Category Archives: War

Liberals Grow A Funny Bone

Barack Obama, Critique, Fascism, Foreign Policy, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, War

Liberals are especially slow on the uptake. Some outside CNN amd MSNBC, however, have begun to cock a snook at the Obama faithful who fawn over His every utterance and action.

Transcribed by News Busters, this video clip is worth watching (from an evolutionary perspective). “Liberals parodying liberals” is how Mark Levin described it:

Text courtesy of News Busters:

“Our president can’t launch into another war without you. And remember: when we voted for him in 2008 and 2012, we promised to support him no matter what.”

“That’s why we here at the ‘Americans for Whatever Barack Obama Wants, Did You Know He’s Friends With Jay-Z?’ have launched a Kickstarter campaign to fund World War III.”

“And America is dead-ass broke, so our goal is to raise $1.6 trillion on behalf of the U.S. government.”

“That’s where you come in.”

“Even a small donation will make all the difference.”

“World War III is a very important, very progressive war that Obama tells me is very important. So it must be.”

“When I first saw the President speak in 2008 in a YouTube clip posted to my Facebook page, I knew he was going to be right all the time. So I support World War III, and IV, and any moon war the President may want to start.”

“I mean, there is no way that he or the cabal of corporate interests, spy agencies, and shadow bankers who tell him what to do would ever mislead us.”

“The $1.6 trillion that we raise will help create a war that truly puts the liberal in neo-liberal. There will be millions of troops, thousands of organic, grass-fed bombs, hybrid Prius tanks, rockets controlled by iPads, and drones that play the Lumineers while they attack.”

“World War III is not going to be like those other Republican wars fought on just 1 percent of the world. This war is going to be fought on 99 percent of the world.”

“It will be everywhere: Russia, China, Africa, Cincinnati, your favorite brunch spot — the one with those kickass ranchero breakfast burritos.”

“World War III will also be the most social media-focused war ever. It’ll be all over Twitter, Facebook, Vine, Pinterest, and whatever eventually replaces Pinterest, and I mean, just think of all the hilarious skits we can make of cats reacting to their owners’ homes being obliterated.”

“Lots of shock, but tons of awww.”

“And come on, guys, how good will Michelle’s arms look in sleeveless Army fatigues?”

“We have a lot of great rewards for our donors. If you donate $10 to the World War III project, you’ll get a shout out on social media.”

“Hashtag #thankyou!”

“A $25 donation will get you a piece of rubble from a war-torn Middle Eastern country, kissed by Sen. Lindsay Graham.”

“A $100 donation gets you a day pass to leave your local refuge camp.”

“You’ll probably end up in a refuge camp, but it’ll have free Wifi.”

“And a $10 million donation gets you your own Senator for a year.”

“So please, help us reach our goal of $1.6 trillion so we can make World War III a reality. Why? Because Obama.”

“Because Obama.”

UPDATED: McMussolini Vs. Marshmallow Man (Man Reads McCain His Rights)

John McCain, Middle East, Military, Neoconservatism, War

In this clip, an intelligent, informed, Syrian American hammers “McMussolini,” exposing his ignorance and arrogance. The exchange shows the measure of the man. McCain’s reply to her amounts to platitudes. His message is clear: “It’s my way or the highway.”

Via Economic Policy Journal:

I like “marshmallow” man even better. Here you see him get in McCain’s face 1:58 minutes into the YouTube clip:

UPDATE (9/8): “The simple irony is that the domestic enemy now in this country is the government of the Unites States.”

Man reads McMussolini’s his rights. The sleeping giant has awakened.

Again, to all consistent and principled anti-war warriors, the specter of Americans rising against Uncle Sam’s bloody suzerainty is … wonderful.

UPDATE II: On Syria (And All Else), It’s ‘Us’ Against ‘Them’ (The Sleeping Giant Has Awakened)

Barack Obama, Constitution, Democracy, Foreign Policy, Founding Fathers, Military, War

“On Syria (And All Else), It’s ‘Us’ Against ‘Them'” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

The “Us” of this column’s title needs no explaining. The “Them,” however, does. We the American people are up against an entity far more sinister than the traditional, inchoate enemy—terrorism—around which we are instructed to unite in purpose.

The debate over whether to strafe Syria or to stay out of that country pits us against the military-congressional-industrial complex, whose interests run counter to ours. …

… Prominent among a new breed of military man turned lawmaker to stalk the people’s House is Illinois Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger. A “veteran of the military,” who still serves as a military pilot in the National Guard, is how Kinzinger bills himself. War weary though he purports to be Kinzinger is not. The verbally flatulent representative from Illinois loved it when his ilk flew sorties over the Old Stable Iraq, and seeks a repeat performance over Syria. He appears to see no limits to the role the U.S. should play in rolling back evil around the world, out of “the goodness of our heart.” Yes, the constitutional principle Rep. Adam Kinzinger invokes to justify war against the wishes and interests of the American people is “The Goodness of Our Heart” Clause.

But then, a “Global Force for Good” is how the Navy promises to fulfill “The Goodness of Our Heart” Clause of the U.S. Constitution, on its frightful, promotional website. You see, members of the U.S. military do not regard themselves as defenders of the realm—unless by “realm” one means empire. They’ve been brainwashed to be foot soldiers for the federal government, whenever, wherever.

Imagine what America’s Founding Fathers would think of a military that straddles the planet, having assumed the unauthorized role of a “global force for good.” Those sages opposed the idea of a standing army. They understood that “a standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty.”

The magnificent Robert E. Lee, on the other hand, had it right. To this American hero, local was beautiful. Gen. Lee saw himself as a Virginian first. Rep. Kinzinger is a Syrian first.

Baseless too is the idea that someone who’s seen war will be especially judicious in sending others to war. John McCain had suffered in war and has not stopped advocating for it ever since. John Kerry voted to go into Iraq. Ditto Chuck Hagel. …

Read the complete column. “On Syria (And All Else), It’s ‘Us’ Against ‘Them'” is now on WND.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION:

At the WND Comments Section. Scroll down and “Say it.”

On my Facebook page.

By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” this week’s “Return To Reason” column.

UPDATE I: “Most lawmakers undecided on Syria.”

“By CNN’s count, 59 senators and more than 280 representatives aren’t sure how they’ll vote on President Obama’s request for a military strike on Syria.” FULL STORY

UPDATE II (9/8): The Sleeping Giant Has Awakened.

… phones are bouncing off the hook, and almost unanimously people are saying do not get involved in a bloody and chaotic civil war in Syria

UPDATE III: Shock ‘N Awe For Syria? (Senators Say Onward To Syria)

Foreign Policy, Just War, libertarianism, Media, Middle East, Neoconservatism, Propaganda, Republicans, War

“A non-interventionist does not pretend that he is all knowing,” explained the great, much-missed Ron Paul to the war mongers on CNN (cheerleader Christian Amanpour is seriously aroused at the prospects of shock ‘n awe). Given the US’s dismal record in detecting WMD in faraway lands about which we know NOTHING, Dr. Paul rightly doubts the evidence as to the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government. Syria is immersed in a civil war, observed Paul, we know nothing about the dynamics there—who’s fighting whom—and Uncle Sam killing more Syrians just because the factions in that country are killing one another will accomplish nothing good.

Van Jones, a former Obama lackey (whom I might just begin to respect on some limited level), seconded Ron Paul’s sentiments. (This just highlights how serious was the failure of Mitt Romney and his surrogates to adopt the libertarian foreign policy so as to galvanize both libertarains and the left to his candidacy.)

Little daylight exists between the Republicans and Democrats in the halls of power. This, in my opinion, will be patently evident in the vote in Congress for Obama’s so-called “strategic” strafing of Syria, as if daisy cutters can be lobbed judiciously.

UPDATE I: Debate, Or Self-Aggrandizing Disquisitions? The “debate” conducted by members of the “Senate Committee Foreign Relations,” better described as the delivery of self-aggrandizing disquisitions, confirms the unanimity of opinion among the people’s so-called representatives—even as most Americans oppose the strike.

If you have any sense, you’ll see that going into Syria, an adventure whose costs our people will shoulder, demonstrates again that is us against them, where them constitutes “The Comitatus—”the sprawling apparatus that encompasses the ministries of government, the lawyers, the diplomats, the adjutants, the messengers, the interpreters, the intellectuals”

Lest you forget, the D.C. hood is also home to your favorite, oh-so gritty media personalities, who gather inside or near the Bubble to reap “the benefits of being at the center of the Imperium.” This means rocking the ship of state just enough to retain street cred with “the folks.”

UPDATE II: ONWARD TO SYRIA. As was predicted in this post, “they” would win; “we” would lose. BBC NEWS is first to report that “US senators’ draft backs limited action.”

The measure to be voted on next week sets a time limit of 60 days on any operation. The draft document also bans the use of any ground forces in Syria.

Secretary of State John Kerry said the US had to act after the Assad regime’s “undeniable” chemical weapons attack.

The Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, endorsed Mr Obama’s call for military action.

According to a copy of the draft resolution obtained by AFP news agency, the senators wish to restrict the operation to a “limited and tailored use of the United States Armed Forces against Syria”.

The resolution states that “the president may extend” a 60-day operation “for a single period of 30 days” if he obtains further specific Congressional approval.

“The authority granted… does not authorise the use of the United States Armed Forces on the ground in Syria for the purpose of combat operations,” the statement added.

FACEBOOK THREAD. It amazes me how immoral people the world over are (US politicians included) about demanding American blood and treasure. As I wrote in The Titan is Tired, “We Americans have our own tyrants to tackle. We no longer want to defend to the death borders not our own—be they in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, [Syria], wherever. And we don’t need our friends looking to us to do so.” And I added, “This column has been consistently polite about—but disinterested in—the putative push for freedom across the Middle East. Dare I say that such a stance, and not slobbering sentimentality, is the proper, libertarian position? I promised, accordingly, that when liberty deprived peoples the world over supported patriots stateside, I’d return the favor. The same goes for Israel.”