OF KUWAIT WAS THE REMOVAL OF SADDAM HUSSEIN FROM POWER. THERE WAS A 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY on the part of high level American officials THAT THIS was going to HAPPEN ANY WAY.
    Saddam HUSSAIN had been EMBARRASSED; HIS OWN PEOPLE rising up against him, HIS OWN ARMY was out to get him. If he lived weeks it would have been a shock instead of days. 999 TIMES OUT OF 1,000 I think THAT IS exactly HOW THINGS WOULD HAVE PLAYED OUT, THAT Saddam WOULD NOT HAVE SURVIVED.

    Unfortunately FROM THE Bush administration’s PERSPECTIVE, GEORGE H. W. BUSH’s perspective, Saddam rolled the dice and made it. But I think that GIVEN THE QUESTION AND Those ODDS again I suspect THEY WOULD TAKE THE SAME bet again.

    USA and Anglo-zionist ghouls have used economic destabilization; starvation; planned and remotely-conducted attacks on civilians, all with the purpose of forcing the capitulation of a government that does not comply with US wishes, or that, having been set up by the Znglo-zionist sphere — as Saddam was, and as bin Laden was, and as it is argued elsewhere that Hitler was, has outlived his usefulness and must be taken out.

    The same scheme is being deployed against Assad and against Iran.

    If the American people hope to save their nation, it is a moral imperative that they refute the lie of the holocaust, the smokescreen that for nigh on a century has hidden the truth of Anglo-zionist crimes against humanity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sherman
    And I thought your parents taught you to like Jews.... :)
    , @Giuseppe
    I don't think you understand the idea I was trying to get across, if you even bothered to read it, that there is no such thing as a "government generic entity" that can be blamed collectively. Government functions through the actions of individuals, and each one is individually responsible.
    Therefore, Kissinger is guilty of his war crimes, they cannot be erased in the fog of government as it were. They rest of your response is just all over the place without a coherent trajectory other than extreme right looniness, although not without it's few cogent points.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • so the piece is about the jew Kissinger, but not about the last 20 years of the Jewish Wars (wars for Israel fought by US boys, etc.)

    OK .

    I have been trying to bring back an old memory of a talk back about 2003 in SF by one of the then current smarties from the left. It might have been Cockburn of Counter Punch, but don’t think so. It was a guy with good credentials more from the center but fun and entertaining. Not Hersch either.

    He was asked about Kissinger and Palestine, and did he have any great dirt on K. He said, well, K. was pulled aside for a private chat and was asked what should be done by the Israelies; K. said they should take the intifada kids into private and beat them within inches of their lives… No cameras, etc.

    Just a story, but it sounds like Jehovah or Maimonides, worried about goyem finding out. Just a story. JW

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Never quite understood so-called strategic bombing, which, as I understand it, is bombing without military invasion and conquest imminent or in near prospect, and decoupled from ground operations. America enjoyed and enjoys air supremacy (or nearly so) in Gulf I and II, in Afghanistan, in drone strikes over at least a handful of countries. Are there victories there, or did I miss that memo?

    The Marine Corps pilots I served with in the 1970s had a high regard for the NV fighter pilots and NV anti-aircraft batteries. Marine Corps aviation is tactical. The millions of tons of bombs dropped by strategic B-52s—did they result in an American victory?

    I know a woman who narrowly escaped death as a baby in Germany when her pediatrician’s office was hit by American bombs. Her mom had been running late for the appointment. So her town was then occupied by the American conquerors? Nope, the NE German city was surrendered to the Soviets.

    My point, of course, is that the whole doctrinal basis of strategic bombing really ought to be looked at to see if there’s something there that actually detracts from successful military operations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    Never quite understood so-called strategic bombing, which, as I understand it, is bombing without military invasion and conquest imminent or in near prospect, and decoupled from ground operations.
     
    As Jörg Friedrich explains here and here, the point of firebombing of civilians is to use their suffering to force the capitulation of their leadership

    -- just as Georg H W Bush and his team were convinced that the Iraqi population would overthrow Saddam and welcome US liberators (see Jeff Engel quotes, above),

    and just as Ed Royce and numerous other US Congresscriminals have declared that the point of sanctions against Iran is to cause so much suffering among the Iranian population that Iranian citizens will overthrow their government.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A little cherry on a pie of modern-day warfare. Perhaps, the wave of oncological problems among the leaders of South American states was not accidental.
    “NSA makes medical intelligence operations a priority:” http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/06/05/nsa-makes-medical-intelligence-operations-a-priority.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If Nixon had tried to suddenly pull all 500,000 Americans out of Vietnam in 1969, the U.S. would have found itself at war with South Vietnam as well as the North.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Gerry1211 says:
    @anonymous
    Ah yes, America and it's love affair with all things that go 'boom'. It worked really well for it in WWII and it's been on a tear ever since. The list of countries who have been on the receiving end of our bombing runs to date is fairly long last time I checked. This is what's known as spreading 'American values'. 'Humanitarian ideals' attained through cluster bombing, what could go wrong? They hate us because of our 'values', because we're so beautiful.

    Having been the recipient of THREE different incidents of American “booming” in March 1945 of the incendiary kind, supposedly because of a faulty atlas, I learned recently, that is, about 5 years ago, that nothing we were taught about WW2 is in fact true. It was Wall Street and every American who had a dime to spare (including the Roosevelt Foundation) that funded and created Hitler. The Dulles brothers actually spent lots of time in Berlin in the early 1930 and were instrumental in getting Hitler elected. He was hugely popular here as he was anti-commi…..Hitler was “Man of the Year” front page of Time Magazine in 1938 (google it) Hitler called Henry Ford “My mentor”. The Dulles brothers also made oodles of money from Auschwitz slave labor. They should have been hanged, instead one became the Sec of State under Eisenhower and the other CIA Director. The Soviets decimated the German Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe at the cost of 27 billion Russian lives. It was only AFTER the Soviets destroyed the Germans that we had the allied landing for the mop up action and to prevent the Soviets from overrunning Europe. As if they would. America has never left any country they ever set foot in. So I don’t want to hear anymore that Americans liberated me.
    Recently some Dutch rumblings are that the allies/Americans caused far greater damage and destruction in the Netherlands with their bombings than the Germans ever did. I lived close to the German border, but why bomb Rotterdam about 11 times? Why bomb the dikes? It’s a war crime. In Germany people died of disease (Typhus) as well as starvation. In the Netherlands, the West was starving, boiled tulip bulbs to eat as well as tree bark…Eventually food packages were dropped but not before 20,000 Dutch civilians died of hunger.
    In the East we still had access to farms who would still accept money which was by and large useless. No one accepted it for there was nothing to buy. Bartering was the way to get things.
    There was no logic behind the American bombings (they only bombed during daytime)
    I saw every bomb drop. I attended school in a bombed out building…It was not until 1957 that we got a new High School.

    In Kosovo we bombed with depleted uranium armaments (against the law), the result of which are a gigantic number of birth defects. Sociopaths in Washington.

    Read More
    • Agree: SolontoCroesus
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • What a powerful refutation of the idea that an amorphous and faceless government is behind decisions to bomb other countries. Those decisions are made by individuals, and the responsibility, or the guilt as the case may be, is personal and not collective. He cannot hide behind government, Kissinger is personally responsible for bombing the hell out of SE Asia, causing the deaths of at least a hundred thousand civilians, and loving it, personally loving it for the deep craters that were made. He writes columns for the WSJ today. In another place or time he would be behind bars, or executed for war crimes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    What a powerful refutation of the idea that an amorphous and faceless government is behind decisions to bomb other countries. Those decisions are made by individuals, and the responsibility, or the guilt as the case may be, is personal and not collective.
     
    I disagree, Giuseppe.

    See Gerry1211's comment @6.

    Kissinger did not introduce carpet bombing to the US war making psyche.

    USA is spending this 70th anniversary year engaging in yet another round of self-congratulations on its triumphs in WW2.

    Here's a discussion about what Americans should teach their children about that evil enterprise:

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?325914-1/discussion-teaching-world-war-ii-schools#

    In introductory remarks, the moderator praised Gen. Zhukov for his courage in conquering Berlin. (No mention of the rapes of 2 million German women incited by Ilya Ehrenberg and carried out by Zhukov's men, nor of Zhukov's practice of driving his troops until they dropped in their tracks, and of shooting any of his soldiers who did not fight to Zhukov's demands."

    @30 min in the video, David Kennedy, a highly regarded historian, began his talk this way:

    Aug 17 1942, first all- US strategic bombing mission, over Rouen France — 12 B17s US Army Air Corp left England & bombed a marshaling yard. It was the first all-American air raid on Nazi-occupied Europe. It was a Successful raid, no damage to planes or crew, targets hit.

    [This date is] Important because it marked the implementation of a decision made about a decade earlier, in the early 1930s [for the chronologically impaired, that would be ~1932 - 1933: Stalin was killing people by the millions; Hitler was "quelling physical violence against Jews." NSDAP was busy building worker's housing, roads, cars, and planning an Olympics. Germany did not begin arming in earnest until ~1937. ] that in the event of a future war the US would place its principle bet on creating and using a new weapons system, a whole new form of warfare, strategic bombing. A doctrine developed by Italian Julio Douhet after WWI, idea is new air technology promised to work a revolution in the nature of warfare, the ability to “deliver your blow not against the enemy’s troops in the field or at sea but instead against his civilian heartland.”
    This accomplished two objectives: so disrupt the enemy’s economy and infrastructure that he could no longer sustain his force in the field, and, Douhet thought, “so terrorize --Douhet's word --the enemy's civilian population that they would sue their government for peace and the war would be over in a hurry."
     
    That is to say, even before war was contemplated by NSDAP (tho it was being planned and prepared for by Jews & other American elites as early as a "fortnight after der Fuhrer assumed the chancellorship", according to Louis Brandeis & Rabbi Stephen Wise), the USA had already made the strategic decision to 'win' a war by incinerating the adversary's civilians.

    US strategists have not yet come to grips with the fact that:

    --USA played the coward's role in WW2

    --terrorizing a civilian population to force capitulation -- or to use the more sanitized term, regime change, does. not. work. It never has. Human nature suggests that it never will.

    ---

    Why keep harping on this, and keep putting it out there that the goddamm holocaust is a fraud and a hoax?

    Because the USA & Anglo-zionists keeps repeating the strategy.

    Jeffrey Engel researched George H W Bush's decision-making process in taking US to Kuwait to "oust Saddam." Here's what Engel said about the key drivers of that decision, and also, why G H W Bush did not march to Baghdad to take down Saddam:


    I ARGUE BUSH TOOK THE DRAMATIC STEP into the Gulf Crisis BECAUSE HE Saw IT AS A BRIDGE TO A BETTER WORLD. HIS New WORLD ORDER, a phrase unveiled in response to Hussein’s invasion, WAS NOT JUST A CATCHY PHRASE; it was rather THE CULMINATION OF LONG AND DIFFICULT JOURNEY of intellectual discovery. . . .

    Bush saw in the Gulf War AN OPPORTUNITY as well as in invasion, a point that I will make by way of conclusion. .. He saw within it a chance to demonstrate that Washington would continue to lead. Leading it in particular towards the kind of world promised to His generation as their reward for service in World War II. It would be a world he said, Quote “Where the United Nations freed from Cold War stalemates is poised to fulfill its historic vision of its founders” End Quote
    Ultimately this vision of a new world order based on sovereignty and stability is what drove his thinking when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. In a similar vein he said, “The prospect of a global peace continues to depend on an American forward presence. " End quote." . . .
     
    [and to the second question, Why did Bush 41 NOT go to Baghdad?]

    BUT there’s a very important distinction here which I would like to make which I think was a REVELATION TO ME within the archives and THAT THERE has always been a question when the decision comes — when the study of the decision comes up about whether or not AMERICAN FORCES SHOULD HAVE CONTINUED ON TO BAGHDAD in 1991. This was not a discussion within the White House FOR a VERY IMPORTANT REASON: THE ULTIMATE GOAL or one of the the ultimate goalS BEYOND THE LIBERATION OF KUWAIT WAS THE REMOVAL OF SADDAM HUSSEIN FROM POWER. THERE WAS A 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY on the part of high level American officials THAT THIS was going to HAPPEN ANY WAY.
    Saddam HUSSAIN had been EMBARRASSED; HIS OWN PEOPLE rising up against him, HIS OWN ARMY was out to get him. If he lived weeks it would have been a shock instead of days. 999 TIMES OUT OF 1,000 I think THAT IS exactly HOW THINGS WOULD HAVE PLAYED OUT, THAT Saddam WOULD NOT HAVE SURVIVED.

    Unfortunately FROM THE Bush administration’s PERSPECTIVE, GEORGE H. W. BUSH’s perspective, Saddam rolled the dice and made it. But I think that GIVEN THE QUESTION AND Those ODDS again I suspect THEY WOULD TAKE THE SAME bet again.
     

     
    USA and Anglo-zionist ghouls have used economic destabilization; starvation; planned and remotely-conducted attacks on civilians, all with the purpose of forcing the capitulation of a government that does not comply with US wishes, or that, having been set up by the Znglo-zionist sphere -- as Saddam was, and as bin Laden was, and as it is argued elsewhere that Hitler was, has outlived his usefulness and must be taken out.

    The same scheme is being deployed against Assad and against Iran.

    ---

    If the American people hope to save their nation, it is a moral imperative that they refute the lie of the holocaust, the smokescreen that for nigh on a century has hidden the truth of Anglo-zionist crimes against humanity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Air war is more expensive than ground invasion, but produces least body-bags and kill more innocent civilians. Non-White population control has been hallmark of Kissinger’s political career. Who would know better than Christopher Hitchens, who wrote a book on Kissinger’s sick mind.

    Samantha Power used to be an outspoken journalist who cried for the fate of Palestinians and other victims of western colonial powers. But since she married Henry Kissinger’s duplicate academic, professor Cass Sunstein in 2008, her changed to a AIPAC poodle, but her career took a boost. Her evil nature came out when she couldn’t control her joy over the retirement of professor Richard Falk as UN special envoy for occupied Palestine.

    “His publication of bizarre and insulting material has tarnished the U.N.’s reputation and undermined the effectiveness of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The United States welcomes Mr. Falk’s departure, which is long overdue,” Said Power.

    http://rehmat1.com/2014/03/26/the-power-happy-over-richard-falks-exit/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • And this ruthless war criminal was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Straight out of Orwell’s 1984.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Ah yes, America and it’s love affair with all things that go ‘boom’. It worked really well for it in WWII and it’s been on a tear ever since. The list of countries who have been on the receiving end of our bombing runs to date is fairly long last time I checked. This is what’s known as spreading ‘American values’. ‘Humanitarian ideals’ attained through cluster bombing, what could go wrong? They hate us because of our ‘values’, because we’re so beautiful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gerry1211
    Having been the recipient of THREE different incidents of American "booming" in March 1945 of the incendiary kind, supposedly because of a faulty atlas, I learned recently, that is, about 5 years ago, that nothing we were taught about WW2 is in fact true. It was Wall Street and every American who had a dime to spare (including the Roosevelt Foundation) that funded and created Hitler. The Dulles brothers actually spent lots of time in Berlin in the early 1930 and were instrumental in getting Hitler elected. He was hugely popular here as he was anti-commi.....Hitler was "Man of the Year" front page of Time Magazine in 1938 (google it) Hitler called Henry Ford "My mentor". The Dulles brothers also made oodles of money from Auschwitz slave labor. They should have been hanged, instead one became the Sec of State under Eisenhower and the other CIA Director. The Soviets decimated the German Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe at the cost of 27 billion Russian lives. It was only AFTER the Soviets destroyed the Germans that we had the allied landing for the mop up action and to prevent the Soviets from overrunning Europe. As if they would. America has never left any country they ever set foot in. So I don't want to hear anymore that Americans liberated me.
    Recently some Dutch rumblings are that the allies/Americans caused far greater damage and destruction in the Netherlands with their bombings than the Germans ever did. I lived close to the German border, but why bomb Rotterdam about 11 times? Why bomb the dikes? It's a war crime. In Germany people died of disease (Typhus) as well as starvation. In the Netherlands, the West was starving, boiled tulip bulbs to eat as well as tree bark...Eventually food packages were dropped but not before 20,000 Dutch civilians died of hunger.
    In the East we still had access to farms who would still accept money which was by and large useless. No one accepted it for there was nothing to buy. Bartering was the way to get things.
    There was no logic behind the American bombings (they only bombed during daytime)
    I saw every bomb drop. I attended school in a bombed out building...It was not until 1957 that we got a new High School.

    In Kosovo we bombed with depleted uranium armaments (against the law), the result of which are a gigantic number of birth defects. Sociopaths in Washington.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This is a good article but it states something that only the North Americans need explaining to. Where I come from, we have a saying (just like in Bronx): “the same cock, different packaging” (and it does not mean a rooster).

    Jewish monster and Irish skunk, the ball pitch angle changes, a little but it is all the same killing by the same scum. Both only make you wish there was Hell with eternally burning fire under such monsters’ feet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The only person Henry Kissinger flattered more than President Richard Nixon was Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran. In the early 1970s, the Shah, sitting atop an enormous reserve of increasingly expensive oil and a key figure in Nixon and Kissinger’s move into the Middle East, wanted to be dealt with as a serious...
  • […] Debacle Inc.: How Henry Kissinger Helped Create Our “Proliferated” World by Greg Grandin, author of Kissinger’s Shadow: The Long Reach of America’s Most Controversial Statesman. […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website

    The Kisser was sort of like Ben Franklin, and not just in their boing factor with the ladies.

    Both understood the strategy of foreign policy.

    Americans like to remember their origins in terms of principles, freedom, values, and valor in battle.
    While it is true that the American Founding Fathers comprised prolly the most intelligent and able assembly of founders of a political order, none of that would have mattered if not for their foreign policy. In other words, whether the Founders had good ideas or bad ideas or justifications or not to secede, the only reason their movement came to be realized was due to foreign policy.
    It was France that won the war for the American rebels. After all, only 1/3 of colonials were pro-independence. Another 1/3 was indifferent and another 1/3 was loyal to the crown. So, without French intervention, the rebels would have lost for sure. Come to think of it, even if 100% of colonials had been for independence, the Brits still might have won cuz they had all the industry and arms on their side.

    So, the only way the revolutionaries could win was by playing the game of foreign policy.
    They understood that UK and France were the two great powers, and it was in the rebels’ advantage to make Brits fight the French. And Ben Franklin was masterly in his foreign policy. In that sense, whoever worked on foreign policy and convinced the French to give full support to the revolutionaries was most responsible for the creation of the New Order. And this wasn’t entirely easy to do since it would cost the French dearly and the French Monarch would be helping democratic revolutionaries to defeat another Monarch. Using one monarch against another.
    Later, the Kisser figured it made sense to use one commie giant against another commie giant.

    Anyway, at the time of the founding, American colonies were vulnerable and weak. Much later in the 1960s, US was the superpower of the world.
    But then, colonial America had no role to play in the world whereas the post-WWII America was expected to police the ‘free world’. America of the 1960s was infinitely more powerful than in the beginning of the republic, but it was also many times more beset with troubles cuz it had taken on so many obligations all around the world.
    So, in both cases, the art of foreign policy was very important.

    Both Ben Franklin and the Kisser were amoral in their foreign policy. Franklin was willing to rub shoulders with French reactionaries to win their support for American revolutionaries against British empire. He played very loose with principles.
    French involvement led to a prolonged war that killed many people, and eventually, it laid the grounds for the French revolution as the involvement in the Revolutionary War had bankrupted France.

    But then, foreign policy was always gangster politics.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website
    @Art
    ""It’s a pity they can’t both lose,” Kissinger is reported to have said of Iran and Iraq. "

    That statement shows the total lack of a human soul in the Jew mindset - call them whatever they want you to call them - Zionist, Talmudist, tribe, religion - they all come with the same mindset - non-Jew life is cheep.

    Just think of all the evil, all the war, all the death that bastard of a man has advocated. Like most all Jews he has a mindset buried in past millennia – religious or not – he is a power hungry tribal killer - end of story.

    “That statement shows the total lack of a human soul in the Jew mindset – call them whatever they want you to call them – Zionist, Talmudist, tribe, religion – they all come with the same mindset – non-Jew life is cheep.”

    It can be Jewish nastiness, and some Jews are indeed like that.

    But it’s a trait to be found all over. Romans and Chinese have long practiced the strategy of making barbarians fight barbarians. An amoral opportunistic game. And Roosevelt had no problem with Soviets and Nazis killing one another and waited until 1944 to invade France.

    Also, we have to see this in the context of the 80s. Iran has long since stabilized. It still has some nutty rulers, but it’s now more or less a normal nation. So, much of the current hysteria about Iran is truly out of order.
    But in the 80s, Iran was like Soviet Union in the 1920s. It was in its fever stage and very aggressive in trying to export its brand of Islamism all over. Iran back then was alarming to both US and USSR. And Hussein was no saint, so it made sense to pit Iraq vs Iran. Since then, the new younger generation of Iranians have grown tired of the revolutionary rhetoric. But in the 80s, it was the younger generation that was calling for world Islamic revolution and acting like Mao’s red guards.

    Now, you’re right that a lot of people got killed as a result of the Iran-Iraq War, but then, foreign policy has always been gangster politics. EVERY nation plays it this way.
    And even though US played dirty in goading Iraq to trigger a war with Iran, Hussein wasn’t forced into it. He did it cuz he wanted to. (Idiots can’t be helped, or they can be helped to do something idiotic.) And of course, Iran supports its own proxies in other parts of the Middle East.

    I would say things that are happening or being allowed to happen today are much worse than in the 80s cuz they are so unnecessary and petty. And why are they happening? All because Israelists rule Washington. Jewish issues used to be an important factor in US foreign policy, but now, they are the ONLY concern, and that is very dangerous. All the problems in the Middle East, with Russia, and even with China can be traced to Jewish neurosis about the world. When the entire spins around the Jewish Axis because US is the sole superpower and EU is a whore of the US, we don’t know where this may lead, especially when Jews are adamant about antagonizing Russia and now even China.

    It could be that Jews tend to be somewhat more devious than non-Jews cuz of the nature of their history, which, in turn, may have favored certain genetic traits(as those Jews with those traits were likely to succeed more and have more kids).
    Gentiles were makers whereas Jews worked as traders. Making is a more straightforward activity whereas trading or middlemanning or merchandising is a trickier endeavor that requires manipulation.(Gambling is Jewish-dominated, and it’s more about rakers than makers. Raking it all in from everyone.)

    Consider the movie LOST IN AMERICA by Albert Brooks. There is the reference to FORD and MERCEDES BENZ. Ford made cars, and Germans have long been famous as makers. Henry Ford was anti-Jewish and Hitler’s car was a Mercedes.
    It’s as if Jews feel that the industry of making has been dominated by gentiles, so Jews must find their niche in marketing. So, the Jewish guy in LOST IN AMERICA works in advertising. Gentiles make, but Jews manipulate. Gentiles build the product, but Jews shape the public opinion of the product. In the end, control of the mind could be more powerful than construction of products.

    Kissinger could be aggressive, but he still understood the art of salesmanship. But the new neocons are like crazies who bang on your door unless you relent and buy whatever it is they are peddling. And then they demand you buy more and more and more.

    It’s like Ziontology. Neocons are Ziontologist bullies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Speaking of debacle, inc.; there might be more to come from what I saw on this blog post.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @KA
    "He’s tried to defend himself by arguing for context. “Just to take a sentence out of a telephone conversation when you have 50 other conversations, it’s just not the way to analyze it,” Kissinger said recently, after yet another damning tranche of documents was declassified. “I’ve been telling people to read a month’s worth of conversations, so you know what else went on.”

    May be ,he should change himself before changing other. He should pause and reject Zionist interpretation of the Iranianin statement on wiping off Israel
    He should read and analyze more the offer of 20 yrs truce offered by Hamas than focus on the forgotten and neglected decaying charter of Hamas. May be he should not take the Hamas firing off the rocket out f context nd may be he should include the constant persistent planned provocation by Zionist every step of the way before offerring his best opinion to the Fox or to the American policy makers .

    “”It’s a pity they can’t both lose,” Kissinger is reported to have said of Iran and Iraq. “

    That statement shows the total lack of a human soul in the Jew mindset – call them whatever they want you to call them – Zionist, Talmudist, tribe, religion – they all come with the same mindset – non-Jew life is cheep.

    Just think of all the evil, all the war, all the death that bastard of a man has advocated. Like most all Jews he has a mindset buried in past millennia – religious or not – he is a power hungry tribal killer – end of story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "That statement shows the total lack of a human soul in the Jew mindset – call them whatever they want you to call them – Zionist, Talmudist, tribe, religion – they all come with the same mindset – non-Jew life is cheep."

    It can be Jewish nastiness, and some Jews are indeed like that.

    But it's a trait to be found all over. Romans and Chinese have long practiced the strategy of making barbarians fight barbarians. An amoral opportunistic game. And Roosevelt had no problem with Soviets and Nazis killing one another and waited until 1944 to invade France.

    Also, we have to see this in the context of the 80s. Iran has long since stabilized. It still has some nutty rulers, but it's now more or less a normal nation. So, much of the current hysteria about Iran is truly out of order.
    But in the 80s, Iran was like Soviet Union in the 1920s. It was in its fever stage and very aggressive in trying to export its brand of Islamism all over. Iran back then was alarming to both US and USSR. And Hussein was no saint, so it made sense to pit Iraq vs Iran. Since then, the new younger generation of Iranians have grown tired of the revolutionary rhetoric. But in the 80s, it was the younger generation that was calling for world Islamic revolution and acting like Mao's red guards.

    Now, you're right that a lot of people got killed as a result of the Iran-Iraq War, but then, foreign policy has always been gangster politics. EVERY nation plays it this way.
    And even though US played dirty in goading Iraq to trigger a war with Iran, Hussein wasn't forced into it. He did it cuz he wanted to. (Idiots can't be helped, or they can be helped to do something idiotic.) And of course, Iran supports its own proxies in other parts of the Middle East.

    I would say things that are happening or being allowed to happen today are much worse than in the 80s cuz they are so unnecessary and petty. And why are they happening? All because Israelists rule Washington. Jewish issues used to be an important factor in US foreign policy, but now, they are the ONLY concern, and that is very dangerous. All the problems in the Middle East, with Russia, and even with China can be traced to Jewish neurosis about the world. When the entire spins around the Jewish Axis because US is the sole superpower and EU is a whore of the US, we don't know where this may lead, especially when Jews are adamant about antagonizing Russia and now even China.

    It could be that Jews tend to be somewhat more devious than non-Jews cuz of the nature of their history, which, in turn, may have favored certain genetic traits(as those Jews with those traits were likely to succeed more and have more kids).
    Gentiles were makers whereas Jews worked as traders. Making is a more straightforward activity whereas trading or middlemanning or merchandising is a trickier endeavor that requires manipulation.(Gambling is Jewish-dominated, and it's more about rakers than makers. Raking it all in from everyone.)

    Consider the movie LOST IN AMERICA by Albert Brooks. There is the reference to FORD and MERCEDES BENZ. Ford made cars, and Germans have long been famous as makers. Henry Ford was anti-Jewish and Hitler's car was a Mercedes.
    It's as if Jews feel that the industry of making has been dominated by gentiles, so Jews must find their niche in marketing. So, the Jewish guy in LOST IN AMERICA works in advertising. Gentiles make, but Jews manipulate. Gentiles build the product, but Jews shape the public opinion of the product. In the end, control of the mind could be more powerful than construction of products.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Eh8lDJpwZc

    Kissinger could be aggressive, but he still understood the art of salesmanship. But the new neocons are like crazies who bang on your door unless you relent and buy whatever it is they are peddling. And then they demand you buy more and more and more.

    It's like Ziontology. Neocons are Ziontologist bullies.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKQQ6PLvcMA

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Quartermaster
    One of the very few foreign policy acts of Kissinger that was correct was the overthrow of Allende. Allende was well on his way to having "one man, one vote, one time." When Pinochet overthrew Allende, the place was already crawling with Cuban agents, and Pinochet knew what was going to come next if the Army didn't act.

    And why is the situation in Chile any business of murderous Zionist Jews who are citizens of convenience in the US?

    It’s for the Chileans to handle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This all started when the alleged prophet Muhammad went on wars of conquest and conversion. Islam is a barracks religion so if you cannot figure out how the rest turns out you are a dullard.

    I blame Muslims a lot more than Henry Kissinger. Sunni-Shiite rivalry, wars and conflicts have been going on for centuries. Muslims are free agents. They are not 100% manipulated stooges of the West, Russia, China and Israel. Muslims will do what Muslims will do which is to get the best weapons they can and go to war with them sooner or later. Might be war against non-Muslims or war against other Muslims, just so long as they can get the rush from blood letting they crave. They crave the drama of war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Twenty years ago I might have been moved by this piece. Now, when I compare Kissinger to the globalist scum that have sold our country out, Kissinger seems like a quaint patriot who was simply forced to play dirty in a dirty game. I’m not approving his actions but I think that we have bigger fish to fry these days. Focusing on Kissinger distracts us from retaliation against today’s elite, who have sold us out much more efficiently and effectively. We were still a nation in Kissinger’s day. Now we are atomized and dysfunctional.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website
    @guest
    I grow tired of picking on and picking apart Kissinger, not because it's not important nor because he deserves better. Rather, I find myself asking why Kissinger? Where did he come from, and why did he have so much power and influence? I have a hard time believing everything he did and all the advice he gave came directly from his head. We're distracted, I think, by "gray eminences," and forget that in addition to the power behind the power there're also powers behind the powers behind the power. Kissinger is only part of the establishment.

    “I grow tired of picking on and picking apart Kissinger, not because it’s not important nor because he deserves better. Rather, I find myself asking why Kissinger?”

    He served Nixon, and Jews and radical boomers hated, hated, and hated Nixon.

    Also, unlike most Sec of State, the Kisser loved being a celebrity of sorts. And he was also a scholar, which meant he wasn’t just a government official but grand strategist playing the world like a chess game. His accent made him stand out.
    The discrepancy between his European manners/Jewish intellect and his brutal foreign policy unnerved a lot of people. He seemed like Dr. Strangelove. He was embroiled in the Vietnam War, the defining event of the 60s for the left that came to dominate academia. And of course, Allende has been lionized cuz he was a Marxist. Had the Kisser worked with Nixon to take down some right-wing tyrant, I doubt if the academia and media would have been offended.

    Also, he had staying power. He didn’t just fade away. Even after he left government, he was sought for advice and opinion, and that kept him as the target of leftist ire forever and ever. Many people also hate him because he is still so revered in many quarters, even by Liberals. The left finds this very frustrating. If everyone hated the Kisser, they could just let it go, but leftists are still pissed that the Kisser is still welcomed as a sage and elder statesman all over the world.

    Though hated more by the left, there have also been those on the Right that never trusted him. They saw him a double-agent, a leaker, a Jew who was no conservative and whose only interest in serving Republic administration was his obsession with the heartless game of international politics.

    That said, he had a great style, and as in boxing, style often makes the fight in foreign affairs. Foreign policy is like making business deals. It’s about negotiations. So, even if you’re tough-as-nails inside or have strong passions, you must be willing to smile at times and shake hands and negotiate with the other side. AND YOU HAVE TO BE CONVINCING DOING IT. Style cannot be faked. Some people have a knack for this, others do not. And the Kisser had something of Tony Roma in GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS.

    Compared to the Kisser, idiots like Nuland and her ilk are amateurs pampered with Jewish privilege and drunk on American power. Or take someone like Rumsfeld and Cheney. In foreign policy, even a bully must play like a diplomat.
    Vito Corleone understood this in THE GODFATHER II. He knew how to make an offer the other side better not refuse. He didn’t act like Fanucci the fat pushy bastard. Hyman Roth had the right style for negotiations and intrigue too.
    The Kisser had the right style for foreign affairs. The later neocons with their Casino-Jack-style of personality did not. Elliot Abrahams, what a freaking jerk. A bunch of Moe Greenes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Kissinger is the first name that comes to mind when reflecting on the fact that no matter how many egregious fuck ups they perpetrate and no matter how monstrous the consequences there are never any consequences for the anointed elites.

    Great piece by the way

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website
    @Wally
    Spoken like a true hasbarist.

    Mass murderer Kissinger should be hung from the nearest tree. Then gather the rest.

    “Mass murderer Kissinger should be hung from the nearest tree. Then gather the rest.”

    I don’t understand this animosity against the Kisser. Sure, his hands are dirty, but he worked in foreign policy, and foreign policy is gangster politics no matter which country practices it.

    Look at China’s support of Khmer Rouge. USSR supported lots of baddies around the world. Every nation plays dirty and loose when it comes to foreign policy.

    The real question is ‘was it necessary or unnecessary and was it for national interest or for cabal interest?’

    During the Cold War, the stakes were high. It was USSR vs US. And US had genuine fears that the Third World with all its natural resources and peoples would fall to communism or side with USSR. As it turned out, the spread of Soviet influence and power only bled the Soviet economy more. When communism spread, it destroyed third world economies that then came to depend on Soviets for aid.
    Communism just barely worked among civilized white folks in Europe. East Germans and Czechs and Poles and Hungarians and Russians were just able to make basic shoddy goods and harvest just enough potaters and tomaters.
    But when third world dummies took up communism, they made a total mess of things, and USSR had to bail them out. Just sustaining the Cuban economy was a huge drain on the USSR. North Korean economy, though not as piss poor as Ethiopia, Mozambique, and Angola under communism, also had to be sustained with endless aid from Soviets.
    Whereas capitalism led to growing economies in Western Europe and East Asia, communist economies just led to poverty, and Soviets had to subsidize every commie state. So, the more the Soviets won around the world, the more they were burdened and began to weaken. (This was one reason USSR didn’t encourage third world peoples to emigrate to Russia. Russia could barely feed Russians.)

    But during the Cold War, many Americans didn’t see it that way. They saw the danger of Soviet influence spreading all throughout Latin America. Americans were afeared of that so many Western European intellectuals were Marxist. Italy had a powerful commie party. France did too, and 1968 movement really shook Western leaders. Charles Degaulle nearly shat his pants. And all the youth and Negro riots in the US made Western leaders feel very uncertain.
    The defeat in Vietnam was especially stinging cuz so much of US prestige had been invested into it. Though it began as a Democratic war, it came to be seen as patriots, capitalists, pro-US ally, and silent majority versus USSR, Red China, leftists, radicals, Negroes, & European anti-American left. So, when US lost in Vietnam, it was seen not only as defeat to the Vietnamese commies but to the entire International Left.

    The Kisser worked in these times. Today, the idear of Latin America turning communist is laughable. But it was seen as a real possibility. Cuba totally kicked Batista ass and then foiled Bay of Pigs. Though US got the upperhand in Cuban Missile Crisis, it also accepted commie Cuba as fait accompli and pledged never to invade it. And though Che Guevara was defeated, he became more powerful dead than when he was alive. He was like a shining inspiration to young radicals all over. So, when Allende, an admirer of Castro, took power in Chile, it was seen as a big deal.

    In retrospect, I don’t much care if communism had spread throughout Latin America. Looking back, it appears communism was never a threat to the US itself. But back then, people thought different.
    People took the domino theory seriously. And there was also the fear that, even though the West was richer, it had grown too decadent to protect itself from disciplined communists. After all, US showered more aid to South Vietnam that had more people than North Vietnam, but SV was helpless before NV that had spartan-like discipline and unity and spirit.
    It’s like what Michael Corleone says in THE GODFATHER II:

    What’s funny is how leftists ridiculed the American Right(and anti-communist liberals) for paranoia and hysteria(about exaggerated communist threat) while, at the same time, firmly believing in the victory of World Revolution because the revolutionaries had ‘spiritual faith’ in their cause whereas capitalists had only materialism that made them soft and decadent(like the Batista supporters who partied and danced to the eve of communist takeover of Havana).

    The Kisser, Gromyko, Zhou En-Lai, and etc. were all playing a dirty game. They all understood the nature of the game. (Why is it that people who condemn the Kisser as a mass killer usually praise him for reaching out to Mao the Chinee butcher who was responsible for millions of deaths and total tyranny that makes Pinochet look like Mr. Rogers?) The thing is the Kisser was playing the big game for national interest(mostly). It was deemed necessary at the time. Yes, US bombing of Vietnam and Cambodia was horrible, but what options did US have in that war where it couldn’t just abandon an ally like a hot potater? And what was US supposed to do when Allende took power? Just let another Latin American nation fall to commies? Soviets made sure no part of Eastern Europe turned non-communist. It was that kind of game. An amoral game. The game was deemed necessary at the time and it was for huge stakes.

    Today, US foreign policy is really crazy because so many of US aggressions are unnecessary and involve nations that US can get along with nicely. Also, these aggressions aren’t for general national interest but petty Jewish supremacist(and mini-me homo) interest. However Jewish-conscious the Kisser was, I don’t think he would have approved of a foreign policy just to appease the likes of Sheldon Adelson. And he was truly a statesman when compared to nitwits like Victoria Nuland, a total pile of puss.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website

    It’s too easy to lay all the blame on the Kisser’s feet.
    Suppose the Kisser had never lived. Would the Middle East necessarily be better off?

    A kind of fallacy is at work here. We assume that because the Kisser did ‘that’ long ago, the ‘that’ that he did inevitably led to ‘this’ right now.
    But any action can have many different outcomes.
    US and USSR upon dividing Germany didn’t know that Germany would be united again in 1989. US and USSR upon dividing Korea didn’t know the Koreas today would be the way they are. Europeans who created Syria didn’t know that it would be in the state it is today. We can connect the dots, but we also miss many other dots.
    There was nothing inevitable about the things the Kisser did in the Middle East.

    When US lost in Vietnam, it was assumed that it was a huge victory for China and Russia. But it wasn’t long before Vietnam was at war with Cambodia and China. And for Russia, aid to the Vietnam was just one more drain on its economy. The more the world got communized and got aid from the USSR — where people stood in lines for bread — , the worse it was for international communism as directed by Moscow.

    FDR and Truman didn’t know what their policies would lead to in the long run.
    Politics is about working with available cards in the present. When it comes to the future, it’s a murky game. And there are many possibilities.
    For example, we blame the Kisser for the Iran debacle. But suppose the Shah had been more of a warm guy who was close to his people instead of being such an aloof prick. Suppose he visited various regions in the nation and kissed babies in front of the camera. Maybe the Iranians would have loved him more. And then, he would have stayed in power, and maybe Iran would have been more modernized and been friendly with the US. The Kisser banked on this, and it’s not his fault that the Shah had no rapport with his own people. He lacked the touch.
    And even though SAVAK was brutal, the problem with the Shah was that he quite committed to modernization, indeed more than other Middle Eastern rulers. And that was the cause of the main contradiction in Iran. Saddam Hussein and the leaders of Saudi Arabia were more repressive and often more brutal than the Shah. But their consistency of toughness and paranoia kept political order as all dissenting voices were silenced. The Shah, in contrast, encouraged Iranians to become more western and modern, and that led to more dissent. To suppress dissent, he used his secret police. Now, had he been totally repressive like Hussein, he would have stayed in power. But he was, in many ways, a ‘nice guy’ and kept promoting modernization and westernization, and that led to more dissent. Of course, it didn’t help that France had given asylum to the Ayatollah.

    [MORE]

    Shah was not a good guy but he was too much of a ‘nice guy’ for a dictator. He was, at once, too cruel for a modern leader and too soft for a dictator. Consider how Hussein was many times more cruel than the Shah, but he had no problem keeping the power. Hussein was like Stalin and never pretended to be an ‘enlightened monarch’ like the Shah did. In a way, the Shah was like Tsar Nicholas II. Nico was repressive but also supported modernization and tolerated liberalization. He was too nice to be tough, too hard to be enlightened. He was too pro-modernization but also too arch-reactionary. These contradictions made his rule unstable.
    Also, he lacked the Will to Power. The problem with monarch-types is that their power was handed to them on a silver platter. They never had to struggle for power, so they don’t understand the true nature of power. Men like Stalin and Hussein who had to struggle for power knew how hard it is to gain power and how easily it could be lost. So, they were ultra-ruthless and paranoid.
    In contrast, Nico and Shah just didn’t get it. They got their power all too easily. Nico just inherited it, and Shah was installed by the US that gave him protection.

    The toughest kind of Monarch has to fight for power or fight against it. Queen Elizabeth had to fight for her claim to the Throne. That made her tough. As for Frederick the Great, he didn’t want to be king. He wanted to write poetry and make music. But his pa killed his friend and whupped his ass real good. Even though Fred didn’t want the power, it was rammed so far up his ass in such a traumatic manner that he came to respect the fearsome force of power. At any rate, a kind of crisis of power marked those who came to power by struggle for it or against it.

    If Shah had been more ruthless, he would kept the power like Hussein and the Saudi royal family. The Royal family was also more clever in generously funding the Fundie Muslims so that they would serve the Family than turn against it. In contrast, the Shah neglected ties with the Muslim community in Iran. Also, the Saudi Royal family focused mostly on oil, so oil became just about the only economy of Saudi Arabia. Since the Family monopolized the oil fields, they controlled nearly all of the economy.
    In contrast, the Shah wasn’t content with Iran just being an oil-producing nation. He encouraged the development of other sectors, and this led to an expansion of an educated middle class, one that came to be filled with dissent.
    In time, the Shah was caught between a rock and a hard place. The modernized middle class blamed Shah for not modernizing fast enough. The Muslim traditionalists blamed Shah for modernizing too much and defiling the nation. The merchant class of the bazaars feared modernization as driving them out of business.
    Though the modernizers and Muslims stood for opposite values, they ended up as accidental allies in their mutual hatred of the Shah, albeit for different reasons. As a result, things got confused, which is why some European leftists supported the Muslim rebellion. They figured since it was anti-American and anti-Shah(ally of US), it must be sort-of-leftist. It’s amusing how the homo radical Foucault became one of the vocal supporters of the Revolution that would turn Iran into a puritanical place.

    Anyway, suppose Shah had managed to survive. Suppose he had the touch, kissed babies, and won the hearts/minds of his people. Then, the Kisser would have been praised for his successful policy.
    The point is it’s difficult to tell how things will work out in the long run. And sometimes, an action leads to something good in the short run, something bad in the long run, and something good in the longer run. Or an action leads to something bad in the short run, something good in the long run, and something bad in the longer run. And who knows beyond that? When US lost in Vietnam, it was seen as huge loss for the US. In the short run, it was indeed humiliating for the US. But as Vietnam imploded under communist economy and fought China, it was US that won the peace. When Reagan was building up arms in the Cold War, people said it could lead to WWIII. And maybe things could have gotten really bad if a hard liner than someone like Gorby had come to power. But Gorby came to power and decided to make peace with US. So, Reagan’s policy came to be seen as good.

    We can trace current realities in the Middle East to the Kisser. But it can also be traced to European imperialism, Arab dictators and their dumb policies, Saudi dirty tricks, etc. And even though the Kisser supported the Iraq War — too many people did — , he hasn’t been the architect of foreign policy for a long long time. And even though the Kisser did thread Jewish interests into his policies, he was nowhere as brazenly pro-Zionist as the later ones who came to control foreign policy. The Kisser’s worldview is more European than American. He’s always thought in terms of balance of powers. But then, foreign policy has always been a kind of gangsterism, essentially a heartless affair. What matters is that foreign policy should not be mindless even if it’s heartless. Bismarck understood this.
    Foreign policy is most dangerous when it is mindless and reckless, as when Germany invaded Russia and Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Or when a nut like Che Guevara urged the Soviets to provoke US into invading Cuba and then shoot off nukes at Miami. And there was Osama Bin Laden.
    And realists try to make ‘enemy monsters’ fight each other. When Iran went radical Muslim and when Iraq was led by monster Hussein, the Kisser saw it as good thing that they destroy one another. And just as USSR was happy to see US bleeding in Korea and Vietnam, the Kisser was happy to see USSR bleeding in Afghanistan. It was all tit-for-tat during the Cold War. Things seemed different back then.

    Btw, was the toppling of Allende a bad thing? The commie killed himself under siege, a few thousand Marxist scum were wiped out in Chile, and Pinochet restored order. Pinochet set the grounds for economic growth and even presided over the nation’s return to democracy. Why is Pinochet made out to be such a bad guy? Imagine if German generals had pulled off a coup, deposed Hitler, ruled with an iron fist to stabilize Germany, and then restored democracy. Okay, so several 1000s of Nazi loyalists and radicals were killed in the bargain. So what? (Democracy may be nice but if democracy paves the way for tyranny, under Allende or Hitler or whoever, isn’t temporary martial law preferable?) Similarly, so what if some commies got killed? When commies took power, they killed many more and created an even more repressive system. I would say the Kisser’s support of the coup in Chile was one of his great successes.
    All this anointing of Allende as some great saint kills me. Notice that ‘leftists’ and ‘progressives’ never much cared about Kennedy’s killing of Diem. And no one seems to care about the coup against Morsi(democratically elected in Egypt) and the massacre of 1000s by the Egyptian military.
    It’s all ‘who, whom’. Because the media and academia were made up of leftists, a Marxist like Allende and his supporters got much more support than right-wing leaders who were deposed or killed.

    Also, we have to keep in mind that the Kisser worked during the Cold War when the rules of the game were entirely different. No one back then foresaw the collapse of the USSR that happened in the early 90s. No one imagined that Reagan would become president… and make peace with a youngish and peacenik-ish leader of a USSR.
    No one in the 60s thought US would become the sole superpower.

    It’s hard to tell the future. Did anyone in the 70s see the state of China today? Who in the 60s and 70s would have thought that in a matter of few decades, China would have a much bigger economy that Russia(that will have lost its empire with the dissolution of the USSR). Who in the 70s or even 80s or even early 90s would have thought US would go nuts with ‘gay marriage’ and set about destroying the lives of those who oppose the homo agenda? It’s hard to tell the future. If someone in the present got inside a time machine and met me in the 80s and told me what the 2000s would be like, I would have laughed. White House lit up with ‘homo colors’?

    All we can do is examine the Kisser’s actions in his own time. And as often as not, they made sense within the context of what was happening then, what seemed urgent back then, and what seemed possible back then. It’s too easy to judge the past with the benefit of hindsight.

    What is truly disgusting about current US foreign policy is that it is no longer about national interest but Jewish Supremacist Interest. Though the Kisser had Jewish interests in mind, he was working in terms of broad US interests. That is no longer the case. Everything about US policy today is about Jews, Jews, Jews, Israel, Israel, Israel, and homos, homos, and homos(as homos are the main allies of the Jews).

    The Kisser kept his Jewish consciousness in check to fashion US foreign policy, but this isn’t the case with recent administrations who shape foreign policy only with the idea of pleasing Jews so that Jews will support them in the next election. GOP foreign policy today is about ‘what can we offer to Jews so that more of them will come over to our side?’ If Jews hate Russia, let’s hate Russia. If Jews hate Iran, let’s hate Iran. If Jews hate China, let’s hate China. That’s GOP foreign policy.
    The J-Street Democratic foreign policy is outwardly less one-dimensional, but it’s pretty much the same thing, with the likes of Obama and Hillary playing whore to Jews. Some people praise Obama for standing up to Neocons in his Iran Deal, but the deal was hatched by J-Street. It isn’t Obama the Stealth Muslim attacking the Jews but Obama taking orders from J-Street Jews while Neocon Jews huff-and-puff to fool the American dummy public that, oh my, Israel is facing an existential threat!!!!!!

    In truth, even Bibi knows that Iran poses no real threat to Israel. If Jews feel any kind of existential threat, it is from Russia and Putin. That is why Jews have decided to go after Russia and leave Iran alone for awhile. Why is Putin/Russia a bigger threat to Jews? Because despite the regional might of Israel, the real source of Jewish World Power is in the West. The core of Jewish power is as minority elites in US and EU. This ideal of gentile majorities being ruled by minority Jews(and their allies homos) has been challenged by Russia. Russia is nice to Jews but believes in national pride and unity. Russia tolerates homos but will not say homosexuality is just as good as real sexuality. It will not allow homo victory parades in the Red Square. Russia insists on majority normal values over minority hostile anti-values.
    Jews see this Russian model as a challenge to their power in the West. What Jews fear most is one European nation after nation seeking inspiration from Russia. After all, the National Front in France is sympathetic to Russia. Orban of Hungary has friendly ties with Russia. If the Russian model spreads in Europe, it might eventually awaken white consciousness in the US. White Americans might stop being cuckservatives who serve Jewish interests and instead insist on white interests. When that happens, whites will likely become anti-Jewish because any white gentile who gains white gentile consciousness will soon realize that the people who are most committed to anti-white policies are Jews.

    Only by suppressing white majority consciousness can Jews make white cuck for Jews and Israel. Since white consciousness is forbidden, white tribalism/nationalism finds its outlet in Jewish pride and Zionism. But once whites are made to feel proud of their own race/nation, they will care less about Jews and Israel.. and even more fearful to Jews, whites may come to realize that no people are as doggedly anti-white as Jews are. After all, Jews, even though the most privileged people on the planet, use the meme of ‘white privilege’ to dump all the blame on whites for all the problems of the world.

    When it comes to most whites, Jews guilt-bait them about either the Holocaust or black slavery. So, white Americans are still apologizing for slavery, and Europeans are forever atoning for the Holocaust(as main perpetrators or collaborators). But this is impossible to pull off against Russians. Russians never done enslaved Negroes, and Russians defeated the Germans and ended the Nazi project of mass killing. So, Jews have used the homocaust card. According to Jewish-controlled media, you’d think Russia is gassing the fruitkins.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @guest
    I grow tired of picking on and picking apart Kissinger, not because it's not important nor because he deserves better. Rather, I find myself asking why Kissinger? Where did he come from, and why did he have so much power and influence? I have a hard time believing everything he did and all the advice he gave came directly from his head. We're distracted, I think, by "gray eminences," and forget that in addition to the power behind the power there're also powers behind the powers behind the power. Kissinger is only part of the establishment.

    Spoken like a true hasbarist.

    Mass murderer Kissinger should be hung from the nearest tree. Then gather the rest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Mass murderer Kissinger should be hung from the nearest tree. Then gather the rest."

    I don't understand this animosity against the Kisser. Sure, his hands are dirty, but he worked in foreign policy, and foreign policy is gangster politics no matter which country practices it.

    Look at China's support of Khmer Rouge. USSR supported lots of baddies around the world. Every nation plays dirty and loose when it comes to foreign policy.

    The real question is 'was it necessary or unnecessary and was it for national interest or for cabal interest?'

    During the Cold War, the stakes were high. It was USSR vs US. And US had genuine fears that the Third World with all its natural resources and peoples would fall to communism or side with USSR. As it turned out, the spread of Soviet influence and power only bled the Soviet economy more. When communism spread, it destroyed third world economies that then came to depend on Soviets for aid.
    Communism just barely worked among civilized white folks in Europe. East Germans and Czechs and Poles and Hungarians and Russians were just able to make basic shoddy goods and harvest just enough potaters and tomaters.
    But when third world dummies took up communism, they made a total mess of things, and USSR had to bail them out. Just sustaining the Cuban economy was a huge drain on the USSR. North Korean economy, though not as piss poor as Ethiopia, Mozambique, and Angola under communism, also had to be sustained with endless aid from Soviets.
    Whereas capitalism led to growing economies in Western Europe and East Asia, communist economies just led to poverty, and Soviets had to subsidize every commie state. So, the more the Soviets won around the world, the more they were burdened and began to weaken. (This was one reason USSR didn't encourage third world peoples to emigrate to Russia. Russia could barely feed Russians.)

    But during the Cold War, many Americans didn't see it that way. They saw the danger of Soviet influence spreading all throughout Latin America. Americans were afeared of that so many Western European intellectuals were Marxist. Italy had a powerful commie party. France did too, and 1968 movement really shook Western leaders. Charles Degaulle nearly shat his pants. And all the youth and Negro riots in the US made Western leaders feel very uncertain.
    The defeat in Vietnam was especially stinging cuz so much of US prestige had been invested into it. Though it began as a Democratic war, it came to be seen as patriots, capitalists, pro-US ally, and silent majority versus USSR, Red China, leftists, radicals, Negroes, & European anti-American left. So, when US lost in Vietnam, it was seen not only as defeat to the Vietnamese commies but to the entire International Left.

    The Kisser worked in these times. Today, the idear of Latin America turning communist is laughable. But it was seen as a real possibility. Cuba totally kicked Batista ass and then foiled Bay of Pigs. Though US got the upperhand in Cuban Missile Crisis, it also accepted commie Cuba as fait accompli and pledged never to invade it. And though Che Guevara was defeated, he became more powerful dead than when he was alive. He was like a shining inspiration to young radicals all over. So, when Allende, an admirer of Castro, took power in Chile, it was seen as a big deal.

    In retrospect, I don't much care if communism had spread throughout Latin America. Looking back, it appears communism was never a threat to the US itself. But back then, people thought different.
    People took the domino theory seriously. And there was also the fear that, even though the West was richer, it had grown too decadent to protect itself from disciplined communists. After all, US showered more aid to South Vietnam that had more people than North Vietnam, but SV was helpless before NV that had spartan-like discipline and unity and spirit.
    It's like what Michael Corleone says in THE GODFATHER II:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sDkYThhzDw

    What's funny is how leftists ridiculed the American Right(and anti-communist liberals) for paranoia and hysteria(about exaggerated communist threat) while, at the same time, firmly believing in the victory of World Revolution because the revolutionaries had 'spiritual faith' in their cause whereas capitalists had only materialism that made them soft and decadent(like the Batista supporters who partied and danced to the eve of communist takeover of Havana).

    The Kisser, Gromyko, Zhou En-Lai, and etc. were all playing a dirty game. They all understood the nature of the game. (Why is it that people who condemn the Kisser as a mass killer usually praise him for reaching out to Mao the Chinee butcher who was responsible for millions of deaths and total tyranny that makes Pinochet look like Mr. Rogers?) The thing is the Kisser was playing the big game for national interest(mostly). It was deemed necessary at the time. Yes, US bombing of Vietnam and Cambodia was horrible, but what options did US have in that war where it couldn't just abandon an ally like a hot potater? And what was US supposed to do when Allende took power? Just let another Latin American nation fall to commies? Soviets made sure no part of Eastern Europe turned non-communist. It was that kind of game. An amoral game. The game was deemed necessary at the time and it was for huge stakes.

    Today, US foreign policy is really crazy because so many of US aggressions are unnecessary and involve nations that US can get along with nicely. Also, these aggressions aren't for general national interest but petty Jewish supremacist(and mini-me homo) interest. However Jewish-conscious the Kisser was, I don't think he would have approved of a foreign policy just to appease the likes of Sheldon Adelson. And he was truly a statesman when compared to nitwits like Victoria Nuland, a total pile of puss.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • We need a way to identify people like Kissinger (zero empathy) in the womb so that they will never see the light of day. Maybe the geneticists on this blog can help.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The following link gives you Mohammad Reza Shah’s Opinion on Jewish Lobby, and its destructive power on foreign policy, when people like Philip Giraldi were silent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Christopher Hitchens called Henry Kissinger a ‘War Criminal’. He was involved in depopulation of Africa even before he became secretary of state.

    Reza Shah was a pro-Israel monarch who killed millions of Iranians who hated him for his pro-western policies and recognition of Israel in 1949.

    Henry Kissinger always felt ‘natural bond’ with Muslim puppet rulers.

    http://rehmat1.com/2011/02/04/muslim-puppets-in-exile/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’m strongly reminded of Sevareid’s Law: “The chief cause of problems is solutions”. Specifically clever, half-baked, short-term solutions. More specifically, immoral solutions whose inhumanity is somehow deemed acceptable because they are so very clever. As we have seen, the immorality lasts while the cleverness quickly begins to look more like smug shortsighted opportunism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I grow tired of picking on and picking apart Kissinger, not because it’s not important nor because he deserves better. Rather, I find myself asking why Kissinger? Where did he come from, and why did he have so much power and influence? I have a hard time believing everything he did and all the advice he gave came directly from his head. We’re distracted, I think, by “gray eminences,” and forget that in addition to the power behind the power there’re also powers behind the powers behind the power. Kissinger is only part of the establishment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Spoken like a true hasbarist.

    Mass murderer Kissinger should be hung from the nearest tree. Then gather the rest.
    , @Priss Factor
    "I grow tired of picking on and picking apart Kissinger, not because it’s not important nor because he deserves better. Rather, I find myself asking why Kissinger?"

    He served Nixon, and Jews and radical boomers hated, hated, and hated Nixon.

    Also, unlike most Sec of State, the Kisser loved being a celebrity of sorts. And he was also a scholar, which meant he wasn't just a government official but grand strategist playing the world like a chess game. His accent made him stand out.
    The discrepancy between his European manners/Jewish intellect and his brutal foreign policy unnerved a lot of people. He seemed like Dr. Strangelove. He was embroiled in the Vietnam War, the defining event of the 60s for the left that came to dominate academia. And of course, Allende has been lionized cuz he was a Marxist. Had the Kisser worked with Nixon to take down some right-wing tyrant, I doubt if the academia and media would have been offended.

    Also, he had staying power. He didn't just fade away. Even after he left government, he was sought for advice and opinion, and that kept him as the target of leftist ire forever and ever. Many people also hate him because he is still so revered in many quarters, even by Liberals. The left finds this very frustrating. If everyone hated the Kisser, they could just let it go, but leftists are still pissed that the Kisser is still welcomed as a sage and elder statesman all over the world.

    Though hated more by the left, there have also been those on the Right that never trusted him. They saw him a double-agent, a leaker, a Jew who was no conservative and whose only interest in serving Republic administration was his obsession with the heartless game of international politics.

    That said, he had a great style, and as in boxing, style often makes the fight in foreign affairs. Foreign policy is like making business deals. It's about negotiations. So, even if you're tough-as-nails inside or have strong passions, you must be willing to smile at times and shake hands and negotiate with the other side. AND YOU HAVE TO BE CONVINCING DOING IT. Style cannot be faked. Some people have a knack for this, others do not. And the Kisser had something of Tony Roma in GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa9dttNx1S8

    Compared to the Kisser, idiots like Nuland and her ilk are amateurs pampered with Jewish privilege and drunk on American power. Or take someone like Rumsfeld and Cheney. In foreign policy, even a bully must play like a diplomat.
    Vito Corleone understood this in THE GODFATHER II. He knew how to make an offer the other side better not refuse. He didn't act like Fanucci the fat pushy bastard. Hyman Roth had the right style for negotiations and intrigue too.
    The Kisser had the right style for foreign affairs. The later neocons with their Casino-Jack-style of personality did not. Elliot Abrahams, what a freaking jerk. A bunch of Moe Greenes.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DZNDEqcSi0
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • One of the very few foreign policy acts of Kissinger that was correct was the overthrow of Allende. Allende was well on his way to having “one man, one vote, one time.” When Pinochet overthrew Allende, the place was already crawling with Cuban agents, and Pinochet knew what was going to come next if the Army didn’t act.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    And why is the situation in Chile any business of murderous Zionist Jews who are citizens of convenience in the US?

    It's for the Chileans to handle.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “He’s tried to defend himself by arguing for context. “Just to take a sentence out of a telephone conversation when you have 50 other conversations, it’s just not the way to analyze it,” Kissinger said recently, after yet another damning tranche of documents was declassified. “I’ve been telling people to read a month’s worth of conversations, so you know what else went on.”

    May be ,he should change himself before changing other. He should pause and reject Zionist interpretation of the Iranianin statement on wiping off Israel
    He should read and analyze more the offer of 20 yrs truce offered by Hamas than focus on the forgotten and neglected decaying charter of Hamas. May be he should not take the Hamas firing off the rocket out f context nd may be he should include the constant persistent planned provocation by Zionist every step of the way before offerring his best opinion to the Fox or to the American policy makers .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    ""It’s a pity they can’t both lose,” Kissinger is reported to have said of Iran and Iraq. "

    That statement shows the total lack of a human soul in the Jew mindset - call them whatever they want you to call them - Zionist, Talmudist, tribe, religion - they all come with the same mindset - non-Jew life is cheep.

    Just think of all the evil, all the war, all the death that bastard of a man has advocated. Like most all Jews he has a mindset buried in past millennia – religious or not – he is a power hungry tribal killer - end of story.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • ““It’s a pity they can’t both lose,” Kissinger is reported to have said of Iran and Iraq. Although that quotation is hard to confirm, Raymond Tanter, who served on the National Security Council, reports that, at a foreign-policy briefing for Republican presidential nominee Ronald Reagan in October 1980, Kissinger suggested “the continuation of fighting between Iran and Iraq was in the American interest.” Having bet (and lost) on the Shah, Kissinger now hoped to make the best of a bad war. The U.S., he counselled Reagan, “should capitalize on continuing hostilities.”

    This paradigm is not old nor discarded. Zionist continues to employ this rule of engagement.
    Krauthammer or one of his ferocious depraved kinds famously said that it was better that they were killing themselves over and won’t have time to kill ” us” here .
    Israel was through obviously America , making sure that the rebels didn’t win enough and have a clear victory over Assad but just enough for a bleeding destructive prolonged stalemate.as NYT reported .

    Kissinger ,seeing the full positive potential of Jay Gardner ,decided to scuttle it . He got rid of him and put Paul Bremmer in charge of Iraq.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Kissinger real Hebrew name is Avraham ben Elazar, the real name of Kissinger was disclosed by the Supreme Rabbinic Court of America when he was excommunicated from Jewry on 20 June 1976. The real reason for the excommunication has not been disclosed.

    http://www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/Killing_Kennedy.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The Pentagon just can’t let go. In the wake of the Charleston Massacre, Amazon and Walmart have announced that they will no longer sell Confederate flag merchandise. Ebay says it will stop offering Confederate items for electronic auction. Mississippi's Republican speaker of the housecalls his state flag, which includes the Stars and Bars in the...
  • It seems that the basic position of liberals is that we must (again) poison the country with sectional hatreds, paving the road to disunion, because they love black people more than country.

    The insane spirit of radical abolitionism lives on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If Grandin chooses to write about Confederate flags he could at least do minimal research before writing. Throughout this article, he refers to the Confederate battle flag as the “Stars and Bars”. These are completely different. The former was carried by Confederate troops going into battle. The latter, in its various manifestations, was the official flag of the Confederate States of America. Even the most basic historical research — say a peek into Wikipedia — would have provided this teacher of history(!!!) with that bit of information. And misuse of the terms by others is no excuse for Grandin’s continued misuse. I wouldn’t want this guy teaching history to any kid of mine. (BTW, to forestall any sniping, my great grandfather fought in the the First Massachusetts Volunteer Regiment of Cavalry and was wounded at Aldie Courthouse and Opequan Creek. He was a proud member of the GAR until the day he died and I was raised hearing stories about him.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Despite the author’s sympathy with the banner banners, this is a good article. A more specific conclusion is that atrocities most often find the Stars and Stripes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • As we end another year of endless war in Washington, it might be the perfect time to reflect on the War That Started All Wars -- or at least the war that started all of Washington’s post-Cold War wars: the invasion of Panama. Twenty-five years ago this month, early on the morning of December 20,...
  • The invasion of Panama was not justified. Neither were other wars to spread democracy. Otherwise, the USA should be invaded by a foreign nation to end racial profiling, GITMO and black sites in foreign nations. No foreign nation invaded the USA to either end slavery, the genocide of Native Americans or the internment of Japanese-Americans during the 2nd World War. If drug trafficking was justified for the invasion of Panama, a foreign power would be justified to invade the USA for cybercrimes against North Korea, Iran and other nations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Fran Macadam
    As Stalin so sanguinely put it, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.

    If democratic rule is a fundamental human right, then the invasion of Panama was entirely justified, as with every other militant action to spread democracy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Fran Macadam
    As Stalin so sanguinely put it, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.

    As Stalin so sanguinely put it, you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.

    François de Charette did, if Oxford English Dictionary is to trust.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • You should have gone back to Reagan’s overblown Operation Urgent Fury in Grenada to make this point. You could always argue that it was a typical Cold War flare-up, but it is much more like Operation Just Cause than any of the other Cold War interventions. Panama just happens to be a success story now, economically and politically, so the neocons can always say that the end justifies the means. It’s hard to argue with results.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Key points were missed in this article. While Bush was calling for a coup, a few Panamanian Army officers responded. A Major showed up at Fort Clayton and told American Generals they had taken Noriega prisoner as the American President wanted. He said if some U.S. Army soldiers would follow him they would turn Noriega over to the U.S. Government.

    Imagine the shock in the White House and the Pentagon as they were planning their fun invasion. Marines would land, paratroopers would jump, even the new F-117 would get to drop bombs. Moreover, Bush also wanted all Noriega’s papers about his interactions with the CIA and Bush himself. The Panamanian Major was shocked when the American Generals told him to go back to his base and wait. Panama’s Generals eventually realized their boss was missing (probably tipped off by the our CIA) and rescued Noriega a few hours later while killing the coup plotters. This became public and BS was spun to the press, as repeated in this article above:

    “The White House was, at that moment, remarkably in the dark. It had no clear intel about what was actually happening. ”All of us agreed at that point that we simply had very little to go on,” Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney later reported. “There was a lot of confusion at the time because there was a lot of confusion in Panama.” “We were sort of the Keystone Kops,” was the way Scowcroft remembered it, not knowing what to do or whom to support.”

    This is SOP for Washington. They are never sinister, just Keystone Kops! An American General calls the President to explain he can get Noriega immediately with no bloodshed and there is “confusion.”? Whoops! I guess we have to invade now. So they had their fun flag waving invasion party and Latin American nations were once again shown who’s the real boss in the Americas, while 2000 innocent Panamanians died. For more on how this works worldwide, read the great book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Many in the United States were outraged by the remarks of conservative evangelical preacher Pat Robertson, who blamed Haiti’s catastrophic 2010 earthquake on Haitians for selling their souls to Satan. Bodies were still being pulled from the rubble -- as many as 300,000 died -- when Robertson went on TV andgave his viewing audience a...
  • “If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost.” Winston Churchill

    Civilization is a thin veneer over our animal nature. I have not the faintest belief that Mr. Grandin’s efforts would serve to preserve or strengthen that veneer, rather they are an attack on it, his moral posturing notwithstanding.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • As we end another year of endless war in Washington, it might be the perfect time to reflect on the War That Started All Wars -- or at least the war that started all of Washington’s post-Cold War wars: the invasion of Panama. Twenty-five years ago this month, early on the morning of December 20,...
  • Your link says that some fires in El Chorrillo were inadvertently started by tracer rounds, others were deliberately started by the general’s men. Not exactly what I was expecting after your description, which sounded a lot more like the U.S. deliberately bombed them just for fun. Creates questions about your credibility that you may wish to address.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • As Stalin so sanguinely put it, you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NVN

    As Stalin so sanguinely put it, you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.
     
    François de Charette did, if Oxford English Dictionary is to trust.
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    If democratic rule is a fundamental human right, then the invasion of Panama was entirely justified, as with every other militant action to spread democracy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Many in the United States were outraged by the remarks of conservative evangelical preacher Pat Robertson, who blamed Haiti’s catastrophic 2010 earthquake on Haitians for selling their souls to Satan. Bodies were still being pulled from the rubble -- as many as 300,000 died -- when Robertson went on TV andgave his viewing audience a...
  • Greg Grandin wrote:

    “Enslaved Africans and African Americans … planted coffee in the mountains outside Bogotá.”

    Why does this charlatan write history books?

    A few facts:

    1. Slavery in Colombia was abolished in all its forms in 1851, and even before that (1821) freedom of the womb had been established. Coffee production only became a major export crop from the late 1870´s onwards http://www.cafedecolombia.com/particulares/es/el_cafe_de_colombia/una_bonita_historia/ that is, several decades after slavery had ceased to exist
    2. There´s hardly any coffee planted in the mountains around Bogotá, as the weather (5-10 C) is too cold for the plants.

    But apparently Mr.Grandin can´t let truth get in the way of a good narrative fallacy…

    P.S. This message was written from Bogotá

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Accepting the “facts” in this article as true, it really underscores for me the belief that the only resolution is for the Africans to be repatriated to Africa and given what tools they need to be self-sufficient. Clearly it hasn’t worked having them in America. The Africans feel victimized and that white Americans owe them an enormous debt. They hate whites for their success and trappings thereof. Meanwhile, whites avoid Africans like the plague. They see social pathologies well accounted for in Unz’ article on African crime here in America. Just in rape and murder, Africans have slaughtered tens of thousands of whites since emancipation while raping hundreds of thousands of white women. Whites have abandoned massive civil, social, and industrial infrastructure to Africans (think Detroit) only to see it all fall into complete ruin. Trillions of dollars have been spent addressing African crime, joblessness, poverty, drug abuse, and educational problems only to have results arguably worse than before the Great Society programs were launched.

    I have yet to see a single example where Africans and whites have successfully lived as social and civil “equals” anywhere in the world. If things in America do not change VERY soon, America will become another Brazil with a social hierarchy too closely resembling India’s with Africa’s diaspora occupying the lowest rung of the society and mestizos serving as a buffer between them and white elites. This can hardly be seen as a positive outcome for anyone can it?

    Only by truly fulfilling the original intent of the Lincoln administration and restoring Africans to Africa, with infrastructure to allow complete independence and self-sufficiency, can any resolution be found. Africans can fulfill themselves free of the white “racism” they believe prevents their fulfillment in America. Whites can again live in urban environments free from fear of African crime and violence. Obviously this would be a monumental undertaking without precedent – to build an entirely new nation for 40 million people – but the Chinese have been building on this scale every year for some time now. The bigger challenge would be in convincing Africans to leave the cradle to grave dependency on white handouts and convincing a certain faction of whites to give up the guaranteed political votes and social bludgeon Africans have provided the last half century.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • About 1.5 million Europeans were captured and enslaved by Arabs and Ottomans between 1500 and 1800. See “Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800″ by Robert C. Davis, “White Slaves, African Masters: An Anthology of American Barbary Captivity Narratives” by Paul Baepler and “White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam’s One Million White Slaves” by Giles Milton.
    Also, some say that, during the Middle Ages, Jews were heavily engaged in trafficking of white Christian slaves into then-Arab Spain. That’s a forbidden topic, but you can find a book in PDF form by Israeli professor Ariel Toaff that discusses it-in passing. The primary topic of Toaff’s book is likely something that should be ignored.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • While we’re busy adding up the reparations we might want to consider the deductions having blacks entails. There seems no end to the expense involved dealing with their myriad problems. First, there is crime. No need to expand here we all know the figures. That costs a lot of money in incarceration, police, judges, prevention and security. Then there is veneral disease. Blacks have between 8 to 20 times the rate of std than whites with gonorhea highest. This segues into the fact that over 70% of blacks born today are illegitmate.

    Which leads to all the gaps that need filling. The education gap, the housing gap -btw whatever happened to the subprime crisis? – the income gap, the drug addiction gap, etc. They cost money.

    Last but not least we need to deduct the cost of affirmative action and disparate impact lawsuits and threat of loss of business or one’s job. Surely, the hiring of employees based on a racial nepotism must be quite high.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I would think blacks would want to flee from their enslavers and return to the motherland. They certainly don’t like whites or as they say crackers. But it seems the real white supremists are blacks and other non-europeans. After all, they don’t just sit at a computer they actually leave their families and homelands at great expense and even danger to live amongst the white men. Fancy that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Kind of gets, you, doesn’t it — right here, where it counts – in the wallet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.