MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Foreign policy’

Trump, the New York Times, and John Bolton – Antiwar.com Original

Posted by M. C. on September 12, 2019

Bolton’s best-known policies have been to bomb Iran and replace the Mullahs with a US puppet government; turn Venezuela into an American oil well; exit the UN; and start World War III

We are well rid but Bolton’s opinion on one thing has always been correct.

Dump the UN.

https://original.antiwar.com/david-bromwich/2019/09/11/trump-the-new-york-times-and-john-bolton/

The New York Times on September 10 ran six articles with the word Trump in the headlines. Two of the stories were clearly warranted – one on Trump’s continuing resolve to withdraw US forces from Afghanistan, and one on the way the commerce department played along with Trump’s false message about the Alabama destination of the recent hurricane. The other stories were tabloid-fodder.

Then midday September 10 came the news that John Bolton had been sacked. That deserved a story, so it was fair to predict the Times would run three: one on the event, one on the history of a memorable relationship, and one on “possible consequences.”

The Times on September 11 ran four stories on Bolton. News analysis on page one, by Michael Crowley and Lara Jakes, opened with this sentence: “On one foreign policy issue after another, John R. Bolton was the in-house skeptic who checked President Trump’s most unorthodox instincts.” The word unorthodox is doing a lot of work there. It would be truer to say that Trump cut down Bolton’s most dangerous initiatives: for example his idea of starting a war with Iran by an immediate violent retaliation after the bloodless downing of a US surveillance drone.

Was John Bolton a “skeptic”? An “adult in the room”? Bolton’s best-known policies have been to bomb Iran and replace the Mullahs with a US puppet government; turn Venezuela into an American oil well; exit the UN; and start World War III soon while the US can win (if we don’t tie our hands). And meanwhile withdraw from none of the following countries: Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan…

Bolton was originally appointed by Trump at the request of the casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson. It was Bolton’s advocacy of Israeli expansion, and his detestation of the very idea of a Palestinian state, that prompted both Adelson and Benjamin Netanyahu to recommend him as the the best choice for Trump’s third national security adviser…

It appears that anyone (no matter how devious and reckless) who opposes Donald Trump can now expect to be rewarded with the honorific title “skeptic” – a word often used in the past to describe a doubter rather than a fanatical supporter of an insane orthodoxy.

We are through the looking glass.

Be seeing you

?u=http2.bp.blogspot.com-vsL9x6b60BcTcjveUcibvIAAAAAAAAB7o1H7iFzRkTx0s1600000pulp_fiction_judy_miller_the_heretik.jpg&f=1

 

 

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Progressive Foreign Policy Fails Again – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on September 12, 2019

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/09/james-ostrowski/progressive-foreign-policy-fails-again/

By

Note: This is an excerpt from their book, The Impeachment of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for High Crimes in Syria and Libya.

What happened in Libya and Syria is simply a manifestation of a very dangerous mindset known as progressivism.  Progressivism amounts to a blind faith that government force can improve any given situation.  It is usually associated with domestic policy but progressivism also operates in foreign policy. Progressives ignore costs and consequences.  Progressives plunge into situations they do not understand, heedless of the consequences.  When progressives fail, they invariably attribute the failure to not using enough government force.  Thus, Obama, explaining his failure in Libya, stated, “I think we underestimated . . . the need to come in full force.”[1]

Thus, it is not merely Obama and Clinton who need to be held responsible.  Their underlying ideology also needs to be called to account.  We need to impeach progressivism too lest that dangerous ideology leads us into an endless series of future foreign policy disasters as it has already led us into 100 years filled with them.

It is important to understand that a callous disregard of consequences is intrinsic to progressivism,[2] whether applied to domestic or foreign policy. One consequence of foreign intervention which the progressives utterly ignore is blowback in the form of terrorist attacks in direct retaliation against the intervention.  It is probably a Freudian slip that those who supported overthrowing Gaddafi and Assad were oblivious to the consequences as these men had few ties to terrorism in recent years.

Another consequence of war that is rarely discussed in advance is the legal risk of engaging in war.  When a state is attacked, it has the legal right to respond and defend itself.[4]  Such a response may include attacking any military facility in the attacking state. Obviously, any such attacks in modern war run the risk of civilian casualties.  Since this is rarely if ever mentioned by politicians, they apparently expect us to simply put all of this out of our minds.

What is truly revolting is this.  Obama and Clinton, who are protected by heavy security, have launched the United States into wars against parties likely to retaliate against innocent and vulnerable civilians, when the perpetrators of these illegal wars are utterly incapable of stopping such attacks or protecting such civilians.  The only legal remedy for such moral depravity is impeachment…

To sum up, progressivism fails in foreign policy for a number of important reasons. First, the progressives are pervasively ignorant about the countries they are invading and conquering. Second, such intervention fails to deal with the underlying causes of problems, usually being related to the preexisting culture and character of a people or the arbitrary borders into which disparate ethnic, racial and religious groups have been consigned. Third, such intervention sparks resistance and retaliation among the victims. Finally, such intervention usually results in unforeseen and unintended bad consequences.

Thus, the lesson of this book is not just that Obama and Clinton blundered by intervening into Libya and Syria but that, once again, progressives applied their utopian theory beyond the borders of the United States with the usual disastrous consequences.

Be seeing you

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BEGAN KKK - KKK=11+11+11=33 DEGREE ...

One of the original progressives

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Worst “Fact Check” Ever

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2019

Truth is treason in an empire of lies.

https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/07/the-worst-fact-check-ever/?fbclid=IwAR0bSIisduyxs0rh37wj8UtBV_ZBq18qV0T7XzZe_N3dHTwSJQ_8jF-KdYE

By:

Voice of America has responded! And it may well be the worst “fact-check” and rebuttal in the history of fact-checks and rebuttals. As Ron Paul Institute executive director Daniel McAdams put it, “Unbelievable! They confirmed everything you said as true and then pronounced you wrong!”

This revolves around an interview I did on RT where I talked about how the U.S. weaponizes the dollar and uses the global SWIFT payment system as a foreign policy billy club. The Voice of America “fact-checking” website Polygraph.info contacted me for comment. Since it was clear they intended to discredit my narrative, we decided not to respond to their email but instead write a full-blown rebuttal of the narrative that I knew they would advance.

This worked out even better than I anticipated. Polygraph.info actually responded to my pre-rebuttal. And in their response, they basically conceded my main point – that the U.S. government can and does use SWIFT as a foreign policy tool. Of course, they tried to downplay the significance, but their concession is telling.

“While the U.S. has the ability to pressure SWIFT thanks to its position in the global economy, it could be limited by potential costs that would be felt by U.S. businesses and those of U.S. allies. An Atlantic Council opinion piece warns the U.S. Congress to ‘be wary of taking unilateral steps to target SWIFT in future legislation,’ adding the practice risks hampering the flow of financial data, “slowing global trade and transactions.” Moreover, the U.S. does not directly control SWIFT.” [Emphasis added]

McAdams is right. This essentially confirms what I said — No. The U.S. does not control SWIFT, but it can exert significant pressure on it.

“So, despite what VoA and the Treasury Department claim, the U.S. government clearly pressures SWIFT to serve as a foreign policy tool. It may be technically accurate to say the U.S. government does not ‘control’ SWIFT. But the U.S. clearly applies political pressure on the institution and that pressure yields results.” [Emphasis added]

The Atlantic Council piece Polygraph.info links to confirms what I wrote. The very fact that somebody felt the need to warn Congress about the consequences of abusing its influence over SWIFT indicates that my position is absolutely correct.

Polygraph.info chose to ignore most of the points that I made in my pre-rebuttal article, writing that they were “beyond the scope of this fact check.”

This is an odd statement considering my article addressed the substance of what they were supposedly fact-checking. So basically, the very thing they were fact-checking was beyond the scope of the fact check.

OK.

As Ron Paul once said, “Truth is treason in an empire of lies.” The fact that a propaganda arm of the U.S. government wants to whitewash the truth about America’s economic warfare is telling. Its inability to effectively do it is even more so.

Be seeing you

truth

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Secret Campaign for 2020: Where the Democratic Candidates Stand on Foreign Policy – Antiwar.com Original

Posted by M. C. on May 14, 2019

https://original.antiwar.com/ted_rall/2019/05/13/the-secret-campaign-for-2020-where-the-democratic-candidates-stand-on-foreign-policy/

According to the latest Pew Research poll, the five most important issues for Democrats are health care, education, Medicare, poverty and the environment.

So it’s not surprising that the major Democratic presidential contenders’ campaigns are focusing on economic and other America-centric issues. Nor is it shocking that the news media, never more anemic or less willing to question the candidates, is ignoring their stances on foreign policy…

Still, voters deserve to know the would-be presidents’ positions on issues that extend beyond U.S. borders. Here’s what I found:

The Democrats on Our Crazy Defense Spending

The military sucks up 54% of discretionary federal spending. Pentagon bloat has a huge effect on domestic priorities; the nearly $1 trillion a year that goes to exploiting, oppressing, torturing, maiming and murdering foreigners could go to building schools, curing diseases, funding college scholarships, poetry slams, whatever. Anything, even tax cuts for the rich, would be better than bombs. But as then-presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said in 2015: “The military is not a social experiment. The purpose of the military is to kill people and break things.” If you’re like me, you want as little killing and breaking as possible.

Unfortunately, no major Democratic presidential candidate favors substantial cuts to Pentagon appropriations. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Clash Is Coming Over America’s Place in the World

Posted by M. C. on March 2, 2019

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. 

https://outline.com/FDK5Zc

Adam McCauley

STEPHEN WERTHEIM

In the past several months, a meaningful debate has finally started to emerge over America’s role in the world. Politicians and analysts — left, right and center — are conceding that longstanding mistakes have brought the United States to an uncertain moment. Provoked by President Trump, they are concluding that the bipartisan consensus forged in the 1990s — in which the United States towered over the world and, at low cost, sought to remake it in America’s image — has failed and cannot be revived.

But the agreement ends there. Foreign policy hands are putting forward something like opposite diagnoses of America’s failure and opposite prescriptions for the future. One camp holds that the United States erred by coddling China and Russia, and urges a new competition against these great power rivals. The other camp, which says the United States has been too belligerent and ambitious around the world, counsels restraint, not another crusade against grand enemies… Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Trump’s Foreign Policy War on Americans – Antiwar.com Original

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2018

For Trump, trade has nothing to do with individual freedom and prosperity. It’s just part of the arsenal with which to wage war against perceived rivals and reward friends. A charge of “unfair trade practices” is one of the first refuges of scoundrels.

https://original.antiwar.com/srichman/2018/11/25/trumps-foreign-policy-war-on-americans/

by 

Beyond any reasonable doubt, in substance if not in appearance, Donald Trump is a thoroughly conventional American politician. It’s a wonder that anyone requires proof at this late date.

This couldn’t be clearer than in foreign policy…

The funny thing is that Trump himself seems to be working hardest to persuade those supporters that he has no intention of changing U.S. foreign policy. He would no more liquidate America’s global empire than liquidate his own global business empire. Alas, America is not going anywhere. Sure, he may hector imperial allies to spend more on their militaries (while insisting he respects their sovereignty), but that’s just a show. He’s an all-in imperialist, so we shouldn’t be fooled by the staged populism that sometimes is mistaken for come-home-Americanism. America First in practice embodies George H. W. Bush’s summation of America’s foreign policy: “What we say goes.”

As Glenn Greenwald writes about Trump’s disgusting relationship with Saudi Arabia, it’s “a perfect example — perhaps stated a little more bluntly and candidly than usual — of how the US has conducted itself in the world since at least the end of World War II.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

The Deep State Exposed: Investigation Uncovers Foggy Bottom Anti-Trump Leak Factory

Posted by M. C. on September 18, 2018

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/17/the-deep-state-exposed-investigation-uncovers-foggy-bottom-anti-trump-leak-factory/

by Kristina Wong

It was mid-May, about six weeks after Trump appointee Mari Stull began her new job as senior adviser at the State Department’s Bureau of International Organization Affairs.

As senior adviser at the bureau, Stull was in charge of making sure President Trump’s agenda was represented at the many international organizations the U.S. participates in and mostly funds, such as the United Nations and its various agencies.

Stull and her boss, Amb. Kevin Moley, had just left for a trip to Geneva for the World Health Assembly. Back at the State Department, Erin Barclay, a senior career diplomat at the IO bureau, invited more than ten civil servants within the bureau to a lunch meeting.

At the meeting, Molly Phee, another senior career diplomat, went around the table and asked each civil servant for complaints about Stull and took notes. Another senior career diplomat in the IO bureau, Nerissa Cook, was also there. One civil servant who participated in the meeting would later say the meeting felt uncomfortable, and that there was pressure to say something. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Why Write About Foreign Policy? – Antiwar.com Original

Posted by M. C. on April 12, 2018

“War is the health of the State” said the great liberal Randolph Bourne: what’s telling is that his statement is totally unintelligible to today’s “liberals,” who glory in the health of the State. That’s how far we have come down the road to serfdom.

https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2018/04/11/why-write-about-foreign-policy/

by 

After all, why write about foreign policy at all? Why is it so important? And what does it have to do with libertarianism, the philosophy of limited government, free markets, and individual freedom?

The answer is fairly simple: we can’t have an empire and a republic at the same time. It is one or the other. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Rand Paul: It’s Time for a New American Foreign Policy | The National Interest

Posted by M. C. on March 14, 2018

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/rand-paul-its-time-new-american-foreign-policy-24862

What kind of job can you have where you are consistently wrong, yet get to still go on TV talking endlessly and making more wild predictions that will no doubt lead to the same failed result?

If you guessed “TV Weatherman” you’re close…but the job I’m referring to is “Neocon Foreign Policy Expert”

Being a neocon means never having to say you’re sorry, even trillions of dollars and decades into doomed wars….

Paul goes on to list the failures…it is a long article.

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Nikki Haley: The Bold Scold of the Trump Administration | The American Conservative

Posted by M. C. on December 31, 2017

When you are trying to rule the world you need a lot of useful idiots.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/nikki-haley-the-bold-scold-of-the-trump-administration/

As governor of South Carolina, Nikki Haley didn’t have much need to worry about foreign policy. Yet for reasons unknown (other than perhaps her Indian heritage), Donald Trump tapped her to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. There, she has performed to perfection, offering a model of the hubris and lack of awareness that consistently characterize U.S. foreign policy.

What makes America different from other nations when it comes to foreign policy is the certainty that it is the right—indeed, the duty—of Americans to run the world. That means telling everyone everywhere what they should do, not just internationally, but in their own nations, too… Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »