The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
America First -- or World War III
🔊 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

“If you’re in favor of World War III, you have your candidate.”

So said Rand Paul, looking directly at Gov. Chris Christie, who had just responded to a question from CNN’s Wolf Blitzer as to whether he would shoot down a Russian plane that violated his no-fly zone in Syria.

“Not only would I be prepared to do it, I would do it,” blurted Christie: “I would talk to Vladimir Putin … I’d say to him, ‘Listen, Mr. President, there’s a no-fly zone in Syria; you fly in, it applies to you.’

“Yes, we would shoot down the planes of Russian pilots if in fact they were stupid enough to think that this president was the same feckless weakling … we have in the Oval Office … right now.”

Ex-Gov. George Pataki and ex-Sen. Rick Santorum would also impose a no-fly zone and shoot down Russian planes that violated it. Said Gov. John Kasich, “It’s time we punched the Russians in the nose.”

Carly Fiorina would impose a no-fly zone and not even talk to Putin until we’ve conducted “military exercises in the Baltic States” on Russia’s border. Jeb Bush, too, would impose a no-fly zone.

These warhawks apparently assume that President Putin is a coward who, if you shoot down his warplanes, will back away from a fight.

Are we sure? After the Turks shot down that Sukhoi SU-24, Moscow sent fighter planes to Syria to escort its bombers and has reportedly deployed its lethal S-300 antiaircraft system there.

A U.S. Marine Corps aviator describes the S-300: “A complete game changer for all fourth-gen aircraft [like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18]. That thing is a beast and you don’t want to get near it.” There are press reports that an angry Putin has ordered the even more advanced S-400 system moved into Syria.

Is Putin bluffing? Are we prepared to ride the up-escalator, at the top of which is nuclear war, if Putin, who has been boasting of his modernized nuclear forces, is also willing to ride it rather than back down?

Uber-hawk Lindsey Graham wants to send tens of thousands of American troops to fight ISIS, and refuses to work with Iran, Russia, or Syria’s Bashar Assad to crush our common enemy ISIS.

Graham prefers “allies,” like the Saudis and Gulf Arabs.

But both have bailed out of the air war on ISIS, and sent troops and bombers instead to attack the Houthi rebels in Yemen. Result: The Houthis have been in retreat and al-Qaida and ISIS are moving into the vacated territory.

Another Mideast base camp for terrorists is being created — by us.

“I miss George W. Bush!” wailed Graham in the undercard debate.

How many other Americans are, like Graham, pining for the return of a Bush foreign policy that gave us Barack Obama?

Yet, now, a rival school is taking center stage in the Republican presidential campaign, rejecting the knee-jerk hostility to working with Putin. Not only does Rand Paul belong to this school, so, apparently, do Donald Trump and his strongest challenger, Sen. Ted Cruz.

Cruz had previously disparaged the legacy of the “neocons” who prodded Bush into war in Iraq and championed a democracy crusade in the Middle East. In Las Vegas, he spoke of a new national-interest-based foreign policy, a policy that puts “America First.”

“If we topple Assad … ISIS will take over Syria, and it will worsen national security interests. And the approach — instead of being … a democracy promoter, we ought to hunt down our enemies and kill ISIS rather than creating opportunities for ISIS to control new countries.”

Cruz rejects the Manichaean worldview of the neocons and their reflexive hostility to Russia, and appears willing to work with a Russian autocrat to crush a monstrous evil like ISIS, as U.S. presidents did in working with anti-Communist dictators to win the Cold War.

Midway through the debate, Trump cut loose with a sweeping indictment of mindless American interventionism in the Middle East:

ORDER IT NOW

“We’ve spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that, frankly, if they were there and if we could have spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems — our airports and all the other problems we have — we would have been a lot better off. …

“We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East — we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away — and for what? It’s not like we had victory. It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, airports, and everything else that are all falling apart!”

If we do not want Syria in 2016 to become what Sarajevo became in 1914, the powder keg that explodes into a world war, the War Party Republicans, who have learned nothing from the past, should be relegated to the past.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Copyright 2015 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: 2016 Election, Republicans, Russia 
Hide 88 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Leftist conservative [AKA "better resurrection"] says: • Website

    why don’t you write about how the media has hyped and greatly publicized putin’s offhand description of trump, in an obvious attempt to hurt trump with voters…or write about how the media mainstream media has ignored so far how the new omnibus spending bill quadruples the number of guest workers using the h2b visa?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  2. The war mongers think they are running for God. They are the absolute dregs of humanity if they even qualify as human. They would impose totally unnecessary death and suffering on millions of people for their own aggrandizement and enrichment. I would very much like to see them all in prison.

    • Disagree: Jeff Davis
  3. Kamran says:

    Pat, why are you Americans so obsessed with the middle east? Just buy the oil and forget it.

  4. JEC says:

    Politics is almost always a choice between evils. If it’s in our mutual interests to crush ISIS, then an American alliance with Russia should be understood as a ‘necessary evil’.

  5. Rehmat says:

    After Pat. Buchanan was fired from MSNBC in 2012 – he has become very careful in making “political wrong” statements except the one concern Muslims.

    Rand Paul is also a Zionist poodle. He is shame to his illustrious father former Congressman Ron Paul.

    Wolf Blitzer belongs to American “fifth column”. Every time there is a war between Israel and Arabs, Blitzer has moved his office to Tel Aviv.

    Ever wondered what happened to the Buchanan who in 2012 said: “Israel is greater threat to America than Iran”.

    http://rehmat1.com/2012/12/02/pat-buchanan-israel-is-greater-threat-to-us-than-iran/

  6. @WorkingClass

    I screwed up. Meant to agree. Hit the wrong button. My bad.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
  7. @Kamran

    US oil companies at the top of the oil food chain skim billions. US banks that “handle” the oil transactions make billions as well. And the US weapons makers sell the gulf oil monarchs billions of dollars worth of death machines.

    The “Aramco” in Saudi Aramco stands for Arabian ***American*** oil company.

    The “one percent” will lose major, major revenue if the US backs off and “just buys the oil”.

    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
  8. Actually Pat is mostly a moron who time to time says something sensible in relation to foreign policy. Now, if he actually wished to do some good, he’d work on getting the religious right out of our lives and get back to a time of thoughtful, pre-bigot conservatism, but that doesn’t work for him, because Pat is a bigoted conservative himself. Maybe he doesn’t like the USA telling other nations how to live their lives but he certainly wouldn’t mind telling the rest of us (Americans) how we should live. Insofar as his newest infatuation Ted Cruz, it’s just more of the same crap on the domestic front. In any case, if were not going up in the nuclear flames, it’s because someone managed to come up with a plan to derail the Doug Coe cult and I doubt Pat will ever go there, if only for the reason people propping up his dream of domestic nastiness would take a huge hit:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/12/14/fletcher-prouty-and-the-secret-team-today/

    ^ Can’t have your cake and eat it too, Pat –

  9. Art says:
    @Kamran

    “Pat, why are you Americans so obsessed with the middle east? Just buy the oil and forget it.”

    Exactly – oil is fungible – oil bought in Brazil is more or less the same as oil bought in Saudi. Oil is a one world market, buy it here or buy it there makes no real difference. Right now there is more oil than buyers. We need Saudi like we need a cold.

    The actual fight in the ME is not about oil – it is about tribes and religion. We do not need to be militarily involved in these ME tribal fights. It is not in our interest – it is not our fight. Getting between ravenous dogs is stupid.

    Israel, Saudi, Turkey, and Iran (the least bad of the bunch) are ancient tribes that are unwilling to become modern states. They all want to use government to inforce a state religion. This goes against American precepts. We must protect our precepts, our interests here at home – not dissipate our future on people with blood in their eye that are wedded to the past.

    America First – America First – America First!

  10. tbraton says:
    @Ronald Thomas West

    “Insofar as his newest infatuation Ted Cruz, it’s just more of the same crap on the domestic front.”

    Yeah, I caught that too, and I was bothered by his blithely combining Cruz with Paul and Trump. After all, I believe Cruz implied before the debate that he was willing to use nuclear weapons to defeat ISIS (“We will carpet bomb them into oblivion,” Cruz said at a multi-candidate event in Cedar Rapids sponsored by the Tea Party-aligned FreedomWorks group. “I don’t know if sand can glow in the dark, but we’re going to find out.”). I strongly distrust Cruz. But Pat often gets carried away with his little enthusiasms. I can recall him predicting on the McLaughlin Group (where he is a regular) shortly after the 2010 elections that Rubio was a likely future Presidential contender. I happened to live in Florida at the time and was aware of Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy positions that he was openly articulating during his campaign for Senate. That was a major reason I didn’t vote for him. I was taken aback by Buchanan’s then enthusiasm for Rubio, since I was aware at the time that Rubio’s foreign policy positions were strongly antithetical to Buchanan’s and I guess Pat wasn’t.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    , @MarkinLA
  11. Trump is dead on about the middle east and how we have blown trillions and made everything worse.

    But I take the tangerine marmot he wears on his head as a hint as to what lies beneath it.

    He appeals to the ever growing idiot percentage in the Republican party. He could be a very smart man who knows better, but on the other hand, he could actually believe some of the stupid lies he expertly peddles. 54% of the Trump supporters believe Obama is a muslim that was born in Kenya. It is safe to say this faction of the Trump fan club was born without a spinner on their beanie. The stupidity exposed by the republicans in the primary goes on and on, in every election cycle the discourse lowers itself to a more embarrassing level.

    Trump might be just playing to his audience what they want to hear. He might be a fiscal conservative and a social liberal (getting divorced three times and living in New York are indications of that) but we don’t know. We never know what the presidential candidates actually think until they get into office and even then sometimes we don’t know because they are inept and directionless.

    • Replies: @William BadWhite
    , @rod1963
  12. @tbraton

    Cruz is the worst kind of opportunist. A smart one. Like Obama.

  13. attonn says:

    Hawkish buffoonery coming from Christies and Lindseys is nothing more than a “bad cop” routine to Obama’s “good cop” one. Nobody in Moscow (or Tehran) is fooled by this phony spectacle. Maniacs who are really “ready to start WWIII” decide nothing and will never be allowed to decide anything. Real US geopolitical strategy consists of destroying other countries, not destroying itself. Even if Russians take over a NATO member like Estonia (or China attacks Taiwan), USA will find myriad of ways to shirk its responsibilities to fight and will resort to venting its fury via economic sanctions and dead-end UNSC resolutions.

    • Replies: @Avery
  14. tbraton says:

    It’s not his intelligence that concerns me. He’s probably the smartest guy in the Republican field. It’s his judgment and lack of real world experience. As you noted, it’s his opportunism. I think he would be better suited for A.G. or Supreme Court. I hope Trump doesn’t make him a running mate. That would surely put a big target on Trump’s back, for I think there are many powerful people who would certainly prefer Cruz in the Oval Office than Trump.

  15. @WorkingClass

    prison? nah. I want them and every single person and donor associated with them executed. only way I can see this country restored.

    And I am 100% sure it will never happen. not when a few people control all the information flowing in the country.

  16. Avery says:
    @attonn

    What you write makes sense.

    However, the danger with nukes is that things can get out of hand even if nobody was planning for it. By all public accounts, Cuban missile crises came very close to being the trigger for the last global war fought by humans. Apparently the captain of a Soviet sub had pre-authorization to launch a nuke without confirming with Moscow. So this sub was being depth-charged by a USN destroyer. Apparently sub captain was convinced WW3 had broken out above, and was going to launch. But to launch a nuke required unanimous agreement by three senior officers. One of three refused to give consent. Lucky for everybody.

    I believe there have been a couple of other close calls due tests being mistaken for actual preemptive strike.

    The problem with nukes is that if the first strategic warhead detonates, everybody will assume WW3 has broken out, and will let loose all their warheads.

  17. Let’s face it folks, Putin was right when he said, “The Americans have mush for brains.”

    America’s foreign policy under the Democrats and the Republicans is run by the same people, the Neocoms. Obama is on television right now singing their mantra in regard to non interventionism and Syria. Presidents come and go, but the State Department and Military Industrial Complex stay the same.

  18. attonn says:
    @Avery

    I don’t believe a single one of these tales about Caribbean Missile Crisis. They strike me a complete fiction. In reality, the whole thing was defused with behind-the-curtain negotiations, after JFK backed down and removed Jupiter missiles from Turkey.
    Not a lot of Americans know this, but Soviets didn’t lose back then. They only agreed on removing their missiles from Cuba in return for the US doing the same in Turkey. A clear draw.

    • Replies: @Bill
    , @Avery
  19. joe webb says:

    a video offered on jewyorktimes now and then on “Demagogues of the Past” features, Joe McCarthy who was right about all the communists in gov’t (see Verona papers wherein the Rosenburgs Were guilty, Alger Hiss Was guilty, etc.), Governor Wallace who was correct about everything, and Pat Buchanan who has always been right about everything.

    So, Pat Buchanan is a demagogue. Great. How about a Trump and Buchanan ticket?

    Pat is also the #l enemy of jews, although Trump may have now replaced him.

    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @rod1963
  20. Rehmat says:

    John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman used to be known “Three Amigos of Zionism”. If needed, they would sell their mothers to AIPAC. They would campaign against every leader who had been declared “existential threat” to the Zionist entity. They got Africa’s most rich and liberal regime of Qaddafi toppled – not for being threat to IMF, WB or the US, but because some French Zionist idiot thought Qaddafi had become a threat to Israel.

    In November 2011, speaking at the first national convention in Paris, organized by the French Israel Lobby, the Council of Jewish Organization of France, Levy boasted that he lead the anti-Qaddafi campaing because it was a Jewish thing to do.

    “What I have done all these months, I did as a Jew. And like all the Jews of the world, I was worried. Despite legitimate anxiety is an uprising to be welcomed with favor, we were dealing with one of the worst enemy of Israel,” said Levy.

    http://rehmat1.com/2012/09/18/bernard-levy-qaddafi-was-an-enemy-of-israel/

  21. @Dave Chamberlin

    “He appeals to the ever growing idiot percentage in the Republican party.”

    Right, because the Dems with their base of shrill homosexuals and blacks are the party of deep thinkers. And of course only an idiot would be opposed to important more moslems, destroying sovereign states in the ME for no discernible reason, and enforcing our immigration laws. After all it is has worked so well to this point.

    At some point it would be nice to see somebody engage on the merits of the arguments. Of course, you know you’d get destroyed so instead you just sit around and call people names.

    You and your ilk are like the gamer dorks back in high school, mad that the popular kids are having more fun so you make yourselves feel better by calling everybody stupid. I sincerely hope that if Trump is elected, he’s made a list of people needing IRS audits, and that you’re on that list.

    • Replies: @Art
  22. rod1963 says:
    @Dave Chamberlin

    Just another I hate Trump and his supporters troll. You probably like Jeb.

  23. rod1963 says:
    @joe webb

    Bibi sure hates him. Bibi got boiling mad when Trump repeatedly brought up the wall and fences Israel is building to keep out Muslims and that moratorium on Muslim immigration.

    Bibi hates us as much as he hates the Arabs.

    The Jews had better watch it, if they try the extortion and bullying gambit on Trump and that will just piss him off. He’ll let them swing in the wind.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  24. Bill says:
    @attonn

    It wasn’t even a draw. The Soviets, from the beginning, only wanted the US to remove the Jupiter missiles. The USSR won, 100%. Of course, the whole thing only happened in the first place because the US can’t resist this kind of hyper-provocative foreign policy.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @MarkinLA
  25. grimsson says:

    chris chrisrie you’re a CUNT do it and we’ll gladly cream you and your paymasters in Palastine because we’re sick to the back teeth of you arse licking wankers.

  26. Rurik says:

    Bibi hates us as much as he hates the Arabs.

    far, far more

    He’ll let them swing in the wind.

    the question of the century is what will they do if it looks like Trump might actually win?

  27. Rurik says:

    after I posted that last comment it took me back to the picture at the head of this article

    • Agree: geokat62
  28. nickels says:

    Putin is against the destructive influence of cultural Marxism.

    That makes him an ally of those who still love America.

    What is wrong with everyone that keeps them stuck in the cold war?

    Are neocons truly a black hole of ignorance regarding history and economics, or is this just a facade to hide their various contrivances and their dual loyalty to their bosses in Israel and at home?

    I hate them.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Thirdeye
  29. geokat62 says:

    Ignore the “agree.” I mistakenly thought the picture you were referring to was Giraldi’s JFK picture.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Rurik
  30. @Bill

    Interesting. Makes sense but by now I would expect US and Soviet archives to have been examined and to yield precise answers. So… can you cite serious historical work which details the truth about Soviet intentions and purposes?

    I have a slight problem when I think about it in believing that the missiles in Turkey were a big deal for the USSR. Even more do I find it hard to regard them as important enough for the USSR to have taken the risks it did with missiles in Cuba. At the very least your argument would look better (in the absence of evidence) if one imagined a Soviet intention to keep the missiles in Cuba as one very satisfactory outcome.

  31. Rurik says:
    @geokat62

    I’m assuming you like that picture for the same reason I very much liked it too

    sick bastard

    • Replies: @geokat62
  32. geokat62 says:
    @Rurik

    …sick bastard…

    Sickness has nothing to do with it. It’s in my genes… my Hellenic roots, remember?

  33. MarkinLA says:
    @Leftist conservative

    why don’t you write about how the media has hyped and greatly publicized putin’s offhand description of trump

    The real problem is that the media know the average American all too well. He is a moron given to thinking America can do anything it wants. He doesn’t comprehend how easy it is for things to spiral out of control. How can Buchanan get this through their skills – especially since Buchanan is one of the biggest cheerleaders for the myth that the US (Reagan) “won” the Cold War.

    Nobody wins or loses a cold war, there is just a temporary thawing of relations that can be used to build bridges and strengthen ties or can be used to attempt to weaken and humiliate the other side (our choice).

  34. MarkinLA says:
    @Kamran

    It is all about the petrodollar. As long as oil is traded for dollars almost exclusively, the dollar has value as one of the world’s reserve currencies.

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  35. MarkinLA says:
    @tbraton

    I was taken aback by Buchanan’s then enthusiasm for Rubio

    Pat is way more a Republican than a conservative when it comes to elections. No matter how bad the GOP candidate is, Pat will always back him. He probably saw Rubio as a sure winner – supposed tea party guy, good looks to get the low IQ women, boot licker for the powerful.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  36. MarkinLA says:
    @Avery

    There have been a few near misses, a weather rocket unreported by Moscow to the radar defenses and this one where Reagan was to take part in a big NATO exercise that scared the Russians into thinking it was cover for a first strike.

    http://nuclearinfo.org/blog/peter-burt/2013/11/thirty-years-ago-nuclear-crisis-which-frightened-thatcher-and-reagan-ending

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/nuclear-false-alarms.html

  37. MarkinLA says:
    @Bill

    The missiles were obsolete and Kennedy was planning to remove them anyway. ICBMs were becoming operational and submarine launched missiles were harder to stop than fixed short range missiles.

  38. MarkinLA says:
    @rod1963

    Congressman are bought cheap. That is where AIPAC gets the real deals on worthless PsOS.

  39. Art says:
    @William BadWhite

    Trump, Cruz, and Paul are the tree brightest on the debate stage. It gives us some hope that they have more or less aligned on foreign policy.

    With Trump you get what you see – bombast yes – but also some clear headed thinking. He is someone who believes his eyes in a straightforward businesslike manner. No wage growth is a problem in America. Cheap illegal foreign labor is keeping wages down in America – this is a clearheaded fact – so Trump says – stop the illegal immigration – DA — build a fence – DA!

    There are a thousand of these problems in America – I think that Trump has the insight and bombast to fix a lot of them.

  40. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @nickels

    What is wrong with everyone that keeps them stuck in the cold war?

    The original neocon plan from the late 1990s made sense from a realpolitik point of view.

    There were a bunch of regimes in the middle-east which were pro-soviet during the Cold War and by default became pro-Russian after the Soviet Union collapsed. The neocons wanted to take out all those regimes while Russia was weak – seven countries in five years – and if the plan had worked it would have been all over eight years ago.

    Obviously it didn’t work – so the question is why are they continuing with the plan now that Russia has partially recovered?

    Assuming the original plan wasn’t just a cover for this all along – which it may have been – the reasons now aren’t the same as they were. The reasons now are Israel wants the US to take out their regional enemies with number one being Hizbollah and Hizbollah are allied to Assad and Assad is allied to Russia.

    (all very 1913-ish)

    Israel wanting to take out Hizbollah is perfectly rational from their point of view.

    The reason everything is so crazy is US policy is being based on another country’s realpolitik but no one in public life will tell the truth because the media would destroy them and because neocons can’t say what the real reasons are they have to make up lies for the reasons for war and bribe congress and then if that isn’t enough mount false flag gas attacks or secretly fund psychopathic jihadist groups and use them as catspaws.

    The worst part imo is that having a political class that has been almost totally corrupted by AIPAC means every other decision ends up being bought also e.g. open borders, off shoring, TBTF banks etc.

    (although who knows – maybe it was the banks or open borders lobby who did the original corrupting and AIPAC just took advantage)

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @nickels
  41. geokat62 says:
    @anon

    … maybe it was the banks or open borders lobby who did the original corrupting and AIPAC just took advantage

    You make it sound like these three lobbies are mutually exclusive. They aren’t.

    • Replies: @anon
  42. nickels says:
    @anon

    Sounds plausible. I need to read more Gottfried on the American right.

  43. Svigor says:

    Pat, why are you Americans so obsessed with the middle east? Just buy the oil and forget it.

    What if Russia decides to fill the resulting vacuum? Then they could dictate the terms of the oil trade.

    Just look at Russia in Syria. Do we think Russia would have moved in and started this campaign without Hussein’s withdrawal and many signals of weakness? (‘Course the Russians might not have moved in if not for our attempts to destabilize Syria, either, but that’s another conversation)

    Not saying we should pursue a neocon strategy. Just saying it’s complicated, and we have vital interests in the region.

    If you’re China or Russia, wouldn’t you like to have a (big) say in where the pipelines are, where the refineries are, the transaction currency, etc?

    Now, if he actually wished to do some good, he’d work on getting the religious right out of our lives and get back to a time of thoughtful, pre-bigot conservatism, but that doesn’t work for him, because Pat is a bigoted conservative himself.

    Commie nut has a pretty short list of (phantom) problems caused by conservatives.

  44. tbraton says:
    @MarkinLA

    Well, Pat Buchanan has had a tumultuous relationship with the Republican Party, that’s for sure. In the case of Rubio, I remember Pat on the Group soon after the 2010 election citing Rubio’s youth and ability to speak Spanish, which was somehow going to draw all those Hispanic Democrats to vote Republican. I don’t believe Pat was familiar with Rubio’s foreign policy positions when he was running for the Senate. If anything, Pat must have heard or read about the “Tea Partier” Rubio campaigning on the promise not to grant amnesty to any illegal aliens in the U.S., a promise which hoodwinked Florida voters. Of course, everyone is now aware that two years later Rubio blatantly broke that earlier campaign pledge by joining with Sen. Schumer and other Democrats in an immigration plan that would have granted instant legal status to upwards of 11 million illegal aliens. Being a resident of Florida, I heard and read about Rubio’s foreign policy positions, which were totally alien to Pat Buchanan’s. Not being a resident of Florida, Pat no doubt was unaware of those positions. As the years passed, Pat’s enthusiasm for Rubio has diminished.

  45. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @geokat62

    I think they overlap but their interests aren’t identical. Picturing them as a monolith leads to missing some of the underlying conflicts of interest.

    • Agree: geokat62
  46. The biggest infrastructure needs are Lampposts and ropes.

    • Replies: @bondo
  47. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Kamran

    Americans aren’t obsessed with the middle east or their oil. It is the elites in America who are.

  48. bondo says:
    @Bill Jones

    i would make a small change. razor wire instead of rope

  49. @Jeff Davis

    “US oil companies at the top of the oil food chain skim billions. US banks that “handle” the oil transactions make billions as well. And the US weapons makers sell the gulf oil monarchs billions of dollars worth of death machines.”

    Imagine what the skim will be under a world government. A little glob of neurons in the brains of the psychopaths is pushing them hard.

  50. Avery says:
    @attonn

    {I don’t believe a single one of these tales about Caribbean Missile Crisis.}

    Well, you don’t to have to believe anything if you so choose.
    On the other hand, that would mean that all those people involved, and who have and are publicly speaking about the events during the crises, are all working together in manufacturing a fantastic tale.

    Americans, Soviets/Russians, Cubans, ….. all are in on it.
    Not very likely.

    • Replies: @attonn
  51. mikhas says:

    Firstly, there is already a NFZ in Syria and beyond, the Americans knows this and that´s why their war planes are grounded, this especially since they earlier this month in an air strike (just like in that strike against Iraqi forces yesterday) deliberately bombed the Syrian army to halt their progress against US´s death squad clients, or according to some sources, provided cover for another part, Qatar, to do the actual bombing. It is the Qatar gas-pipe project trough Syria to Turkey that Syria refused, this war is all about.

    If Syria and Russia says the word and verbally activates the shield, no one would even think about violating Syrian airspace again, even the war hawk Breedlove admitted as much.

    Second, since this is an existential threat to Russia, Russia has clearly stated that it wont hesitate to go nuclear. They know that if the US and it´s medieval vassal monarchies in the Persian Gulf succeeds in Syria, next stop for al-Qaeda & ISIS will be Iran and Russia.

    • Replies: @Charles Martel
  52. attonn says:
    @Avery

    You sound like there were a lot of people who were issued orders to nuke each other, and for one reason or another not a single order was executed…

    How likely is that?

    Yep, not very.

  53. Thirdeye says:
    @MarkinLA

    Thus the impotence of the US when faced with the support of Al Qaeda and Daesh by the gulf states that keep the petrodollar dominant. Financing terrorists keeps the gulf monarchies on their good side, which they need to assure the stability of their petrodollar regimes and the US knows that.

  54. Thirdeye says:
    @nickels

    The real Marxists were often culturally conservative as well. They had no use for what they saw as decadence and division. The term “cultural Marxism” to describe identity politics is a misnomer.

    The neocon revival of the cold war has a simple explanation: greed. The so-called threat from the Soviet Union was just an excuse. Once they saw post-Soviet Russia as a stumbling block to their ambitions in eastern Europe and the mideast, they revived it.

    • Replies: @nickels
    , @anon
  55. @mikhas

    The S400 system is already activated in Syria. Putin dared the Turks to try breaching Syrian airspace again and “see what happens.” They won’t even try. A Turkish F16 in Syrian airspace could be obliterated by the S400 within a matter of a few seconds (even if it was flying 200 kms away).

  56. simomsays says:

    Side issue on the infrastructure US and trillions. Always wondered if gas tax revenue for roads was siphoned off for bribing the coalition of the willing in the Cheney w administration?

    • Replies: @KA
  57. Putin says American brains have turned to mush. He would love Trump to get elected. The world will be laughing at the US if he is. Oh and for confirmation that there is an idiot faction in the republican party we have this tasty nugget.

    30% of GOP voters want to bomb Agrabah. It is the home country of Aladdin in a cartoon movie.

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  58. KA says:
    @simomsays

    Poland was given a lot of freebies by Bush Cheney to extract Polish support for 1 war. 2 rendition,3 providing lies on Atta .

    Italy also got a whole lot including burlesque pedophile Burlosconi for helping out in passing to OSP / Neocon war central , bypassing CIA Italian station. disseminating,and supplying the Niger Yellow Cake documents written by the neocons

  59. Thirdeye says:
    @Dave Chamberlin

    Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said that one of Lyndon Johnson’s strengths was the tendency of people to underestimate him. We might be seeing something similar with Trump. At least he’s a realist when it comes to Russia.

  60. nickels says:
    @Thirdeye


    The real Marxists were often culturally conservative as well. They had no use for what they saw as decadence and division. The term “cultural Marxism” to describe identity politics is a misnomer.”

    You mistake the ideology with its realization. Of course the realization is just tyranny of one form or another.
    The economics of socialism do not work so the regime accepts deviations and incorporates trafitional elrments.

    But we cannot ignore or disregard the nature of the ideology just because it is a pipe dream.
    In fact, with the split of the Bolsheviks and mensheviks we see that, in fact, the cultural revolution has a power uniquely its own. Like a virus that doesnt just kill its host it lingers on a renders the patient paralyzef and festering for decades.
    But once revolution occurs there is always a normalization because the ideology id bankrupt both evonomically and socially.

    Likewise greed is a materialistic reasoning of what seems to be an ideologic conflict.

  61. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Thirdeye

    The term “cultural Marxism” to describe identity politics is a misnomer.

    The term was coined precisely because it was a break from the industrial-focused Marxists.

    It’s easy for people to check for themselves – after the Russian revolution in 1917 failed to spread (like it was supposed to according to Marxist theory) a Marxist called Gramsci came up with the idea that the proletariat were subject to something he called false consciousness which held them back, this false consciousness being connected to things like Christianity and patriotism, and that Marxists needed to poison the culture first to weaken that false consciousness.

    Regardless of the theory the practical upshot was Cultural Marxism – effectively a cultural guerrilla war to poison the culture in preparation for a revolution – in particular targeting education, especially teacher education, and the media.

    The odd part is the main body of Marxism has mostly died off but cultural Marxism – because it disguised itself and poisoned areas like teacher education – took on a life of its own as modern left-liberalism.

    That’s what modern left-liberalism is; the cultural Marxist poisoned version of old style liberalism.

  62. @anon

    so what exactly is this “cultural marxism”?

    • Replies: @nickels
    , @anon
  63. nickels says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    Start here
    http://la.utexas.edu/users/hcleaver/330T/350kPEEMarcuseToleranceTable.pdf

    And then our democrats mentor:
    http://www.mynacc.org/Rules_for_Radicals.pdf

    To understand more deeply go back in time, Bebel, Hegel, Marx, Mises on Socialism.

    It is basically a rationalized version of Christian Millenialism gone very awry and hijacked by every two bit hustler with s hrievance.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  64. @nickels

    I kinda want his version of it, not the correct version or others. I want his.

    • Replies: @nickels
  65. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    It’s a big topic but the basic gist is they believed things like the family, religion, patriotism were a kind of glue that held populations together (which they are) and so they needed to develop cultural acid to dissolve that glue.

    They never had large numbers so they developed ideas which could be plausibly spun as benign so they could be sold to idealistic-minded liberals as a good thing.

    For example a guy called Lukacz who in the Marxist Lit. promoted using sex education to undermine traditional morality but in public Lit. spun it as being about public health.

    https://centurean2.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/radical-georg-lukacs_to-achieve-the-communist-utopia-lukacs-launched-a-graphical-radical-sex-education-program-promoting-free-love-and-promiscuity/

    Some people think cultural Marxism still exists as a thing and maybe it does but i’m not so sure personally. I think it was injected into teacher training and social work training by actual cultural Marxists back in the 1930s to 1950s and there morphed into a self-sustaining Frankenstein which is now modern PC left-liberalism. It’s still just as destructive but to no purpose – the revolutionary end game has gone and it’s just a runaway train.

    However regardless of what it is now it’s root comes from a very specific time and place – Europe in the decades after the Russian revolution – but then moved to the US cos WWII.

  66. dfordoom says: • Website
    @anon

    Regardless of the theory the practical upshot was Cultural Marxism – effectively a cultural guerrilla war to poison the culture in preparation for a revolution – in particular targeting education, especially teacher education, and the media.

    It was supposed to prepare the ground for the actual socialist revolution. But no-one believes in the socialist revolution now. Cultural marxism no longer serves any purpose. But the Cultural marxists go on poisoning the culture, for no purpose whatsoever other than the pure joy of destruction.

    • Replies: @another fred
    , @nickels
  67. @anon

    thanks for delivering on a random question by a random commentator.

  68. geokat62 says:
    @anon

    … it’s root comes from a very specific time and place – Europe…

    You’re getting warmer. Here’s a commented I posted previously:

    The question that has to be asked is: who is responsible for promoting Political Correctness (PC)?

    The brain-trust behind the promotion of PC is the Frankfurt School. The FS identified nationalism as the root cause of the holocaust. To ensure that another holocaust never occurred again, the FS prescribed cultural Marxism (better known as Political Correctness) as the antidote to nationalism.

    Theodor W. Adorno, a leading member of the Frankfurt School of critical theory, wrote The Authoritarian Personality in 1950. In it, Adorno invented a set of criteria by which to define personality traits, ranking them on what he called the ‘Fascist scale’.

    Here’s how one observer characterized the book’s goal:

    [it] was to eliminate antisemitism by “subjecting the American people to what amounted to collective psychotherapy — by treating them as inmates of an insane asylum.”

    But hell bent on eradicating PC is a zionist front group called The Clarion Fund. It is keen on destroying PC, especially in Europe, as the birthrate of Muslims is outstripping that of Christians. The concern is that the jungle will be expanding rather than contracting, thereby making it less safe for the villa.

    The Clarion Fund has produced a trilogy of films – Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West, The Third Jihad, and Iranium – in an effort to get the goy to get their act together and re-embrace nationalism.

    With all this toing and froing between nationlism and political correctness, one gets the sense that the goy are perceived to be puppets whose strings are constantly being pulled by the puppet masters.

    • Replies: @anon
  69. @dfordoom

    But the Cultural marxists go on poisoning the culture, for no purpose whatsoever other than the pure joy of destruction.

    While I certainly agree that the “joy of destruction” exists, especially in the form of a natural rebelliousness of the young, there is a rationalization that relies on a blank slate understanding of the world. According to this rationalization bad things, like racism, sexism, and xenophobia, are social constructs and can be plucked from the heart of society without affecting the whole. A corollary is that where things that appear to be racism, sexism, and xenophobia exist in non-western societies, they are only reactions to western social dominance and will disappear once eradicated from the West.

    It’s like Mao’s blooming flowers without the Marxist theorizing. They don’t really have a hard theory about what will result, only that it will be better, and “natural”.

    • Replies: @another fred
  70. @another fred

    For an opposing view regarding “social constructs” that “can be plucked from the heart of a society”, I think this short chapter is a good summary.

    http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/2/2248/1.html

    The “Cultural Marxists” may succeed in changing society, but in the end it will be “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

  71. @Avery

    So this sub was being depth-charged by a USN destroyer. Apparently sub captain was convinced WW3 had broken out above, and was going to launch. But to launch a nuke required unanimous agreement by three senior officers. One of three refused to give consent. Lucky for everybody.

    IIRC a Russian sub of that vintage had to surface to launch, a suicidal act under the circumstances. Maybe a little more than luck involved.

    • Replies: @Avery
  72. Avery says:
    @another fred

    {IIRC a Russian sub of that vintage had to surface to launch, a suicidal act under the circumstances. }

    What submarine needs to surface to launch a torpedo ?
    The Soviet sub in question was planning to launch nuclear tipped torpedos not missiles.

    A bunch of US Navy ships would have been vaporized and a nuke war would be on.

    • Replies: @another fred
  73. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @geokat62

    That may have added a turbo-charger but it started in the 1920s with people like Gramsci.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci#Thought

  74. nickels says:
    @dfordoom

    I think it is hard to argue that CM perpetuates based on pure hatred, although there are certainly those with grievances that use the revolutionary aspect such.

    It involves atrribution of less complex motivations if we see the Marxist push as secularized milleniarism (as Von Mises suggests). These people really believe in a form of totalitarian egalitarianism. The weird gender identity equality and other bizarre twists come from the loss of anchor when the movement became secular.
    The general hatred of christianity byany proponents is the jump straight from milleniarism back to Judaic messianism. Thus explains why the Jewish influence in CM is so powerful.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  75. nickels says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    And the correct version is? Or do you just like tossing stones?

    Version up or accept your trollitude.

  76. dfordoom says: • Website
    @anon

    Some people think cultural Marxism still exists as a thing and maybe it does but i’m not so sure personally. I think it was injected into teacher training and social work training by actual cultural Marxists back in the 1930s to 1950s and there morphed into a self-sustaining Frankenstein which is now modern PC left-liberalism. It’s still just as destructive but to no purpose – the revolutionary end game has gone and it’s just a runaway train.

    Runaway train describes it exactly. A runaway train to nowhere.

  77. dfordoom says: • Website
    @nickels

    These people really believe in a form of totalitarian egalitarianism.

    It’s a weird form of egalitarianism though. They seem to have abandoned the idea of economic egalitarianism. Partly because they’re being bankrolled by billionaires and billionaires are not generally speaking very enthusiastic about economic egalitarianism.

    So what we’re getting is the totalitarianism without the actual egalitarianism.

  78. dfordoom says: • Website
    @nickels

    The general hatred of christianity byany proponents is the jump straight from milleniarism back to Judaic messianism. Thus explains why the Jewish influence in CM is so powerful.

    And the sad pathetic thing is that most Christians are happy to go along with it. They seem to think that if they can convince the Cultural Marxists that they’re “good” Christians (i.e. leftist Christians) they’ll be OK. They won’t be sent to the gulags. Just as lots of Russians thought that if they were good communists they wouldn’t end up in the gulags.

    We see the same craziness at work in male feminists who think they won’t get stomped by the feminazi jackboots.

    • Replies: @nickels
  79. dfordoom says: • Website
    @nickels

    I think it is hard to argue that CM perpetuates based on pure hatred, although there are certainly those with grievances that use the revolutionary aspect such.

    There’s a lot of anger and hatred driven by cognitive dissonance. Basically victim groups have been given everything they wanted and asked for. And they’re still miserable. It hasn’t made their lives better. Blacks were better off in the 1950s. Women were happier in the 50s. Even homosexuals are more unhappy.

    Of course if these people were rational they might consider that what blacks really needed were the decent unskilled and semi-skilled jobs that manufacturing industry used to provide, jobs that allowed blacks to make a good living, have decent lives and to raise families. They might consider that women are not the same as men and that the things that make men happy don’t make women happy. Trying to turn women into men just produces unhappy women. Homosexuals might consider that their lifestyle is fundamentally empty, shallow, unhealthy and destructive.

    But of course such considerations are unacceptable. The only reason the social revolution hasn’t worked is that it hasn’t been pushed far enough. If only it can be pushed to greater extremes those victim groups will suddenly magically become happy.

  80. woodNfish says:
    @Kamran

    We don’t need the ME oil, Kamran. The US is self sufficient because of fracking. Why our dumbass “leaders” keep sending our troops into ME conflicts is because they are criminally stupid.

    • Replies: @Unz Reader
  81. @Ronald Thomas West

    The “religious right” (a silly pejorative, by the way) is not in your life you whiney malcontent. In case you hadn’t noticed, it is the leftwing who is calling the shots.

  82. @woodNfish

    The reason our politicians are so eager to get into wars in the Middle East is because partisans of a little democracy in the Middle East want us to. Taking out Assad has nothing to do with oil.

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 Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?