Even confirmed imbeciles can sometimes get it right.
Or, in the case of former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, partially right.
Speaking at the annual meeting of the Faith and Freedom Coalition on June 15, 2013, Palin said the United States should not intervene in Syria while Barack Obama holds the Presidency:
“Until we have a commander in chief who knows what he is doing… let Allah sort it out!”
Actually, she got it half-right: “Let Allah sort it out”–regardless of who is President.
But noted draft-dodger and former President Bill Clinton had different advice for President Obama.
Bill Clinton
Clinton urged Obama to intervene in Syria:
“Suppose I had let a million people, two million people be refugees out of Kosovo, a couple hundred thousand people die, and they say, ‘You could have stopped this by dropping a few bombs. Why didn’t you do it?’ And I say, ‘Because the House of Representatives voted 75% against it’”?
“You look like a total wuss, and you would be.”
This was truly heady stuff, coming from a man who has proudly boasted how he outwitted his draft board and thus escaped military service in Vietnam.
Apparently, for Clinton, it’s OK for other Americans to risk their lives in pointless military misadventures on behalf of foreigners who hate us.
It’s just not OK for bullet-shy chicken-hawks like Bill Clinton to do it.
Clinton doesn’t seem aware, or concerned, that, in Syria, two of America’s most deadly enemies are now waging war–with each other.
Yes, it’s Hezbollah (Party of God) vs. Al-Qaeda (The Base).
Hezbollah is comprised of Shiite Muslims, who form a minority of Islamics. A sworn enemy of Israel, it has kidnapped scores of Americans suicidal enough to visit Lebanon and truck-bombed the Marine Barracks in Beirut in 1983, killing 299 Americans.
Flag of Hezbollah
Al-Qaeda, on the other hand, is made up of Sunni Muslims, who form the majority of that religion. It is intolerent of non-Sunni Muslims and has instigated violence against them. It denounces them as “takfirs”–heretics–and thus worthy of extermination.
Al Qaeda has attacked the mosques and gatherings of liberal Muslims, Shias, Sufis and other non-Sunnis. Examples of sectarian attacks include the Sadr City bombings, the 2004 Ashoura massacre and the April, 2007 Baghdad bombings.
Flag of Al Qaeda
In a June 1, 2013 column entitled, “Stop the Madness,” Dr. James J. Zogby, the founder and president of the Arab American Institute, warns:
“What began as a popular revolt against a brutal and ossified dictatorship, Syria has now degenerated into a bloody battlefield pitting sects and their regional allies against each other in a ‘dance unto death.’”
The Syrian conflict began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of dictator Bashar al-Assad.
Since then, more than 310,000 people have been killed in Syria’s uprising-turned-civil war.
“On the one side,” said Zogby, “is the Ba’ath regime, supported by Russia, Iran, Hizbullah, and elements in the Iraqi government.
“Arrayed against them are a host of Syrians (some of whom have defected from the armed forces and others who have formed militias receiving arms and support from a number of Arab states and Turkey) and a cast of thousands of foreign Sunni fighters (some of whom have affiliated with al Qaeda) who have entered Syria to wage war on behalf of their brethren.”
But Clinton isn’t the only one who has urged Obama to waste American lives in a cause that only Islamic terror groups and right-wing Americans find compelling.
Arizona U.S. Senator John McCain has repeatedly demanded that the Obama administration militarily intervene in Syria.
John McCain
He has demanded that the United States create a “no-fly” zone over Syria to deny Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad the use of his air force against his rebellious subjects.
McCain, unlike Clinton, did serve in Vietnam–as a U.S. Navy pilot. In October 1967, while on a bombing mission over Hanoi, he was shot down, seriously injured, and captured by the North Vietnamese. He remained a prisoner of war until his release in 1973.
Now McCain wants today’s young servicemen to have the same opportunities he did–to be blown out of the sky and taken prisoner for another worthless cause.
Just as Sarah Palin was partially correct in urging “let Allah sort it out,” so, too, was Clinton partially correct in his “total wuss” remarks.
President Obama can rightly be called a “total wuss”–but not for keeping Americans out of harm’s way in a war they have no stake in.
He can legitimately be called a “total wuss”–for surrendering to the demands of the same neocons who lied America into a needless 10-year war in Iraq.
But it’s not too late for Obama to recover from his mistake.
He can establish an all-volunteer brigade for those Americans willing to fight and possibly die in yet another pointless war. And he can offer to fly them to the border of Syria so they can carry out their self-appointed “conquer or die” mission.
If these armchair strategists refuse to put their own lives on the line in defense of a “cause” they claim to believe in, Obama should have the courage to brutally–and repeatedly–point this out.
ABC NEWS, AFGHANISTAN, AIRBUS A321, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, CBS NEWS, CNN, FACEBOOK, IRAQ, ISLAM, ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA, MALAYSIA FLIGHT 17, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, RUSSIA, SOVIET UNION, STINGER MISSILES, SYRIA, TERRORISM, THE CHICAGO TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN
THE CHICKEN KIEV IS COMING HOME TO ROOST
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on November 2, 2015 at 3:01 pmOn September 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin started launching airstrikes against Syria.
The objective: To bolster the dictatorship of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who is now caught up in civil war.
This began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of al-Assad. More than 310,000 people have been killed in the fighting.
The Obama administration is worried about Russian intentions. And Republicans are furious, demanding that American military forces directly confront those of Russia.
Yet despite Right-wing alarms about Russia, there is no reason for alarm–by Americans.
Putin’s intervention in Syria’s civil war offers three possible outcomes for the United States.
And they’re all positive.
Vladimir Putin
First, the Russians will kill thousands of America’s sworn enemies.
Russians are well-known for their disregard for human life. During their invasion of Germany in 1945, Russian soldiers literally nailed civilians to barn doors, squashed them under their tanks, and raped countless women of all ages.
In Syria, they will slaughter everyone who gets in their way. Thus, they will kill far more of America’s Islamic enemies than even our own military–hamstrung by do-gooder “rules of engagement”–could possibly eliminate.
Second, Russia will replace the United States as “The Great Satan” in the eyes of most Islamics.
The Soviet Union waged a ruthless war against Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989. Out of that war grew Al-Qaeda. Millions of Islamics still hate Russians for their brutalities.
From 1999 to 2009, Russia fought a brutal war against Islamics in Chechnya. Chechens responded with terrorism across Russia.
Russia’s intervention in Syria will only harden its image as an enemy of Islam–even if it’s supporting one group of Islamics (the Assad regime) against others.
If Islamic terrorism starts raging throughout Russia, Putin may be forced to back down from his military moves against Syria and Ukraine.
Third, if Russian planes get shot down or Russian soldiers killed, Russia will suffer the casualties–not the United States.
The Soviet Union never fully recovered from its losses in Afghanistan–13,310 soldiers killed, 35,478 wounded.
If Russia starts taking heavy losses in Syria or at home through terrorism, this could lead to widespread unrest. Even Vladimir Putin could find himself in danger of being replaced.
And for Russia, the chicken Kiev has already come home to roost.
On October 31, Airbus A321, a Russian airliner, broke up in mid-air, then crashed in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, killing all 224 people on board.
The plane was carrying holidaymakers from the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh to St Petersburg when it crashed into a mountainous area of central Sinai.
In Egypt, a militant group affiliated to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) claimed that it had brought down the plane “in response to Russian airstrikes that killed hundreds of Muslims on Syrian land.”
At this point, it’s too early in the investigation to know whether this is true.
Egyptian analysts began examining the contents of the two “black box” recorders recovered from the airliner. But this process could take days.
And there is more to determining what caused an airline crash than examining the contents of “black boxes.”
On July 17, 2014, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17/MAS17) was traveling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur when it crashed in Ukraine. All 283 passengers and 15 crew on board were instantly killed.
Malaysia Airlines Flight 17
Not until October 13, 2015, did the Dutch Safety Board release a final report on their investigation into the incident. Its conclusion: The airliner was downed by a Buk surface-to-air missile launched from Eastern Ukraine by pro-Russian insurgents.
It could easily take a year for investigators to reach a verdict on the cause of the Airbus A321 disaster.
Meanwhile, the crash has already proved emotionally wrenching for Russians.
Flags across Russia are flying at half-staff and Russian Orthodox priests are conducting services to pray for its victims.
President Putin declared a nationwide day of mourning. In St. Petersburg, home to most of the victims, authorities ordered the mourning to last for three days.
Many Russians no doubt already believe the plane was brought down by a surface-to-air missile. And there is good reason for this.
American military officials have told Fox News that it “appears likely/probable” that U.S.-made Stinger missiles have fallen into the hands of ISIS combatants.
The Stinger is a shoulder-fired surface-to-air weapon. During the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan, the United States supplied huge numbers of these weapons to Afghan forces. They proved devastating against Russian planes and helicopters.
And how might have ISIS fighters acquired such a weapon? From American-supplied army bases they have occupied in recent days.
Flag of ISIS
There’s also the possibility that a bomb could have been smuggled aboard.
Even if the investigation finds the plane wasn’t shot down or blown up, many Russians will blame Putin’s intervention for their loss.
And if the investigation finds that terrorists were responsible, there may well be major protests throughout Russia against Putin.
And if this loss is followed by others equally dramatic and costly, all bets are off for the long-term future of the Putin regime.
Share this: