MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘John Bolton’

Who Wants This War on Iran? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 17, 2019

So, again, Cicero’s question: “Cui bono?”…

Who wants us to plunge back into the Middle East…

Who benefits? Not you, me nor your child, relative or friend in the military who naively or stupidly think they are defending US.

Mr. Buchanan forgets to mention Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, Electric Boat, General Dynamics, Northrup Grumman…

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/05/patrick-j-buchanan/who-wants-this-war-with-iran/

By

Speaking on state TV of the prospect of a war in the Gulf, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei seemed to dismiss the idea.

“There won’t be any war. … We don’t seek a war, and (the Americans) don’t either. They know it’s not in their interests.”

The ayatollah’s analysis — a war is in neither nation’s interest — is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for his own country.

Iran’s hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.

And though Iran’s nuclear sites are under constant observation and regular inspection, they would be destroyed.

Tehran knows this, which is why, despite 40 years of hostility, Iran has never sought war with the “Great Satan” and does not want this war to which we seem to be edging closer every day.

What would such a war mean for the United States?

It would not bring about “regime change” or bring down Iran’s government that survived eight years of ground war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

If we wish to impose a regime more to our liking in Tehran, we will have to do it the way we did it with Germany and Japan after 1945, or with Iraq in 2003. We would have to invade and occupy Iran.

But in World War II, we had 12 million men under arms. And unlike Iraq in 2003, which is one-third the size and population of Iran, we do not have the hundreds of thousands of troops to call up and send to the Gulf.

Nor would Americans support such an invasion, as President Donald Trump knows from his 2016 campaign. Outside a few precincts, America has no enthusiasm for a new Mideast war, no stomach for any occupation of Iran.

Moreover, war with Iran would involve firefights in the Gulf that would cause at least a temporary shutdown in oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — and a worldwide recession.

How would that help the world? Or Trump in 2020?

How many allies would we have in such a war?

Spain has pulled its lone frigate out of John Bolton’s flotilla headed for the Gulf. Britain, France and Germany are staying with the nuclear pact, continuing to trade with Iran, throwing ice water on our intelligence reports that Iran is preparing to attack us.

Turkey regards Iran as a cultural and economic partner. Russia was a de facto ally in Syria’s civil war. China continues to buy Iranian oil. India just hosted Iran’s foreign minister.

So, again, Cicero’s question: “Cui bono?”…

Who wants us to plunge back into the Middle East, to fight a new and wider war than the ones we fought already this century in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen?

Answer: Pompeo and Bolton, Bibi Netanyahu, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the Sunni kings, princes, emirs, sultans and the other assorted Jeffersonian democrats on the south shore of the Persian Gulf.

And lest we forget, the never-Trumpers and neocons in exile nursing their bruised egos, whose idea of sweet revenge is a U.S. return to the Mideast in a war with Iran, which then brings an end to the Trump presidency.

Be seeing you

Endless War by Jim Richter on Amazon Music - Amazon.com

 

 

 

Advertisements

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

That Time John Bolton Said It’s Good To Lie About War – Caitlin Johnstone

Posted by M. C. on May 17, 2019

Back in 2012 at a forum for the Washington Institute Of Near East Policy think tank, the group’s Director of Research Patrick Clawson openly talked about the possibility of using a false flag to provoke a war with Iran, citing the various ways the US has done exactly that with its previous wars.

“I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough, and it’s very hard for me to see how the United States president can get us to war with Iran,” Clawson began.

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/05/16/that-time-john-bolton-said-its-good-to-lie-about-war/

That Time John Bolton Said It’s Good To Lie About War

Journalist Whitney Webb recently tweeted a 2010 video clip I’d never seen before featuring US National Security Advisor John Bolton defending the use of deception in advancing military agendas, which highlights something we should all be paying attention to as Trump administration foreign policy becomes increasingly Boltonized.

On a December 2010 episode of Fox News’ Freedom Watch, Bolton and the show’s host Andrew Napolitano were debating about recent WikiLeaks publications, and naturally the subject of government secrecy came up.

“Now I want to make the case for secrecy in government when it comes to the conduct of national security affairs, and possibly for deception where that’s appropriate,” Bolton said. “You know Winston Churchill said during World War Two that in wartime truth is so important it should be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.”

“Do you really believe that?” asked an incredulous Napolitano.

“Absolutely,” Bolton replied.

“You would lie in order to preserve the truth?”

“If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it,” Bolton answered.

“I don’t think we’re often faced with that difficulty, but would I lie about where the D-Day invasion was going to take place to deceive the Germans, you’d better believe it,” Bolton continued.

“Why do people in the government think that the laws of society or the rules don’t apply to them?” Napolitano asked.

“Because they are not dealing in the civil society we live in under the Constitution,” Bolton replied. “They are dealing in the anarchic environment internationally where different rules apply.”

“But you took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution mandates certain openness and certain fairness,” Napolitano protested. “You’re willing to do away with that in order to attain a temporary military goal?”

“I think as Justice Jackson said in a famous decision, the Constitution is not a suicide pact,” Bolton said. “And I think defending the United States from foreign threats does require actions that in a normal business environment in the United States we would find unprofessional. I don’t make any apology for it.”

So that’s a thing. And it’s important for us to know it’s a thing because of the way things are heating up in Iran right now, since Bolton’s fingerprints are all over it.

Bolton has long been calling for war with Iran and in a paid speech in July 2017 told his pro-regime change MEK terror cult audience that they would be celebrating the successful overthrow of the Iranian government together before 2019. Now we’re seeing threat alarms being elevated and fearmongering about Iranian missiles being circulated, with reports being leaked to the press of possible plans to send 120,000 US troops to the region.

This is an environment that is ripe for deceptions of all sorts, and, given what Bolton said on live television nearly a decade ago, we would all do very well to remain very, very skeptical of any and all news we hear about Iran going forward. If for example you hear that within this environment of escalated tensions and military posturing Iran or one of its “proxies” has attacked the United States in some way, your immediate response should be one of intense skepticism about what the mass media talking heads are telling you to believe.

Back in 2012 at a forum for the Washington Institute Of Near East Policy think tank, the group’s Director of Research Patrick Clawson openly talked about the possibility of using a false flag to provoke a war with Iran, citing the various ways the US has done exactly that with its previous wars.

“I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough, and it’s very hard for me to see how the United States president can get us to war with Iran,” Clawson began.

(Can I just pause here to note what a bizarre series of words that is? “Get us to war with Iran?” Get us to the thing that every sane human being wants to avoid with every fiber of their being? You want to “get us to” there? This is not the kind of thing normal humans say. You only hear this kind of insanity in the DC swamp where creatures like John Bolton have their roots.)

“Which leads me to conclude that if in fact compromise is not coming, that the traditional way that America gets to war is what would be best for US interests,” Clawson added. “Some people might think that Mr. Roosevelt wanted to get us into the war… you may recall we had to wait for Pearl Harbor. Some people might think that Mr. Wilson wanted to get us into World War One; you may recall we had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mr. Johnson wanted to get us into Vietnam; you may recall we had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn’t go to war with Spain until the USS Maine exploded. And may I point out that Mr. Lincoln did not feel that he could call out the Army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander at Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians said would cause an attack.”

“So if, in fact, the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war,” Clawson continued. “One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that explosion on August 17th. We could step up the pressure. I mean look people, Iranian submarines periodically go down. Some day, one of them might not come up. Who would know why? We can do a variety of things, if we wish to increase the pressure (I’m not advocating that) but I’m just suggesting that this is not an either/or proposition – just sanctions have to succeed or other things. We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians. We could get nastier at that.”

So these are ideas that have been in circulation for many years. That gun is loaded and ready to fire.

Bolton trussed up his 2010 confession using an example that most people would agree with: that it was reasonable for the Allied forces to deliberately deceive the Nazis about the nature of the D-Day invasion. But we know John Bolton better than that by now. This PNAC director and architect of the Iraq war once threatened to murder a foreign official’s children because his successful diplomatic efforts were putting a damper on the manufacturing of consent for the Iraq invasion. He wasn’t defending the use of deception in crucial military options used to halt tyrants trying to take over the world, he was defending the use of deception in the senseless wars of aggression that he has built his political career on advancing.

Take everything you hear about Iran with a planet-sized grain of salt, dear reader, and everything you hear about Venezuela too while we’re on the subject. There are skillful manipulators who are hell bent on toppling the governments of those nations, and they have absolutely no problem whatsoever with deceiving you in order to facilitate that. And they don’t believe the rules apply to them.

__________________________

Everyone has my unconditional permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitterthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here.

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

Why Is the US Always ‘Stumbling’ or ‘Sliding’ into War? – RT News

Posted by M. C. on May 16, 2019

Whether this propagandistic language is always employed in a totally conscious way or not, it’s difficult to tell. Either way, it’s a psychological trick which frames the most powerful, military-minded and trigger-happy country in the world as some kind of innocent victim of events beyond its control.

In April, Foreign Policy magazine even had Venezuela’s self-declared interim president Juan Guaido “stumbling toward a coup.” How do you stumble into a military coup?

https://www.rt.com/usa/459429-us-media-language-war-propaganda/

Danielle Ryan

The way the mainstream media tells it, the United States never, ever ends up embroiled in wars and military conflicts on purpose — only ever by mistake, or as a result of things like ‘bad planning’ or ‘strategic missteps’.

Very often when media coverage of war is analysed, there is a focus on how hawkish pundits cheerlead for conflict and journalists parrot official narratives while dissenting voices are drowned out. Mainstream networks, for example, have been heavily criticized by media watchdogs for almost exclusively inviting pro-war guests and ex-military hawks onto their news shows to convince Americans that war is the only reasonable course of action, while refusing to let anti-war commentators get a look in.

But there is another more subtle and unnoticeable way that the media deceives us. Even when they are not outright cheerleading for military action (as was the case in the lead up to the Iraq War), the language they use to describe events is designed to absolve Washington of blame.

Next time you read the news, notice how the US is always “stumbling into” war, or “drifting into” war or “sliding into” war — or even “sleepwalking into” war. To “stumble into” war seems to be a firm favorite among headline writers. The US has “stumbled” into war in Iraq and Syria and has been, at one time or another, at risk of “stumbling” into war with Russia, North Korea and most recently Iran.

According to these headlines, the US has also been “dragged into” (CNN) and “sucked into” (NI) war in Syria and Afghanistan, twice (NI, The Times). In recent weeks, the Trump administration has been “sliding into” (AP) a potential “accidental” war with Iran — and back in 2017, it was “dragged into” (FP) the disastrous Yemen conflict.

The examples of the US stumbling, blundering and bumbling its way into wars are endless — and it does raise a question that no one ever seems to ask: If it’s so easy to trip and fall into massive never-ending wars, why isn’t it happening to everyone else? Is Washington just especially clumsy?

With this narrative of the bumbling superpower, agency is always removed from the architects of war. Instead of enthusiastically banging the drums for war, we’re told the White House is always ‘reluctant’ to deploy its military, but is ‘forced’ into it . Then, once the war is in full-swing, when things are not panning out exactly as planned, the US can become the sacrificial hero, propelled into a deadly conflict not of its own making.

A recent headline in the Miami Herald framed recent US actions on Venezuela as the US being “pushed to act.” Pushed by who? The Trump administration voluntarily helped organize and instigate the attempted coups that worsened the country’s political crisis and proudly imposed the economic sanctions which have led directly to thousands of premature deaths. There was no “pushing” involved…

It’s not just media pundits and journalists who employ this kind of misleading language, either. British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said this week that a US war with Iran could happen“by accident.” Did Hunt take a vacation from reality and miss US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton ramping up war rhetoric against Iran for months? Maybe Trump abandoned the 2015 Iran nuclear deal by accident and sent an aircraft carrier and bomber task force into the Persian Gulf last week to “send a message” to Iran by mistake.

Such framing obscures basic facts about Washington’s motives and predilection toward military conflict over diplomacy. Washington doesn’t get into wars by mistake. Unless a country is directly attacked, threatened or occupied, wars are quite easy to avoid getting into if you really don’t want to be in them  — but the hawks in Washington, no matter how much they pretend to not want war, are always itching for more and they will stop at nothing to get what they want, even if that means fabricating evidence (as in Iraq) or pulling off false flag attacks to use as convenient pretexts for the US to ‘respond’ to…

 

 

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

THIRD GULF WAR FEARS US ‘plans to deploy 120,000 troops to Middle East’ if Iran attacks American forces in chilling echos of Iraq War

Posted by M. C. on May 14, 2019

Be sides that time when the CIA overthrew the Iranian government and installed a hated dictator in 1953, when did Iran attack US?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9069070/us-deploy-troops-middle-east-iran-iraq-war/

THE US is planning to deploy as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East if Iran attacks American forces, a bombshell report claimed last night.

In chilling echoes of the invasion of Iraq, US defence chiefs have reportedly drawn up fresh military plans that would see a huge response to Iranian aggression…

Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan revealed the audacious strategy to America’s top national security aides last Thursday, according to the New York Times.

The top secret plans are said to spell out how a vast land, air and sea force would be sent to America’s regional allies bordering Iran should its foe attack US forces.

The deployment could also be sparked if Iran accelerates its work on nuclear weapons, according to defense sources – in breach of an international treaty.

President Trump’s hard-line national security adviser John Bolton is said to have ordered the heavily beefed-up military plans in response to growing tensions in the region.

ECHOES OF IRAQ

It is unclear if President Trump – who has tried to scale back US military involvement in the Middle East – would order the deployment.

Such a large force would be able to launch an invasion on the scale of Iraq in 2003 – and would almost certainly be met with a military response from Iran.

Mr Trump yesterday refused to play down the prospect of an all-out war.

When asked if an invasion was on the table, the president said: “We’ll see what happens with Iran.

“If they do anything, it would be a very bad mistake.”

Spokesmen for Mr Shanahan and Gen Joseph F Dunford Jr – the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff – declined to comment to the New York Times…

Be seeing you

Iran: What’s in a Name? Historically known as Persia until ...

 

 

 

 

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

TWO Saudi oil tankers were hit by a “sabotage attack” off the United Arab Emirates, it was announced this morning – as tensions flare between the US and Iran.

Posted by M. C. on May 13, 2019

Dumb ‘ol Iran.  What a convenient time to stage an attack, just when Bolton and Pompeo ‘suggest’ such a thing may happen.

Rather convenient for John Bolton and McDonnell Douglas.

Oh wait…we don’t really know who staged the attack…wink, wink.

Hands Off My Fries: A Philosophical Objection to "Nudging ...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9060525/saudi-oil-tanker-sabotage-us-iran/

The ships were struck off the coast of the port of Fujairah – with one of the tankers due to be loaded with Saudi crude oil bound for the United States.

Saudi energy minister Khalid Al-Falih revealed the tankers suffered “significant damage” – although it was unclear what the attack involved.

He said: “Fortunately, the attack didn’t lead to any casualties or oil spill; however, it caused significant damage to the structures of the two vessels.”

Trading and shipping sources identified the Saudi ships as Bahri-owned very large crude carrier (VLCC) tanker Amjad and crude tanker Al Marzoqah.

A huge US naval presence has built up in the Gulf over recent days amid a fevered standoff between Washington and Tehran.

US intelligence revealed Iran was on the verge of carrying out offensive action to disrupt and attack American and partner interests in the region.

It led to the deployment of US aircraft carriers, Patriot missiles and B52 bombers over recent days…

U.S. and Them - Operation Ajax - Iran and the CIA coup ...

 

 

 

 

 

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

Bolton Is Spinning Israeli ‘Intelligence’ to Push for War Against Iran

Posted by M. C. on May 13, 2019

The United States is in danger of falling for yet another war ruse as malignant as those that led Congress and the mainstream media to accept the invasion of Iraq or the Gulf of Tonkin resolution.

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/bolton-is-spinning-israeli-intelligence-to-push-for-war-against-iran/

Gareth Porter

John Bolton has gotten away with a dangerous deception. The national security adviser’s announcement Sunday that the Pentagon has deployed air and naval forces to the Middle East, which he combined with a threat to Iran, points to a new maneuver to prepare the ground for an incident that could justify a retaliatory attack against Iran.

Bolton presented his threat and the deployments as a response to alleged intelligence about a possible Iranian attack on U.S. targets in the Middle East. But what has emerged indicates that the alleged intelligence does not actually reflect any dramatic new information or analysis from the U.S. intelligence community. Instead, it has all the hallmarks of a highly political case concocted by Bolton.

Further underscoring the deceptive character of Bolton’s maneuver is evidence that senior Israeli national security officials played a key role in creating the alleged intelligence rationale for the case.

The new initiative follows an audacious ruse carried out last fall by Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, detailed in Truthdig in February, to cast the firing of a few mortar rounds in the vicinity of the U.S. embassy and a consulate in Iraq as evidence of an effort by Tehran to harm U.S. diplomats. Bolton exploited that opportunity to press Pentagon officials to provide retaliatory military options, which they did, reluctantly.

Bolton and Pompeo thus established a policy that the Trump administration would hold Iran responsible for any incident involving forces supported by Iran that could be portrayed as an attack on either U.S. personnel or “interests.”…

Be seeing you

aipac

 

 

 

 

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

Trump Is Being Set-up for War with Iran – PaulCraigRoberts.org

Posted by M. C. on May 13, 2019

The war that Bolton and Netanyahu are preparing to spring on Trump is likely to be much larger than they think.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/05/12/trump-is-being-set-up-for-war-with-iran/

Paul Craig Roberts

Trump destroyed his chance at being a successful president by the stupid appointments he has made.  At the moment he is being set up by his national security advisor John Bolton and Israel for a war with Iran.

Using the same format of lies that was used against Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Venezuela, Bolton has accused Iran of “troubling and escalatory indications” of a forthcoming Iranian attack on American forces in the Middle East.  To help protect against the attack, Bolton has ordered Patriot missile batteries, an aircraft carrier strike group, and a bomber strike force to the region.

Even the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, pointed out that Bolton failed to identify the “troubling and escalatory” Iranian actions.  https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/u-s-sends-patriot-missiles-to-the-middle-east-to-counter-iranian-threats-1.7221997  No one else has seen any sign of them.

The reason for the Patriot missiles is not to deter Iran from an attack, but to prevent successful Iranian response to an attack on Iran.

This is the likely situation:  The deal between the Washington Ziocons and Netanyahu is that either Israel will attack an American ship or whatever is selected, and it will be blamed on Iran, thus forcing Trump to “defend America” and retaliate, or Israel using American disguise will attack Iran, thus provoking a response from Iran.

Iran is already on hair trigger from having been provoked excessively by Washington withdrawing from the Iranian nuclear agreement, reimposing sanctions, and making endless false accusations against Iran, as Washington has done against Russia, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Venezuela, Yemen.  It wouldn’t take much more to set off Iranian emotions.

Trump is clearly set-up.  If Bolton and Netanyahu want the US at war with Iran, it is their call…

Be seeing you

 

 

 

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

Does Trump Have Control of His Government, or Is It His Government? – PaulCraigRoberts.org

Posted by M. C. on May 9, 2019

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/05/07/does-trump-have-control-of-his-government-or-is-it-his-government/

Paul Craig Roberts

I smell a rat.  John Bolton, Trump’s national security adviser or, more correctly, Israel’s agent, has assembled a team consisting of himself, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Emirati crown prince Mohammed bin Zayed, and Saudi ruler Mohammed bin Salman. These men are Iran’s four worst enemies.

The purpose of the team is to produce a false flag event that will provide an excuse for Washington to attack Iran.  As the Israelis are the most competent member of this team, the speculation is that Israel will shoot down an American aircraft or attack a US Navy vessel, and Washington will have the presstitute media blame it on Iran.  In other words, a revival of the Northwoods Project that the US Joint Chiefs presented to President Kennedy in hopes of setting up a US invasion of Cuba.

The plot seems already to have been set in motion. Both Bolton and acting Pentagon secretary Patrick Shanahan have announced their detection of a “credible threat by Iranian regime forces. We call on the Iranian regime to cease all provocation. We will hold the Iranian regime accountable for any attack on US forces or our interests.”

To be clear, the “threat” and the “provocation” are not identified.  But they are somehow happening even though no news services and no governments anywhere in the world, excepting Washington, Israel and Saudi Arabia, are aware of the “escalatory action from the Iranians.”

Bolton has sent an aircraft carrier strike group and bomber taskforce to quell the unidentified “threat.”

It turns out that the Iranian threat to America was uncovered by—you guessed it—Israel…

CNN furthered the false flag event by quoting “unnamed officials” confirming that the US had “specific and credible” intelligence that Iranian forces were targeting US forces.

Here we go again. Sounds exactly like “Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction,” “Assad’s use of chemical weapons,” etc., etc., etc…

Possibly Russia, China, and Europe will not be misled by Washington’s ploy and will stick with Iran, as war with Iran is in no one’s interest except the rulers of Israel and Saudi Arabia…

Success breeds success.  If the Russian and Chinese governments do not have sufficient awareness of reality to let the warmongers in Washington know that there will be NO attack on Iran, Russia will be next, and then it will be isolated China’s turn.  Russia and China cannot escape Washington’s hegemony by allowing it to succeed.

Be seeing you

Obama peace

 

 

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

Will the Real Moron Please Stand Up? – Antiwar.com Original

Posted by M. C. on May 3, 2019

https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2019/05/02/will-the-real-moron-please-stand-up/

“I wonder how he goes to work every day,” says a longtime aide to John Bolton, “because deep in his heart he believes the President is a moron.”

The joke is on Bolton. Having been handed a near impossible task in overthrowing the leftist regimes of Venezuela and Nicaragua, Bolton and his little neocon cabal have been set up for failure – and Trump doesn’t like failure. When it comes to neocon foreign policy, you can reverse the Trumpism that the President adorns his speeches with: Are you tired of losing yet?

And defeat looms large in the neocon effort to bring down Maduro.

Wednesday (May 1) was supposed to be the Day of Revolution in which the Yankee running dogs of imperialism were supposed to be defeated and run out of the country.

It didn’t happen...

Maduro and his “socialist” party are about as socialist as any typical socialist democratic Party in the European Union. There are plenty of opposition parties, none of which are too popular. Their record consists chiefly of bombast, which has little if any difference from that of its rivals: we will take care of you, just don’t give us too much trouble. Like it’s twin, the Sandinistas of Nicaragua, it has a fanatically loyal military which it depends on in order to maintain power – which is why the comic-opera appeals by the rebels to come over to the opposition have the air of a child’s game.

There is nothing “Red” about Venezuela: it is “Bolivarian,” in other words it is nationalist. There is no threat, either ideological or military, emanating from Caracas.

There are no real American interests in this comical effort to conquer a country that has no material resources of any possible interest to Washington: Aside from oil, which is rapidly diminishing in value, it’s a purely ideological enterprise. The Cubans, the Russians, the Chinese, even the foot soldiers of Hezbollah, for chrissake, are all supposedly involved in this sinister plot to violate the Monroe Doctrine – the perfect neocon piñata! Except this one won’t pop.

Venezuela will never fall to the Yankees for the simple reason that Washington is far more hated than the little Lenins of Caracas. The history of our dogged efforts to dominate the country, the inability of the government to create an economy that should be able to maintain a moderately wealthy economy, the persistence of sharp class divisions – such a government that masks an overwhelming incompetence with the sobriquet of “socialist” deserves to be overthrown – but not by the political designs of John Bolton. As I’ve said in previous columns, this administration’s Venezuela’s project is more about American domestic politics than anything having to do with US foreign politics. The President has put the neocons, his longtime enemies, in an untenable position – setting them up for defeat…

Congress will rediscover its suzerainty over US foreign policy … nah, wait, that’s one prediction far too fantastical.

Be seeing you

world tour

 

 

 

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

US Out of Venezuela – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 3, 2019

Venezuela’s situation is not sustainable. Let the fate of the Marxist Socialist regime of Nicolas Maduro be decided by the people of Venezuela.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/05/patrick-j-buchanan/let-venezuela-decide-its-own-destiny/

By

“Who would be free themselves must strike the blow…

“By their right arms the conquest must be wrought.”

So wrote Lord Byron of Greece’s war of independence against the Turks, though the famed British poet would ignore his own counsel and die just days after arriving in Greece to join the struggle.

Yet Byron’s advice is the wise course for the United States, and for the people of Venezuela who seek to free their country of the grip of the incompetent and dictatorial regime of Nicolas Maduro.

Let the Venezuelans decide their own destiny, as did we.

Opposition leader Juan Guaido, recognized by the U.S. and 50 other nations as president, has failed to persuade the army to abandon Maduro.

Yet he can still muster larger crowds in the streets of Caracas to demand the ouster of Maduro than Maduro can call out to stand by his regime.

Tuesday and Wednesday, Guaido announced that the regime’s final hour was at hand. But by midweek, the army’s leaders, including the minister of defense, still stood with Maduro.

Guaido’s opportunity seems to have passed by, at least for the moment. Maduro remains in power, though his generals, weighing the odds, have apparently been negotiating in secret with Guaido.

The Trump administration has backed Guaido, only to see him fail twice now at taking power.

The White House backed the plan in February to breach Venezuela’s borders with truckloads of food and medicine, counting on the army not to use force to block the trucks.

Vice President Mike Pence traveled to the border.

But Guaido and the Americans miscalculated. The army stood by Maduro. The trucks were kept out. Read the rest of this entry »

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