Obama send me no more drones …

It’s hard to keep up with events while traveling the Interstate and being NPR-dependent. We do get some BBC, and while Official Secrets prevents BBC from reporting on Britain, they do a better job reporting on the US than American news media.

That in mind, it appears that the Executive is diverting news attention to Syria and away from NSA spying. BBC says that US believes Syria has crossed the “Red Line,” a perception management device that will be used to justify full-scale attack on Syria. It’s only been a matter of creating a false-flag incident that doesn’t cause the rest of the world to gag laughing. But BBC says that Americans will only be sending “small arms.” Since Americans are already doing that and god only knows what else, it is safe, I think, to conclude that this is a mere attention-diversion tactic.

They still have to solve the Russian problem in Syria. Since Syria must be removed from Israel’s northern flank before an attack can be unleashed in Iran, it is safe to say that we are at peace for one more day. It’s a good thing. Americans are famous for bombing wedding parties in Afghanistan. Our daughter is getting married tomorrow. We don’t want no stinkin’ Obama drone attacks.

About Mark Tokarski

Mostly retired CPA living the life here in Colorado. Formerly Montana, 59 years, which is why so much of this blog is devoted to Montana issues.
This entry was posted in Agitprop, American "journalism", American terror, American wilderness. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Obama send me no more drones …

  1. rightsaidfred says:

    The current Alawite Syrian regime has largely been our friend. Aren’t they the good guys? The rebels are the Islamic radical terrorist types. Why would we give them the time of day?

    I realize we must hate Iran at all costs (the instructions came with my envelope of cash) but this seems like really bad policy. Please tell me who is making this policy so I can put them on my list for the day when my militia goes into action.

    • Tomato Guy says:

      Russians have a naval base there and therefore military power presence on Mediterranean. Very important pipeline runs through there. Syria threatens Israel from north so that if US attacks Iran, Syria threatens Israel. Strategically, to take out Iran, Syria must go first.

      I all makes sense. Who? Must you reduce national strategies to a few names to understand them? It isn’t Obama, but might be called Neocons or Neolibs, indistinguishable to me. ZBig is a player, Obama is a ZBig pupil. But it’s very big, scores make policy, thousands are on board, hundreds of thousands of clueless kids make it work.

      And Syrian “rebels,” when they fight for us elsewhere, are called “terrorists” or “death squads.” it all depends on what policy they serve.

      • Big Johansson says:

        You’re right it is about oil.

        Cheney/Bush/Gore planned it all along by letting the Syrians twist in the wind with their puppet Obama.

        Armed conflict increases the price of oil. When the political pendulum swings Bush 3 builds 6 new refineries, completes the XL pipeline, drills in Federal dirt, digs oil shale, ships natural gas to Europe, coal mega trains to China while backwater regimes slather themselves.

  2. rightsaidfred says:

    Pipelines? Naval bases for an imploding country? Doesn’t seem like a big enough candle, especially when there is much more wax in other areas.

    I can’t imagine Israel any safer with a destabilized Syria to the north.

    I suspect you can’t come up with names because these things are largely emergent: permanent bureaucracies, lobbyists, ambitious individuals all spinning as a three body problem.

    • Tomato Guy says:

      Again with names! All I need do is look over the roster of various department heads, financial donors, military contractors and the like and the names will fall out like peanuts from a bag. But these are replaceable cogs in institutional imperialism as has been going on for centuries. All areas of the world are in play, and when one power recedes, as did the Soviets, the world becomes a very dangerous place as other powers rush in to fill the vacuum. The language of Project for a New American Century, written by those whose names would become the Bush II Administration, was strident. Something had to be done soon, the American public had to be brought on board. Time was of the essence. That’s why 9/11 took place a mere nine months after the election. They were almost in panic. they needed something big that changed the landscape.

      Syria does not have the resources of Iraq, but is strategically located and is not in the flow of the London/Wall Street axis, and so has to fall. It was one of seven countries set to go down like dominoes after 9/11, Iraq being the first.

      Interesting your attitude about Syria is identical to that of our leaders, that Assad is a bad dude, and you have come about this attitude as if by osmosis. What have you read of the country, it’s inhabitants or their satisfaction with their leaders? (I assume you know that the rebellion is nothing more than a disguised a military attack on that country, its participants only coincidentally aligned with real reformers of that country. You really don’t buy that the rebellion is indigenous, right?)

        • Tomato Guy says:

          Don’t care. Right is right.

          • Big Johansson says:

            BS. You side with the majority most of the time.

            “The Palestine-Israel issue and other Arab-Israeli conflicts take up a significant portion of the debate time, resources and resolutions at the United Nations. The United Nations Security Council was founded in 1948 and till 2012; it passed 79 resolutions that were directly critical of Israel due to its violations of the resolutions of U.N. Security Council, the Geneva Conventions, international acts of terrorism and international law. In Lebanon alone, Israel is subject to the violations of 15 UNSC resolutions which include using military force, not complying with the cease-fire agreements and withdrawing of forces from Lebanon.”

            • Tomato Guy says:

              The “majority,” the US and Israel, ignore these resolutions and carry on with the crimes. World opinion heavily favors peaceful resolution and some justice for Palestinians, regarded as something like niggers by American and Israeli leaders.

              It is true I am with the majority of world opinion, but against the ones that matter – the ones with the bulldozers, F16′s, nukes, white phosphorus – the true terrorist scourge of the region, Israelis and their US overlords.

      • rightsaidfred says:

        Your exposition speaks more to your need for neat, tidy explanations than to how the messy world works. It is comforting to you to think that a cabal is in charge.

        The Iraq attack speaks more to our purported “leader”‘s stupidity than to any overarching plan that has any semblance of usefulness to anyone.

        • Tomato Guy says:

          The “cabal” is people who think alike. They have access to our military, our treasury, and hold regular leaders at gunpoint, have since 1963. Osama before his death in ’01 called it our shadow government or something similar, even Clinton said that there is a government within the government and that he did it control it.

          It is the natural fallout of the National Security Act of 1947, and the Red Scare, where we engaged in peacetime agitprop, failed to dismantle our military, and created an agency that was allowed to act with impunity abroad, toppling governments, engaging in torture and terrorism, and yet believing that such a beast would not naturally turn on its master and extend its activities to the home front. It lodged itself in key positions throughout government, and in 1963 killed JFK, and since that time has been a shadow that all in legitimate power fear, and many of whom actively support. That’s why Gore Vidal called the National Security Act of 1947 the “end of the republic.”

        • rightsaidfred says:

          My my, chewing through a lot of scenery there, Mr. Drama Guy.

          Any large group starts to take on a life of its own, and Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy reigns supreme. It is a little much to imagine some individual, or even a small group of people, imposing their will on these somewhat autonomous groups. Bill Clinton was just pissed because he couldn’t insert himself as puppet master on the permanent bureaucracy.

          I’m wondering: Why do we even need these large behemoths? Except to give Tomato Man hope that he can someday sway the reins of this free and hard to regulate power and punish his alleged enemies.

          • Tomato Guy says:

            So the institutional forces behind US imperialism are now a “small group of people?”

            How do you imagine that other forces in history – the Spanish empire, Dutch, British, Ottomans – functioned? If you can imagine that other states form empires and have functioning bureaucracies and state planning, complete with successes and failures, brilliance and stupidity. Why can you not imagine it here? Why is the US always the exception to the rule?

          • rightsaidfred says:

            You don’t get that there is a stochastic nature, an emergence, to these things.

            Think of it as a cityscape. Tashkent looks much different than Pittsburgh. Each has city planners; but no one person, or a small group, sat down and drew the precise skyline; or maintains a precise skyline. What emerges is the result of many independent actors, but they are influenced by cultural factors that give the result its local flavor.

            • Tomato Guy says:

              True enough regarding random events, but most cities are not random, have building codes and the like and planning to prevent sprawl and maximize economies of scale. It may not be true in Houston, but is in Tashkent, wherever that is.

              Public opinion is not random, events like 9/11 are not random, warts wars are not random, agitprop is not random. Make your point.

            • rightsaidfred says:

              Ahh, grasshopper: much, much difference between random and chaotic.

              We thought that with more information, we could more precisely predict the weather into the future. But we found the the weather is a chaotic phenomenon. The weather is not random, it is chaotic. It follows physical laws to the letter, but at every point (and especially at some points) there is a uncertainty as to which path it will follow. These uncertainties add up to the point where any prediction is no better than a random guess.

              So much more for political systems. Your imagining a Star Chamber guiding events is problematic.

              • Tomato Guy says:

                Chaos can be contained and predicted – that is the future of economics right now. The current system is failed.

                But you’re confusing analysis of a natural system with a human system full of human intrigue. While it is true that the future is never predictable, future human actions are – it is just the outcome of those actions that cannot be predicted with certainty. I knew in 2002 that the US would invade Iraq in 2003, as did everyone paying attention. I thought that it would be a cakewalk, that they we arrange to “discover” WMD’s, and that the country would be easily subdued. So did they.

                Military forces are not cloud banks. A butterfly flapping its wings in Baghdad did not bring about invasion. It was conscious human staging and planning.

              • rightsaidfred says:

                “Conscious human staging and planning” is subject to natural forces, not by the same processes as weather or electron behavior that is used for analogy, but we are in and part of the same universe.

                Find and slap your chaos theory teacher. Chaos tells us where things are unstable and unpredictable, not where they are contained and predicted.

                • Tomato Guy says:

                  I think it is you who confuses random and chaotic. There would be no “chaos theory” were it not possible to grapple with chaotic events, like weather, and make some predictions. Ergo, weather, while still random in the small, is relatively predictable in the large. When they say “30% chance of rain” for us, I don’t think there’s a 30% chance of rain, but rather that in our large area there’s a high probability that 30% of it will get some precipitation.

                  So too with economics. What we have with current neoclassical theory is a stick figure to represent a Michelangelo painting. We are nowhere near grasping its complexity, but chaos theory can be useful, and the new generation of economists will grapple with it.

                  JFK’s murder was not a random event in the small, but a planned execution. How you can ascribe it to mere chaotic patterns of history is baffling, as if your mind cannot deal with intent and purpose. It’s as if you don’t want to grapple with complexity.

                  • rightsaidfred says:

                    I’m feeling picky: When they say “30% chance of rain” for us, I don’t think there’s a 30% chance of rain, but rather that in our large area there’s a high probability that 30% of it will get some precipitation.

                    No. Otherwise one could say there is a 100% chance of rain, if you pick a large enough area.

                    The forecast says that under these conditions, we see rain 30% of the time.

                    • Tomato Guy says:

                      Prior to use of percentages, weather forecasters were hobbled by your 100% perception. On a large scale, they knew it would rain somewhere, but could not pinpoint where. They forecast in defined areas for defined populations.

                    • rightsaidfred says:

                      We’ve had percentages since the ancient Greeks.

                      Sometimes high precip. percentages yields no rain in the forecast area.

                    • Tomato Guy says:

                      That’s why it’s “probability” and not “certainty.”

                • rightsaidfred says:

                  You are retreating into obtuseness here. We analogize between relatively simple physical systems and human events to show the difficulty of prediction: if even well understood systems are difficult to predict, how even more so those with sentient actors and all those connections?

                  You seem anxious to have some kind of a somewhat mysterious God overlooking human affairs.

                • Tomato Guy says:

                  Human affairs are random, like weather, but chaos theory is making gains in putting large bodies of random events (economies) into an organized theory. Te best is to come.

                  What you make of neoclassicism (and the Austrian School, which is a step closer to reality) is fine and dandy IFF there are attempts to improve the model via trial and error. But the science as it is practiced is repetition of error, each time expecting it to work for the first time.

  3. Big Johansson says:

    Couldn’t have been better said.

    Comment of the Week by John Fleming

    Can anyone name even one constitutional purpose of American foreign policy that is being satisfied by an intervention into the Syrian pesthole? Did We the People grant our Powers and wealth to our government so that they could succor the grinding misery that foreigners, hoisted by their own deluded petard, have put themselves into? We never did. The powers We the People granted to our government were to be used for the benefit of Us, only us, and not some Levantines forever in thrall to both secular and religious tyranny.

    Syria can live, can die, be glassed, anything, and it won’t make one single bit of difference to the United States. i’m sorry all you Syrian people, but in the calculus of the United States your value is zero; and to even mess with you brings nothing but your misery and delusion to our shores. Be off with you, and save yourselves!

    If the Usurper does this, and our Armed Forces professional officers do not resist this to the last man, then I will know we are well and truly f’ed. Who will be left to defend us against our enemies foreign and domestic? If the Usurper does this, It will be clear, that his aim is to destroy our Armed Forces. May God have mercy on us, because we don’t have His Blessings anymore.”

    Read more at http://iowntheworld.com/blog/#38cgoEl4uQeH4IEb.99

    • Tomato Guy says:

      The contempt for Syrians borders on racism. I doubt the people of that country consider it a pesthole. Remember it is “US” agents that are feasting on human innards for the camera. I don’t think you ever come close to grasping that our leaders are the tyrants, thugs, terrorists, and they run the death squads and perpetrate the attacks on innocents. Until you n understand that, you are clueless.

      It’s full of imperial hubris and overarching ignorance of the basics of “US” foreign policy. Utterly forgettable.

      • Big Johansson says:

        Came in from chores and read your comment while fixing dinner for the boys.They had, “Lord of the Rings” on when a Orc lieutenant uttered this.

        “The age of Men is over. The time of the Orc has come!”

        Sounds about right.

  4. steve kelly says:

    “Cheap” money maintains the status quo: perpetual war/perpetual funding for rockets, planes, ships, etc. The money must be spent, or Congress will spend it elsewhere. http://www.salon.com/2013/03/09/the_world_according_to_milton_friedman_partner/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s