The troops will be going to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Trump has said: “I’m the President of the United States of America. I’m not the president of the world.”
This situation could easily lead to another situation in which the U.S. is acting on behalf of other powers for interests that aren’t its own. We can only hope that he keeps that from happening.
“Pentagon will deploy US forces to the Middle East after Saudi Arabian oil facilities,” by Amanda Macias, CNBC, September 20, 2019:
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon will deploy U.S. forces to the Middle East on the heels of the Iranian attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, U.S. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper announced Friday.
“The president has approved the deployment of U.S. forces which will be defensive in nature and primarily focused on air and missile defense,” Esper said, adding that Saudi Arabia requested the support.
The strikes on the world’s largest crude-processing plant and oil field forced the kingdom to shut down half of its production operations. What’s more, the event triggered the largest spike in crude prices in decades and renewed concerns of a budding conflict in the Middle East. All the while, Iran maintains that it was not behind the attacks.
On Wednesday, Saudi Arabia’s defense ministry said that drone and missile debris recovered by investigators shows Iranian culpability. Saudi coalition spokesman Col. Turki al-Maliki said during a press briefing in Riyadh that all military components retrieved from the oil facilities “point to Iran.”
The latest confrontation follows a string of attacks in the Persian Gulf in recent months….
Though Trump has threatened to bring military action or even “fire and fury” against American adversaries, he has also said he does not want to throw the U.S. into another prolonged military conflict. In a tweet Tuesday, Trump called his measured response to the strikes “a sign of strength that some people just don’t understand!”
Al Dajjal (@AlDajjal1) says
Has President Trump learned from the invasion of Afghanistan? Has he learned from the failure to respond to bombing of Khobar Towers and two embassies? Has he learned anything from Old Harrfy’s ending of war in the Pacific?
mortimer says
Yeah Dajjal … everyone but you knows that it’s a different nuke world than it was in 1945. You are impetuous. Iran is well-armed with nuke friends. We cannot doubt that the Iranians have secret relationships with many of America’s allies as well. The Shi’ites are not only masters of taqiyya … they practically own the copyright.
Rasputinxray says
I did see a post recently that Saudi Arabia insists that it oil be paid for in US dollars. This is suggested as the reason why the US is staying close to Saud.
gravenimage says
Actually, many industries around the world take payment in US dollars, because it is a stable currency. That doesn’t mean the Saudis are allies of ours.
Sabri S. says
The infidels are coming, the kaffirs are coming…again. The muslim world needs to wake up,
and fight US racism, imperialism, and zionist-inspired violence throughout the world. In a prior post, I stated that we need another 83′ lebanon, and I think time is proving my point. I mean seriously, how many puppet governments, dictators and evil governments can the US prop up in our lifetimes. As it says in the Holy Quran, drive them out from where they drove you out!! This evil US will persist in its actions until it is blown out of islamic countries, or have their garbage corpses dragged in the street for days for the world to see. Lets continue to shed light on this US abomination and the proxies that serve them. Wake up Ummah! Just yesterday, the US drone killed 30 innocent farm workers in Afghanistan – the US are even cowards when they kill!! Not even kaffir enough to fight man to man on the ground, like our beloved prophet – who won his battles fair and square by the way. NO US TROOPS ON MUSLIM SOIL – ever…
Angemon says
“ US racism, imperialism, and zionist-inspired violence throughout the world”
He said, living in a world where not only the majority of ideological violence is perpetrated not by Zionists but by his coreligionists but also where it are his Saudis coreligionists who are begging for US help against his Iranian coreligionists … But I guess that when all you have are cries of “racism”, “Zionism” and “imperialism”, facts don’t matter – as the saying goes, if the only tool you have is a hammer, everything will look like a nail…
“he US are even cowards when they kill!! Not even kaffir enough to fight man to man on the ground”
Sabri S. – “get Americans out of muslim soil”
Also Sabri S. – “Filthy Americans, come here so my braver coreligionsts who, unlike my cowardly ass, take up arms and actually live by their religion, can try to kill you”
“like our beloved prophet – who won his battles fair and square by the way.”
Like when, during a raid, he was asked about the use of catapults who might kill civilians and answered with “they are of them”? Face it, your imaginary, delusional, voices-in-his-head, self-proclaimed “prophet” would, had he had access to it, use drones in a way that would make Obama look a saint by comparison.
BTW, tangentially related:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/09/11/us-obliterates-isis-infested-island-40-tonnes-bombs/
You can run but you can’t hide…
gravenimage says
Sabri S. wrote:
The infidels are coming, the kaffirs are coming…again. The muslim world needs to wake up,
and fight US racism, imperialism, and zionist-inspired violence throughout the world.
………………………..
Sabri S. is pretending that the Americans are invading Saudi Arabia–instead, the Saudis are begging for our help against attacks from Iran. Iranians are not Americans or Jews–they are the Saudis fellow Muslims.
And while our going to help the ungrateful Saudis may be foolish, how is it “racist” to aid them against internecine Islamic attacks?
More:
In a prior post, I stated that we need another 83′ lebanon, and I think time is proving my point.
………………………..
Yes, Sabri S. did say this. The US at that time was trying to bring peace to Lebanon, against the Jihad that Muslims had started there. Muslims hate peace.
More:
I mean seriously, how many puppet governments, dictators and evil governments can the US prop up in our lifetimes. As it says in the Holy Quran, drive them out from where they drove you out!! This evil US will persist in its actions until it is blown out of islamic countries, or have their garbage corpses dragged in the street for days for the world to see. Lets continue to shed light on this US abomination and the proxies that serve them. Wake up Ummah!
………………………..
Apparently the savage Shari’ah state of Saudi Arabia–which crucifies people, beheads them, and murders them for “witchcraft” is just not Islamic enough for Sabri S…
More:
Just yesterday, the US drone killed 30 innocent farm workers in Afghanistan – the US are even cowards when they kill!! Not even kaffir enough to fight man to man on the ground, like our beloved prophet – who won his battles fair and square by the way. NO US TROOPS ON MUSLIM SOIL – ever…
………………………..
Well, this last is just hilarious. The “Prophet” usually hung back and let others die in his incessant Jihad wars. He himself died when poisoned by one of his victims.
As for Afghanistan, the target was an Islamic State hideout. Sabri S. loves ISIS–and can’t wait to get some of those sex slaves. *Ugh*.
AleX says
The illiterate, horned demon has thumping hooves to let the ummah know it’s time to raise the green flag of al-lah for the next cowardly retreat of the mohamedan flock.
islam is shrinking with every wife beaten up ‘gently’. islam will be brought to an end by a mighty woman. Same as mohomet gave his last pitiful breath poisoned by a proud Lady of Justice.
John says
So Saudis are in violation of the Quran. Are they no longer Muslim now? Hypocrites!
O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily God guideth not a people unjust.] (Al-Ma’dah 5: 51)
gravenimage says
Not really, John. The Saudis don’t think of us as their friends or protectors–they think of us as their *slaves*.
Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz, Jeddeh 1993: “I summon my blue-eyed slaves anytime it pleases me. I command the Americans to send me their bravest soldiers to die for me. Anytime I clap my hands a stupid genie called the American ambassador appears to do my bidding. When the Americans die in my service their bodies are frozen in metal boxes by the US Embassy and American airplanes carry them away, as if they never existed. Truly, America is my favorite slave.”
Infidel says
Thank you, Presidents George Bush!!! Both of you!
Am I glad John Ellis Bush Bush ain’t our president!
Wellington says
Thanks for that quote, gravenimage. I will remember it.
Islam breeds extreme ingratitude among so many other faults that it has.
gravenimage says
So true.
I also remember the disgusting story of female American military personnel there during the Gulf War who were angrily refused service at an ice cream shop by irate Muslims who didn’t want them mixing with men. Their male counterparts brought them some cones, which they had to eat out in the parking lot in the blazing sun.
No gratitude in Islam.
Anjuli Pandavar says
I’d love to see Yasir Qadhi explain this one. According to him, the verse does *not* prohibit getting help from non-Muslims. It prohibits getting help from non-Muslims *against other Muslims because they are Muslims.” Assuming the Saudis know Islam at least as well as Yasir Qadhi does (after all, they educated him), then it can only be that the Saudis do not consider the Shi’a to be Muslim, in which case taking help from non-Muslims against Iran is permissible. Would Yasir Qadhi, the anti-sectarian sheikh, agree? And while we’re at it, does Yasir Qadhi condemn the Kuwaitis for enlisting the help of the US against Saddam Hussain?
gravenimage says
+1
Snare says
Giving power to goat herders back in the thirty’s was the west mistake we should of bought land … drilled for oil and left them to their false god and goats ..sick twisted people since ..Ishmael …cane …Jehovah will end it at all with fire no water this time…
LB says
Gotta keep that oil flowing! Even if it means sending thousands to their deaths.
mortimer says
Agree somewhat with John’s reasoning because it “grimly true”. John expresses the logic of the terrorists and that is how they will see it … for sure!
The Saudis see it as a ‘temporary alliance’.
Isn’t Islam contradictory, bafflingly inconsistent and self-referentially incoherent? If you are Muslim, you can eat your cake and have it. Whichever.
Carl says
It’s not power of Islam, it’s the power of oil. U.S. doesn’t need their oil, but our Allies do. If we don’t fight for those Monkees then Russia would.
gravenimage says
Russia is schmoozing with Iran–they aren’t going to fight them.
Carl says
But I still don’t like it. I hope we remain only a defensive aid, and only involving the air warfare
Carl says
Gravenimage you are RIGHT. I should have realized that, but Russia would still be the super power of the middle East if we dont help.
Carl says
After reading post from underbed cat, I changed my mind. Let them eat cake, and let the chips fall as they may.
gravenimage says
True about Russia, Carl. But who, generally speaking, wants to be a super power in this crap heap?
Infidel says
Carl, if we analyze this from Moscow’s POV, Russia would not wanna bail out either Saudi Arabia nor Iran. It’s in Russia’s interests that the Straits of Hormuz remain blocked, so that oil/gas supplies from a whole bunch of countries – Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrein – are disrupted. In fact, the Saudis would be the least vulnerable in all of these – they’d have to lay out pipelines to their Red Sea Coast and establish some ports there apart from Jeddah – then they’d just have to worry about the Gulf of Aden. Once this happens, it makes Russia, rather than Saudi Arabia, more control over the world’s oil markets. In fact, Presedent Putin pretty much suggested it at Helsinki, when he suggested that the US and Russia form their own cartel to control the world’s oil supply and prices. (Of course, that was all overlooked in the media outcry over President Trump preferring the word of President Putin over the likes of intel coup plotters like John Brennan et al)
Yeah, Russia supports Iran b’cos Iran is a major weapons customer of Russia – a major one after the collapse of Gadaffi and Saddam. Yet, Putin ain’t hostile to Riyadh either – if you recall, after the Khashoggi murder, while everyone else was ostracizing MbS in Buenos Aires, Putin made it a point to seize the opportunity and give MbS an audience. Essentially, Moscow officially has good relations w/ both Teheran and Riyadh, but it’s in their interests that the impasse in the Gulf continues.
Already, this standoff is benefiting Russia. Like India, which is second only to China when it comes to oil and gas imports, is already nervous. Previously, they were getting the bulk of the 80% of oil that they import from Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Now, due to the friction in the gulf, they are nervous, and looking at other sources. As it is, the US has made them cut off Iran totally and reduce their Venezuelan imports, but what the US sells to India has a higher ASP than what India bought from the Middle East. So India has started working w/ Russia to develop and import oil from their far eastern region, and Russia already has Indian engineers working to develop resources there (since only 25% of Russia’s population lives in Siberia).
Essentially, if we just let the Middle East fester, while divvying up the world’s oil customers b/w ourselves and Russia, we’re better off, and so are they. Which is why it’s not in US economic interests to keep the Straits of Hormuz open, despite the impact its closure might have in Wall Street.
Angemon says
“Yet, Putin ain’t hostile to Riyadh either ”
You can say that again…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXiSafSqXAY
Infidel says
Angemon, that’s exactly what I pointed out in my post above. Note that this meeting happened in the aftermath of Jamal Khassoggi’s murder, when everyone else was ostracizing MbS.
P.S. What HTML tag do you use to embed YouTube videos? Does the URL have to follow a particular template, like youtu.be/abcdefgh or youtube.com/abcdefgh?
Angemon says
I simply copy/paste the full URL. If there’s nothing after it, if the URL it’s the last thing I write, they show up embedded. Otherwise, it’s just the link.
J D S says
Has anyone noticed the price of gas rising ?? Guess it will climb steadily with Saudi oil on fire.
Is the lives of soldiers worth the price of oil??
Are we going to fight a proxy war for Saudi??
There have been so many mistakes made concerning the middle east that it is costing us both lives and dollars…Only GOd knows how much the Muslims have cost us since 9/1, just in security measures alone.
The Muslim world is just where it has planned to be all these many years..They have much patience.
Long ago they knew they would never have the might to take the world militarily as they once thought they did when they refer in full military/political mode ravaging through cities and countries. So over time they put Plan B. In motion and centuries later it is working.
One may call migration in Europe just the turn of the cards and migration just happened….NOT SO!!!! . this is part of Plan. B in the making. .
They used their hole card “RELIGION ” to start the ball rolling knowing just what buttons to push in order for their religious antics to move the European leaders and people like their plan calls for.
They are now in phase one of Plan B. MOVE FORWARD A FEW OR MORE YEARS and during this time they will use every scare tactic, murder and mayhem in the U.S., to keep us Tee Tottering to and fro so that we will stay off balance all the while they’ll be doing their “thing” in Europe to keep Islam advancing like a creeping plague
Now move forward whatever time it takes (REMEMBER THE PATIENCE MENTIONED BEFORE) for Europe to be engulfed in sharia and the wiles of islam…..Now military might comes into play with, more and more Muslims now in Europe and a military machine in their grip and phase one of Plan B complete they are ready to go back and pick up plan A, .conquest of the world..
Does all this sound like a pipe dream fairy tale…or???
tgusa says
Where are their men? Are they too busy beating their women to defend their own countries? I’m tired of America being the nursemaid to the world. Washington DC calls them allies but all I see are wards.
gravenimage says
If they were just wards they might at least be grateful–but they are not.
gravenimage says
Hard to know that to think about this. It is not good to let the vicious Mullahs run amok, but the Saudis are *no* allies of ours.
Infidel says
I know that we don’t want the world’s oil markets to implode, but this is ridiculous! Why doesn’t the president, or someone in either State, Pentagon or CIA tell the Saudis to get the Arab League or the OIC to send their big armies to protect their installations?
Say what you will about Iran, but the fact that a country of 80 million can be such a threat to all the world’s 400 million Sunni Arabs is an amazing accomplishment in its own right. If only they were a secular non Muslim power, as opposed to a Shia theocracy
mortimer says
Islamic armies have a morale problem stemming from their first-cousin sociology and internecine, tribal loyalties. They would not be able to work together, let alone work cohesively within their own countries. Sadly, they would repeat the situation of the beginning of ISIS in which unqualified, untrained generals took all their loot, got into fast vehicles and beetled out of the battle zone living their troops behind and leaderless and without orders. Shockingly unprofessional. That’s what I would expect. The Saudi family lives in constant fear of a coup d’état which would sweep them from power in unbelievably bloody, internal purge. When revolutions begin, they seldom turn out as the American revolution did with principles of order, freedom, reason and equality. Large armies of Arabs with guns, cannons, missiles and bombes, might turn out differently than you wish.
Infidel says
Yeah, the defeat that Arab armies have suffered at the hands of Israel is legendary. But they do know how to either fight for themselves, or hire other mercenaries to fight for them. Hey, Pakistan has a huge standing army, and is desperate for the cash (in order to pay off Beijing for its Belt/Road deals). Why doesn’t Riyadh pay them for loaning as many troops as they can, in return for such a bailout?
gravenimage says
Muslim armies are pathetic. Generally Muslims are only good at stealth Jihad or targeting unarmed victims.
KWJ says
This is something Americans and most of our soldiers don’t like happening. Even while there was no conflict our soldiers have been there when Saudi Arabia should form its own army.
Additionally, our soldiers and other Americans have not been given the same kind of immunity and treatment in KSA while princes and their sons have got off scot-free which means Americans didn’t get justice. Americans have died in Saudi Arabia…murdered, tortured and punished, and punishments are draconian in KSA. These things happened under Clinton, Bush, Obama and bow Trump. Under Obama 9/11 victims’ families couldn’t even get justice from KSA.
There are always people benefitting from war but it’s not us little people. A war with Iran would be a big problem. There’s already war in Yemen. We don’t need another Desert Storm war like when Saddam attacked Kuwait.
Oil markets. We have our own oil but the oil market is like a millstone around our necks.
Infidel says
Oh no, not again. In 1991, we sent troops to Saudi Arabia to save their ass from Saddam, and 10 years later, 9/11 happened. While they had myriad reasons, one of those was the presence of our infidel troops in Saudi Arabia.
Seriously, after spending something close to what the US spends on its own defense, if the Saudis can’t defend themselves, why don’t they just hire the military of other poor Muslim countries as their mercenaries? Like Pakistan, whose prime minister has been panhandling recently in both Beijing and Riyadh? Let them have Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and so on send as many troops that they can to Saudi Arabia, so that they can withstand an Iranian invasion. But why should non-Muslim armies defend a country whose citizens are on record as attacking the country that provided the protection? There should be no Saudis in America, and there should be no Americans in Saudi Arabia (except maybe our Mohammedans, like Ilhan, Rashida, Ellison and Farrakhan)
gravenimage says
+1
WPM says
Those men age 17 to 40 who have been invading Europe under the bander of being refugees are mostly members of the Sunnis branch of the Islamic tree. Have Europe send them to Saudis to fight there war ,if those Saudis do not want the refugees tell them to use there own citizens to defend their own country. We sold billions in arms for the Saudis to defend their own country have the Saudi men change out of their house dress robes into a pair of Kaki green pants grab an American made rifle and defend their own homeland are they “not the best of people” if they die they go straight to whore heaven? I forgot the rich Saudis already enjoy whore heaven right here on earth in there trips to Europe and the west buying escort girls for the night, gambling ,drinking ,buying high end real estate , with the money they make selling oil to us unbelievers . Are the Saudis paying for and supporting radical imams, and Mosque building in the west?
underbed cat says
Dear Mr. President, Please do not aid the Islamic Saudi Arabia after an attack from Islamic Iran, Saudi Arabia is where most of the hijacker on 9/11 who hijacked planes, originated from, the 57 Islamic countries ummah declared war on the United States. Atta and 2 others came from other Islamic countries. To defend Saudi Arabia and attack a nuclear country of Iran will incite the middle east in revenge. The special privileges allowed for Saudi Arabia, which is the it the birthplace of Islamic terror starting in Medina, SA, this would be a disaster…Remember after 9/11, it was suppressed and denied that 400 Saudi’ were sent back home protected on or after 9/11. They were in Las Vegas for 1 month and left 1 or 2 days before the attack on many Americans this should really be investigated. do not sacrifice your election of 2020 or the young American men who have been sent to Iran, to fight Islamic wars of dominance while many are here plotting here in the U.S, to take us down by their alliance with the left to remove guns, and free speech, and make it illegal to criticize Islam such as Resolution 1618. Facts were made into hate speech. They have be working on the United State for many years, and used many MB organizations start the process. they stripped our border patrol of in-tell, shut down all connections known sources of jihad terror
The middle found the left and left over Marxist using Maoist methods to align with, and since they srubbed the border patrol are easily afforded entry.as they fly or walk into this country , they knew many were unaware of the warfare doctrine,. Now today your favorite new station, a new story has the left exposing what you would be criticized for revealing. Big shock. Your understanding of Islam is that you can get the Saudi Prince to “fight The Imams, and Islamic scholars who have control, have used our freedoms and rode into the U.S. as a religion, declaring themselves with no ties to terror, as a religion of tolerance and peace reading the Quran it clearly shows the origin of terror. Please read the Quran in English at least 2 thru 10 and see that you have been deceived. The verses call for muslims to kill kaffar, that is us. Most of your voters know much more than you realize…..your instincts, from your statement it seems muslim hate us, is true, they have trained from birth to do so. Some leave….but those leaders you deal with are Islamic and have controlled our national defense with deception. Please change the CVE guidelines back to fact based.
underbed cat says
Islamic Saudi Arabia air force was in Las Vegas for nearly 28 days,rented and used an entire hotel and brought their own staff in to operate how does this fly? to do what?….plan for a purchase to finalize if not of hotels but warplanes….2 days later a massacre who lived in a remote Nevada town, that had two mosques. It is possible he was after many trips to ME someone recruited. Time to discern who we ally with, this relationship one that shows a friendly face and holds a hard heart, unknown unless you analyze the doctrine they follow, as experts predicted,we must know the operating principles of whom we partner and before we allow to a hidden problem to influence our country down the wrong path to fight abroad while enemies scurry in a open door for ceaseless dominance after years of deception and using the left to undermine our stability.
If this works to suppress attacks from a technical Iran, I hope the experts know, actually this is a dilemma that took years to construct, tributaries.
Infidel says
Fully agree w/ this. At a time when he’s pulling teeth in order to get our troops out of Afghanistan, it would be a disaster if we started re-deploying them in Saudi Arabia. Remind the Saudis of the OIC, and encourage them to have countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia deploy as many of their troops as they can spare in Saudi Arabia.
Besides, if the Strait of Hormuz gets blocked, the US, as well as Russia, can leverage the situation by selling oil to all the big customers who need it at elevated prices. Given that our budget deficits as well as the debt are seriously hurting, we could use the money!
mortimer says
Meanwhile, China, Russia, Germany and other countries continue to help Iran in its reckless sabre rattling. Without the US troops in the region to add credibility to the American alliance with Kingdom of S-A, the Iran’s will think they can continue their attacks without any response whatever.
The situation in the region is similar to that of the Balkan powder keg in 1914. A stable oil and gas playing field is in the interest of Europe, but only Russia will benefit from instability. Europe needs an alternative to Russian oil and gas.
Germany is the sixth largest consumer of energy in the world. Germany imports more than half of its energy. For example, Germany is the fifth-largest consumer of oil in the world. Germany largely imports its oil from Russia, Norway and the United Kingdom, in that order. Germany is also the world’s largest importer of natural gas. Over 22.6% of its primary energy use comes from gas.
The Western world needs to start transitioning from oil to a hydrogen-based energy economy. This will stop Muslim countries from having so much to say on the world stage and without mega-bucks, the Islamic dictatorships will return to relative unimportance on the world stage. The unbridled transfer of Western wealth to the Gulf states should stop forever. Turn off their cash flow.
Demsci says
Thanks for these very interesting statistics, Mortimer. Transitioning to alternative fuel sources seems great to me, but not at the cost of Western economies, not with the Green New Deal, not one-sidedly only in Western countries.
For me ultimately the choice is between democratic and dictatorial countries. If we save democracies democracy will save us. Democracies don’t fight among each other, have much more scrutiny due to freedom of speech, they in general, perform better than dictatorial states.
The Islamic countries are most in the dictatorial camp. So are China and Russia. All attempts to spread of democracy are obstructed by them. So I see it as imperative for all Democracies to unite, maybe in the UDN, United Democratic Nations.
That’s why I am “livid”, angry with the policies of the UK, France and Germany, who still want to appease Iran and who “semi-betray” the US, perhaps because of “Hate and contempt for Trump”. But hopefully Boris Johnson will choose the side of the US soon enough. And Emanuel Macron is always so cordial to Trump when the two meet, can’t he take the American side soon? And in Germany Merkel is “on her last legs”.
Beneath the Veil of Consciousness says
And so it begins again We can’t afford to fix our roads and bridges, support our teachers and their children, insure the health of our people, yet we have what it takes to sacrifice our blood and treasure for some contemptible pigs who see us as nothing but maid servants ready to wipe their asses anytime their religion of peace showers the world with another shit show.
Peter WF says
Are Arab forces so impotent that they need western forces?
PATHETIC.
Westman says
Perhaps we should think that being able to purchase sophisticated weaponry with oil money does not change the nature of of those operating it. When it comes to battles of physical strength, Arabs might prevail. When it comes to a battle relying on intelligent use of technology, the Persians(Iranians) are likely to prevail over Arabs. The regime of Iran will remain a menace until it is either whittled down by the West or overthrown by its citizens.
Like Communism, Islam creates incompetence in every society it controls, some more than others.
Demsci says
I think the Iranian regime is ultimately going for nuclear weapons, deal or no deal. Their foreign policy seems stubbornly aggressive. If the US and Israel do “nothing with sanctions or military” the Iranian regime will force war upon the world eventually. And the regime will very probably blackmail the Western and Arab world with nuclear weapons while expanding their territory and upping their own and proxy forces with deadly force, in order to destroy Israel.
And Israel, at some point, will attack Iran, if not in it’s well defended nuclear sites than in Irans own vulnerable oil refineries. What Iran can do to Saudi Arabia, Israel can do to Iran. And Israel will feel that it must, in order to prevent annihilation. Despite huge protests from world opinion.
For all the accountability that president Trump has and is called out for, I say that the Iranian leaders are no apes but that they are human beings that should be held as much accountable as the American leaders. When, as now happens so often, the Americans are held accountable but the Iranians not, that means illogical immoral “discrimination/ racism of lower expectation” to me.
To me the Iranian regime carries, say, 90 % of responsibility for the current situation. The U.N. has 193 members and America maintains friendly, neutral or at least hostile-but-peaceful relations with 190 of them. With North Korea being at least quiet for now. Why can’t Iran behave more like these other 190 countries?
Because of this looming threat of Iran, it seems better to the American Government to concentrate on the bigger of two evils, Iran, and use the other, Saudi Arabia, as “useful idiot of our own inside the Islamic world”. And the Saudi’s ARE useful because both China and Russia like or need to deal with them and so the Saudi’s prevent these two for choosing Iran’s side wholeheartedly.
Infidel says
China also has 2 captive oil suppliers on their west – Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. Those countries can’t ship their oil anywhere w/o going thru either China or Russia, since both Iran and Afghanistan block their path to the Arabian Sea. Russia can’t do much for them, not the least b’cos it’s a competitor. So all they can do is ship their oil to China, and either sell it there, or to other customers worldwide.
Given that, it would seem that China would be less dependent on Middle Eastern oil. Also, if their negotiations w/ the US totally collapse, as is more likely than not, China might as well buy Iranian oil that’s off the market for lower than market rates, thereby stabilizing the world’s oil prices
Demsci says
Thanks infidel for providing information about K-and T-Stan oil sales to China. I gather that you, Wellington and I share a big interest in geopolitics and there is infinite food for thought about it.
But we can only tell each other so much and not in all the nuance/ width that I think we all possess. No, we can not be complete here on this platform. But here goes at least some of what I think.
Right now it worries me that America takes on China and Iran simultaneously, if you will. Why not concentrate on the worst enemy; Iran?
The Pakistan ambassador to the US wrote in Dawn (Pak newspaper) that China and Iran concluded a 410 Billion contract considering oil field reconstruction and such. Furthermore we know that Iranian oil is stockpiled near China. If China buys these huge quantities in storage next to it, and starts constructing oil structure in Iran, it may effectively ”bail Iran out” from it’s current desperate situation, in an all out defiance of the US in a lose-lose situation. So my fondest hope geopolitically is that China and US play win-win with each other.
The unexpected voice says
I don’t think you could trust the Chinks. They couldn’t be trust as they’re greedy and power hungry as hell. Also, helping Saudi Arabia is wasting your own lives and resources, and theey’re muslim anyway, so may be let them kill each other. I’m not even the West but all I care is the West and may be Japan and Russia(It may be a Authoritarian dictatorship but back in the 18th-19th century before communism poisonous It. Russia play major role in defeating Ottoman the most evil empire in human history. so deep down I want to see The West and Russia getting along).
Infidel says
Demsci, during the Cold War, we made an assumption that Communism was a greater threat than Islam, and accordingly, did everything we could in Afghanistan to make the Soviets bleed so badly that ultimately, they’d be forced to withdraw. Fast forward to 2001, and at least some of us were forced to reconsider whether we prioritized our enemy ideologies correctly.
That said, it’s hard to determine whether China is a bigger threat w/ their 25 year plan and their one belt/one road agenda, or whether Islam still is the bigger threat. On one hand, you have China making predatory loans all over Africa and also making inroads into Latin America and even Europe (Italy). We can’t spread ourselves thinly like they can, given the situation in Latin America, so we need to decide which places we’re fine w/ letting China have, and which places we wanna own instead.
My thoughts – I’d try and keep Latin America within our sphere of influence, while recognizing that certain countries – Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia – are probably better left to China. I’d avoid touching Africa at all – let China be the ones burned there, like the Brits, French, Belgians and Germans before them. I’d work to keep the entire Indo-Pacific region free of Chinese influence – even try and win North Korea over, if the Trump-Kim interpersonal dynamics ultimately works that way.
But other than that, I actually support Beijing in Xinxiang, even if I oppose them in Tibet. However, I’d love to play rope-a-dope w/ China and entice them to try and totally own the Muslim world – like they’re doing w/ Pakistan – and make countries like Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Turkey, et al their economic colonies. B’cos ultimately that’ll have a way of bleeding them, but not before they’ve totally caused serious damage to the psyche of those countries. Once that’s done, they can recover slowly, while in the process assessing whether Islam is likely to help or hinder such a recovery
Demsci says
Great analysis, Infidel, thank you. I still see Islam as the bigger threat. And I like your ideas about almost “dividing the world between US and Chinese spheres of influence”. Yes, China and Islam deserve each other! And also China is not forever strong, with their faulty one party system, I dare say, and yes Islam will bleed them, and China itself will influence and possibly antagonize Islam. And yes, let America withdraw from Islamic countries. And let us tell our Muslim “friends”, foreign and domestic, that China is a worse foe to them than the West is.
I dare say you and I have a lot in common on geopolitical ideas. As we have with the ‘grey fox” Wellington. Who may still well correct and improve us on some issues.
Jack says
I see a lot of Code Pink replies to this strategy from President Trump… What ever happens in the Middle East, the US needs to be kept up to speed with real time intel.
Don’t believe for a minute that Don Trump will allow the Saudis to control him. He won’t make the mistakes of previous administrations.
underbed cat says
I hope you are correct Jack. No code pink here. However I think this is Saudi Arabia’s responsibility, the two Islamic countries have been fighting each other for dominance nothing more since 1979 Islamic takeover of Iran.
gravenimage says
Having reservations about sending our brave military to die for ungrateful Mohammedans does *not* make us “Code Pink”. Some wars are well worth fighting–this one, i;m not so sure.
Infidel says
Actually, looking back at that now, I think Cindy Sheehan and Code Pink were right, and I regret opposing them at the time. Had we withdrawn our troops immediately after ousting Saddam, and just leaving a few special forces to look for WMDs, which was the only stated reason that we were there, her son wouldn’t have died, and she’d not have made a spectacle of herself at Crawford, TX
gravenimage says
I take your point, Infidel, and largely agree. But “Code Pink” has been against *any* defense against Jihad.
Infidel says
Is Code Pink a single-issue group, viz exclusively an anti-war group, or are they supportive of the larger woke Left in general? In other words, do they also support open borders, oppose the Travel ban, support CAIR, et al?
If it’s the former, I can support them. But if they’re a part of the larger woke SJW movement, then obviously no!
Mario Alexis Portella says
So true! This is something we should completely stay out! Hasn’t he learnt from Afghanistan and even Iraq?
UNCLE VLADDI says
So basically the headlines should read:
“Orange Man Pimps Out US Soldiers To Muslims”
Paddy O'Connor says
Pres.Trump can play this hand easily.
Have no fear. Beware the enemy within ,the Demos.
underbed cat says
Paddy O’Connor I hope he can play his hand but I fear it will take a serious incident before he sees or gets the truth. I believe in this country there much unseen, but when the woman’s attire change appear mandatory, the public will notice and it will shock the nation, since the hidden enemy may be appearing in western clothes, shaved and living quietly,revealing themselves only to others who are embedded, but it could change suddenly. I surmised this may be the reason SA was attacked a possible distraction, all the while mosques are being funded and built everywhere, consider how many are located Las Vegas….5 or 6, a strange place for a religion( 90% nope) revival, without understanding what they follow, see no danger. The leftist dems held the door open and may have fooled some of the population to ignore the doctrine, the fact they are not allowed to make treaties and never have been truthful for years to Israel, slander laws that forbid exposure to non believers, and trying to criminalize speech of facts, the pressure to cause disruption in our land and worse to be a good believer and be warned who is in national security and how the define it and defend it. This spider web is extremely sticky.
Angemon says
No. Whatever aid the US provides to the Saudis – and the Saudis should be made to pay for it, up to the last bullet – should be limited to remote means, like aerial support, drone bombings, etc. Turn Iran’s military into a heap of molten scrap but remotely, no boots on the ground whatsoever – let the Saudis and their local allies do that.
Hello Hello says
The many comments to this article were interesting. It seems very obvious that as world powers converge in the Middle East that there is something developing that is of grave significance. It is fascinating to watch events falling into place that seem to fullfil God’s plan for the Middle East and the World. Russia is the key player in the Middle East and will be for sometime. In America, there are forces that are not friendly to the country who are encouraging the President to become more involved in this staged Iranian event, and sending troops there is not wise.
gravenimage says
I don’t think that our brave troops being sent to defend–and possibly die for–ungrateful Muslims is part of God’s plan.
Jim Buterbaugh says
And where is the United Nations? Were they not created to stop wars?
Joss says
Oh Jim – you will have your little joke!
Jim says
Yeah Joss, I know. The United Nations has become the lap dog of the Muslims. I sure miss Nikki’s fiery spirit in the middle of it. It’s just sad that people elect gutless crap that will not take a moral step forward to save their child’s life, let alone a nation’s
Demsci says
With hindsight many Americans believe that the 2 Bushes should not have interfered with the 2 Gulf Wars. Why was it necessary to rescue Kuwait? As an Islamic country it largely consists of ingrates to the USA. Why could George W. Bush not let Saddam Hussein stay in power? The WMD were supposedly not nuclear and any way never found. If Iran now is suspected of WMD they would be nuclear and that could be really dangerous, but now there is not support enough for a military strike, not even a limited one, because of the earlier false alarm.
What is good about Tulsi Gabbards foreign policy is that she sees the real hostility and arrogance of Saudi Arabia and that she wants to avoid spilling American soldiers blood for the interests of foreign dictatorial Islamist countries and interests. Like in the past.
Only her plan is also to get back into the JCPOA and stop with the crippling sanctions on Iran. But that I consider a very risky gamble. Knowing the aggressive apocalyptic attitude and behavior of Iran’s leaders, I am sure that they sooner or later will break the JCPOA-deal. I think their acquiring a nuclear weapon can’t be stopped, except by regime change.
And regardless I consider Pres. Trumps sanctions policy already a success, in that a really Islamofascist hostile apocalyptic-thinking regime is now severely deprived of funds and increasingly detested by it’s own population. The Soviet Union reportedly fell because the leaders could not bribe enough important supporters to remain loyal, so the hope is that this happens in Iran too. Once the regime gets too weak the hope is that some “coyotes or vultures” become brave enough to strike a blow against it.
Infidel says
Demsci, looking back at history, you seem to be right. Remember that Saddam was our ally until he occupied Kuwait. What if we had recognized his move to make Kuwait Iraq’s 19th province? The oil supplies from both Iraq and Kuwait would have been fine, and there would have been no threats to oil supplies from anybody – Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrein, et al Same if he had continued to occupy and annex Saudi Arabia. We would have needed to exact a pledge out of him of not to harass Israel, in return for such a recognition. He’d have had his empire, or more importantly, made Iraq into a Shia minority country, while the world would have had its stability and its oil.
While I like Tulsi Gabbard, I totally miss why people on the right are so enamored w/ her. If one takes out her foreign policy, she’s Bernie-lite – supports Medicare for all, Gun control, race based reparations and a whole lot of left leaning crap. Only things she’s good about – respecting religious freedom, opposing free health care and education for illegal immigrants and her anti-Saudi policy. But unlike Rand Paul, she doesn’t see that as an issue w/ Islam: she addresses Muslim audiences w/ Assalamalaiqum (even though she’s not a Muslim), and when Trump first announced the travel ban, she opposed it, featuring a Syrian refugee w/ her (it wasn’t clear whether the refugee was a Sunni Muslim or one of their persecuted enemies, like Christians, Alawites, etc). At any rate, she’s pretty well disliked in today’s woke Dem party due to her past opposition to Gay marriage, and is unlikely to be hired in any Democrat administration, should there be one.
Rand Paul is the one who’s read this all right: he recognizes that Iran has not been helpful in its attitude when the US wanted to talk, and also is cognizant of the fact that they feel surrounded and threatened by all the Arab countries across the Gulf, who’ve been arming themselves. And president Trump thankfully seems to agree more w/ Rand than Lindsay, so this decision should be easily reversible.
Wellington says
On the specific matter of Saddam Hussein, Infidel, he was a megalomaniac who, like Hitler, never knew when to stop, contra Bismarck. It’s one thing for America to support an authoritarian but quite another to continue backing a megalomaniac like SH.
While I have no respect for Kuwait, international law was violated when SH in 1990 took it over and the principle that you simply can’t do this had to be upheld. Thatcher saw this right away and shortly thereafter Bush 41 did too.
Where we went wrong was after the 1991 war our truce terms were too generous (e.g., allowing SH to retain helicopters). He should have been held to far stricter control with the understanding that if he went “astray” (which he did), we would see to it that he and his family were no more. Instead, he kept violating the truce terms (e.g. firing daily on British and American jets over the two no-fly zones) and playing rope-a-dope with WMDs. Once 2003 came around and we finally decided he had to go, as we have already exchanged posts about this, America’s huge mistake then was nation building with democracy as an end goal. To hell with that in ANY Islamic nation. Get in and then get out with a “standard authoritarian” in charge. If, on occasion thereafter, extra bad guys have to be taken out, so be it and temporarily send in some Special Forces to do so.
The Islamic world is hopeless and what we should have done all along is follow a new containment policy, which would include denying Muslim immigration to the West (finding whatever legal pretext to do so) and which would occasionally entail having to get rid of the worst of the lot in that sorry-ass region of the world where Islam, a decrepit religion if ever there were one, is dominant.
Finally, on the matter of Russia, I don’t want said country getting any more powerful. Putin is not to be trusted and the Russians in general too (just this past March per a Levada Centre poll, 70% of Russians have a positive view of Stalin, arguably the great mass murderer in history). In effect, trying to buddy up with Russia is as fraught with all kinds of difficulties as is buddying up with Islamic countries. Russia is not as hopeless as the Islamic world but it’s pretty hopeless nonetheless. Would be interested in your take on my take of things. Take care.
Infidel says
Wellington, we can’t have enemies/adversaries everywhere. As the president point out, the EU are not our allies. China is not our ally. The Muslims of either side – Iran or Saudi Arabia – are not our allies. Russia, otoh, is not the adversary that it was when it was the Soviet Union. It has an economy the size of Italy, and like Saudi Arabia, is a one trick pony – oil. We could do the flip of what Nixon did w/ China: just like he used China to leverage them against the Soviets, we could – and probably should – use Russia as a foil against China. If we did it right, not only would they be an ally against China – they’d also be an ally against both the EU as well as the Arabs. And given that they have no other industry, they could be a great market for the US, and help us reduce our overall trade deficit.
They would be a lot more useful as an ally, and that’s what candidate Trump probably had in mind when he’d say repeatedly that he wants good relations w/ Russia. Almost every other GOP candidate opposed that, but look at who a majority of Republicans then voted for. Then we had the deep state do what it could to sabotage any normalization of relations w/ Russia – whether it was the Mueller witch hunt, the spying on Michael Flynn, the expulsion of Russian diplomats for Sergei Skripal, preferring Turkey over Russia… When our foreign policy establishment still thinks that Turkey is an ally and Russia an adversary, it’s obvious that they’re stuck in the 80s.
As I pointed out elsewhere in this page, Russia would love it if the Straits of Hormuz were blocked. As it is, the sanctions on Iran have been good for Russia, since it’s raised both their ASPs and their market (India’s now actively developing a supply source from the Russian far east). On top of that, if tankers are too scared to cross Hormuz for fear of being hunted down by either Iranian or US navy, that takes Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrein and Qatar off the oil markets: at that point, you’d effectively have a virtual cartel of the US and Russia, no matter what we think of Putin or what Moscow thinks of us. Yeah, the market price of oil would shoot up, probably leading to inflation, but we’d be one of the least affected by that, as a result of being a supplier. Yeah, Russia would be strengthened immensely by that, but with that, they’d be less of a client state to China, which is what they currently are.
Another thing – if you look at the Arabs, particularly the Gulf countries, they’re not the same as they were back in the last century, when they pretty much controlled the world market in oil and Islamic causes drove their policies. Since the US became a major exporter of oil, their market has shrunk significantly, so that they no longer make Islam the driving factor behind their foreign policies. For instance, the reason they’ve all turned a blind eye towards China’s persecution of Uighurs is that they don’t wanna lose that market, and they know that China already has 2 captive suppliers in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, who can’t sell their oil via the Arabian Sea, thanks to the situation in both Afghanistan and Iran. Similarly, when India revoked Article 370 on Kashmir and Pakistan begged the OIC to take their side, Saudi Arabia refused to back Pakistan, and Emirates point blank took India’s side. Reason is simple: while Pakistan’s economy has imploded, India is still one of their few customers left, and they don’t wanna lose that to the US and Russia any more than they’ve lost the others.
P.S. I do agree that it is sad that 70% of Russians have a positive view of Stalin. Especially given that Stalin was not even Russian, he was Georgian. In fact, if one looks at it, the only Russian leaders of the Soviet Union were Lenin, Andropov and Gorbachev. Incidentally, any idea whether they reverted the name Volgograd back to Stalingrad? It’s not unnatural to be proud of a country’s history, and I’d hope that if Russians wanted to hark back, that they’d go back to the Romanovs – particularly Tsar Peter the Great, rather than Stalin or Brezhnev, who were not even Russian
Wellington says
Thanks for your reply, Infidel. Well, you are more sanguine about Russia than I am. Understand, I wish Russia well but, a la George Kennan, they look upon their neighbors as vassals or enemies. If Russia had been really smart, which it surely wasn’t, it would be democratic by now, with a much more diversified economy and in NATO, something both Bush 41 and Clinton suggested was possible. Instead, in traditional Russian mode, they saw NATO, the greatest military alliance in history for the protection and promotion of freedom, as an enemy. Poland didn’t, nor did Estonia, nor Latvia, nor Lithuania, nor Ukraine, nor the Czechs and Slovaks, etc. Telling and damning that Russia did. I fear the price of getting closer to Russia would be Russia being allowed to re-create in some de facto way the old USSR. I simply don’t trust the Russians. They are brave and have a great artistic and intellectual heritage but they stink on the matter of freedom. And they really are xenophobic. They see enemies everywhere and they have a highly warped view of the West. Still, we should work with them but NEVER at the price of letting them dominate Eastern Europe again and this should be non-negotiable.
I don’t see the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz as a positive. Way too many variables here even if your scenario of working closer with Russia became a reality. There is also Japan to consider. They get a great deal of their oil from the Persian Gulf region. If Russia or China would start supplying them with much of their oil needs, then they would have leverage over Japan that would not be in Japan’s interests surely—nor America’s.
I hope you are correct about the Gulf countries and yes, at least temporarily, they may have curtailed their enthusiasm somewhat in pushing Islam in the West, but I wouldn’t rely upon this long term. Money talks but Islam also creates fanatics and fanatics are unstable. At least with the Russians, bastards that they are, you know they’re not crazy. I don’t see the Arab world ever giving up on pushing Islam on the West. There might be a lull for a while but that’s all it will be. For my money, the Arabs are the single most dysfunctional major people on the planet. A lot of this has to do with Islam but not all of it. They are still very tribal and have perverse ideas of what constitutes honor.
I certainly agree with you that we can’t have enemies everywhere but most of the world simply doesn’t work and America must deal with this reality constantly. What is a damn shame is that Western Europe has become such a wimp. A strong and tough Western Europe would really give America the leverage it needs. Alas, wishin’ ain’t gettin’.
Infidel says
Wellington, I agree w/ you that we don’t wanna sell Eastern Europe down the Oder or the Danube the way Roosevelt did in 1945. However, at the same time, we need to be practical, rather than sentimental about them. Like under Article 5 of NATO, had the Soviets ever invaded West Germany, that would have triggered WWIII. Do we wanna have that still applicable to, say, Latvia? How about Ukraine? Also, if I recall right, Russia, under Yeltsin, did wanna join NATO, but were declined. Also, US policies against Serbia in the 90s – both in Bosnia and in Kosovo – and that too in favor of Muslims – did serve to alienate the Russians, who saw that as a Western anti-Slav and anti-☦️ (Eastern Orthodox) move. Add to that the Bush Administration almost supporting a Jihadist insurrection in Uzbekistan, which at the time was hosting 2 US forwarding bases against Afghanistan, and the Russians ain’t totally unjustified in being suspicious of us.
I don’t see the Soviet Union getting resurrected. For once, the Communists have been so thoroughly discredited that they’ve not been able to do squat in any elections since Putin came to power. Also, during the Soviet era, the Russians had to subsidize the other republics, something that they resented. Currently, on the world stage, they play second fiddle to China – something that I suggested that the US should try and break.
I agree w/ you about the Gulf countries, which is why I’m actually against Iran completely imploding. If that happens, it would be like the 7th century, when the Arab conquest of Iran just emboldened Islam, which then went on to not only consolidate in Iran, but go on to conquer Turkistan, Afghanistan and northern India. It would be nice if Iran were still a Zoroastrian country, but in absence of that, I’m happy to see insurgent Islamic sects take on the Sunnis. Do not imagine that if Iran folds, that Israel would still get the support of the Saudis or other Sunni Arabs: I’m not betting on them becoming like Jordan or Egypt, but rather, more like Hamas or Lebanon.
On oil, I think the US should make a list of the countries that they don’t wanna see dominated by Russia, and put them high on the allocation list. Like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, maybe India(?)… and concede that Russia is gonna get some high value customers. Essentially do a de-facto division of the market w/ Moscow: let Moscow sell to Germany/EU while the US sells to Eastern Europe, Latin America, Indo-Pacific region (there, they’ll have to share customers w/ Russia). Essentially, this will be like 2 companies, such as Samsung & LG, or Google and Apple, or Coke and Pepsi…. splitting up the world market.
gravenimage says
Interesting exchange, Wellington and Infidel.
Demsci says
Thanks, Infiidel, for response and analysis with which I agree. And yes, your information about Tulsi turns me off regarding her political standpoints. She remains a radiant personality though. Rand Paul seems at times all too isolationist? But he makes a good impression.
Infidel says
Demsci, I agree w/ Rand Paul. As Tucker Carlson pointed out, we have troops in 150+ countries (out of 190) in the world, but not in the US. I don’t see why we need to have troops in Germany, Iceland, sub Saharan Africa or even the Middle East. For instance, one of the things that the US is doing is working w/ the Ethiopian navy. Quite an achievement for a country that’s been landlocked since Eritrea seceded. Both Rand Paul and Tucker are also right in opposing NATO expansion: seriously, if Russian troops were to invade, say, Latvia, do we wanna send US troops there to fight and die for them, just like we were for West Germany during the Cold War? Talking about including Georgia or Ukraine in NATO is demented, but Rand Paul is the only elected official who opposes it.
I’d much rather see them brought back to the US and line up the entire US-Mexico border – from San Ysidro to Brownsville. I don’t know if that’s isolationist, since Rand also supports USMCA, KORUS and other trade deals that the US is working on. The other thing is that since the attempted attack in Bowling Green (which Chelsea Clinton mocked Kellyanne Conway for), Rand Paul has been supportive of the president’s immigration and extreme vetting policies as well, and has not demanded that Muslims be allowed into the US. Making somewhat of a departure from the standard Libertarian open-borders stance.
Demsci says
Infiidel, I am Dutch and thus European. But I reject and despise the attitude of UK, France, Germany in regard to the Iran deal.
I am a democratic ideologist or so. Prof. Clay Fuller of American Enterprise Institute explained how democracies are better than dictatorial states. And anyway, I think dictatorial states makes slaves and democracies proud free people. Of course in a sense. And yes, in a peaceful way I like Democracy to expand ever further.
So it saddens me that pres. Trump who I admire says that the Europeans are not the US allies. I strongly hope and contend that they still in many ways are and should be. Maybe now, after “Abqaiq” the UK, France and Germany will join the US against the JCPOA?
I hope I thus also explained why I find Rand Paul to be really too isolationist, I guess. AND Tucker too. I hope the US never abandones other democracies. And Tucker also in my view too easily dismisses the grave danger of Iran getting nukes and posing a mortal threat to Israel and being the real threat to peace. Which John Bolton is NOT, as he just realisticallly advocates a strong preventive reaction to utterly agressive and hopeless Iran! It is a shame that Tucker so naively attacked John Bolton as a warmonger and that the president then fired John. Or so I feel of course.
Infidel says
Demsci, my point – which I didn’t spell out clearly – is that the Cold War is over. Russian tanks or paratroopers ain’t gonna land in Berlin, Frankfurt, Paris, Brussels, Madrid or any Western European capital. The threat that existed to your country, and indeed all of Europe – during the Cold War, had passed some 30 years ago, and our policies need to reflect that. Our troops don’t belong in Iceland, Germany, the Netherlands or anywhere else – not b’cos you don’t matter, but rather, b’cos that era is over. We don’t have troops in France along the Maginot line either.
The problems America has is that trillions of dollars are being spent abroad, be it on military missions, foreign aid and so on, while within the US, middle America has been hollowed out. That’s what drove the America First agenda in 2016, and that’s why the GOP is slowly but surely changing from an establishment globalist party to a MAGA/KAG party.
John Bolton’s problem was that he never modified his position or reconsidered it after facts on the ground changed. Like in the early 2000s, many of us supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and they made sense as long as the mission was simply toppling the regimes in power. The reason public opinion soured on them is that the missions morphed into nation-building exercises, thanks to an Israeli genius by the name Natan Sharansky. Also, in 2011, when the Arab Spring began, the West, instead of staying out of it, supported the toppling of leaders like Gadaffi. Now, Gadaffi was very much a villain in 1986 when he used to support terrorism, but in 2004, he had turned over his entire WMD program to the West, renounced terrorism and had a settlement w/ the Lockerbie victims, and had restored normal relations w/ the US and the rest of the West. There was no reason for the West to turn on him, but yet, they did. John Bolton’s problem was that even though he wasn’t a Democrat, he supported these regime change wars, which is why he has been loudly berated by Tucker Carlson.
The reason the President fired Bolton was that the latter wasn’t getting along w/ too many officials, even though they were probably more on Bolton’s side than Trump’s as far as policies go. The president even joked to Steve Hilton that if John Bolton had his way, we’d probably be in 50 wars throughout the world
gravenimage says
Infidel I don’t want to see Russia invading Eastern Europe again.
Infidel says
gravenimage, I agree w/ you here, but at the same time, I no longer want us to defend the likes of Germany, when they are busy connecting to Russia via the Gulf Stream pipeline from Vyborg, Russia to Griefswald, Germany and selling gas there. The president is right about them. While I don’t want Russia to repossess Eastern Europe, I actually wouldn’t mind them somehow possessing Western Europe. As it is, the French, Germans and even the Brits have been thorns on our side, like opposing us during attacks on Libya in 1986 or Iraq in 2003. I’d take Putin over Merkel/Macron any day, despite misgivings about him
gravenimage says
Infidel, I agree that it is *long* past time for nations like Germany to pull more of their own weight.
Wellington says
Infidel: I have enjoyed this back and forth with you. You obviously analyze matters in a sophisticated geopolitical context, which of course is to your credit.
My problem with the specific matter of Russia is that it has been led by a thug since 2000. Putin has no real understanding of the West, sees enemies where there are no enemies and yet makes apologies for the worst religion of all time (e.g., celebrating the opening of the largest mosque in Moscow and allowing Sharia to prevail in Chechnya). He is both a liar and a killer, quite corrupt too. His taking over Crimea was against all conventions of international law going back to Grotius if not before (and yes I know that previous to 1954 Crimea was part of Russia but this is beside the point).
He has (thankfully ham-handedly) tried to interfere in sundry elections in the West. He orchestrated a cyber attack on all of Estonia, et al. He has killed opponents as even the dismal Theresa May provided evidence for. My God, why has Russia to date not put forth a George Washington, a Winston Churchill, an Abraham Lincoln? Even a Grover Cleveland or Calvin Coolidge would do. But Putin? How pathetic.
And so here I will tell you what a Russian student of mine (I taught history at the college level for 29 years) said to me back in 2000 when Putin replaced Yeltsin and little was known about him. When I asked this student what Putin would be like, he responded in perfect but accented English, “Once KGB, always KGB.” Damn good call I would aver.
Putin long term is an utter disaster for Russia. For the West. For America. For freedom. And so, proceed accordingly I would argue.
Once again, thanks for the give and take. I may not always agree with your views but I always respect them.
Infidel says
Oh, I’m certainly no fan of Putin, and do hope that he retires sooner rather than later
However, the reason he rose to power was the ham handed way that Russia’s transition from a Communist to a Capitalist system was handled. All that nationwide shock therapy by Wall Street advisors of Yeltsin’s team members, like Yegor Gaidar, shook Russia’s fledgling democracy. In any democratic country, which Russia at the time was, if you don’t take proper care of your people, ultimately they’ll revolt against you. They did it in 2000 by bringing in Putin, since they saw that every other prime minister brought in by Yeltsin was pretty inept. It’s sorta like Trump’s election in 2016: as Tucker Carlson pointed out, people who’re happy w/ their political leadership don’t elect a Trump. It was the same thing w/ Russians: the reason they elected Putin is that the rest of their political leadership failed them.
I do respect your views as well. My only differences w/ views like that is that they’re typically held by traditional conservative ideologues who still seem stuck in the 80s, w/o a grasp of what world politics looks like 30 years since the Soviet hammer/sickle flag came down and the Russian tricolor went up in the Kremlin. I have no issues w/ people who do concede that Russia is not the Soviet Union, and that the Soviet Union was nothing like Russia
gravenimage says
Infidel–with all respect–it was not America’s fault that Russia rejected freedom and became an authoritarian state. The sad fact is that this is what Russia has *always* been, from the tsars to the Communist state to Putin. It has only been anything else for brief shaky periods, if that.
Infidel says
gravenimage, I wouldn’t stereotype Wall Street into ‘America’ here: when Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, et al melted down, was it America who failed, or was it corrupt and greedy execs in various company boardrooms across America? When companies decided to move the bulk of their manufacturing ops to China, again, was it America doing that, or just Wall Street boardroom members calling the shots based on profits uber alles?
Similarly, if a bunch of Wall Street financial whizzes w/ no idea of how real world markets really worked advised the first Russian premiers Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais to just let prices skyrocket overnight in a bout of ‘shock therapy’, making life miserable for Russians, would you blame that on ‘America’ at large, or just some clueless financial execs?
The reason Yeltsin kept replacing premiers was that the economic situation never got better, so he’d try replacing each one of them w/ someone less liberal, until he ended up w/ Putin. And when Putin summons company CEOs and orders them to dismantle plans to fire everyone and close plants, obvious result is that he gains the support of ordinary Russians. If you want a freedom respecting leader in any place, the first thing you have to have is someone who can figure out how to keep the lights on, the trains run and supplies going
gravenimage says
Infidel, I take your point that Wall Street and America are hardly synonymous–but I don’t think you can blame Russia’s re-embracing authoritarianism on Wall Street, either. Authoritarianism in Russia much predates Wall Street.
And as chaotic as things were in the early days of the fall of Communism, things were in no way as bad there as they had been under Communism itself. Stalin was starving people to death.
I have serious issues with crony capitalists–which is what you are referring to–but they did not turn Russia into an authoritarian nation, either.
More:
The reason Yeltsin kept replacing premiers was that the economic situation never got better, so he’d try replacing each one of them w/ someone less liberal, until he ended up w/ Putin. And when Putin summons company CEOs and orders them to dismantle plans to fire everyone and close plants, obvious result is that he gains the support of ordinary Russians. If you want a freedom respecting leader in any place, the first thing you have to have is someone who can figure out how to keep the lights on, the trains run and supplies going
………………….
The market would have taken care of this–but no leader of Russia has ever allowed this kind of economic freedom. Things are better than they were under full communism in that regard, but this is damning with faint praise.
Notice how much better things have gotten in India when leaders there finally allowed some economic freedom.
Infidel says
One more thing, Wellington – no other country has produced a Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, et al. You might give the UK some credit for producing quality leaders like Churchill, Disraeli, Palmerston, Burke, et al, but other than that, the rest of the world has hardly produced many quality leaders. So I’d hardly single out Russia.
ginger says
we sell them weapons; why can’t they shoot them; they do not need our people there for any reason. it is their mess, not ours. not one would come to our aid.
Jan Disher says
Not a good idea, President Trump. They have weapons, use them. They have an army, use them.
James Lincoln says
From a US military veteran who has served in the Middle East, the feature article states:
““The president has approved the deployment of U.S. forces which will be defensive in nature and primarily focused on air and missile defense,” Esper said, adding that Saudi Arabia requested the support.”
I tend to believe Pres. Trump when he states that he does not want to send the US into yet another prolonged military conflict.
I’m okay with this very limited support as long as there are NO US Army Soldiers / Navy Marines boots on the ground. Again, NO boots on the ground.
And the Saudis should pay us for this support – down to the last penny.
And let’s triple our strategic petroleum reserve…and continue to be the world’s largest oil producer…
Wellington says
+1
The unexpected voice says
Come on, everyone has their flaw but we can but together against Islam. Past is pass time to let it go.
gravenimage says
Let what go? What are you suggesting here?
patriotliz says
NOoooooooooooooooo!
It’s NOT in our interests. What’s wrong with Trump?
Saudis are NOT our friends…no Muslim is. Let the US and Russia supply additional oil. Why help these filthy rich infidel-hating Saudi Muslims who helped blow up the twin towers on 9/11 and spreads Wahhabism?
What is Trump thinking? Betrayal!
gravenimage says
Is the next bin Laden plotting the next 9/11 because there are Infidel boots on the ground in the “Kingdom of the Two Holy Places”?
Infidel says
Speaking of which, given that AQAP is one of Riyadh’s allies in Yemen – in fact, the only credible anti-Houthi militia in Yemen outside the Arab armies in that country, what is the status of AQAP in Saudi Arabia itself? Can we credibly believe any Saudi claims that AQAP is an outlawed organization within Saudi borders, but an ‘ally’ in Yemen?
gravenimage says
Yes–the Saudis involvement with Al Qaida was clear after 9/11.
Old Fat Bald Socially Inept Ron says
When Iran blew up an American drone aircraft President Trump out of concern for the loss of Iranian lives turned the other cheek and took no military action,
However,
When Iran did the same to some Saudi owned equipment in the birthplace of the beloved Osama bin Laden, Trump got the U.S.A “Locked and Loaded” and is now willing to risk America’s blood & treasure in defense.
I haven’t been this disgusted since watching Mr Trump and Tillerson sword dancing while on their absurd “Interfaith Peace Tour”.
tgusa says
Sword dancing and then when a threat emerges it is, hurry up, lets dive under the bed! Really pathetic.
imwithstoopid says
WTH, the Saudis quite capable to defend themselves. This is a truckload of Toro Feces. I am a trump conservative but I’m getting tired of his ways.
Why do they need our military, let them spend the money that they spend building MOSQUES every, including here in the states. Allies my pitoo.
Snare says
20yrs is small to these freaks they will play any government they can with …only their religious goals in their beady little minds ….blood is a sacrament …and mercy not in the cards for those who hold hands with …this religion shiite or Wahhabi Islam Are seeking to over throw the west….by the way. China put over 1 million Islamic people in labor camps …they are wise to the deception ….God bless China for that …
Jeremiah says
Who is the President of America? There are many pretenders. Trump is expected to analyse information before taking action. The pretenders are suggesting action before knowing anything. Let our president do his job; that is what he was elected to do. Then pray to God that he is right. I am thankful that we have the right man. We have not had better president . . . ever!