The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPhilip Giraldi Archive
Neocons Triumphant in Washington and Geneva
It's either 1938 or 2001 again
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The forced resignation of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense and the continued prorogation of talks with Iran in Geneva might not seem to be connected but they are both major triumphs for the confrontational neoconservative foreign policy that continues to prevail in Washington in spite of repeated failures overseas. And, of course, they are both at least in part about Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed his delight at learning that the negotiations with Iran have again failed to produce an agreement. It also pleased Senator John McCain who then called for “increased sanctions and requirement that any final deal between Iran and the United States be sent to Congress for approval.” Per McCain, only the legislature can provide the necessary wisdom to avoid a bad deal with the Mullahs.

Hagel’s resignation is being packaged as response to excessive micromanaging from President Barack Obama’s White House regarding appropriate measures to be taken to “destroy” ISIS, deal with Syria and aid Iraq. In truth, Chuck Hagel was reflecting informed opinion among the Pentagon’s top ranking military personnel in confronting National Security Adviser Susan Rice over the chaotic and constantly shifting series of responses to a growing Middle Eastern crisis. Generals and Admirals may be pompous self-serving asses but they are not stupid.

Unlike Hagel, Obama’s inner circle national security team consisting of Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett are all cut from the same cloth as the president. They are academics who come from privileged backgrounds and have, as the expression goes, no skin in the game. Their children will not be dying in some hell hole and for them it is a self-serving complete abstraction to use American power to “fix things” and undertake “humanitarian interventions” overseas.

Chuck Hagel by contrast experienced Vietnam as a grunt and saw considerable combat, for which he was decorated. Even though he has most often gone along to get along while a Senator and even more so as Secretary of Defense, his life experience has nevertheless made him reluctant to view war as a first option and he was widely seen as a peace candidate when he briefly considered a presidential run in 2008. There were high hopes that when he joined the Obama team he would serve as a voice for reason and moderation.

Hagel is also partly a victim of Israel first policies. He was guilty of a mortal sin by saying when he was a Senator that “the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people on Capitol Hill” and “I’m not an Israeli senator. I’m a United States senator.” Since that transgression he has never been trusted by the Lobby, which was unsuccessful in blocking his nomination after pulling out all the stops during his confirmation hearings two years ago. As the approval of Hagel by the Senate was at that time widely viewed as a major defeat for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Robert Cohen, its current president, is probably smiling as he observes smugly that revenge is a dish best eaten cold.

So now Hagel is going, going gone, likely to be replaced by someone with whom both the neocons and the liberal interventionists will be more comfortable. That will almost certainly be an accommodating personality willing to uncritically join what Colonel Pat Lang has rightly described as the White House’s “children’s crusade.”

The fall of Hagel combined with the probability of a Congressionally-driven new, harder line from Obama sits well with some constituencies. Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard puts it succinctly from his viewpoint of what is important, “America has the misfortune to have an anti-Israel president for two more years. America has the good fortune to have a pro-Israel Congress for that same period of time. It should be a priority for that Congress, through speech and deed, to signal unequivocally to Israel and its enemies that terror and pressure against Israel will not succeed, and that America stands with Israel in our common fight against terror and barbarism.”

The incoming Republican majority also appears to be wonderful news for the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), which held its annual bash in New York City on November 23rd. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas was the featured speaker, asserting that “threats to Israel have never been greater” while basking in repeated chants from the attendees of “Go Ted Go!” ZOA President Mort Klein labeled Hamas as a “Nazi like terrorist group whose charter calls for the murder of every Jew” before taking several jabs at Obama, describing the American president as “A Chamberlain in the White House.” Neville, that is. For Klein and other neocons it is always 1938 and we are always in Munich. Pastor John Hagee of Christians United for Israel went one better, calling Obama the “most anti-Semitic president ever.”

And then there is Iran, whose alleged “interference” in Iraq apparently thwarted American plans to turn Baghdad into Stockholm. It is also reliably the perpetual “threat” used to justify any and all of Israel’s misbehavior. Given the gathering storm being summoned up by Israel’s friends, the Obama administration would have been well served by closing the deal with Tehran, but it failed to do so. The prolonging of the timetable for the talks in Geneva is not necessarily a death sentence, but it does give both time and the organizational advantage to Congress, which, with its new Republican majority, will almost certainly move to block or torpedo any agreement. If the friends of Israel can muster up the 67 Senate votes needed to be veto proof they will undoubtedly punish Iran yet again with sanctions, a move that will undoubtedly end any chance for a compromise. And even though the Republicans do not themselves control all the needed votes there are plenty of Democrats who love Israel inordinately and will likely vote with the GOP. Senator Elizabeth Warren, reliably progressive except when it comes to Palestine, has just had her first meeting with Netanyahu, an important ticket punch on her career trajectory if she wants to become president. She is not alone in doing her obeisance but will have to out-Israel Hillary Clinton, something that may not be possible.

But at the end of the day, the greatest neocon triumph is its continued grip over policy with Russia, which is the sole power in the world that can attack and destroy much of the United States. The confrontation with Moscow makes no sense as the only United States vital interest at stake is to maintain a good working relationship, but the tension continues to mount. State Department Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland, who was the enabler of the Ukraine crisis earlier this year, recently showed up in Riga Latvia where she pledged that American soldiers and their European counterparts are “ready to give our lives for the security of these countries.” She was referring to the Baltic States, raising the rather serious question whether or not Americans should be prepared to die for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Nuland’s allusion to giving “our lives” should surely be regarded as poetic license on her part as the only way a neocon could possibly die tragically would be if he or she were to choke on a piece of foie gras. She surely understands but chooses to ignore the fact that Latvia is only part of NATO due to the unwise expansion of what was originally a defensive alliance after the fall of the Soviet Union. The expansion was itself a violation of the understanding between Moscow and Washington that the West would not take advantage of the situation to extend its sphere of influence into Eastern Europe. Latvia’s defense is in no way important to the security of the United States unlike the actual threat posed by the Warsaw Pact up until 1991. Indeed, Latvia was part of the Warsaw Pact back then. Protecting Latvia as a policy is all too reminiscent of the lead ups to both the first and second World Wars. In 1914, a series of mutual defense agreements led to armed confrontation after an Austrian Archduke was assassinated by a Serbian nationalist. In 1939, Britain and France were drawn into a war with Germany after giving security guarantees to Poland even though they had no critical interests at stake. Sixteen million died in 1914-8 followed by an additional 60 million in 1939-45.

That the White House has fired a voice for restraint and moderation at the Pentagon is perhaps inevitable. That it is simultaneously increasing its combatant role in an unwinnable confrontation in Iraq and Syria which it helped create, is again taking on the Taliban in Afghanistan, has backed away from cutting a deal with Iran that would have eased tensions in a key part of the world, and is needlessly provoking Moscow for reasons that must be inscrutable to any observer is a bit difficult to grasp. And, of course, the package includes standing beside Israel right or wrong. But that is what being a neocon is all about, apart from never having to say you’re sorry. Or wrong. We’ve got that fine expensive military just sitting around and by God we are going to use it. And someday the whole world will look and behave just like Peoria.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy, History • Tags: Chuck Hagel, Neocons, Victoria Nuland 
Hide 25 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Matra says:

    She surely understands but chooses to ignore the fact that Latvia is only part of NATO due to the unwise expansion of what was originally a defensive alliance after the fall of the Soviet Union.

    Whether it was wise or not Latvia is in fact a part of NATO so as bad as Nuland may be she is re-stating something the US signed up for.

    The expansion was itself a violation of the understanding between Moscow and Washington that the West would not take advantage of the situation to extend its sphere of influence into Eastern Europe.

    In a recent interview Gorbachev said NATO expansion never came up but that it “was definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990”. I guess he should’ve got it “legally enshrined” as he did with regards to Germany.

    In 1939, Britain and France were drawn into a war with Germany after giving security guarantees to Poland even though they had no critical interests at stake.

    That’s an American opinion that few geopolitical observers in Britain or France back then or today would agree with.

    That the White House has fired a voice for restraint and moderation at the Pentagon is perhaps inevitable.

    Probably. Susan Rice does seem both reckless and incompetent. Based on MSM reports Hagel had a problem with the US strategy (if you could call it that) on Syria and it leaked out at the end of October. His removal seems to have more to do with not being a team player than anything to do with triumphant neocons. Despite his confirmation hearing Hagel was getting on well with the Israelis.

  2. Priss Factor [AKA "Andrea Ostrov Letania"] says:

    Proper term is ‘Jewish Supremacists’.

  3. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Let us hope that your analysis of present events is more realistic than some comments you made about the past.

    For instance, take that piece of pseudo history “Britain and France were drawn into a war with Germany after giving security guarantees to Poland”. Really? Britain and France drawn into a war? Against their own sovereign wills? Drawn by whom? And what happened next?

    Consider in this context a piece of real history. By mid 1930s Poland had signed bilateral non aggression pacts with both Germany and Soviet Union. The Ribbentrop Molotov pact was signed a few years later, in late August 1939. A swift implementation followed in a few days (!): a military aggression by the signatories’ armies which culminated in a joint military parade of Wehrmacht and Red Army in Brest Litovsk in late September 1939. One month from the pact to the parade.

    Can you see the difference?

    Greetings, Jerzy.

    • Replies: @fnn
  4. Kiza says:

    Another nice article by Geraldi. The only point worth adding is that the US is a bankrupt giant. Any more wars by the neocons will result in the total financial and economic ruin of the country. The social environment in the US is already boiling. Maybe the neocon regime hopes to divert the attention and get rid of the opposition by starting wars (an ancient strategy of the rulers). But challenging Russia and China to war vouches for stupidity of this US political “elite”. Good luck US, neocons in power is big trouble.

    • Replies: @Chris Condon
  5. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “The fall of Hagel combined with the probability of a Congressionally-driven new, harder line from Obama sits well with some constituencies. Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard puts it succinctly from his viewpoint of what is important, “America has the misfortune to have an anti-Israel president for two more years. America has the good fortune to have a pro-Israel Congress for that same period of time. It should be a priority for that Congress, through speech and deed, to signal unequivocally to Israel and its enemies that terror and pressure against Israel will not succeed, and that America stands with Israel in our common fight against terror and barbarism.”

    A president is anti Israel ( that when necessarry ,will be termed as anti Zionist and in same breath anti Semite) despite keeping quiet ,silent,and passive supporter of atrocities wrought by Israel in Gaza repeatedly,despite vetoing condemnation,despite offerring extra billions as bribes so that Israel delays an illegal construction for few months,despite punishing the victims of Israeli crimes ,despite allowing contacts,dialogues,and military hardwares to Israel ,despite repeated violations of international norms,laws,and mutual trusts, despite being personally attacked,undermined,and facing moneyed campaigns from the Israrli supporters in election openly ,despite allowing Israel to undermine Egyptian democratic process , allowing Israel create facts on the grounds of West Bank,Gaza,and to some extent in Lebanon and Syria( repeated attacks on these two sovereign countries and forcing Obama to an almost inevitable confrontation through the neocons pressure and through false Sarin propaganda ) ,despite continuing sanctions on Iran ,despite keeping / maintaing Iran,Syria,Hamas,and Hizbullah as Pariah and rouge elements ,despite keeping silent over killings of Iranian scientist by Israel,despite killing of Americans by Israel over the sea and in the occupied land of Palestine by Israel.
    He is anti Israel for he hasn’t done yet what Israel demands- 1 an attack on Iran
    2 an attack on Syria
    3 an attack on Gaza
    He is anti Istael for he shows the audacity of disapproval of Israeli behaviors in WB ,Gaza,and in the Mediterranean Sea ( Israeli aggression against various humanitarian boats by private citizens of various nationalities )
    4 for he has not committed and acted yet on massive bombing campaigns against Iran and Syria and Lebanon .

    Congress is pro Israel for 1 it has been trying Obama to bomb Iran 2 it has been pushing formoresanctions, 3 it has voiced criticism of American president’s policies on settlements and on East Jerusalem,3 it has signed on the bills written by Israel known as accountability Acts( Syrian Accountability, Lebanon Accountability, Iran Accoutability .. So on ) 4 it has promised that Israel wouldn’t face any cut in aids when cuts will be faced by foreign governments and by domestic programme, 5 Congress has come put batting for Israel when the whole world was condemning Israeli atrocities on Gaza 6 Cpngress was blaming Gaza for the violence inflicted on it by Israel, 7 Congress was sending arms and ammunitions when President was not aware that arms being sent to Israel.8 Congress was violating established rules in order to support illegal activities of Israel, 9 Congress was openly embracing anti American activities and statements of Israeli leaders and the neocon- Zionist circles .

    So to be accepted as pro Israel ,one has to give up legitimate self interest, has to put himself or helfself at risk of death and destruction, has to send his or her children or ward to possible death and mutilation, has to violate moral codes,has to violate legal obligations and treaties ,has to keep silent when one of his or her children dies,has to undermine strategic interests ,has to suffer economic losses ,has to create enemies has to go to war ,has to punish ,has to condemn the innocents and has to be ready to starve himself or herself so that bombs can be dropped on the victims by Israel , has to pass bills and acts written by foreign entities and make them into binding laws .

    Only an atmosphere of slavery can explain this phenomenon. The difference is in the open embrace of this form of obedience or slavery. To become Zionist or pro Israeli or be accepted as committed pro Israeli one has to become a slave .

    This is what Bill Krystal getting away with . But this is also the reality This has become American self interest .

  6. Chiron says:

    The jewish elite and their useful idiots will get WWIII like they got WWI, WWII and the Iraq Invasion.

  7. Nuland is ready for poor young Americans to die in battle against Russia, but we know not ready to give proper care to the injured who survive. Part of being cannon fodder for Wall Street’s neocons is outliving your value to them. As for Peoria, the way government mismanagement and the domestic consequences of over-militarization is going, it’s more likely it will resemble Ferguson, or foreign war-ravaged occupation zones.

  8. Jay says:

    Well stated essay; the politics of the empire will trump reason until total imperial collapse, and that may be sooner than we think. American hubris escalates exponentially and for all those who relish this process, no doubt they actually look forward to a catastrophic apocalypse as well. Childish: if I can’t have it my way, then no one gets to play. Neocons are believe in military confrontation because we are “exceptional,” and it is our moral responsibility to confront and where necessary, destroy all perceived evil in the world. Such is a manichean worldview and it will certainly be the death of us. Here is the dark side of the American rise to global dominance after WWII. It is an old saying, but power certainly corrupts, does it not!

  9. Jim says:

    The extent to which a tiny country on one side of the globe exercises enormous influence on the foreign policy of a huge country on the other side of the globe is one of the most remarkable phenomena in world history. Future historians looking back on this from centuries in the future will find it utterly astonishing.

  10. Mark says:

    HOW JEWISH SUPREMACISTS CONTROL ALL 3 BRANCHES OF GOVT + MEDIA.

    Thanks for the great article, Mr. Giraldi. I agree with you.

    We are involved in wars in the Middle East for one reason only—to make the Middle East safe for Israel. The USA is a colony of Israel.

    Kristol’s comment that Obama is anti-Israel is so stupid. Kristol is a Jewish left-winger posing as a fake conservative. The Judaists control Obama too and got him elected and put in power. He is just more controlled by the likes of Soros who are not as pro-Israel as some of the other Oligarchs.

    The US gov. (all 3 branches) are owned and operated by the Judaists. Here is how a small country like Israel is able to control a big country like USA:

    Congress: 50% of the campaign contributions to the Democratic party (and 40% to Republicans) are from the Judaists. This is just what is disclosed. Billions more are paid to both parties disguised in other ways.

    Senate: 27 Jewish Senators (27%), compared with 1-2% of the population.

    Supreme Court: Totally under Jewish control. 3 Judaists openly on board, destroying USA. 0 Protestants (the same Xians who worship their Jewish masters).

    Those who do not take the bribes are taken to Israel to “soften them up.” See:

    http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/freetrips.html

    During these Israeli trips, the congressmen are wined and dined in Israel and bribed and “entertained” and pretty girls come to their hotel room to “entertain them”. These rooms are secretly wired (just like Al Gore’s was, as reported in Newsweek) so everything is videotaped. If the Congressman returns to the US and does not follow the orders of the Jewish Oligarchs (such as flooding and destroying his own country with raping murdering aliens or billions for Israel or the Oligarchs), then he can be blackmailed and the video released and he could even be criminally prosecuted, so he has no choice but to vote as ordered by the Jewish Lobby.

    Federal Reserve: Jewish controlled dollar printing press.

    Media: 90% Jewish controlled.
    See the admission by Jewish writer Joel Stein in the LA Times article of Dec. 19, 2008.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/opinion/oe-stein19

    President: Illegal alien Barry Sotero, cases against him fixed, real Kenyan birth certificate in Israel by the Jewish Oligarchs, ready to be brought out and put Barry in jail if he strays. Barry paid Oligarchs trillions of dollars disguised as “stimulus” and carried out their order to destroy USA by flooding it with aliens.

  11. fnn says:
    @Anonymous

    Mainstream Jewish historian admits that FDR played a big role in inciting the war in Europe:

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1557780218/ref=ox_sc_act_title_8?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A261XCYOOOCB2D

    For three quarters of a century, scholars have debated President Roosevelt’s role in bringing the United States into World War II. But this book goes far beyond that question: It argues that FDR was the mastermind behind the very war itself. From late 1938, Robert Herzstein writes, Roosevelt’s agents in Europe were busy at work agitating for a total European war to destroy Germany: They incited Poland and Germany against each other, and at the same time more or less bullied Britain and France into supporting Poland. At the same time, the President set up a virtual police state at home, using the HUAC, the FBI, and other government agencies to spy on, harass, and ultimately annihilate the domestic opposition.

    Herbert Hoover on FDR’s eagerness for war in Europe:

    http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2012/05/poland-as-pawn-hoover-identifies.html

    Hoover would document his conversations with the various people he met with. An example is provided of Hoover’s meeting with Kennedy on May 15, 1945. Kennedy indicated he had over 900 dispatches which he could not print without consent of the U.S. Government. He hoped one day to receive such permission as it was Kennedy’s intention to write a book that would:

    …put an entirely different color on the process of how America got into the war and would prove the betrayal of the American people by Franklin D, Roosevelt.

    …Roosevelt and Bullitt were the major factors in the British making their guarantees to Poland and becoming involved in the war. Kennedy said that Bullitt, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the Poles not to make terms with the Germans and that he Kennedy, under instructions from Roosevelt, was constantly urging the British to make guarantees to the Poles.

    He said that after Chamberlain had given these guarantees, Chamberlain told him (Kennedy) that he hoped the Americans and the Jews would now be satisfied but that he (Chamberlain) felt that he had signed the doom of civilization.

    Kennedy said that if it had not been for Roosevelt the British would not have made this most gigantic blunder in history.

    Kennedy told me that he thought Roosevelt was in communication with Churchill, who was the leader of the opposition to Chamberlain, before Chamberlain was thrown out of office….

  12. TomB says:

    While Netanyahu may be happy that the Iranian talks haven’t yet resulted in any deal an interesting thing happened just in the last couple of weeks, Phil, that shows the spot the Israelis are in given the extremity of their position.

    I forget where I saw it—the J-Post I think—but in essence it was reporting some remarks made by Netanyahu himself and maybe a few other big Israeli-security-thinker types too that began to consider what the Israelis really have been asking for.

    That is, their comments were directed to the idea that even if they persuaded the U.S. and the P5+ to get the kind of strict deal the like out of the Iranians, that, well, just how long can it be reasonably expected that the deal would have as its term? So that now (honest-to-God as if they really hadn’t considered the logic of their position before), they are saying gee their problem may well be that Iran will go along with some otherwise satisfactory deal and just lie low for its … 5 or 10 year term … but that thereafter will be free as the wind to just get nukes or get nuke capable as fast as it wants.

    Like I say, it really brings home the logical problem the Israeli’s position alway had in that indeed it’s difficult to see the P5+ or even just the U.S. alone trying to lord it over the Iranians in perpetuity.

    In any event the piece just sort concluded by reporting such comments and didn’t go further but for what it’s worth my take at least was that Israel now believes like I do that in fact there will be a deal reached by the P5+ and Iran and is digesting that. All the really good pieces I’ve read about the thing seems to indicate that all sides feel some very good progress has been made.

    Nor did the piece venture into any talk about whether any such conclusion by the Israelis would lead them to launch their own attack on Iran, but, again for what it’s worth the statements reported sounded as if there was some resignation on the part of the Israelis that all same would do would be to obliterate any further Iran cooperation with the P5+, and then of course just increase any desire on the part of Teheran to actually get a nuke a million-fold.

    Anyway, sounds to me like Obama’s clear resistance to going to war with Iran (coupled with the clear probably even greater resistance to same amongst the other P5+ members) has finally sunk in and the Israelis are now in a thinking mode somewhat. The results of same, of course, might well determine what marching orders it gives its tools here.

    Like I say, for what it’s worth…. I at least found same interesting.

  13. Art says:

    The tipping point to a major war is just one step away – attacking Assad. If Obama attacks Assad – then the Alawites, Druze, Christians, Kurds, and Lebanon Shea are all in grave danger. Russia and Iran will oppose that in a big way. For the people on the ground it will be a fight to the death.

    Zionism and the Sunni elite want a war where a benign Sunni puppet takes over ISIS territory.

    It is all up to Obama – will he do something stupid?

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Don G.
  14. Realist says:
    @Art

    “It is all up to Obama – will he do something stupid?”
    Good one….you are kidding right?

  15. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Neocon = Jew. America is effectively controlled by its Jewish lobby. With their money, power and influence they dominate the US government. The Jewish control of America and American subordination to Israel, a tiny, corrupt and racist country an ocean and a continent away, is a phenomenon without precedent in history.

  16. @Kiza

    The neo-conservatives and others may plan for endless war on behalf of Israel and other goals, and the political system might be incapable of stopping them, but nonetheless financial difficulties are going to interfere. Washington is running out of money fast.

  17. moi says:

    What’s to worry when we have the best leadership that money can buy.

  18. Don G. says:
    @Art

    Art, Obama didn’t do Syria. Remember how he played his dirty trick on the neocons and didn’t honour his ‘red line’ demands? Remember how he got in bed with the evil Putin and together they prevented a war by snookering the wishes of the the majority of both congress and the American people? And now look at how he’s angered Netunyahoo. Why Art, some would think Obama is in bed with the Russians! I’m sure the American people have been told to believe that!

    • Replies: @Art
  19. Art says:
    @Don G.

    The Zionist neocons are doing a bit time major bait and switch – the bait for the American people is big bad ISIS – the switch is to attacking Assad and the non-Sunni peoples. This is an end-around the American people who already said NO to a war on Syria.

    Obama is the ONLY hope in stopping this from happening. Hold your nose and support him in this matter!

    Clearly the establishment elite Republican Party types are pro-war and anti-peace.

  20. “In truth, Chuck Hagel was reflecting informed opinion among the Pentagon’s top ranking military personnel in confronting National Security Adviser Susan Rice over the chaotic and constantly shifting series of responses to a growing Middle Eastern crisis. Generals and Admirals may be pompous self-serving asses but they are not stupid”

    Phil, that’s not altogether correct. At least one ‘General Officer’ (rear admiral John Kirby) at the Pentagon is dumber than a box of rocks and he proved it on camera:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/10/18/rear-admiral-john-kirby/

    Also, Hagel altogether lacked the courage (or common sense) to take on the Pentagon’s religious extremism, and that is most definitely NOT good news:

    ^ “You’re telling me 28 to 34 percent of our military want 7 billion people to die” [believe in literal Armageddon] … “The simple answer is affirmative” (Mikey Weinstein on ‘The Young Turks’)

    Other than that, I could not agree more with the idea Susan Rice and Sam Power are privileged, incompetent, destroyers of nations (narcissistic killers) .. but I’m not so certain they’ve no reason to mistrust a Pentagon populated with tea-bagging generals who by no means are in love with Obama for reasons altogether independent of his incredibly poor judgement and egoistic inner circle

  21. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Neocons wear different hats,profess differnet faiths, sport differnet beards, lie through gold plated teeth, wear patriotic lapel pins on puffed out chest and serve one master by name Israel

    “Longtime Post columnist Richard Cohen attested to Powell’s unquestionable veracity with these words: “The evidence he presented to the United Nations — some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail — had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn’t accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without a doubt still retains them. Only a fool — or possibly a Frenchman – could conclude otherwise.”

    Inches away, another venerable pundit held forth. Powell managed to “present the world with a convincing and detailed X-ray of Iraq’s secret weapons and terrorism programs yesterday,” wrote Jim Hoagland, a Post foreign-policy specialist. He concluded: “To continue to say that the Bush administration has not made its case, you must now believe that Colin Powell lied in the most serious statement he will ever make, or was taken in by manufactured evidence. I don’t believe that. Today, neither should you.”

    Fast forward to the current era. What are Richard Cohen and Jim Hoagland writing — about Iran?

    On February 6, 2012, exactly nine years after proclaiming that “only a fool” could doubt Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, Cohen’s column declared flatly: “The ultimate remedy is Iranian regime change.” Four months ago, Cohen wrapped up a column by observing “there is still time for Iran to back down before President Obama’s red line — no nuclear weapon — is crossed. This is a war whose time has not yet come.” Not yet.

    Hoagland — a decade after telling readers they should put their trust in Colin Powell’s “convincing and detailed X-ray of Iraq’s secret weapons” — is now making clear that his patience with Iran is wearing thin. “Until recently,” Hoagland wrote five weeks ago, “I had been relatively comfortable with Obama’s assertions that there is time to reach a peaceful resolution with Iran.” Hoagland’s column went on to say that military strikes on Iran “threaten disastrous political and economic consequences for the world,” so diplomatic efforts should try to avert the need for such strikes — before they become necessary.”
    http://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/02/05/ten-years-after-colin-powells-un-speech-old-hands-are-ready-more-blood

  22. learned says:

    1 “When he agreed to make the administration’s case, why did he take only two personal staffers (Col. Wilkerson and executive assistant Craig Kelly) to the CIA to review what Cheney, Scooter Libby and Paul Wolfowitz had prepared and/or distorted, instead of bringing knowledgeable members of his own intelligence service, the State Department Intelligence and Research Bureau (INR), to protect him?

    On Feb. 5, 2004, I quoted Greg Thielman, former director of the Strategic, Proliferation and Military Affairs Office of INR, in Salon: “He didn’t have anyone from INR near him. Powell didn’t want to know what was true or not. He wanted to sell a rotten fish. At some point, Powell decided there was no way to avoid war. His job was to go to war with as much legitimacy as we could scrape up.” Why did Powell cut out his own people to his own ultimate detriment?

    The documentary “No End in Sight” depicts the creation of the multivolume “Future of Iraq” study prepared by Powell’s State Department staff for the reconstruction of Iraq after the war. When Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz rejected the study and blackballed Powell’s staff, what did he do to counter them, if anything?

    http://www.commondreams.org/views/2007/08/09/will-real-colin-powell-stand

    It is the hatred against Arab and now Iran that permeate the dark souls of tehse neocons . The destruction of iraq was the sole intention and there was never any desire of any recosntrcution or rerstoration of semblance of normalcy .

    2- Regarding regime change in the Middle East, in 2002 Ledeen criticized the views of former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, writing: Regime change is the overthrow of a government (or regime) considered illegitimate by an external force (usually military), and its replacement with a new government according to the ideas and/or interests promoted by that force.
    He (Scowcroft) fears that if we attack Iraq “I think we could have an explosion in the Middle East. It could turn the whole region into a caldron and destroy the War on Terror.” One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today. If we wage the war effectively, we will bring down the terror regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and either bring down the Saudi monarchy or force it to abandon its global assembly line to indoctrinate young terrorists. That’s our mission in the war against terror.”
    http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Michael-Ledeen

    3 “” in a speech at American Enterprise Institute on October 29, 2001. Ledeen followed this up with a piece on National Review Online in August 2002, when he mocked Brent Scowcroft’s concern that an invasion of Iraq could turn the Middle East into a cauldron. Ledeen’s response:

    One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today.

    Ledeen is no mere kibitzer on the rightwing gravy train. He is one of the architects and chief abettors of the cauldronization — the slaughter and suffering — we see across the Middle East today. As the Washington Post noted back in the glory days of 2003, when these bloodthirsty wretches were still strutting around beating their chests about their importance:

    One [of Karl Rove’s advisers] is Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, whose specialties include terrorism and the Middle East. His latest book, according to the official summary, asserts that “America must topple the regimes of the terror masters to eliminate the threat of terrorism.”

    The two met after Bush’s election. “He said, ‘Anytime you have a good idea, tell me,’ ” Ledeen said. Every month or six weeks, Ledeen will offer Rove “something you should be thinking about.” More than once, Ledeen has seen his ideas, faxed to Rove, become official policy or rhetoric.”
    http://www.chris-floyd.com/articles/1510-falling-cedars-fomenting-war-in-lebanon-and-beyond.html

Current Commenter
says:

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


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Philip Giraldi Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
A Modern Guernica Enabled by Washington
Pressuring Candidates Even Before They Are Nominated
But is it even a friend?
The gagged whistleblower goes on the record.
Today’s CIA serves contractors and bureaucrats—not the nation.
Pay no mind to the Mossad agent on the line.