Eric Trump: My Daddy Isn’t Colluding With The Russians–Honest!

_50157714_eric

http://time.com/4734889/eric-trump-syria-airstrikes-russia-assad-putin/

This statement from Eric Trump confirms what I’ve thought and written for the past week. The Syria bombing, this whole new tension and downgrade of relationship between the U.S. and Russia is all political theater. Hey–how can we be colluding with Russia when we’ve made them really pissed off at us?

We’re very fortunate that both subtlety and intelligence are lacking in the Trump Family (it stems from Donald) and is reflecting throughout his administration. Behind closed doors Trump is still Putin’s U.S. lackey and bootlicker. Make no mistake about that. They’re just waiting for Americans and the corporate media to shift their attention to the next big shiny thing and leave them alone. They thought the Syrian bombing would do the job. It didn’t.

A Strong Case For Treason

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/%e2%80%98there%e2%80%99s-a-smell-of-treason-in-the-air%e2%80%99/ar-BByCgjM?li=BBnb7Kz

“The fundamental question now isn’t about Trump’s lies, or intelligence leaks, or inadvertent collection of Trump communications. Rather, the crucial question is as monumental as it is simple: Was there treason?”

I’ve been stating for months that Trump may be impeached and convicted–even by the GOP-controlled Congress–for treason over his actions with Putin and the Russians. Maybe this is why he was elected president, to put him out of our misery for good and all while he gets what he’s always deserved. We’ll see.

Mike Pence, The Now And Future President

 

 

c4-cfahvyaam3ez

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mike-pence-nato-hold-russia-accountable-munich-angela-merkel-vladimir-putin-a7587891.

Here it is: Mike Pence’s opening gambit to display to the world that not only is he the real president behind the president but he plans to be the only president in the near future. This is the first step away from Trump regarding Donald’s ad campaign to make us believe Russia is misunderstood but friendly folks.

This is also Pence laying the groundwork for sounding presidential by announcing a policy towards Russia which is diametrically opposed to Trump’s. He’s framing himself as the future friend to Europe should he become president and giving Putin advanced notice as president he and Europe won’t stand for Vladimir’s expansionist crap. Perhaps Pence has inside info that Trump is not long for the White House? I think a whole bunch of stuff connecting Trump to Putin and the hacking of the 2016 election is going to bust loose in a few months.Trump will be forced out–or worse–and Pence will become prez via the 25th Amendment. The problem is that while Trump is a clown whose ego might cause collateral damage domestically and globally, Pence is the real and serious evil behind the clown. And the GOP is ready to embrace him as the president they really wanted to elect.

The Bizarro World Of The Ultra-Farleftys

I’m a farlefty. My blog name validates this or it wouldn’t be called Farlefty. My world is ruled by logic, common sense, and deductive reasoning and opinions based on research. Then there’s the world of the ultra-farleftys in which President Obama is lying about ISIS/ISIL and the threat they pose to our American way of life. They claim he just wants to phony up a war in Iraq just like the Bush administration did. They also claim we are being lied to about the threat ISIS/ISIL poses to Syria along with the threat Assad poses to his own Syrian people. These people claim the puppet masters behind the marionette show which is Congress, SCOTUS, and the White House are hungry for more oil fields and the plentiful natural resources laying around all over the place in the Middle East and that’s what’s really going on. Well, I agree with that up to a point—especially about most of Congress and the five Koch Brothers employees on SCOTUS being puppets.

But here’s the problem as I see it with the overwhelming paranoia on the Far Left: If Obama is just as much of a liar as George W. Bush was, then this country is already lost to the likes of the Koch Brothers. It’s game over, folks; there’s no Blue and there’s no Red, just Purple. If this is to be believed, then there’s not a thing we can do about it because the game is rigged and no matter who you believe or who you vote for, you’re wrong. I believe Obama to be a basically good man of good intentions for this country, but it’s undeniable that for most of his presidency he’s been in the pockets of the likes of Goldman Sachs (look at how many people from GS he chose to fill White House and Federal Reserve Bank positions) and the banksters (Jaime Dimon being his good buddy). But given all this, Obama did sign into law bills that have helped—for the most part—consumers and homeowners.

These same ultra-farleftys also think Vladimir Putin is an innocent victim of worldwide disinformation intended to frame him as a despot intent on returning the Ukraine piece back to the jigsaw puzzle that was the Soviet Union. They claim that it’s Petro Poroshenko, president of Ukraine, who’s the real villain, trying to gain the world’s sympathy by falsely claiming Russian nationalists and operatives had invaded Ukraine and started shooting wars to capture and control the southeastern region of the country. Ultra-farleftys also point to interviews and articles on Russia Today (where else) that claim it was Ukraine that shot down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 near Donetsk in the that the ensuing global outrage would result in a world war against Russia.

The world of the ultra-farleftys is like the Bizarro world in the Superman comics. The good guys are the bad guys and the bad guys good. Everything you know is wrong, which is true up to a point. I think that intelligent people who are also congenitally insightful are intuitive enough to discern truth from fiction, lies, and propaganda. When you read a book by Paul Krugman, you just know he is truthfully and accurately relating what went wrong with the financial system in this country and how to fix it. When you read books by Bill O’Reilly or Ann Coulter, you know they’re lying pieces of shit.

Ultra-farleftys may be intelligent folk—many of them seem to be—and some may well be well-meaning but unknowing purveyors of disinformation while others are in on the scam. I don’t know. But what I do know is that people on the far left can go so far to the left, and people on the far right can go so far to the right that both groups meet in the middle. It’s one thing to be faced on both sides with lunacy, but to be surrounded by it creates a vacuum empty of knowledge and truth. Nature abhors a vacuum but tyranny loves it.

Israel Should Give Up Its Conquered Lands After The U.S. Gives Up Its Conquered Lands

Some people are calling for Israel to return to its 1945 borders. The people who angrily cry that force should be used against Israel if it fails to comply know nothing of the history of the region and even less about the Jewish people and about the Palestinians. They are the same people who claim they are nor neither side, yet it’s Israel they attack and Israel at whose feet they lay all the blame. Try reading some history and get some knowledge before you post comments showing your lack of both. Israel has been attacked by a coalition of Arab states in 1948, 1967, and 1973, winning all three conflicts along with the additional land which acts as a buffer zone for Israel against future attacks. Note that the PLO has been waging war against Israel since the PLO’s formation in 1967.  Nowadays, Hamas do the fighting while the PLO “attempts” to negotiate peace with Israel while at the same time Israel is trying to negotiate with Hamas. But this is not the main point I’m making here. But this is not the main point I’m making here.

 

 

Not only is this talk about returning to previous borders unrealistic, it flies in the face of history. Let’s take this “logic” to its absolute absurdity. Open another browser window and bring up a map of the United States. Got it up in front of you? Look at it; look at how our borders stretch from coast to coast and from Mexico on up to Canada. Look also at Alaska and Hawaii. Our country sprung full blown with these borders and with Alaska and Hawaii, right? The indisputable fact is that every single acre of land, every stretched border of this country was taken or bought from somebody else—and I’m not even getting into current protectorates or territories: England, France, Spain, Mexico, Russia. Every one of these countries stole their possessions from the original inhabitants: the Indians, the Inuits, and the Polynesians were all here before us and none of the aforementioned conquering nations gave back the land they took.

 

 

To take the demand that Israel cede back those lands it won from defending itself against Arab coalition attackers to its ultimate absurdity, then these same people should be calling for the U.S. to cede back all the land it appropriated from Mexico after it won the Mexican-American War in 1848. Goodbye Texas, the Southwest and California. Let’s go further back: the U.S. should cede back all the territory it used to create states after England officially lost the Revolutionary War in 1783. Maybe the Pilgrims had a claim on the Plymouth Rock area in 1620 but everything else was taken or bought from its previous inhabitants or “owners”. So, on that basis, just about this entire country must be ceded back to the American Indians (Native Americans if you want to be p.c.) because the way we acquired their land is no different than how Israel acquired its additional land and our treatment of the American Indians was no better—in fact, far worse—than the Israelis have treated the Palestinians. Let’s see a raise of hands who want to give back all our lands to those who were here first. Thought so.

 

And for those of you with pitifully-poor memories, look at a map of the Middle East and see which countries surround Israel. Then remember it was the Palestinians who refused to agree to the partitioning of the land in dispute (most of which became Israel) and waged war against Israel to destroy it and take back the land. The Palestinians were and have always been the war aggressors because they would rather fight than negotiate. Israel keeps the Palestinians under tight control because if it didn’t, Hamas would grow into ISIS (the Palestinians have received hundreds of millions of dollars in aid from Qatar, which is now soliciting additional funds from Iran and Turkey. Israel is surrounded on all sides by enemies who want to see it destroyed and the Jews eliminated so that the various Arab states can then wage war over who gets the Israeli lands. This is why the Israelis are so iron-fisted with the Palestinians and this is why Israel will never go back to its pre-1948 borders, let alone 1945. Get real, people, literally.

 

 

 

The Syrian Shell Game

If you listened to what President Obama said last night without analyzing his statements, it sounded pretty good and reasonable.  Leave it to Chris Matthews to put it into perspective.  In essence, it is our job to stop Assad from killing his own people by US (meaning both “us” and the US) killing more of his own people. Bombs and missiles don’t hit their targets 100% of the time.  Bombs and missiles fall on innocent men, women, and children who have nothing to do with civil war and chemical warfare. This creates what is called collateral damage.  You know the videos of dead children and others Obama urged us to watch online last night? Matthews was correct in saying that after the bombs and missiles fall, the Assad regime will be posting videos of the dead bodies of all civilians who we killed with our errant armament.  How humanitarian will we look to the world then? How pissed off and frantic will the surviving, grieving Syrians be when they think that EVERYONE in the world is dropping bombs and missiles on them, that no one will save them, that they are totally and completely alone in their own country and there is not one damn thing they can do about it EXCEPT to fight everyone in the world, including rebels in their own country?

Obama is not the genius many people take him for if he hasn’t thought this through. Or maybe it’s just good ol’ American hubris on his part, perhaps being influenced by the hubris shown by his advisers.  Obama’s been giving bad advice by his financial advisers. No reason not to think the advice from his foreign relations and national security advisers is just as bad.  He’s even pulled out, dusted off, and given a makeover to the old Vietnam Domino Theory. The latest model?  It goes something  like this: “If we don’t stop Assad from using chemical weapons he will continue to use them which will embolden other terrorists and dictators all over the world to use them on their own people, on their enemies, and then finally on us.”

Lastly, Obama says he would hit “military targets”. Oh yeah? Which ones? And Mr. President, please explain how these attacks will prompt Assad to say he’s sorry and that he’ll never do it again.  To get an idea of how complex this whole issue of chemical weapons removal and dismantling of the facilities that make Assad’s chemical weapons cache, go here:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/09/11/221337548/lessons-from-libya-on-how-to-destroy-chemical-weapons

People who are simplistic can only understand simple solutions.  This is who Obama is trying to sell his limited strike plan to.  Obama needs to address the entire complexity of the Syrian situation and specify and delineate exactly how and by whom all chemical weapons will be removed and how and by whom all chemical weapons producing factories will be closed down.  Much of Assad’s chemical weapons arsenal is mobile; tracking them all down will be like trying to follow hundreds of shell games—sometimes literally “shell” games. What is Obama’s plan for all of that?

Overthrow Or Kill Assad—Then What?

What frustrates me are people who don’t think things through.  Everyone who is pushing for direct US intervention in Syria against Bashar Hafez al-Assad is guilty of this.  I’ve been guilty as well as advocating a SEAL Team 6-like strike but logically I know it’s impossible. It would be ill-advised also for the reasons I will present.

John Kerry and Barack Obama are treating this like the US should be the stern father figure taking the belt to Assad’s backside for his black deeds so that he promises to “never do it again”.  Well, Assad already has two “fathers”: Russia and China. He does what he does because he has such lenient and supportive dads.

With this attempt to whip of support of the American people for an illegal strike (not sanctioned by the UN) against Syria, John Kerry has become the new Condoleezza Rice and UN Ambassador Samantha Rice is the new John Bolton.  But what the people who don’t think things through are failing to think through: who would fill the political and leadership vacuum if Assad is either sent packing or sent down under? The track record for actual democratically-elected government leaders is none too good throughout the Arab and Islamic states; witness Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia.  In every one of these countries where the leaders were “democratically” elected or put in place by the military, the rulers have been murderous, drug lords, “ex”-military generals, and hard right Muslim leaders.  “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss” indeed.  In every one of these countries the people are still protesting and many dissidents have been imprisoned and/or shot dead.  This same exact scenario will play out in Syria—you can count on it.

So, assuming that Assad is deposed or killed, who will fill that power vacuum? Among the volunteers will most certainly be Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey with the U.S., Russia, and China either duking it out behind the scenes or in the center ring.  Take a look at a map of the Middle East and take note of where Syria is situated and remember that nature abhors a vacuum.  The peremptory overthrow of the Assad regime by outside forces (whether or not the rebels participate in it) will destabilize the region for years, and destabilize is probably too mild a term.  As for Syria—do we need yet another country under its military control—which over and over has been shown in every country where they have installed themselves in power to be just as corrupt and brutal as the corrupt and brutal despots they displaced?

But if by some remote chance power isn’t seized by the military, who will fill the power vacuum? This isn’t a simple case of heroic rebels vs. the Assad regime.  Nope,  within this generic “rebels” designation there are factions upon factions fighting each other: Islamists vs. non-Islamists; Saudi-supported groups vs. anti-Saudis,  Syrian drug lords vs. each other, factions who are seeking outsider support vs. factions who want all outsiders out of the conflict. This is not only a civil war, it’s a turf war; the Jets vs. the Sharks on steroids. The gang we back may not be the gang who wins the war.  It’s Iraq all over again.

So, what are the alternatives? Russia will block any UN military actions voted on by the Security Council, so that’s no good.  So, the US became damn fine in advising or orchestrating regime changes in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chile, Argentina, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Brazil, Indonesia,  Angola, Turkey, South Vietnam, etc. (for more info on most of these, read Naomi Klein’s classic “The Shock Doctrine”.) so why can’t we use the techniques we perfected to install the good guy into power for once? Train, arm, and fund them just as we did for the likes of Pinochet of Chile and Suharto of Indonesia and many, many other despots globally.

What the US war hawks still don’t get is that instead of just toppling a government, you’ve first have to win the hearts and minds of the people through humanitarian acts.  Don’t just arm rebels with weapons and battle tactics; supply them with food, clean drinking water, clothing, medical supplies, house building materials and heavy equipment.  We’ve got to make ourselves the good guys in the people’s eyes, not the invaders. But being men, this is considered much too expensive and would take way too long in the eyes of Kerry, Obama, McCain (if you can take his eyes away from his video poker games long enough) and the other chairbound warriors.