The pseudonym "Philo Vaihinger" has been abandoned. All posts have been and are written by me, Joseph Auclair.

Monday, March 25, 2013

Why are only one or two Republicans not on al-Qaeda’s side in Syria?



The democracy shills had their eyes wide shut to the realities of the revolution of the mullahs in Iran.

They have not been better about Libya or Egypt.

And now they are doing it again with regard to Syria.

For them, it’s never enough for us to withdraw support from a friendly but not very democratic government.

We have to provide positive support for those who would install a much less friendly government in its stead, the excuse being it will be more democratic.

In the present case it likely would.

Much like the Islamic Republic in Iran.

Whoopie.

It’s bad enough when interventionists insist we meddle in other people’s affair based on utter eyewash about crucial American interests in danger.

But when they insist we meddle to the obvious hurt of our own interests and those of our real or supposed allies – in this case, our client, Israel – it’s really silly.

Read down far enough to see the bit about SR 65, aimed at freezing the US into support for any war against Iran started by Israel, not to stop Iranian efforts to build a nuke but to remove from Iran even the capacity to undertake such project.

Pat’s claim that the policy toward Syria is about bringing us closer to war with Iran is not well explained or justified, though not absurd.

But SR 65 is bad news, all the same.

And so is the big push to force the US into support for the Syrian rebels with a lot of baloney about government forces using gas, the taboo on which is far, far loonier and stupider than the taboo on nukes.

Oh, the War Party?

Well, that’s mostly – but by no means only – Pat’s own party, the Republicans.

Not that he would desert them over this.

The bottom line is always the money, but he likes their clericalism, too.

No comments:

Post a Comment