The fools on the Hill: IMO – nothing “humble” about it – U.S. politicians (a) are blind in one eye and can’t see out of the other, (b) are Polyannas, (c) they are just plain “stoo-pid,” or (d) “all of the above.”
SYRIA: The fools inside the beltway want to supply arms, albeit “small” arms, to the Syrian “rebels.”
The U.S. has no business meddling in Syria’s internal affairs; its civil war. Yes, I know Iran is sending troops and I know terrorists organizations (Hamas and Hezbollah) are sending fighters, and yes, I know Russia is promising, but apparently not yet delivering, arms to the regime.
That STILL does not justify U.S. involvement in Syria.
Does anyone remember that the U.S. outfitted the Taliban in Afghanistan? Does anyone remember what the Taliban did with the U.S.-provided weapons when the Taliban kicked the Russians out? If you forgot or never cared to know, the Taliban first turned the weapons on the Afghans and then, when the U.S. sent in troops to protect the non-Taliban Afghans, the weapons were turned on U.S. boys who really had no business in Afghanistan.
The U.S. (mostly) removed Sadam Hussein from power in Iraq. To what end? So that Iraqis, with a little help from there Iranian and Islamist friends, could plant IEDs along the roadways and so that Iraqi police and army “trainees” could murder U.S. soldiers. Does anyone really think Syria would be different? The idea that “cutting the head off the snake” would resolve all the problems obviously is a bad idea. Ben Laden is gone, but Al-Qaida carries on with renewed vigor.
U.S. politicians are living in La-La land if they think removing a strong leader – a dictator such as Syria’s Bashar Hafez al-Assad, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti, or Libya’s Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi - will suddenly turn the people they controlled into Friends of America? It failed to work in North Africa. It failed to work in Iraq. It failed to work in Afghanistan and Pakistan. America has no friends in Egypt. Saudia is a false friend at best. “Palestine” – both Hamas’ “Palestine” and Hezbollah’s “Palestine” both consider the U.S. an enemy, yet Washington’s fools, of both parties, continue to support it at the expense of its lone ally in the area.
IRAN just held a free and democratic election for a new Iranian president. The winner was, according to many western sources a “moderate,” cleric Hasan Rowhani.
Unlike the U.S., Iranian politicians are elected by direct vote, in theory a true democracy.
However, in Iran “democracy” is tempered, and tampered with, by the ayatollahs and, in the end, the Shi’ite Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei, Iran's “supreme ruler.” Rowhani, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad before him, is only a mouthpiece for Khamenei, so no matter how “moderate” the liberal press declares Rowhani to be, he is only as “moderate” as the Shi’ite’s grand ayatollah.
Iran’s rush to nuclear weapons will go on full speed ahead, even under the “moderate” who "just happens" to be Iran’s top nuclear negotiator.
The only way Iran will see political change is if the general populace throws out the ayatollahs from political power. Given the ayatollahs control of the military, a regime change is unlikely sans outside interference.
Like Syria, Iran is – not yet – the U.S.’ problem, although it is becoming an increasing danger to the U.S.’ only reliable ally in the region. Greece, Turkey, and Jordan all have their own problems to manage, and Lebanon has been Syrian controlled for decades and is a non-state of no consequence. Egypt and North Africa are in turmoil and Iraq, for all practical purposes, is in Iran’s political pocket.
AND THEN THERE’S RUSSIA that wants to be seen as a major player, a superpower returning as the phoenix rising from the ashes. As before, for every move the fools of the Kremlin make, the fools in Washington think they must make a counter-move. Russia is supporting Assad therefore the fools along the Potomac feel they must support the anti-Assad forces. With support from both parties - at last, cross aisle cooperation, even if it IS detrimental to the nation in the long term, is in play – the politicians from Chelm are preparing to arm our future enemies to fight a war in which the U.S. has no political, geographical, financial, or other interests. The U.S. “must” counter the Russians in a game of checkers . . . forgetting that in the end the game will be Chinese checkers and both Russia and the U.S. will lose.
