I have referred to Diana West and her book American Betrayal on pro Soviet perfidy within the Franklin Roosevelt administration before. This is her treatment of an event in which Roosevelt adviser was actively helping the Soviets spy on the US during a time of war. You really should follow all the links in the article
From TFA:
Why does this matter of ambassador vs. embassy matter? I will jump ahead in Haynes and Klehr's text to reveal the importance they ascribe to the notion that Hopkins passed the FBI's covert surveilance information to the Soviet "ambassador" -- and not an intelligence professional.
#2
...Hopkins was pro-Soviet, but it's hard to be a traitor when your orders to do these things come from the President of the United States. Another example of this sort of thing should suffice: a Soviet warship went down near Finland, and British intel recovered its code book, and quite reasonably shared it with us. Upon being advised of this, President Roosevelt ordered the code book copy be returned AT ONCE to the Russians, and OSS director William Donovan was detailed to do it, along with a groveling apology.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/19/2013 6:21 Comments ||
Top||
Last February marked the 92nd anniversary of the 1921 Kronstadt Uprising in the nascent Soviet Union, when 11,000 sailors of the Soviet Baltic Fleet went on strike to raise demands for more democracy in the Russian Revolution. After ten days of talks to settle the matter, Soviet troops loyal to Leon Trotsky and under command of the ill-fated Mikhail Tukhachevsky put down the strike, killing about 3,000 including by summary execution.
It is said that the reaction of the Soviet Union to the modest demands of the Kronstadt naval detachment caused several US and other supporters of the Soviet Union to not only stop supporting the Soviet Union, but to turn anticommunist. Those who saw what communism was really all about had formerly placed their hopes that the Russian Revolution was really about some elusive communist ideal that would make all men truly equal.
Robert Conquest in his excellent history book on the Soviet Union, Harvest of Sorrow, makes mention of the Krontstadt Uprising (going by memory here), concluding in the text that even though the rebellion brought many back from supporting the communist idea, communism was not going to work in practice without terror.
As an aside, Conquest's book was one of the several real life events that brought me back from the ledge and started my own road to recovery as a former liberal.
So, when in 2008 Barak Obama came to power with a message of hope and change, and so many folks jumped on the idea that perhaps we can all have hope of a better future of peace, love and equality, American Thinker's Eileen Toplansky, herself a student of the Soviet Union saw through Obama's message as so many did, by comparing his message with that described by Isaac Bashevis Singer in his novel Satan in Goray.
In her article she describes the destruction of a Jewish community through pogroms, but she also describes the aftermath, when the blows have fallen and those physically affected by the pain and suffering, were turned towards something even more devastating.
According to Toplansky: The decay of the community is even worse than the physical destruction which had preceded it. The people lost their moral compass; they succumbed to all forms of evil. They allowed themselves to be mesmerized by the promise of a new age out of hope for a better world. Their downfall is pitiful to behold.
In other words, the Kronstadt communists in 1921, Barak Obama supporters in 2008 and Singer's characters in his novel bought into the triumph of hope over experience, as Samuel Johnson put it when referring to second marriages.
It would be so easy at this point to blame the president and his supporters for what I did in the pages of Rantburg, and on some level more fun, but it would not be honest and more importantly it would not help anyone.
On August 7th's This Week in Guns, I included a video of a black power leader (read black supremacist) talking about how white folks were getting into better gunnery while black folks were playing video games and emptying semiautomatic weaponry at a target and not hitting anything. The title of the video was "Black Power Leader Has A Moment Of Clarity". When I saw the video framed in that way it was hard not to disagree.
Unfortunately, the video was posted by someone from an antisemitic website with opinions so hateful and vile, it is hard to imagine. When I pasted the code into the story I had not investigated the website, but my editor, Trailing Wife did and alerted me to it.
Once it dawned on me what the site was about, I immediately removed the video code without comment, deciding to write this article today. If I were actually paid to do this, I would have been gone, fired. The only redemption was a link to the website itself had not been posted.
My excuse, my only excuse, and the only explanation I had was I wanted to believe that a black power activist finally got the message that Big Government was not his friend and that this communist would be the first to be "put on the trucks". I wanted to believe that to advance the notion that maybe the worm was finally turning; that maybe Barak Obama and his message of hope and change was close to collapse. That Barak Obama's biggest supporters were finally getting the notion that their own personal well being was now at stake, not the end of antiblack racism.
This apologia is not about any shame I may have had in posting a video with a reference to the hate site, but shame about putting the notion of hope over experience. A lot of that has been going on since the summer of 2008, and indications are it is truly about to collapse. For years conservatives have been hoping that Barak Obama's biggest supporters would help dispose of the disaster of a presidency in short order. I honestly thought we were on the cusp of witnessing that happy event.
I should have known better than to buy into a provably untested and unworkable ideal, and should have investigated further. I can't say it won't happen again. A lot of garbage passing for ideas floats about the Internet and I am human. I will make every effort to prevent such a thing from occurring in the future, and if it does hopefully Trailing Wife will backstop me as she did last week.
Chris Covert writes Mexican Drug War and national political news for Rantburg.com and BorderlandBeat.com. He can be reached at grurkka@gmail.com
Tukhachevsky was executed in 1937 after a sham trial prior to which he was tortured into signing a confession. About 2000 other Russian officers were executed during 1937 and 1938 by stalin.
Posted by: lord garth ||
08/19/2013 0:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Chris that's my fear: that we have an oncoming generation that isn't so much unaware of liberty, as they are simply uncaring about it - for them liberty and individual rights have no value, and no real meaning versus feelings and group orientation. So they will never "wake up" - because how can they miss something they never seem to have learned in history, in ethics, and in their families - something that they have as a birthright, yet seem utterly unconcerned with it compared to the latest declarationn of Hope and Change and Blame The Other Guy...
Its not so much Orwell's 1984 as it is Huxley's Brave New World.
Rand was right as to how the collectivists go about their task of destroying the individual, and the values necessary for individuals to prevail against the state or the collective. And Huxley was right - and frightening prescient when it comes to the end-stage of where the collectivists are attempting to push us.
But most of all, a rereading of Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves To Death (Public discourse in the age of show business)" on its pending 30th anniversary would do a lot of people some good. If anything, the internet has accelerated the worst of the bad trends he put forth in that book.
For those of you unfamiliar with it, here is a cover blurb "a prophetic look at what happens when politics, journalism, education, and even religion become subject to the demands of entertainment" A synopsis from Wikipedia (yeah I know...) The essential premise of the book, which Postman extends to the rest of his argument(s), is that "form excludes the content," that is, a particular medium can only sustain a particular level of ideas. Thus Rational argument, integral to print typography, is militated against by the medium of television for the aforesaid reason. Owing to this shortcoming, politics and religion are diluted, and "news of the day" becomes a packaged commodity. Television de-emphasises the quality of information in favour of satisfying the far-reaching needs of entertainment, by which information is encumbered and to which it is subordinate.
To apply this to the current electronic media; the way the current generation (basically those 40 and under) gets its "news", TV had to cram everything into at most an 8 minute "news" piece back in that day. Compare to TV now, which is pretty much a 30-60 second sound bite and video blast. And sadly, this has devolved even further into a single picture on instagram, a 6 second "vine" video, and at most 140 characters in a tweet.
That is how we end up with people idolizing a vicious thug, Trayvon Martin, as a martyr, how Obama gets away with Benghazi, and many other things that seem to show the dearth (and death) of necessarily extended rational discourse in the public arena.
Read it. And go read Huxley's Brave New World to see how people voluntarily and willingly abandon their rights once they abandon their rationality in favor of feelings.
Then try ti figure out how to teach a blind man about "purple" - something he has never seen before. Because that is the task we face if we cannot change how these people see the world.
What could be a more blatant attempt than that? If true then Putins openly trying to grab Egypt. Breitbart reports Egypt is sending a diplomatic mission to Russia. Sadat threw Russia out of Egypt, the source told Breitbart News. Peace came from that. If Russia reenters Egypt, they reenter the world. Are the reports true? But things may have reached a crisis. The Egyptian military is planning to outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood.
That would put Obamas hand squarely in a vise. He may be forced to do what he loathes most: to take a definite, public stand that must alienate part of his international coalition. He has thrived so far by selling the same real estate to all comers; by being the blank slate who is each and every supplicants friend.
But now he must anger somebody. Now somebodys asking for a refund. The web is rife with rumor that one side or the other is holding a scandal over the administrations head. There is no proof that any such scandal exists. But given the parade of scandals already too numerous to mention it cannot wholly be discounted that some such exists.
So Obama remains hunkered down in Marthas Vineyard, emerging periodically from his vacation home, like a cuckoo from a clock, to make a statement no one appears to hear, playing for time. No one in the Beltway seems to know what line to take. Shall they restore democracy in Egypt by supporting the Muslims Bros, knowing they too will take their revenge on the generals and the Copts? Suspend aid to the Egyptian military and open the door to Russia, who might do a hat trick and scoop up Saudi Arabia into the bargain?
And Mark Steyn:
As a result, the factions in Egypt are united only in their contempt for Washington. Obama is despised by Sisi and the generals for being fundamentally unserious; by the Brotherhood for stringing along with the coup; by the Copts for standing by as the Brothers take it out on them; and by the small number of genuine democrats in Egypt for his witless promotion of Morsis thugs as the dawning of democracy. Any national-unity government of the kind the usual deluded twits are urging on Egypt would be united only in its unanimous loathing of Obama, his secretaries of state, and his inept ambassador.
Meanwhile, out on the streets, Washington is reviled both for standing by Mubarak too long and for pushing him out too soon (eighty per cent of Egyptians say things are worse than under the old man). And, with the 2011 Facebook Revolution all out of Likes, the King of Jordan and the Gulf emirs understand the meaning of the ailing, abandoned strongman in his military prison cell in purely geopolitical terms that (as Bernard Lewis once warned) America is harmless as an enemy but treacherous as a friend.
Whatever regime emerges in Cairo, it will be post-American.
A year before the fall of Mubarak, David Pryce-Jones, in a conversational aside, quoted to me Lord Lloyd, British High Commissioner to the old Kingdom of Egypt in the Twenties: Ah, the jacarandas are in bloom. We shall soon be sending for the gunboats. Theres more wisdom about Arab springs in that line than in all the blather of Obama, Clinton, Kerry and Anne Patterson combined.
#2
Putin is so consistent. He is being very effective. China is doing the same in Brazil and Africa. The race is on. We have created a vacuum. They offer less interference in local governments also.
#6
How does one say "We shall soon be sending for the gunboats" in Mandarin?
The PLAN did send a naval squadron to the Horn of Africa for about 90 days about 2 or three years ago. Dunno if they are still ending ships to the region, though.
#8
See also BIG NEWS NETWORK > NO US CREDIBILITY IN MIDDLE EAST LEFT FOLLOWING OBAMA'S MISHANDLING OF EGYPT CRISIS: MCCAIN.
McCain says the Bammer has NO POLICY + NO STRATEGEERY [strategy].
As in the ME + Persian Gulf, as so per IRAN + espec CHINA in East Asia???
I'm telling locals that the danger is very real that Guam could lose both its US Territorial + Citizenship status in the very near-term/future iff alleged anti-US, Marxist-ANarchist-Globalist POTUS Bammer fails to militarily intervene + support America's overseas allies in any China-involved East Asian war(s) agz Japan + PHIL + Vietnam + India.
"POST-US" WANNABE AMBITIOUS CHINA VERSUS
US-LED, ANTI-CHINA "A2/AREA-DENIAL".
As per MilBlogs, to avoid a major military conflict in the SOuth China Sea, the US is willing to allow the Philippines to permit the Chinese PLA to set up Milbases on their own Philippine soil.
* Also from BIG NEWS NETWORK > SENATOR [Lindsey]GRAHAM PREDICTS EGYPT PROTESTS WILL SHIFT TO ARMED INSURGENCY.
* IIRC STARS-N-STRIPES > EGYPT CRUCIAL TO US MISSIONS IN MIDDLE EAST.
RELATED USA TODAY > US MILITARY NEEDS EGYPT FOR ACCESS TO CRITICAL AREAS.
Widout Egypt's Air-Sea Ports + Suez Canal, US ABILITY TO PROJECT MILITARY POWER = MILITARY ASSETS WILL BE COSTLIER, LONGER.
What's currently going on with Benghazi, over eleven months later? The answer is "not much of anything."
The Libyan Transitional Government (TNG) had arrested, then released a suspect in the attack, Faraj al Chalabi, an al Qaeda terrorist also linked to the 1994 murder of two German tourists. An unnamed US official said the US government (USG) had evidence that al Chalabi was linked to the Benghazi attack but had not provided that information to the Libyans.
A Libyan interior minister official told Reuters that a photograph was taken of the head of the Ansar al-Sharia militia (the same militia that was assisting with providing security to the consulate) at the consulate at the time of the attack, but there was not enough evidence to arrest him:
"There were many people there from Ansar al-Shariah, from other brigades and from the general public," said the official. ""Ansar al-Shariah is a factionalised militant group without one home address. There may be several military commanders playing a role in its activities. Just because someone is there doesn't mean they were behind it."
Considering Libya's multiple problems in attempting to gain control of the country, plus anecdotal evidence of Interior Ministry complicity (or at the least, inaction), plus the Libyan TNG's overall lack of cooperation and ineffectiveness both during and after the Benghazi attack, it can be assumed that not much will be done on that end.
What about at "home"?
Five or so House committees are working on the Benghazi incident. Among these are the House Armed Services Committee and the House Oversight Committee. Aside from getting some rather quickly-dismissed (by USG sources) testimony by a couple of State Department officials, the committees have been relatively ineffective. The time window for discovery was greatly reduced due to the election where the political workings of the Beltway pretty much shut down for the season, much like Paris in July.
With regard to the Presidential election - there were some concerns about the incident and its sorry aftermath being used in the political arena. It was, but in a peripheral way (and effectively muted by the Obama camp.) In any case, that was all cut short by a civil Mr. Romney, who likely was briefed by the intelligence community about Benghazi.
On the positive side, some of the "fog of war" has been lifted and some questions have been answered, if unsatisfactorily, particularly the response or lack of response by US assets within Tripoli.
The CIA is in full damage control mode. There are reports of frequent polygraph tests, the wounded and other survivors being given assumed names or moved around to avoid detection.
The State Department has been no less intransigent, but they've gone about it more cleverly. Former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was indisposed for health reasons for several weeks and unable to appear before committee. When she did appear for testimony, it was essentially a testy and defiant "swan song". Ms Clinton had announced her departure from the position and the punditry was not so much focused on the reason for the testimony as they were on both her replacement and her impending and highly-assured coronation as the 2016 Democratic Party candidate for President.
The Pentagon has also been uncooperative in its own way. In early July, when Republican members of both the House and Senate wanted to interview the former commander of Joint Special Operations Task Force-Trans Sahara, Marine Colonel George Bristol, they were told that the officer had retired and the Department of Defense "cannot compel retired members to testify before Congress," which is an odd statement considering that the officer's superior, former AFRICOM commander General Carter Ham, was made available to testify. The Defense Department stated that they made General Ham available because he was not yet "officially retired". However, Colonel Bristol was still on active duty through the end of July, with a transfer to the inactive list on August 1st. There still has been no word whether the colonel has or will be located.
In mid-August, the US Department of Justice took time off from its civil-rights investigations to issue a "sealed" set of charges against a "number of suspects". The issuing of those charges was later confirmed (likely in violation of federal law)by President Obama. Among the charged is one Ahmed Abdu Khattala, the head of the Libyan militia Ansar al-Sharia. That militia had been enlisted by the State Department to assist in providing security for the consulate and provide, on an as-needed basis, security for ambassador Stevens. Khatalla, who has been living openly in Benghazi, did not deny that he was at the consulate at the time of the attack, but that that his involvement was confined to helping "direct traffic with other militia leaders".
The mainstream media has been reluctant to pursue questioning, having been warned about losing access by doing so. As a result, much of the discussion has centered around the fringes of the media, among the punditry and the blogosphere. Each has offered a myriad of scenarios, pet theories, and "expert" opinion. What can be agreed upon by the most reputable, is that extraterrestrial aliens weren't involved. Probably.
Conclusion
So what will happen? No one knows. Benghazi is still highly unstable and like a significant portion of Libya, is still not under control of the Libyan government. Egypt, a major player in Benghazi in the past, is in the throes of what appears will be a major and bloody political realignment. That will likely further destabilize the Benghazi region and make it harder for answers to be found or suspects to be arrested there.
Disregarded by the agencies and people they wish to talk to, hamstrung by internal politics and distracted by other and equally important matters, the various House committees still slog on. That the mid-term elections are fourteen months away will not help things.
Subsequent overseas events such as the Egypt disturbances, Syria's war, the brewing, revived Far East animosities, and the recent campaign to restart Israeli-Palestinian talks have served to push Benghazi even farther into the background. Factor in domestic and domestic-foreign issues such as the NSA kerfuffle, health care, an anemic economy... Well, one gets the idea.
What can be assumed is that the War on Terror is being superseded by a new Cold War in yet another iteration of the Great Game. Like the first Cold War, the second came to being as a preference to, and weariness with, a long period of combat and will involve a myriad of fronts and conflicts. Like the first Cold War, the second will prove a boon to academia, various think tanks and experts, and the industries that gear themselves to the new reality. Careers will be made, political offices will be gained. Except for the rare public assassination, lives will end in the shadows and in places one has to look up in an atlas.
Benghazi is among the first events of this new Cold War. And Benghazi will likely end up like many of the events of the first Cold War, where we will not know what really happened for decades, long after its participants have passed away.
But unlike the first Cold War, there are no clear enemies or allies, and no clear objectives. One cannot even be sure one's own side is "friendly".
It may be that we will never know the full story about Benghazi.
#4
To paraphrase Thing from Snowy Mountain: Remember that the ones in charge now were backing the 'other side' during the last Cold War. Posted by Pappy
A poignant fact indeed, and one not to be forgotten.
#1
"37 percent of Germans in agreement with the following statement: Considering Israels policy, I can understand why people do not like Jews.
Can we have the same survey in the U.S. please?
Sorry, but no. People didn't like Israel's policy in the 70s, 80s, 90s etc but the Jewish communities in Germany are doing well. And Berlin seems to be very attractive to young Israelis these days.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
08/19/2013 1:39 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Jewish businesses also survive in the Rue des Rosiers of Paris.
[Dawn] THE KP government has decided to "rectify the mistake of removing Koranic verses on jihad" in the textbooks for elementary and secondary levels in the province. The move, a most fundamental one, seeks to undo the attempt at moderation undertaken by the previous government led by the Awami National Party whose politicians say they had brought in the changes in consultation with scholars. Some of these were aimed at ensuring that at the state level the students are taught about the idea of jihad at a later stage than they had been exposed to until then. The modifications were justified in the background of a Death Eater campaign in the name of religion which particularly affected the province. ANP members say they subscribe to a strong parallel view which interprets jihad more than just war, as a struggle for the people's betterment. Considering the thrust they have shown so far, it is not surprising that the Pakistain Tehrik-e-Insaf ...a political party in Pakistan. PTI was founded by former Pakistani cricket captain and philanthropist Imran Khan. The party's slogan is Justice, Humanity and Self Esteem, each of which is open to widely divergent interpretations.... and the Jamaat-e-Islami ...The Islamic Society, founded in 1941 in Lahore by Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, aka The Great Apostosizer. The Jamaat opposed the independence of Bangladesh but has operated an independent branch there since 1975. It maintains close ties with international Mohammedan groups such as the Moslem Brotherhood. the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. The Jamaat's objectives are the establishment of a pure Islamic state, governed by Sharia law. It is distinguished by its xenophobia, and its opposition to Westernization, capitalism, socialism, secularism, and liberalist social mores... , the current custodians of power in Beautiful Downtown Peshawar ...capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (formerly known as the North-West Frontier Province), administrative and economic hub for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. Peshawar is situated near the eastern end of the Khyber Pass, convenient to the Pak-Afghan border. Peshawar has evolved into one of Pakistan's most ethnically and linguistically diverse cities, which means lots of gunfire. , disagree.
As it decided to partner the PTI in KP, the Jamaat was very keen to have the education ministry under its command. It had all but secured the coveted portfolio when the PTI decided against giving it the ministry. Now, while the JI has taken credit for the step towards 'rectifying' the syllabus, Imran Khan ... aka Taliban Khan, who who convinced himself that playing cricket qualified him to lead a nuclear-armed nation with severe personality problems... 's PTI has been more than a willing partner in this initiative, highlighting the ideological bond between the two coalition parties in KP whose joint decision has far-reaching implications.
Reverting to the old syllabus is a powerful statement of intent. The repercussions can be deep and defining for a people trying to return to a state of normality where it is possible to argue with words, and issues are not settled by the bullet. The situation has implications which require deft and rational handling. For instance, the scholars have long engaged in a debate about who is authorised to call jihad and the question is all the more relevant in the current context. Let alone the futility of war -- all wars -- this is a most complicated affair. When individuals and groups are fighting with the state for rights to calling jihad our policymakers must show extra caution. They must not shun a thorough debate on the subject involving scholars who represent various viewpoints. The PTI-JI coalition must not rush here where it has been quite slow in dealing with many, more pressing issues in the province.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/19/2013 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
I for one don't give a sweet rose for anything these Islamic backwoodsmen do as long as they keep their kids down home on the farm, not flying airliners into buildings in the West.
#4
...maybe because after the factions trashed the old republic enough, the guys who ended up running the place, Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Caesar, etc all had military backgrounds? Not your local ward heelers.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
08/19/2013 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#6
...actually, Ike was the exception in that he had no faction to start with. The Draft Eisenhower movement was the first successful political draft of the 20th century to take a private citizen to the Oval Office. It was a widespread American grassroots political movement that eventually persuaded Dwight D. Eisenhower to run for President. - wiki at linky
Unlike Sherman, "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve." - he was drafted and served.
...maybe because after the factions trashed the old republic enough, the guys who ended up running the place, Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Caesar, etc all had military backgrounds? Not your local ward heelers.
EVERYONE in the Roman government had a military background. You started with military service, then tried to get elected to a lucrative position. Even Cicero served in the military.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
08/19/2013 10:52 Comments ||
Top||
#8
...it was a means of political advancement but not the only one. Various 'religious' positions/duties that came with caste position provided another means, but by the time of the late republic the main route was military, though some held positions (brought as usual) in name only with competent retainers doing the real work. See the decedent of Scipio at the final reduction of Carthage. He wasn't sent for his military acumen but for symbolism. By military backgrounds in the case of the individuals cited, it was practical successful field work/conquests. Simply doing a tour in someone's entourage (staff) in some obscure province didn't count for much. Thus the motivation in some case (ie Caesar in Gaul) to make a name.
#9
but for the moment the struggle for power trumps the power of the faith.
Is it not always, thus, Mr. Ledeen? And when the power struggle is over, then the power of faith kicks in.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/19/2013 11:52 Comments ||
Top||
#10
And we wish to cut aid to the Army for what reason again ?
Section 508 of the Foreign Assistance Act;
None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended to finance directly any assistance to any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree: Provided, That assistance may be resumed to such country if the President determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations that subsequent to the termination of assistance a democratically elected government has taken office.
As a member of the 'Ta Hell with 'em crowd I say maybe we should first obey our laws and then see what happens.
#11
Ledeen's premise is, "The war is easily described: there is a global alliance of radical leftists and radical Islamists, supported by a group of countries that includes Russia, at least some Chinese leaders, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. The radicals include the Sunni and Shiâite terrorist organizations and leftist groups, and they all work seamlessly with the narcotics mafias. Their objective is the destruction of the West, above all, of the United States."
This is, I think, so simplistic as to be useless. Yes, on some issues the left allies with islamists, Shiites w Sunnis, Islamists w narco producers. But on other issues the bad guys fight it out among themselves. On Egypt for example, the Moslem brotherhood is supported vigorously by Iran, Turkey and Qatar, supported more causually by CNN and the EU and opposed by the saudis, Iraq, Jordan, the UAE and France. On Syria, Assad is supported by Russia, Iraq and Iran and opposed by almost every Sunni majority country and much of the rest of the world.
Posted by: lord garth ||
08/19/2013 16:03 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The "trick" to winning the great game is to make your enemies fight each other and you not have to fight.
...Through history we have learnt, again & again & without exception, that nothing comes of negotiating with psychopaths. Or rather, worse than nothing. When they are strong, they resort to force without hesitation; when they are weak, they play for time. Nor does the dumping of billions in aid, & all the baubles of modern commerce, change the outlook. The ruthless take it all in their stride, without the slightest gratitude, as an admission of our weakness. It enables them to be more obdurate.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
