Big news – quite predictable – but BIG news nevertheless, to wit, that Iran is sending troops to Syria to make sure the Assad regime doesn’t go under, though it probably wouldn’t have anyway. Syria is not Egypt or Tunisia, where insurgents gained a foothold, if only by screaming. It also is not Libya, meaning that no U.S. intervention even though as badly and unjustifiably engaged as it was in that benighted nation, will happen.
Regardless of which party dominates Congress and/or the administration, the U.S. mindset regarding any nation that is 96% Muslim or better – therefore ruled by a handful of religious fanatics – is so deficient as to make this country look silly. If the president wanted to get a leg-up on the election, he would put out an order today for instant non-attachment with Afghanistan, thereby removing all U.S. forces immediately, if not sooner. It’s perfectly obvious by now that U.S.-type democracy is not possible in Muslim nations, in which life is considered anything but sacred, directly antithetical to the American mindset.
The reason for withdrawal is obvious, namely, that when a U.S. soldier is shot in the back by a supposed friend he is attempting supposedly to train, the time has come to either leave the country or wipe it out, neither of which plan is on the table currently, with the U.S. scheduled to have troops there to be back-shot through 2014, never mind the cowardly treachery of the “friends.” Putting on some kind of “brave front” (for others) on the part of both the administration and the military hierarchy is just as treacherous vis-à-vis the American GI, who is trained to fight or fight back but never taught how to dodge the bullet of a coward…for good reason – there’s no way to do it.
Isolated “death by treachery” incidents happen and these are an expected part of any military action, but the Afghan treacheries are not isolated. They are a part of the Muslim plan and they have taken many NATO lives just this year alone. Bullets-in-the-back and roadside bombs are routine for the Muslim fighter, to whom someone else’s life is of no consequence and is subject to execution by any means available.
When I was in fifth-grade, a new kid my age moved to town and we became fast friends. The son of missionaries, he had spent most of his childhood in then-Persia, now known as Iran. In later years, he explained the mindset of the Iranian with respect to his dealings with others. The objective is to outdo the other, no matter what it takes. In business, it’s cheating. In any kind of physical struggle, it’s no-holds-barred…anything goes. Success is measured by how completely the opponent is defeated. In business, bankruptcy works! In a struggle, complete incapacitation or death! This is indeed the credo of the governing/militant Muslims, whether Shiite or Sunni or Alwite or whatever.
The TV reporters, without a scintilla of evidence (all hearsay), semi-hysterically caterwaul every evening about the massacres in Syria, now said to be about 20,000, though no one has even the slightest idea of the actual number. This is roughly equal to the alleged number of massacres in the early 80s perpetrated by Bashar Assad’s father, who was then head of state. The TV folks seem to want President Obama to just “do something,” as if he could. Imagine taking on the Syrians and the Iranians half-a-world away while facing fiscal bankruptcy and fighting a hopeless war in Afghanistan! Anyhow, the prez is too busy defining perverted marriage.
Obama went ’way out on a limb when he publicly – for all the world to hear – told Assad he had to go. The clear implication (undoubtedly thought authentic by Syrian insurgents) was that if he didn’t ol’ U.S. prexy would do a number on him, maybe like in Libya, where Obama declared his own war without even a nod to Congress, so afraid of the racism problem that not one legislator had the nerve to institute impeachment proceedings, with Obama demonstrably culpable…a slam-dunk since Libya posed no threat to the national security of any nation, especially that of the U.S. U.S. and NATO planes rained down havoc on innocent Libyan civilians for seven months, with NATO officials all the while jabbering propaganda about “only military targets” and spouting demagoguery regarding Qaddafi’s meanness. Of course he was mean, just like Bashar Assad and his father. On the other hand, was Abe Lincoln mean when he handled an insurrection that turned into a civil war and cost 600,000 American lives, nearly all white men?
Obama and State Secretary Clinton have made a laughingstock of this nation, never understanding either the mindset of Muslims or the folly of encouraging a rebellion that would be successful in only one way – the deaths of thousands of Syrians, who had a right to feel that they had been misled by the mightiest nation on earth. About Obama’s “Osama Caper,” Counter-terrorism Adviser John Brennan said this in May 2011: “one of the most gutsiest calls of any president in recent memory.” Such is the shallowness of this administration. How gutsy was his call to murder Libyans, with a population two million less than that of New York City?
This administration has absolutely no foreign policy. Any change would be an improvement.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
No comments:
Post a Comment