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
Who Wants This War with Iran?
🔊 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

Speaking on state TV of the prospect of a war in the Gulf, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei seemed to dismiss the idea.

“There won’t be any war. … We don’t seek a war, and (the Americans) don’t either. They know it’s not in their interests.”

The ayatollah’s analysis — a war is in neither nation’s interest — is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for his own country.

Iran’s hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.

And though Iran’s nuclear sites are under constant observation and regular inspection, they would be destroyed.

Tehran knows this, which is why, despite 40 years of hostility, Iran has never sought war with the “Great Satan” and does not want this war to which we seem to be edging closer every day.

What would such a war mean for the United States?

It would not bring about “regime change” or bring down Iran’s government that survived eight years of ground war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

If we wish to impose a regime more to our liking in Tehran, we will have to do it the way we did it with Germany and Japan after 1945, or with Iraq in 2003. We would have to invade and occupy Iran.

But in World War II, we had 12 million men under arms. And unlike Iraq in 2003, which is one-third the size and population of Iran, we do not have the hundreds of thousands of troops to call up and send to the Gulf.

Nor would Americans support such an invasion, as President Donald Trump knows from his 2016 campaign. Outside a few precincts, America has no enthusiasm for a new Mideast war, no stomach for any occupation of Iran.

Moreover, war with Iran would involve firefights in the Gulf that would cause at least a temporary shutdown in oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — and a worldwide recession.

How would that help the world? Or Trump in 2020?

How many allies would we have in such a war?

Spain has pulled its lone frigate out of John Bolton’s flotilla headed for the Gulf. Britain, France and Germany are staying with the nuclear pact, continuing to trade with Iran, throwing ice water on our intelligence reports that Iran is preparing to attack us.

Turkey regards Iran as a cultural and economic partner. Russia was a de facto ally in Syria’s civil war. China continues to buy Iranian oil. India just hosted Iran’s foreign minister.

So, again, Cicero’s question: “Cui bono?”

Who really wants this war? How did we reach this precipice?

A year ago, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a MacArthurian ultimatum, making 12 demands on the Tehran regime.

Iran must abandon all its allies in the Middle East — Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in Gaza — pull all forces under Iranian command out of Syria, and then disarm all its Shiite militia in Iraq.

ORDER IT NOW

Iran must halt all enrichment of uranium, swear never to produce plutonium, shut down its heavy water reactor, open up its military bases to inspection to prove it never had a secret nuclear program and stop testing missiles. And unless she submits, Iran will be strangled with sanctions.

Pompeo’s speech at the Heritage Foundation read like the terms of some conquering Caesar dictating to some defeated tribe in Gaul, though we had yet to fight and win the war, usually a precondition for dictating terms.

Iran’s response was to disregard Pompeo’s demands.

And crushing U.S. sanctions were imposed, to brutal effect.

Yet, as one looks again at the places where Pompeo ordered Iran out — Lebanon, Yemen, Gaza, Syria, Iraq — no vital interest of ours was imperiled by any Iranian presence.

The people who have a problem with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon are the Israelis whose occupations spawned those movements.

As for Yemen, the Houthis overthrew a Saudi puppet.

Syria’s Bashar Assad never threatened us, though we armed rebels to overthrow him. In Iraq, Iranian-backed Shiite militia helped us to defend Baghdad from the southerly advance of ISIS, which had taken Mosul.

Who wants us to plunge back into the Middle East, to fight a new and wider war than the ones we fought already this century in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen?

Answer: Pompeo and Bolton, Bibi Netanyahu, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the Sunni kings, princes, emirs, sultans and the other assorted Jeffersonian democrats on the south shore of the Persian Gulf.

And lest we forget, the never-Trumpers and neocons in exile nursing their bruised egos, whose idea of sweet revenge is a U.S. return to the Mideast in a war with Iran, which then brings an end to the Trump presidency.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2019 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Iran, Neocons 
Hide 127 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. peterAUS says:

    Short, shallow and weak.
    In a word: disappointing.

    And the main premise is wrong. Not occupation. Chaos.
    Not “taking, holding, controlling”. “Destroying”.

    On a practical note, how about the Syrian scenario? With Russians.

    Anyway, the topic will keep popping up, of course.
    Blathering about it is all we can do. Great, a?

  2. Congress better get a crack at a say in this one. What, we’re going to ask the CIA for an assessment? Our intel/DOD institutions are corrupt gangster cells now, none to be believed and this is the last chance to reign them in.

    WashPost is deeply concerned Trump isn’t exactly on board with a new war:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-frustrated-by-advisers-is-not-convinced-the-time-is-right-to-attack-iran/2019/05/15/bbf5835e-1fbf-4035-a744-12799213e824_story.html

    • Replies: @Miro23
  3. @peterAUS

    peterAUS, my favorite chairborne ranger, is at it again.
    “Blathering about is all we can do.” Well that’s good news because you excel at blathering, pal.

  4. tomgreg says:

    “Iran’s hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.”

    Yeah, probably. The Yanks wouldn’t get off scot free though. They lose some planes, some ships, possibly a carrier, more than a few soldiers….

    And the Iranians might invite the Russians in for tech assistance as well. The Iranian oil business crashing helps the Russians enormously to boot. Isn’t this the opposite of what those neocons want?

    • Replies: @anon
    , @follyofwar
  5. Patrick Buchanan is correct once again.

  6. Heredot says:

    neocon fools will collapse the financial system.

    • Replies: @Carroll Price
  7. anon[347] • Disclaimer says:
    @tomgreg

    Question is – will Iran have a right to take revenge on every form for next 80 yrs?

    Holocaust survivors are still exacting prices from West in every form and America still hunting down Al Quiada in N Pole .

  8. Who wants war with Iran?
    Duh.
    Israel.

    “Clean Break” listed regime change in Iran to “secure the realm” for
    Israel.

    Israel can’t stand to have any successful unified neighbors.

    Israel wants widespread death and chaos throughout the ME,
    and throughout the world at large.

    Yeah, the truth is ugly.

  9. The Terrorist Theocracy of Israel is our only real enemy.

    “ISRAEL LOBBY:
    WE NEED A FALSE FLAG TO START WAR WITH IRAN!!

    Neocon traitor Patrick Clawson openly suggests the US provoke Iran into firing the first shot, or failing that, a false flag deception…”

    • Agree: Robert Dolan
    • Replies: @peterAUS
  10. Very simplistic and optimistic outlook on the likely scenario. Americans just cannot help themselves when it comes to underestimating their adversaries and the imaginary all consuming power of their weapons. The US would lose more than a few ships and their bases in the region would be hammered. Above all “Israel” will be targeted and within 24 hours probably fighting for survival for real this time.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @jack daniels
  11. peterAUS says:
    @Pat Kittle

    We are in the game… of using covert means against Iranians. We can get nastier than that”

    Neocons really want to do that.

    Either way one cuts this it comes to two things, only.

    It shall be some sort of fireworks unless two…just two…things happen.

    One.
    Kremlin signals it will really going to help the regime in Tehran.
    More importantly, the signal is understood as real, this time.
    Yeah….

    Two.
    People who voted for Trump put massive pressure on the White House not to do that. Massive.
    Yeah………..

    Here we are.

  12. nsa says:

    “Who wants this war with Iran?”
    Go ahead and say it, Pat………the JEWS.

    • Agree: Robert Dolan
    • Replies: @Art
    , @follyofwar
  13. In Brazen Act Of Aggression, Iran Deploys Its Country Right Next To Our Aircraft Carrier
    https://babylonbee.com/news/in-act-of-aggression-iran-puts-its-country-right-next-to-our-aircraft-carriers

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  14. Best move ever for the Trump Presidency: Permanent retirement for Jared Kushner as an advisor. Let Bibi swing in the wind.

  15. Pat vastly underestimates the hellstorm.
    Sun Tzu says check which of the enemy’s allies will join the fight.
    Russia, China, Turkey will cause all to mourn;
    Missile-locked Hormuz a blocked artery causing western heart attack.

  16. Art says:
    @nsa

    “Who wants this war with Iran?”
    Go ahead and say it, Pat………the JEWS.

    Hear hear — that is the only way this nightmare is going to end.

  17. @Rabbitnexus

    I tend to doubt Israel would be targeted since the Iranians would realize this is an order of magnitude worse than targeting any American asset. It’s a shame, since if Israel were actually afraid of possible consequences they would stop egging us on.

    • Replies: @Amon
  18. Some other people who might want another costly, Empire-draining war:

    1) globalist war profiteers, seeking more taxpayer money, and using their already ample financial resources, to do anything but create jobs for underemployed American citizens;

    2) America haters, hoping to see the Empire buckle under the weight of $21 trillion in debt and overextended commitments in 20 million corners of the globe;

    3) weapons manufacturers, one of the few manufacturing industries employing mostly US citizens at high wage levels;

    4) Donald J. Trump, operating under the premise that war-time POTUSES are re-elected, even though history really doesn’t repeat exactly, and Americans have had it with ME wars.

  19. “Iran’s hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.”

    Uhhh, Pat: What about hundreds of thousands or millions of Iran’s people? Their very lives don’t deserve a mention, Pat? You have no concern or compassion for them?

    • Replies: @Miro23
  20. Miro23 says:
    @Jim Christian

    The article is saying that nobody in Washington wants a war and everyone is going on the record to say so.

    BUT – It also says,

    Trump is not inclined to respond forcefully unless there is a “big move” from the Iranians, a senior White House official said. Still, the president is willing to respond forcefully if there are American deaths or a dramatic escalation, the official said.

    So, when the “big move” arrives, all these pacifists will reluctantly go to war.

    All they need, is for some of their friends to fabricate a 9/11 type “big move” as a justification – for example, a traitorous and staged supposed Iranian attack on the US military.

    The conclusion has to be that the USJM (US Jewish Mafia) are going to get their Iran War whatever the cost to the United States.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    , @Grace Poole
  21. Miro23 says:
    @roberthstiver

    Uhhh, Pat: What about hundreds of thousands or millions of Iran’s people? Their very lives don’t deserve a mention, Pat? You have no concern or compassion for them?

    Try asking that question to the US general public – judging by the million Arab lives already lost in other US ME wars, the short answer is No. If the ever compassionate Zionist MSM doesn’t report it, the public won’t see it.

    • Agree: swamped
    • Replies: @anonymous
  22. Neo-Don likes his politik real,
    And so offers his Yet-Greener Deal:
    Less gas we will use
    When they block the Hormuz.
    It’s got plenty of eco-appeal.

  23. Spot on piece by Buchanan, bringing to mind his seminal article ahead of the 2003 Iraq invasion, “Whose War?” At 80, America’s (largely) unacknowledged giant of political discourse is undiminished in fundamental form: courageous, patriotic, well-apprised of the contemporary scene and wise.

  24. Beb says:

    The author is correct – this push for war is just part of the ongoing “coup”- if they can push Trump into starting a new war, he will be toast in 2020 – and the deep state will have won!

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Realist
  25. MEexpert says:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/16/iran-tells-middle-east-militias-prepare-for-proxy-war

    It is not just the US media, the british are not far behind. The Guardian reports:

    Iran tells Middle East militias: prepare for proxy war
    Exclusive: Top military leader delivers message at Baghdad meeting as tensions rise

    The whole article is full of un-named sources, and talks about a high level meeting between Iran’s so-called proxies and Genral Suleimani, which another disgruntled attendee promptly reported to the Americans.

    The inmates/insanes are running the assylum (the US government)

  26. swamped says:

    “…a U.S. return to the Mideast in a war with Iran, which then brings an end to the Trump presidency”…and probably an end to civilisation as we know it. It would be the true ‘mother of all wars’, uncorking all extremist forces everywhere & spreading like wildfire across the M.E. & throughout Europe. The Millenialists will at last get their wish & there will be hell to pay – and not just for the satanic neo-con’s who richly deserve it. Fortunately, the President probably gets it & won’t let it happen but “Pompeo and Bolton, Bibi Netanyahu, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the Sunni kings, princes, emirs, sultans” are not so easily thwarted. And Democrats don’t have a clue so better hope Rand Paul keeps whispering in the CinC’s ear. And Pat Buchanan in the other ear, too – excellent article.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  27. It is ‘interest’ that leads nations to war: but quite often the conflict comes to undermine those interests. There are reports that Moscow and Beijing are now committed to supporting the regime in Tehran. Obviously, they see it as in their vital interests to do so. When the ‘interests’ of rivals clash the result is war. Confrontation over Iran has the potential for world war three. History points its ghostly finger in that direction.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  28. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Miro23

    And this is one of the reasons I keep harping on Mr. Buchanan’s pronoun (“we, us, our”) propaganda. Brainwashing Americans to identify with the USG also numbs them to Uncle Sam’s destruction of other people.

    When it comes to matters beyond his country’s borders, Mr. Buchanan’s dissidence goes to tactics, not principles. He is stagehand Right in the Beltway puppet show.

  29. anon[347] • Disclaimer says:
    @Beb

    You might be correct to a certain degree . But that ‘ certain degree’ is not important in the larger scheme of the underlying moving pieces. Jews want us believe that and want is ignore the constant presence of the obvious but unquotable fixed Jewish piece that makes other pieces appear,move,and disappear and make those pieces look responsible guilty and stupid .

    May be there is a socio – political reason for development of certain attitude to falsehood and to truth – to guard or to understand or to make the most important issue get the right attention, certain truth is declared beyond introspection or discussion. By forcing this course of action, morality- legality, survival – attitude , history,society,future,and justice get protected from the distraction of the manufactured unimportant and impotent pieces . By focusing on the Jewish angle, by reminding ourselves of the corrosive effects of the Jewish presence ,by not forgetting the dangers they pose ,by referring to their incessant preoccupation on friction and war as the only method to earn a living , we might end up being viewed as one track mind ,obsessed ,religiously precouucuoed , rigid inflexible and racist . We will . But that is millions times better than unnecessarily focusing on those manufactured moving pieces introduced by the Jews whether in Iraq war ( oil, attack on Papa Bush’s life, WMD lies by intelligence or Cheney ) or Syria ( sarin gas, ISIS, brutal dictator ) or Iran ( killed American so.fiers, chanted – Death to America , spreading hegemony ) .
    Better for who? For Humanity . Better for peace and prosperity.

  30. El Dato says:

    But in World War II, we had 12 million men under arms.

    The US also had:

    1) Soviets doing the really heavy lifiting on the Eastern front under horrendous conditions (die by enemy, torture, death camp, winter, neglect, lack of resources or enforcement by political commissars)

    2) Chinese doing the really heavy lifting on the Japanese front under horrendous conditions (ditto, replace winter by lack of food)

    Just saying. One must not forget about the real circumstances. Cruising around in aircraft carriers and B-17 and Sherman tanks in lovely french villages is all well and good and very glorious, but it would have been a lot harder without those little nudges.

    John Bolton’s flotilla

    That guy should have received a well-deserved beating in an UN office when he threatened to come after the family of some functionary. Direct to hospital. That would have put him in contact with real life.

    Anyone remember Admiral Fallon’s “Not On My Watch”? What happened to that?

    March 2008:

    Even if the sofa samurai in Dick Cheney’s office and the American Enterprise Institute (not to mention Norman Podhoretz) still think a splendid little war with Iran might be a lovely capstone to Bush’s time in office, most of the military – the people who would have to draw up the plans and do the fighting and dying – are convinced a war with Iran would be a huge mistake. Such opinions are especially prevalent among the junior officers on a career path to colonel and general, who are disappointed that senior officers weren’t more forthright when the Bushies wanted to start the war with Iraq.

    Speaking of the war with Iraq, whose fifth anniversary we are observing – doesn’t it seem like more than five years ago that the United States invaded Iraq? – it may well have been disagreement over the way forward in Iraq more than disagreement over Iran that led to Adm. Fallon’s resignation, which Mr. Korb [undersecretary of defense, at that time with the Center for American Progress] believed was forced rather than voluntary.

    As head of Centcom, Adm. Fallon’s responsibilities stretched from the Mediterranean to South Asia. He was concerned that keeping as many troops tied up in Iraq as are there now could leave the U.S. unprepared to handle crisis that might arise elsewhere.

    The “surge” in the numbers of U.S. troops will end in July due to inescapable logistical factors, leaving the number of U.S. troops in Iraq at pre-surge levels of about 130,000. Army Gen. David Petraeus, the commander on the ground in Iraq, wants a pause in reducing the number of troops in Iraq, perhaps lasting until a new administration takes office next January. Adm. Fallon, has argued that the pause should be brief.

    • Replies: @David
  31. El Dato says:
    @Miro23

    Yeah, that “tanker sabotage” did arrive pretty quickly (there are still no details on that).

    Totally non-suspicious. Completely normal, Iran will bomb random tankers just like Poland will attack random radio stations.

    About the as un-suspicious as the crashdown and burnup of the Venezuelan power grid just when the regime change show went into high gear. That too, has disappeared from the mediaverse.

  32. KenH says:

    Pompeo is a Christian Zionist fanatic and Bolton is just an Israel worshipping psychopath. Both are acting as agents of Israel. Part of the reason Ms. Lindsey Grahamnesty has fallen in love with Trump is the latter’s embrace of neoconnery since he assumed office. I think it’s been a bromance ever since the first cruise missile strike on Syria.

    It would be better if the bloated Pompeo, Bolton and Trump had the same iron resolve to secure the southern border, deport all illegals and enact a moratorium on legal immigration as they do to vanquish all of Israel’s enemies in the region.

    I think there could be some limited air strikes so Trump can feel important and goose his approval ratings a few points. Outside of a few people the Cohengress will be worthless.

    • Agree: Old Prude
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Twodees Partain
  33. @Endgame Napoleon

    “2) Empire haters, hoping to see the Empire buckle under the weight of $21 trillion in debt and overextended commitments in 20 million corners of the globe;”

    I fixed it for you (at no charge); “America,” if it ever existed, is long gone.

  34. David says:
    @El Dato

    The twelve million men under arms would cost today’s US military 12 trillion dollars a year, not counting fighting machines. The estimated cost of WW2 in today’s dollars is 4 trillion.

    Something’s changed in our fighting efficiency.

  35. @tomgreg

    Everyone seems to think that the Russians will just sit on their hands and allow the dismemberment of the ancient Persian nation to happen. How would Russian “tech assistance” be of that much help? Mr. Putin sent the Russian Air Force into Syria and saved the country and the religiously tolerant Assad government – even as that action could have led to a war with the US (remember Hillary’s no-fly zone). Why would he allow Russia’s investment in blood and treasure to save Syria go for naught? Plus, the Russian hardliners, so I’ve read, are furious at Putin for being far too diplomatic when dealing with the world’s worst Outlaw Nation.

    I’m not buying Pat’s argument that Trump does not want war. If he truly doesn’t then he has to be the Stupidest Person ever elected president, by putting the CIA in charge of the State Dept, and making a Neocon Maniac (Bolton), whose hawkishness-on-steroids Israel-first views were well-known years before before 9/11, his national security advisor.

    • Agree: bluedog, RVBlake
    • Replies: @tomgreg
    , @Colin Wright
  36. TG says:

    As an added bonus, all this saber-rattling about a war with Iran helps keep the proles from noticing other things, such as that we are being invaded by Central America and our government refuses to defend us. No, don’t worry about your own country being invaded and eventually turned into just another overpopulated third-world sweatshop – IRAN! ABORTION! TRANSGENDER BATHROOMS!

  37. Realist says:

    Who Wants This War with Iran?

    Zionists and their sycophants.

  38. @nsa

    Since neither Trump nor Pompeo nor Bolton nor Pence are Jews, it is far too simplistic to say that. The 60 million strong Christian Zionists want war, not because they love Jews, but because they are led to believe, by sinister pastors like John Hagee, that an attack on Iran will bring about the longed-for Battle of Armageddon will bring about the Second Coming. A conservative Christian podcast, TruNews, which I’ve recently discovered, has been great in calling out these treasonous Israel-first, fake Christians as well as the Jewish Zionists, whose goal is nothing less than world domination.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  39. Realist says:
    @KenH

    I think there could be some limited air strikes so Trump can feel important and goose his approval ratings a few points.

    It won’t be limited when a carrier is sunk.

  40. Realist says:
    @Beb

    The Deep State will win….but Trump is part of it.

  41. @swamped

    Swamped says: “Fortunately, the President probably gets it & won’t let it (war) happen.”

    You are assuming that Trump is in charge of the situation. But, when he tore up the hard won JCPOA (the only country to do so), he unleashed the Dogs of War, and can no longer stop what is about to happen. He did so, not only for Netanyahu, but because he wanted to eliminate Obama’s one foreign policy achievement.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  42. At the very end, Pat Buchanan named the real profiteers of such a war, definitely not the US. Trump said it yesterday that he doesn’t want the most excellent Americans to sacrifice, but he forgot to add, for Israel, the murderous Saudi regime and the decadent sheikdoms. Everyone knows that the mastermind of such a war, John Bolton, is an Israel asset in the center of American power. He does Netanyahu’s bidding.
    One of Obama’s real achievements were not to be dragged into a war with Iran, although Netanyahu and Ehud Barak did everything to draw him into the fight. It was the Israeli intelligence chiefs who torpedoed the plan.
    Trump should give John Bolton and Mike Pompeo the bum’s rush and appoint more reasonable people to the White House and the Department of State. The following names come to my mind: John Mearsheimer, Stephen Walt, or Andrew Bacevich. With them, reason and political realism would find its way into the Trump administration.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  43. Anonymous[379] • Disclaimer says:

    I wonder if Trump is dreaming of a short, sharp intervention, like Reagan’s in Libya in the 80s, that could boost his ratings in 2020. Taking out Iran’s nuclear facilities would be a doable, limited goal—Libya writ larger, sort of.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  44. lysias says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson were not re-elected.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  45. Neocons want this (and all) war: Bolton, Pompeo, Pence, Kushner, Netanyahu…

  46. Time to call our “Defense Budget” by its real name: The IDF or Israel Defense Fund.

    • Replies: @USAF JAG VET
  47. @follyofwar

    “Since neither Trump nor Pompeo nor Bolton nor Pence are Jews, it is far too simplistic to say that.”

    You’re wrong. On the contrary, it is very simple: jews make the policies, and everyone else falls in line (the immoral people who worship the beast, that is).

    • LOL: follyofwar
  48. @follyofwar

    “‘Swamped says: ‘Fortunately, the President probably gets it & won’t let it (war) happen.’

    You are assuming that Trump is in charge of the situation.”

    He’s assuming, correctly, that as “president,” Trump has the authority to not let it happen. What Trump has authority to do (or not to do) and what he actually chooses to do (or not to do) are two different things entirely.

  49. Rurik says:

    Patrick Buchannan = Adolf Hitler / Heinrich Himmler / Adolf Eichmann and Tomas de Torquemada – all rolled into one!

    By asking this vile and leading question..

    ‘Who Wants This War with Iran?’

    Mr. Buchannan is overtly trying to suggest that war with Iran would be conducted for the interests of a state other than America.

    And we all know which state that is, don’t we Adolf?

    When six million isn’t enough for some people, they’ll go twisting themselves into human pretzels trying to blame everything from war on Iraq, to war on Syria, to war on Libya, to war on Iran, as motivated by ‘The Jews’!!!

    Perhaps Mr. Buchannan forgot about 9/11, and how they hate us for our freedom! (that’s Freedom, Mr. Buchannan, with a capital F! )

    But I remember, and I’m not about to go handing over my freedom to Bashar Assad and Vlad Putin/Hitler, just so I can cling to my Jew-hatred’ till the last breath.

    Who Wants This War with Iran?

    all freedom-loving people! That’s who, you anti-Semites!

    Maybe Buchannan should pick up a Bible one of these days, instead of reading his anti-Semitic books, and see there who are god’s chosen!

    Genesis 12:3 – ‘god favors them what kills for Israel, and curses them what asks leading question about why we must kill Iranians for greater Israel’. It is written.

    Perhaps Mr. Buchanan might want to consider those Biblical exhortations to submit to god’s people – or else!

    Sieg Hiel! all you goose-stepping Nazis trying to impugn America’s Eternal Wars for Israel, as something other than what they all are!

  50. Pat, did you notice how Israeli “intelligence” kicked off this latest push for war on behalf of Israel?

    I mean, the Israeli NS adviser comes to see Bolton in person and provides him with their stolen laptop/cartoon/BS and then Israel goes totally silent as the U.S. public manifest their disbelief and distate with Israel’s disgraceful warmongering. “Oh, it’s not us, we didn’t do anything, we’re just providing intelligence…” squirm the Israeli cabal.

    What a bunch of hasbara cowards. No wonder they can’t even put any boots on the ground.

    Total wussies.

    • Replies: @Amon
  51. Rurik says:
    @Ludwig Watzal

    Andrew Bacevich

    Bacevich is a crypto-Zio whore.

    Otherwise your post is solid.

    • Replies: @homahr
  52. @Anonymous

    “Taking out Iran’s nuclear facilities would be a doable, limited goal—Libya writ larger, sort of.”

    Not quite. First of all, the evil orange clown only has the ability to start a war; what happens after that is not up to the clown. Second, “doable” in what sense? In the sense that all “objectives” (whatever they are) can be accomplished at or below some preconceived notion of the “cost”?

  53. tomgreg says:
    @follyofwar

    Well, it could be that Trump is pretending to not want war…yet setting things up for escalation, hoping to blame Pompeo and Bolton later….And yeah the Russians would get involved.

  54. Yup, quite right. The Israel-First, yellow-belly holo-cowards have gone dead quiet as they sweat an American public that is pushing back against their militaristic hubris and rejects their Iran fairy tales.

    Guess Americans have finally discovered who foots Israel’s bills.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  55. “Bacevich is a crypto-Zio whore.”

    Sorry Rurik, but that’s the president.

    • Agree: Rurik
  56. lavoisier says: • Website

    The people who have a problem with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon are the Israelis whose occupations spawned those movements.

    It is really too bad that most Americans think all Muslims are savages who deserve to have their lands stolen and their families destroyed.

    Israel wants to steal other people’s homes and lands, murder innocents, corrupt governments, and criminalize as “anti-semitic” anyone who calls attention to their crimes against humanity.

    This malicious game has to end.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  57. Amon says:

    So I was thinking doing a moment of downtime at work and had a it of a far fetched idea pop up in my head.

    What if the attempt to overthrow the left leaning government of Venezuela really is all about securing that oil for America. Think about it, any kind of war with Iran will crash the global flow of oil and send the world into the worst economic recession in human history. The entire global economy will nose dive straight in the ground as nation after nation is starved for oil, unless of course you control the largest oil reserves in the world and can keep your army, factories and farms going.

    If America can manufacture an event that causes the entire global economy to implode and bankrupt everyone else including its biggest targets, Russia and China, the US will regain its position as the best of the best as it will have the world by the balls economically.

    An event like that would reshape the national layout of the planet and allow Uncle Sam to quite frankly control the world for decades to come.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Colin Wright
  58. Amon says:
    @jack daniels

    It’s a shame, since if Israel were actually afraid of possible consequences they would stop egging us on.

    Israel has announced that if a war breaks out between the US and Iran they will not help their closest allied and most trusted friend fight it. No, America will stand all alone on the battlefield fighting the enemy of their backstabbing friend while the Jews relax behind their iron dome, great walls and stolen nukes as they laugh at the thought of whites dying for them again.

    With friends like these, who needs enemies.

  59. Amon says:
    @sabrawussies

    You have to marvel at their sheer audacity. First they spend nearly two decades pushing for war with Iran, but just as it looks like they might get their wish they announce that they’ll be doing everything to not be a part of it because reasons.

    https://www.axios.com/netanyahu-and-pompeo-discuss-iran-tensions-gulf-403ce567-3302-4d87-8c91-b34fb0773701.html

  60. @KenH

    Graham’s love of Trump started when his lover McCain died. As long as McCain lived, Graham loved only those loved by McCain.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  61. Funny how every time a thread begins to paddle Israel, contributors suddenly come in and feel like they have to answer some one further up the the thread – to change the subject.

    Who cares about Senator Graham – he’s not as dangerous as the Israel-First president and his BFF bib?

  62. Rurik says:
    @lavoisier

    that most Americans think all Muslims are savages who deserve to have their lands stolen and their families destroyed.

    We shouldn’t forget that the most egregious human rights violators in the Muslim world today are the bestest buddies ever of the Zio-Regime in Washington, DC – the House of Saud.

    And when it suit’s ((them)), it isn’t just Muslim who’re demonized and targeted, but Christians too.

    We shouldn’t forget that it was Bill Clinton who took the lead in trashing all notions of International Law, when he bombed sovereign Serbia into submission, so that a group of Islamic terrorists and human and narcotic and organ traffickers; the KLA, could steal some ancient Serbian land, and slaughter the Christian Serbian farmers wholesale.

    Or of course the ethnic Russians of Ukraine, who’ve been targeted by the ZUS regime for disenfranchisement and death.

    Or the Christians of Venezuela who’ve been targeted for starvation and regime change by the zio-fiend.

    All you have to do is be in some way inconvenient to the ((agenda)), and the sanctions kick in, and before long the bombs start dropping. Muslim, Christian, Latin, Arab, Persian, Russian… it matters not.

  63. peterAUS says:
    @Amon

    What if the attempt to overthrow the left leaning government of Venezuela really is all about securing that oil for America.

    Quite possible.

    …any kind of war with Iran will crash the global flow of oil ..

    Not quite and depends.
    If…if the fireworks escalate and Iran closes Hormuz it will “disrupt”, not “crash”.

    That scenario (closing Hormuz) is interesting.

    My take:
    If the regime in Tehran feels the attack is just for pushing them back, say, 10 years, they won’t try to close the Hormuz. They’ll weather that out.

    The problem, for Tehran, with closing Hormuz, is simple: it could force all US allies to really join the fray.
    Iran, in extreme case, could have the bulk of Japanese Defense Force against them, for example.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Amon
  64. homahr says:
    @Rurik

    Why do you say that?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  65. @Heredot

    Sooner the better. Thirty days later (or less) Israel cease to exist, followed by peace returning to the world for the first time since 1948. What’s not to like about that?

    • Agree: Dannyboy
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  66. The Guardian : “Sheldon Adelson : the casino mogul driving Trump’s mideast policy .” Give the GOP and Trump $30 million and you may get your long-wished for attack on Iran .

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  67. Rurik says:

    https://governmentslaves.news/2019/05/17/video-in-order-to-get-re-elected-barack-obama-will-start-a-war-with-iran-donald-trump-2011/

    never in a billion years would I have ever imagined that I’d agree with Don Lemon

    this needs to be bull-horned across the spectrum, that a contrived war with Iran is a political stunt

    and it will and should not only end Trump’s career, but in a sane world, it would land him in the Hague.

    Trump is hated by the left like no other. He’s hated by the neocons like no other.

    If he gets us into a war with Iran, then he’ll be hated by his former base, like no other, because he will have betrayed them.

    So what will that leave him? No leftist-progressives. No Deplorables. Just John Bolton and Bibi and Sheldon and Pence.

    Will they be enough?

    The perfect ticket for 2020!

    • Agree: Colin Wright, bluedog
    • Replies: @KenH
    , @Colin Wright
  68. What will a failed Iran mean for mas exodus IMMigration??? Europe???

  69. All roads lead to Israel. Short, sweet and true. I suggest reading up on Benjamin Freedman and his speech at the Waldorf Astoria in 1960

  70. KenH says:
    @Rurik

    The perfect ticket for 2020!

    Maybe on foreign policy, but even they would capitulate to the Israel lobby. They both suck on immigration so unless you want a billion third worlders to arrive in their first term alone you might want to keep looking.

    Rand Paul is a libertarian loon who things we’re all equal and interchangeable parts and Tulsi seems partially down with the anti-white agenda of the Democrats. Rand Paul also offered to have a town hall with Black Lives Matters people in 2015, but never made that same offer to white nationalists and alt-righters. He’s a coward and race hypocrite.

    No thanks.

  71. @lysias

    Neither Truman nor Johnson chose to run again, though there is every possibility, despite his Vietnam debacle, that LBJ could have beaten Nixon in 1968 (his VP Hubert Humphrey barely lost in an extremely tight race).

    Gulf War I did not help GHWB to win re-election. He started and ended the war in 1991, and had a a short-lived 90% approval rating. A year later he lost to Bill Clinton. Perhaps Bush the Elder started the war a year too soon.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @HallParvey
  72. @KenH

    ‘…Rand Paul is a libertarian loon who things we’re all equal and interchangeable parts and Tulsi seems partially down with the anti-white agenda of the Democrats…’

    Yeah — but ya gotta consider the alternatives.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  73. @Carroll Price

    ‘Sooner the better. Thirty days later (or less) Israel cease to exist, followed by peace returning to the world for the first time since 1948. What’s not to like about that?’

    The detail that as with the iceberg that the Titanic fucked up, there will be consequences for us.

    Adios America the Beautiful. We’ll be like the Germans post-Hitler; how can we grovel sincerely enough? Would someone let us have some food? Those of us who are under twelve didn’t do anything.

    I liked it when America was a nation one could be proud of.

  74. @peterAUS

    ‘…Iran, in extreme case, could have the bulk of Japanese Defense Force against them, for example.

    Or against us. Our Zionist masters may have finally pushed their luck too far. When everyone agrees the US is no longer global hegemon, we’re no longer global hegemon.

    Consensus reality, dude.

  75. @Twodees Partain

    ‘Graham’s love of Trump started when his lover McCain died…’

    Graham’s love of Trump started when Trump finally rolled over and just started doing as Adelson instructed.

  76. @Amon

    ‘…If America can manufacture an event that causes the entire global economy to implode and bankrupt everyone else including its biggest targets, Russia and China, the US will regain its position as the best of the best as it will have the world by the balls economically.

    An event like that would reshape the national layout of the planet and allow Uncle Sam to quite frankly control the world for decades to come.’

    I think you attribute more wisdom to us than we possess. This like thinking that my dog had something to do with the appearance of those pop-up ads for premium dog food. Yeah, but…

    • Replies: @Amon
  77. Anon[504] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    WHO wants it?

    Sure ain’t the Eskimos.

  78. @openeyeeeedeed

    ‘…The Israel-First, yellow-belly holo-cowards have gone dead quiet as they sweat an American public that is pushing back against their militaristic hubris and rejects their Iran fairy tales.

    Guess Americans have finally discovered who foots Israel’s bills.’

    Either that or they’ve gone quiet because the fix is already in and they don’t want to be caught cheer-leading when the false flag attack goes off.

    I’ve got a bad feeling about this. I’ll be genuinely happy to be proved wrong, but…

  79. @Rurik

    Damn, that woman’s a natural.

    Particularly given the field this year, it makes one realize the fix is really in.

    Else how’d she get shut down so fast? At a minimum, she should have gotten the Sarah Palin treatment.

    • Replies: @lavoisier
  80. @9/11 Inside job

    ‘The Guardian : “Sheldon Adelson : the casino mogul driving Trump’s mideast policy .” Give the GOP and Trump $30 million and you may get your long-wished for attack on Iran .’

    Is it any consolation to realize they gave even more to Hillary Clinton?

    This was going to happen no matter who won.

    • Replies: @9/11 Inside job
  81. @follyofwar

    ‘…I’m not buying Pat’s argument that Trump does not want war. If he truly doesn’t then he has to be the Stupidest Person ever elected president…’

    You’re aware that last is a distinct possibility? I voted for Trump in 2016, and barring some very improbable primary results, will be voting for him again in 2020, but…

  82. @Tired of Not Winning

    I agree. And the U.S. military should more aptly be called the Israeli Foreign Legion.

  83. @peter mcloughlin

    ‘…Confrontation over Iran has the potential for world war three. History points its ghostly finger in that direction.’

    If so, I cannot imagine us fighting a war for a worse cause.

    It makes every other war I can think of appear to be the result of sober, careful, moral, intelligent, and realistic calculations, by comparison.

    This is all unbelievably foolish, corrupt, cynical, futile, and outright evil. I suppose it’s all what happens when you start pretending to believe in lies.

  84. @Grace Jones

    ‘In Brazen Act Of Aggression, Iran Deploys Its Country Right Next To Our Aircraft Carrier’

    Best quote of the day.

    • Replies: @Grace Jones
  85. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Colin Wright

    I used to, but decided that voting serves the Establishment by channeling and harmlessly blowing off dissent.

  86. Amon says:
    @Colin Wright

    I think you attribute more wisdom to us than we possess

    Its an event that can be done and most likely looks good on paper and in closed doors meetings between the Zionist, Army command and Politicians in the know is praised for being brilliant and daring. The problem with it, like so many others, is actually getting it done with the army and leadership that the US/Israel actually has.

    So when you say wisdom I think you should use the more accurate expression of Insanity. Because that one word really sums the way the US and the rest of the west have been acting since 2003 and I have no doubt that some armchair general and his boot licking yes men actually thinks they can pull this off with the sham of a military the US has these days.

  87. Amon says:
    @peterAUS

    Given who is on board for this idiotic scheme, I find it very, very likely that Iran will go all out to defend themselves and just target the oil fields and refineries in their surrounding nations to simply grind any and all foreign military actions to a total halt.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  88. @Colin Wright

    Unfortunately it’s no consolation , the entire political class is “bought and paid for “, in fact Sheldon Adelson is reported to have given much more than $30 million to the GOP and Trump . The Republicans and Democrats are “two wings of the same bird ” and at the moment the Democrats have taken on the role of the controlled opposition in our plutocracy/pathocracy .

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  89. anon[371] • Disclaimer says:
    @follyofwar

    Jewish media made the economy as issue ( they could have made the color of the fading sun at the sunset as an issue. The stupid Americans fall for anything or can be made to fall for anything . Bush 2 increased Taxes and the Jew media explained to the same Americans why it was good for USA) to divert the attention from the aid and the grant. If he were reelected , the politicians would have grown more courageous strong and confident to take the Jewish media and the Jewish moneylenders down. History would have been different . It really would have been an American century.

  90. Renoman says:

    So far Trumps foreign policy has been to make a big noise and then do nothing. I hope it continues. Perhaps this is the only way he can squirm out from under the neocon thumb? The abortion situation is the only thing that might keep him from winning in 2020.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  91. bluedog says:
    @KenH

    Hmm are you really trying to say that they would be no different than the orange clown who now occupies the oval office, as the brown horde keeps flowing into the country from south of the border, no one even if they have a crystal ball (which I guess you have) can predict what they would do on foreign matters,but one thing that’s for sure is that they couldn’t do any worse then the three nuts that are there now.!!

    • Replies: @KenH
  92. @Renoman

    “So far Trumps foreign policy has been to make a big noise and then do nothing.”

    He’s already done lots of damage, including escalating existing “conflicts.” That a “kinetic” WW3 hasn’t actually happened yet is apparently mainly because of the restraint of the other parties involved, not because the evil orange clown hasn’t been trying.

    Here’s a brief summary of orange clown’s accomplishments: https://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/3875/TRUMP-LIED.aspx

  93. KenH says:
    @bluedog

    Tulsitardism isn’t the answer but go ahead act like she, Rand or emperor Yang are some kind of saviors. I don’t need a crystal ball to divine that if Tulsi or Rand man were to become president the Jews would throw the kitchen sink at them until they adopted neocon policies.

    They don’t need to be shamed on immigration because they both suck already. And yes, as much as Trump as failed us I think they would be even worse.

    Dubya promised a humble foreign policy and we got a disastrous war which we’re still feeling the effects of through Muslim radicalism and millions of refugees. Obama was supposed to be the foreign policy savior but we got a massive surge in Afghanistan, an overthrow of Qadaffi and a proxy regime change war in Syria. Trump claimed to be a man of peace but now we have a new cold war with Russia, ongoing behind the scenes regime change in Venezuela and probable war with Iran.

    But somehow your crystal ball reveals that Tulsi and Rand would stand fast against the Jewish lobby and MIC, or at least “wouldn’t be any worse.” But at best if they won’t be any worse then what’s the point of supporting them since they’d just give us Trumpist failures on immigration and foreign policy without Trump?

    • Replies: @bluedog
    , @Harold Smith
  94. peterAUS says:
    @Amon

    ….to simply grind any and all foreign military actions to a total halt.

    O.K.
    I believe if they do that they’ll, on the contrary, dramatically increase the level of “foreign military action”.

    I guess we’ll resolve the issue sometime between now and November next year.

  95. bluedog says:
    @KenH

    And of course its people like you that keep the scam going,with everyone else is worse except the orange clown in office that I (you) just happened to have voted for.Going back some 40 years these are the clowns that’s occupied that oval office, Reagan Bush,Clinton,Bush,Obama and now Trump.
    Reagan was the outsource king, old Bush crafted the NAFTA and the brown tide,Clinton signed it into law,Obama was the wall street king and Bush the stupid was the war king and Trump is the tariff sanction king,and if I had to pick the three you voted for it would be Reagan Bush,Bush and Trump,the ones who just happened to be the one who’s tanked this country.!!

    • Replies: @KenH
  96. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Colin Wright

    Else how’d she get shut down so fast? At a minimum, she should have gotten the Sarah Palin treatment.

    She is too smart to get the Sarah Palin treatment–so they will just try to ignore her.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  97. KenH says:
    @bluedog

    And of course its people like you that keep the scam going

    How’d you draw that conclusion? I voted for Trump because he said all the right things, stood up to the (((media))) unlike every other pansy Republican and seemed to be worth taking a chance on. Hillary wanted 500K Muslim refugees and they’d be here if she were elected.

    But I’ve also called Trump out on this site repeatedly for his broken promises, failure to deliver, failure to protect members of his base on social media and his Israel worshipping since taking office. At this point I don’t what I’m going to do in 2020, but in case you aren’t paying attention virtually all of the Democrat candidates are talking about declaring open war on all traditional white, right of center Americans through various schemes.

    But let me let me guess, you’re one of those clairvoyant geniuses who just knew all along that Trump was scamming us and that illegal immigration would actually get worse under his administration and we’d have a bellicose foreign policy. Point me to your comments where you predicted all of this.

    Since you think of yourself as so brilliant can you explain how voting for Tulsi, Bernie, Yang, etc. won’t keep the scam going? Why is voting for them better than simply staying home and refusing to play the game any longer?

    • Replies: @bluedog
  98. Iran the fuse;
    Russia, China, and Turkey the bomb.
    Sing grief O Muse,
    How war became apple pie and mom.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  99. @Miro23

    Congress is urging itself to grow a spine and take responsibility for declaring war; declaring war is not a presidential prerogative.

    WHICH SIGNALS that the Izzies that control US government are fearful that they cannot control Trump to the extent of forcing him to go to war against Iran — Mueller fell flat; Nadler is flapping and flailing; exposing Trump on personal or financial peccadilloes might also expose his Jewish counterparts in those activities.

    BUT the Izzies are confident of their control over Congress.

    If Izzies want war against Iran, Congress will be made to declare it.

    Go ahead.
    Call your congressman, and your senator, too.
    But first, brush up on your Hebrew.

    The American people do not know that the do or do not want a war with Iran — they know nothing about the issue, the forces, the context — nada — but they will jump on any bandwagon and, if it’s got “Jews = victims” attached, the American people will cheer lustily, recite that “I am a Christian but[t], and quote the bible.

  100. @KenH

    “Tulsitardism isn’t the answer but go ahead act like she, Rand or emperor Yang are some kind of saviors.”

    You’re looking at the situation incorrectly. The evil empire must either continually escalate conflict everywhere (and possibly “win”) or not escalate and certainly lose. Those are the choices.

    The problem the empire has is that all the “low-hanging fruit” has already been picked, and the further escalation of conflicts – in the face of resistance from Russia, China, Iran etc. – carries greatly increased risks.

    So to be a “savior” of “America” under the circumstances requires not a “saint” for a president but merely someone who’s not willing to risk WW3 for the sake of the jewish-supremacist agenda.

    Would Hillary Clinton have been willing to risk WW3 with Russia and China over Iran, or would she start thinking about her grandchildren? I think she wouldn’t go that far if her own life and the lives of her family were at stake. This is why orange clown is so special, IMO. He’s far more evil and therefore willing to take risks that his predecessors weren’t.

    “I don’t need a crystal ball to divine that if Tulsi or Rand man were to become president the Jews would throw the kitchen sink at them until they adopted neocon policies.”

    Then please explain why Obama tried to make peace with Iran rather than create a conflict as orange clown is doing. And please explain why Obama didn’t move the embassy to Jerusalem and why Obama didn’t try to overthrow the Venezuelan government, for example.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @KenH
  101. Miro23 says:
    @SeekerofthePresence

    Iran the fuse;
    Russia, China, and Turkey the bomb.
    Sing grief O Muse,
    How war became apple pie and mom.

    Iran’s the next war
    to show the U.S. the door –
    To exit from Empire
    and ask her one time –
    Why do this crime?

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  102. bluedog says:
    @KenH

    Quit dodging the question how do you know that they will/would,hell Trumps background should have told a sane man something, 6 bankruptcies( and brags what a big deal maker he is,rather than the con man he really is) 6 deferments from the military, bone spur was the reason.The only bank in the world that will/would do business with him located in Germany, and he’s behind with his payments there or so I read,as far as staying home I agree with that and that’s just what I did in 2016 and probably will in 2020 as they drag up another dead fish to parrot the same old line with a catchy slogan to get peoples attention, simply because the stupid people are to stupid to get behind a candidate that may change something, and then whine and bitch because they didn’t come thru on the lies spewed on the campaign trail..

  103. @lavoisier

    ‘She is too smart to get the Sarah Palin treatment–so they will just try to ignore her.’

    Yeah. The difficulty is that they are succeeding.

    It’s oppressive; the fix really seems to be in. It’s hardly a statistically valid sample, but me, my daughter (who’s politics don’t particularly resemble mine), and Ron Paul all think Tulsi Gabbard is great — or at least a beacon of hope in a sea of darkness. We’re hardly all on the same page politically — and yet she’s being methodically ignored.

    It’s hard to draw anything but the worst possible conclusions from that.

  104. @Endgame Napoleon

    and Americans have had it with ME wars.

    Because when the dust settles. they’ll still be Arabs. Cf. Central America. Some things just can’t be fixed.

  105. @KenH

    Rand Paul is a libertarian loon who things we’re all equal and interchangeable parts

    Nothing would destroy equality faster than liberty. People, like water, would reach their own level.

    • Replies: @KenH
    , @HallParvey
  106. @Harold Smith

    ‘…Would Hillary Clinton have been willing to risk WW3 with Russia and China over Iran, or would she start thinking about her grandchildren?’

    She was paid even more than Trump was to do so: her top contributor is on record as saying, ‘I’m a one issue guy and that issue is Israel,’ and fourteen of the top twenty donors to her campaign were ardent Zionists.

    I assume Hillary would have delivered.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  107. KenH says:
    @Harold Smith

    Then you’re saying that even with Tulsi baby we might get less war but war nonetheless and I agree. Every president since Reagan has used military force against someone and it’s now a rite of passage for a president, so it wouldn’t be long before Tulsi’s face gets streaked with war paint.

    Would Hillary Clinton have been willing to risk WW3 with Russia and China over Iran, or would she start thinking about her grandchildren?

    Yes, judging by her rhetoric during the campaign and after Trump upset her in the presidential election. Some political observers have joked that Trump has adopted her policy towards Russia while junking the detente that he promised on the campaign.

    Then please explain why Obama tried to make peace with Iran rather than create a conflict as orange clown is doing.

    Well not all Jews felt that the Iran deal was inimical to Izzy’s regional interests and if all Jews were Likud hardliners then I believe there could have been sanctions and war instead of the deal.
    https://jstreet.org/save-iran-deal/who-supports-the-deal/#.XOFLoCv46Uk

    But don’t forget that Obama, the Tulsi Gabbard of 2008, ordered a massive troop surge in Afghanistan, helped overthrow Mohammed Morsi of Egypt (probably not a bad thing), was implacably hostile towards N. Korea, overthrew the Qadaffi regime, and gave us a proxy war in Syria along with with the Saudis, UAE and QATAR.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  108. KenH says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Nothing would destroy equality faster than liberty. People, like water, would reach their own level.

    Rand was once on record as opposing the 1964 Civil Rights Act but when (((political pressure))) was applied he crapped himself, had a road to Damascus moment and now supports it. Rand man also seems to believe that there are no appreciable differences between ghetto blacks, Hispanics, Muslim refugees and European whites and that all can coexist harmoniously if we just adopt the right economic policies.

    Everything will all work out as long as we go back on the gold standard. We might become racially mixed pigsy but at least we’ll have sound money.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  109. @follyofwar

    This is all about manipulating the “Chattering Class”, i.e. the mass media. Like feeding hay to cattle, the Chattering Class requires a steady diet of new material. And it is necessary that it be tasty, so they enjoy denigrating Trump. It makes them feel good. And it’s entertaining, which is good for the country. And us here.

    Trump was elected because he was a showman who knew how to lead the discussion. He still does. There will be no war.

  110. @Reg Cæsar

    How to achieve equality. Take from the rich, skim ten percent for yourself, then give the rest to the poor.

    The old poor are now the new rich and the old rich are now the new poor. Oops. Inequality again.

    So do it again, and then again. Back and forth until you eventually have it all.

    What a wonderful plan. The old rich and the old poor are now equally poor, and you are rich. Equality at last.

  111. Trump “leads” a “discussion”?

    How do you figure that? He can hardly form sentences – let alone parse and articulate ideas. He’s just a mass of reactionary spittle and wind.

    Dont’ tell us, it’s really just “4-D chess”.

  112. @KenH

    Everything will all work out as long as we go back on the gold standard. We might become racially mixed pigsy but at least we’ll have sound money.

    One of Harry Browne’s early books ranked countries by the gold reserve backing of their currencies. Switzerland was a distant second, with about 25%. Topping them was a country with 40%. But Harry was reluctant to counsel investment there.

    That country was Lebanon.

  113. @Miro23

    Superb verse. Thank you.
    We should exit ASAP and give peace a chance.

  114. Ham says:

    cream of this was, millions of more muslims and africans sent to the west, win win for Israhell

  115. @9/11 Inside job

    ‘Unfortunately it’s no consolation , the entire political class is “bought and paid for “, in fact Sheldon Adelson is reported to have given much more than $30 million to the GOP and Trump . The Republicans and Democrats are “two wings of the same bird ” and at the moment the Democrats have taken on the role of the controlled opposition in our plutocracy/pathocracy .’

    At the risk of being anti-semitic, wouldn’t ‘Judeocracy’ be more appropriate? After all, no one’s caught Warren Buffett buying elections.

    As I pointed out, fourteen of the top twenty donors to Hillary Clinton’s campaign were Zionists. Since it’s come up (somehow), seventeen of the top twenty were Jews. Other than Jews, there were two gays and some guy who cared about the gorillas.

    This in a country where two percent of the population is Jewish. One donor in the top twenty would have been excessive. What’s one supposed to do? Refuse to see what is right there?

  116. @Colin Wright

    You’re looking at it incorrectly. The election was a complete scam. Of course they contributed to Clinton’s campaign because: (1) they want to cover all the bases by ingratiating themselves to anyone with a chance to win; and (2) it would’ve been too conspicuous if the candidate who ran on a platform of defiance to the “deep state”, promising diplomacy and peace, etc., orange clown, got more jewish money than the candidate promising a confrontational foreign policy, right?

    The dead giveaway was Obama’s attack on the Syrian army at Deir Ezzor in Sept 2016, just as the election was coming into the home stretch. Obama was giving voters a taste of what a Clinton presidency would bring, i.e., escalating conflict in the Mideast and a significant chance of war with Russia.

    And the ploy worked: apparently Obama scared enough disgruntled Sanders supporters (anti-war democrats) into holding their noses and voting for orange clown, giving him a winning margin in three key states, which swung the election to him.

    https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

    “I assume Hillary would have delivered.”

    Bad assumption, IMO. They needed a dependable, hard-core militant zionist extremist i.e., orange clown, not a mere opportunist like Clinton.

    BTW Clinton’s on record bad-mouthing jews; is she going to risk a war with Russia and China for “the stupid k**e(s) and f***ing Jew b*****d(s)”?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3635882/Hillary-Clinton-called-disabled-children-Easter-egg-hunt-f-ing-ree-tards-referred-Jews-stupid-k-s-Bill-called-Jesse-Jackson-damned-n-r-claims-Bill-s-former-lover.html

  117. @KenH

    “Then you’re saying that even with Tulsi baby we might get less war but war nonetheless and I agree. Every president since Reagan has used military force against someone and it’s now a rite of passage for a president, so it wouldn’t be long before Tulsi’s face gets streaked with war paint.”

    No, because as I endeavored to point out, the low hanging imperial fruit has already been picked and there are no more low risk wars, accordingly. Tulsi’s face won’t have war paint unless she’s criminally insane (to use “worldly” terms) and therefore willing to risk nuclear war to ingratiate herself to the jews.

    “‘Would Hillary Clinton have been willing to risk WW3 with Russia and China over Iran, or would she start thinking about her grandchildren?’

    Yes, judging by her rhetoric during the campaign and after Trump upset her in the presidential election.”

    Well if there’s one thing every sentient American should know by now it’s that you generally can’t take the campaign rhetoric of a candidate for political office at face value, right?

    “Some political observers have joked that Trump has adopted her policy towards Russia while junking the detente that he promised on the campaign.”

    By now anyone paying attention can see that it’s unfortunately no joke. Obviously, we were defrauded by a con man and his handlers.

    “‘Then please explain why Obama tried to make peace with Iran rather than create a conflict as orange clown is doing.’

    Well not all Jews felt that the Iran deal was inimical to Izzy’s regional interests and if all Jews were Likud hardliners then I believe there could have been sanctions and war instead of the deal.
    https://jstreet.org/save-iran-deal/who-supports-the-deal/#.XOFLoCv46Uk”

    It’s not surprising to see differences of opinion among jews as to tactics; i.e., different preferences regarding an approach to the same end. My point is that jew handlers have to work within the confines of the moral limits (and/or the survival instinct) of their presidential puppet. And if you look at the Obama presidency as a whole and compare it to the orange clown presidency (so far), you’ll see that orange clown is generally far more evil and reckless than Obama was, IMO.

    An example is orange clown’s withdrawal from the INF treaty. It was long clear that the Aegis Ashore systems in Romania (and also intended for Poland) violated the INF treaty, and Putin said Russia would have to respond to this destabilizing situation. So why didn’t Obama withdraw from the treaty? Since orange clown withdrew from the treaty without a hint of meaningful political opposition, it seems clear that Obama could’ve done the same thing, but he didn’t. Why? I claim it’s because as evil as he was, he was not willing to take action that would risk a nuclear war with Russia the way orange clown apparently is.

    As risks rise, the jews need a progression of ever-more-inherently-evil people in the white house willing to keep pushing regardless, or they lose. They can’t risk a JFK or a Gerald Ford or a Jimmy Carter or a Tulsi Gabbard.

    • Replies: @KenH
  118. herr Trump is president – Hillary isn’t. herr Trump is America’s first Israel-first president – Hillary isn’t.

    Trump has betrayed his country’s interests to those of an alien, foreign entity (Israel) and its agents.

    Watching his ‘tard base try make excuses for him by constantly invoking “Hillary” and then omitting any mention of Sheldon Adelson is tiresome.

    (If he conned you, then it clearly didn’t take much – he’s been quite obvious about his “loyalties” right from the get-go.)

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  119. @hestheirman

    “If he conned you, then it clearly didn’t take much – he’s been quite obvious about his “loyalties” right from the get-go.”

    In my view it wasn’t so much a matter of his apparent “loyalties” per se, but a question of whether or not he had a survival instinct that most people apparently have. Going into the 2016 election, I understood (correctly I believe) that the further pursuit of the aggressive jewish-supremacist agenda in the face of a resurgent Russia and an increasingly powerful China was a very risky proposition.

    In light of this, I concluded that the jews needed a suicide bomber in the white house, not a banal political opportunist, and I gave orange clown the benefit of the doubt that he was not a suicide bomber.

    Unfortunately I was wrong about orange clown. I admit that he conned me. It was at least remotely plausible in my view that he could love jews, and yet see the danger that his beloved jews were putting the world in, and he thought he could assauge the extremists and find some middle ground.

    In retrospect I believe his recklessness demonstrates “demon-possession” (or “criminal insanity” to put it in worldly terms) and I believe his handlers recognized this “quality” a long time ago. I believe that he was long groomed for the job of “president” – at least for several years if not for decades.

    But I’m not ashamed of myself for giving him the benefit of the doubt, under the circumstances, because he only fooled me once. As I see it, the shame is on those people who continue to support him and make excuses for him.

  120. APilgrim says:

    I have favored a nuclear attack upon Tehran, since fifty-two (52) American diplomats and citizens were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979, to January 20, 1981.

    To the tune of Barbara Ann, by the Beach Boys.

    Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb-Bomb Iran!

  121. Come now, an Arch of Titus for America’s capital is far more in tune.

    This is especially so when any American considers the USS Liberty’s 34 brave crew members killed and 171 wounded by Israel’s premeditated, despicable and hostile attack on June 8th 1967.

    The Romans put an end to the problem whereas D.C. encourages it.

  122. KenH says:
    @Harold Smith

    No, because as I endeavored to point out, the low hanging imperial fruit has already been picked and there are no more low risk wars, accordingly. Tulsi’s face won’t have war paint unless she’s criminally insane (to use “worldly” terms) and therefore willing to risk nuclear war to ingratiate herself to the jews.

    The low hanging fruit may have been picked but a certain (((group))) will just make more low hanging fruit. Think false flag. Just like they created more low hanging fruit by getting Trump to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and the friction that it’s causing between the two nations. And just like they created low hanging fruit by lying about Assad gassing his own citizens.

    To think that if Tulsi were to win the presidency that she’d give us either peace in our time or WWIII, no in between, and most likely peace since all of the low hanging fruit has been picked is a bit naive.

    Well if there’s one thing every sentient American should know by now it’s that you generally can’t take the campaign rhetoric of a candidate for political office at face value, right?

    LOL. Then why are you and others taking Tulsi’s Gandhi rhetoric at face value?

  123. “The low hanging fruit may have been picked but a certain (((group))) will just make more low hanging fruit.”

    Apparently you misunderstand what I meant by the phrase “low-hanging fruit.”

    “Think false flag.”

    That’s irrelevant. False-flag or no false-flag, the days of “America” attacking and destroying countries and overthrowing their governments – without the risk of massive unwanted consequences (up to and including WW3) – are apparently a thing of the past.

    “Just like they created more low hanging fruit by getting Trump to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and the friction that it’s causing between the two nations.”

    No, nobody created more “low hanging fruit.” Orange clown can withdraw from treaties and agreements and increase “friction” and scream and threaten all he wants, but Iran is still there, still intact and still independent. And there isn’t much orange clown can do to change that without taking a very great risk. IOW dropping bombs on Iran in 2019 will not be like dropping bombs on Yugoslavia in 1999.

    “And just like they created low hanging fruit by lying about Assad gassing his own citizens.”

    Once again, no, nobody created more low hanging fruit. The empire and its henchmen can tell all the lies they want but Assad is still there. The empire’s plans for Syria were foiled by a resurgent Russia. Twenty years ago they might have gotten away with it but those days are apparently over with.

    “To think that if Tulsi were to win the presidency that she’d give us either peace in our time or WWIII, no in between, and most likely peace since all of the low hanging fruit has been picked is a bit naive.”

    Apparently you’re just being contrary. The situation being what it is, she wouldn’t have much choice in the matter. The mask is off, the world is sick and tired of U.S. aggression/interventionism/lawlessness, and Russia has re-emerged on the world stage as a military superpower and is defending its legitimate interests. Also, China is fast becoming a military superpower, both countries are cooperating militarily, economically and politically, and both are apparently preparing for WW3 against the U.S. The window of opportunity for arbitrary, unopposed U.S. aggression has closed. It’s no longer 1990, whether you like it or not.

    “‘Well if there’s one thing every sentient American should know by now it’s that you generally can’t take the campaign rhetoric of a candidate for political office at face value, right?

    LOL. Then why are you and others taking Tulsi’s Gandhi rhetoric at face value?”

    ROTFL! You’re projecting; anyone who cares to read our previous comments can see that you’re the one hung up on “rhetoric.” My point was that the further pursuit of the jewish-supremacist agenda for world domination and control has now become so risky that it basically requires a president who’s a criminally insane madman with suicidal tendencies.

  124. eah says:

    Mr Buchanan, this is getting embarrassing — how can you pen an entire column entitled/asking the question “Who Wants This War with Iran?”, and not mention Jews?

  125. @Colin Wright

    And the last straw of bellicose provocation: “Iran then claimed they couldn’t find any space on the globe that was a safe distance from the U.S. military.”

  126. The scenario is now being composed for the end times. Armageddon awaits in the Middle East. It is written don’t you know.

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?