sunset from behind the wire

sunset from behind the wire

Thursday, March 3, 2016

How I Really Feel

Are the mandarins correct, or is Trump?

I try to write the truth as best I see it here  on this blog. You all can decide for yourselves whether I'm an honest man or a maniac.

  1. George W. Bush did not know that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction when we invaded Iraq. There was no SHRED OF PROOF in the intelligence that he received. Pres. Bush and others surmised that there 'must be weapons of mass destruction' in Iraq. That's a far cry from, 'there are weapons of mass destruction'. The go-order for the Invasion of Iraq took place mid-June 2002. I still recall where I was when it came down from the President. We didn't invade until March 20, 2003. 
  2. The Bush Administration was told that it would take 250,000 American troops on the ground in Iraq for 10 years to pacify the place and get it "civilized". That was a sound analysis given to SECDEF Rumsfeld and his staff. He said, "We don't have 250,000 to commit and we don't have ten years." The answer was, "Then you shouldn't invade." But we invaded because we could, not because we should.
  3. Iraq was not part of the "war on terror/war against al Qaeda". The administration put it that way because it advanced their agenda, not because it was true. The War in Iraq actually distracted from the war against al Qaeda after 9/11/01.
The War in Afghanistan against terror cells ended early in that conflict as those groups were killed or disbursed by the CIA-led conflict. The Taliban were and always have been a construct of the Pakistani Government, our ally, which we prop up with massive foreign aid.
  1. In the mid-1990's the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence Agency (ISI) created and armed the Pushtuns living in the Northwest Frontier Province (NFP) in Pakistan to get them out of Pakistan and back into Afghanistan. The "holy quest" they embarked on was the removal of the Tajik-led government and replace it with a Pushtun tribal government, creating a "Greater Paktunistan". It would also block a natural gas pipeline in the process of construction from Turkmenistan/Uzbekistan to India.
  2. The war we have been fighting in Afghanistan at a cost of trillions of dollars (15 year war to date) has been a "big Army" war. The CIA turned it over to them. Alexander-the-Great, the British Empire and the Soviet Union tried to tame the place and they all left, frustrated. When the US leaves, nothing will have changed. 
  3. The Pakistani Government could end the US War in Afghanistan in one day. It's not in their financial interest to do so.
It's true that the US invasions of Iraq or Afghanistan (after big Army took over) were lodestones for foreign fighters to run to and die in rather than engage in attacks on the United States or its allies. That is a fact.

The Obama government decided that making allies of Iran was preferable to allying ourselves with Saudi Arabia (and by extension, al Qaeda). I leave it to you, the reader, to form your own opinion on the matter. The truth is that the US/Canada does not need their oil. 

There are a lot of FILTHY secrets that the Republicans want to have swept under the rug. The same is true of the Democrats. They live in fear of a Trump presidency partially because they don't know whether or not he'd be inclined to keep their confidences.

Now to Mitt Romney, who I like as a man and respect. He ran against the biggest fraud ever to occupy the White House and failed to take on Barack's fraudulent attendance at US Universities as a "foreign student" from Indonesia. There is a lot of attack material on Barack that Mitt did not use. He has chosen to attack GOP front-runner Donald Trump. My respect for Romney has diminished.

24 comments:

  1. I want it BACK. The money I gave to the Romney campaign 4 years ago. WITH interest. And even THAT would not satiate my anger right now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Speaking of Romney, it must be difficult to be irrelevant in a process where you were once the focus of so much adoration and significance. I don't think that it took all that much flattery for the old, fearful, mainstream GOP to goad him to the attack. People paid attention to him again.

      Delete
  2. Politics ain't bean bag.

    You can quote me on that, LL. And just for the record, Dubya was my LAST pick as the 2000 candidate. I was initially a Phil Gramm guy, but he washed out early. But Dubya was the last man standing, and I held my nose and pulled the lever for him (twice). He was way more liberal than everybody else in the race, but that didn't seem to matter. And now we have the mess that he left in Afghanistan and Iraq, and subsequently the greater Middle East.

    I'm not sure Romney's rant is going to help the Establishment, but rather anger the rest of us, which appears to be quite a lot of conservatives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure Romney's rant is going to help the Establishment, but rather anger the rest of us, which appears to be quite a lot of conservatives.

      Well, Fredd - it ticked off this conservative. All I see when I look at Mitt is his deer in the headlights expression when Candy Crowley dumped all over him.

      Delete
    2. Politics are not a high school prom. Romney was too nice for the biz. And lately the GOP has turned him into a bitter, mean spirited voice. I suspect that the fact that he could be called on as the "voice of moderation" in a brokered convention was trolled by the power brokers.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, I am curious as to who convinced Mitt to put himself out there. Had to be some serious, 800-pound gorilla-types. Names of these guys will always be buried. They are seriously irked that they can't buy their way out of this one, though. Irked as hell.

      Delete
  3. Cui bono? What does Romney get out of being a sock puppet for the GOPe? What a disgusting thing he did. Go home, Mitt, and enjoy your life and your money. He just managed to add another 10 points to Trump's numbers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a certain vanity that comes with people suggesting that YOU (and only you) can save the GOP. Mitt bit. But it was the wrong thing to do in my opinion.

      Delete
  4. The only argument I have with your comment on Iraq. The order came down to invade in 2002, but it took a year to do it. If you recall, the countries with vested interest in Iraq (German, Russia, and France, to name a few) argued against us going in. It took a year for Bush to tell them to take a flying fuck on a rolling doughnut and start the invasion. Also, the American people viewed the term, “WMD” as the ballistic missiles of the cold war. But they were not explosive type weapons we were used to. They were vials of gases or germ type stuff that could be delivered in a suite case. Hussain knew we were coming and he had a year to move them into Syria and other border countries in the trunk of cars, in trucks loaded with products, etc. The inspectors did find the places where they were made. The military found sites, too. So Bush did have knowledge to start with. But the delay made him look bad. I have no argument for Afghanistan other than I think they should bomb it night and day.

    As for you being honest man or a maniac, how about you being an honest maniac? You were there and more involved than I, so I have to give you credit for being more closely informed and involved than I ever was. So thank you for that (and welcome home).

    I am not a Trump man, as you know. I will vote for him if he is the candidate, simply because I cannot ever vote for the Hilderbeast or the Commie. But I also know that Congress could bring him to his knees, too. Unless he sues them, of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I want to see a win. I am not a Trump person. I don't have a bumper sticker, a t-shirt or a sign on my lawn. I simply see him as one who may be able to bring some balance to a system (both parties) that has gone wrong. And I could be wrong.

      Bush knew that there was not ONE SHRED OF PROOF that there were WMD's in Iraq. They went to war (and we killed a lot of non-combatants) under the ASSUMPTION that there must be. And there were a lot of people in the know in the intelligence community who cringed, saluted smartly and said, "aye-aye sir".

      As to Afghanistan, there is a way to win. You do what the Russians did in Chechnya (remember that problem that they had?). You move out or kill all of the Chechens. There is no more radical Chechen problem in Russia. It's how the Mongols dealt with problems. We can't do that. So it doesn't matter how many bombs we drop.

      Final word on GW Bush. I personally like Pres. Bush. He's a patriotic man, he loves his country and the people in it. I'd throw myself into a mud puddle and he could walk on my back rather than soil his shoes. I'm serious about that. But he made a grave mistake and we are still paying for it with ISIS (which rose on Obama's watch, but it stemmed from the Second Iraq War). Saying that a president blundered doesn't mean that I don't like the man. He made a few big mistakes: Iraq War, propping up the US economy post 9/11 rather than allowing a small recession - which led to a big one, and growing the government at a massive rate. But I still like him.

      Delete
  5. So, LL, it seems the take away is that instead of invading Afghanistan we should have obliterated Pakistan. Net result would be dead bin Laden and no one to pay a billion a year (or more) also India would like us a lot more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We could have ended the War in Afghanistan after the CIA/SPECWAR people finished off the al Qaeda cells and training areas. Let the Taliban rape, pillage and plunder their own as they are moved to. FIGHTING A LAND WAR IN ASIA is never a good idea, right? When it became a Big Army civil war it became useless. We could have been out by 2003. If terrorists moved back in, B-52's could have pounded them back to dust.

      Inside every Afghan, there is not an American screaming to get out. I know Afghanistan and was there when Zahir Shah was king before the Russians invaded the place. I like the Afghans personally.

      Our policy toward Pakistan dates back to when the US felt that India was becoming a client state of the Soviet Union. I've been published in Indian defense journals (in the 90's). Let India and Pakistan solve their own problems, bring back all the US jobs from India and let the chips fall where they may. But I wouldn't pay Pakistan $.01. It all goes to graft anyway.

      Delete
  6. Re: WMD
    1) It's been a while, but I recall stories of Kurd
    village(s) apparently attacked with chem/bio agents.
    2) What were they making in the "Baby Milk Factories"?

    Re: land war in Asia
    We might ask the Brits and the Russians about fighting in Afghanistan...

    Re: Mitt
    What happened to him after the first debate with barry??

    I agree with your assessment on India/Pakistan.

    Until recently we were fighting elsewhere. I fear this will change soon as this Country is now importing the seeds of our destruction.

    =T.Wrangler=

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. They dismantled their chemwar factories and destroyed the stocks of chemical agents as per the UN resolution following Gulf War 1. The US thought that they were cheating but apparently not.

      2. Maybe baby milk?

      3. We need to insure that all wars are fought for need (no more "Gulf of Tonkin Resolutions"). Look, war is good for the economy. We buy bullets and butter and so forth but when we borrow that money we need to pay it back. There is no national will to do that.

      Delete
    2. 1) Maybe.
      2) I doubt it.
      3) Absolutely!

      Also- we have few friends in that region. Seems pretty stupid to import our enemies.

      =T. W.=

      Delete
    3. The baby formula plants were clearly used to make chemwar products but those plants had been dismantled by the time we invaded.

      Delete
  7. No real surprises here. W was just another reason why I left the party system altogether so many years ago. If that was the Republican Party, I ain't no Republican. And I ain't no Democrat.

    Romney's speech was just really, really weird. Is he that entrenched in the GOP machinery?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that he succumbed to intense flattery and pressure. What he said and how he said it bothers me.

      Delete
  8. Yep... I kinda like the idea of Trump taking the lid off... :-) It's about time the people knew the truth!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Hillary deleted the truth" - but I think that there is one old goose who is about to be cooked.

      Delete
    2. Don't you mean she wiped the truth? Like with a dustcloth?

      Delete
    3. She's even incompetent at the cover-up.

      Delete
  9. "FILTHY secrets" -- I think people sense that, some know it, and they're getting mad at the self-serving merry go round of corrupt cronyism.

    Someone needs to put Mittens back in his box.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He harbors the hope that he will be the savior of the Party at the Convention. I have my doubts.

      Delete

It's virtual - it's a mirage - it's life