Home | About | Donate

Missile Attack on Syria Is a Salute to 'Russiagate' Enthusiasts—Whether They Like It or Not


#21

We haven’t clearly demonstrated that since the end of WW2. The “Post War” Era has been continuous non-stop war against the world on behalf of white supremacy and capitalist hegemony. The people have pretty much gone along whether it was the Red Scare McCarthyism, Yellow Ribbon Wars, Dirty Wars everywhere, etc.

The uprisings against the U.S. wars in Southeast Asia were an aberration, basically because the Vietnamese people were able to survive the massive onslaught and drive the U.S. out. Only then did (a critical mass, not necessarily a majority) of the people of the U.S. want “peace.”


#22

Echoes of the alt-left in what has become his Norm.

I am too troubled by the support of this military action, or tacit support by liberals and progressives who have dropped their principles that they supposedly held against Bush launching attacks in the ME.

I also, have never given much credence to any evidence that Russia’s influence, to whatever degree was if at all true, had any tangible effect on the election compared with the surely tangible effect of Clinton’s campaign that ended up defeating herself.

All of that said, the alt-left Norm, that Norm echoes here, is this bizarre blindness, or refusal to see the FACTS regarding Trump’s very long track record of business interests that are entwined with Russian oligarchs, that have long been about him getting more power and more money.

That those relationships would be considered even more important during his campaign, and during his Presidency should be damn obvious, and because after all Trump is, well, Trump it is an absolute given that those relationships are dark and infested with corruption.

It was those interests entwined with Russian business crooks that inspired any “peace” intentions with Russia. I and others asserted that point time, and time again during the campaign, countering the alt-left fucking absurd argument that Trump, TRUMP!!! could possibly possess any enlightened view about peace with anyone.

But Norm, as has become his Norm, on this, once again pushes the narrative that gosh, Trump just wanted peace and now look what has been done to poor Trump.

Did I just assert that the DOJ shouldn’t be busy ferreting out corruption by countless US business crooks? Nope.

What I am asserting, is of all people, I’m quite pleased that the NY district is hot on the heels of Trump’s jerk attorney in delving into just what a monumentally corrupt President we have sitting in the Oval Office.

And the chance that Trump might not actually have the power to do anything about THAT wing of the investigation.

One can only hope. I hope I didn’t just ruin Norm’s day.


#23

Said pretty much the same myself:

What purpose do these types of myopic articles serve? It’s like really bad propaganda that everyone can tell is crap, except for the diehards. What’s worse, and as I’ve pointed out a bunch, people on the Trump campaign were in communication with a Russian intelligence officer that they knew was one. It’s in the Van Der Swaan plea. Were they exchanging pancake recipes? Oh, and this agent worked with Manafort in the past.

The evidence gathers, the story gets broader, but people like Norm plug their ears and yell nonsense.


#24

By the way, I don’t doubt for one minute that Trump actually did seek help from his connections in Russia to influence the election. At this point, I just think the case against Trump/Cohen relative to the NY wing of it, will end up being the most significant. Most significant, as in opening all of the most pertinent lines of investigative evidence regarding the corruption of Trump, and by extension, Cohen. And how, possibly, the NY district might be out of the reach of Trump getting rid of Mueller, in however fashion he tries to.

Did you see that Cohen was indeed in Prague? Also, that the judge yesterday was even questioning whether Cohen was by definition a lawyer in his service to Trump? And given that, how unlikely it will be that much, if any of the evidence seized by the FBI will be considered legally “client privilege” and thus off limits.

And also, the likelihood, that since Trump doesn’t email, Cohen may well have lots of recordings of Trump i.e., keeping track of the wishes of his bestest and pretty much only, client.

Ends up being “the client from hell” for poor Cohen.


#25

Ohh goody the vagina phobic tiny penises had their “military action”. One result that can be expected is the EU and Turkey will have more Syrian Refugees to contend with. Secondly theus is closer to being bankrupt in more ways than one. USSR lost more than cash in Afghanistan and so history repeats.


#26

And sometimes, History, while repeating, tosses in a bit of tragic irony to boot.


#27

I didn’t see the judge questioned Cohen, but I saw the report about Prague. The thing that bothers me about arguments like Norm’s and other “progressives” is that Trump’s basic crookedness was well covered and taken for granted by New York-centered journalists who covered him for years. David Cay Johnston is basically like, “Why wouldn’t you think Trump would take help from the Russians? His whole background is shady deals.” Yet, Norm basically asks everyone to close their eyes, presumably in the interest of peace, though I’m not sure. The thing is, a crook who gives two-shits about himself and nobody else ain’t going to do peace if it doesn’t help him. Plus, turning your back on basic Democratic norms for convenience is not exactly a progressive thing to do, at least in my estimation.


#28

Did you read the same article I did? The article wasn’t making excuses for Trump. In fact, it wasn’t really analyzing Trump’s rationale for doing anything. The point of the article was that there has been an atmosphere among the dominant TV and print media to not only intensify our involvement in Syria, but also to ramp up tensions with Russia. This was all obvious as far back as the 2016 campaign, where Clinton proudly touted the support of very hawkish political figures and politicians, and was in favor of more confrontation with Iran and Russia. No matter what Trump does, and regardless as to his rationale, the end result of what Maddow does from a policy perspective is to increase tensions with Russia. Hell, she at one point critiqued Trump for sitting down with North Korea. And there are far worse elements in the media that are not considered to be right wing for some reason, that want even more than she does. The range of debate on these issues is just as narrow now as it was in 2002, and there are large profits to be made in war, which find their way into the campaigns of many Democrats. Trump and the neocon right aren’t the only group we should be confronting here.

If there wasn’t far more involvement from countries with worse human rights records in our democracy, I could see the intense focus on Russia, cause in that instance it would be unique. The push to hot or cold conflict with Russia, if looked at in a wider context and given the consequences, is monumentally stupid and irresponsible.


#29

I’ll never forget the obvious disappointment Maddow showed the day it was announced Trump would meet with Kim Jong Un. She just could not hide her disappointment and consternation. After all, imagine…peace might break out! She’s not paid $30k per day for nothing.


#30

Yeah, and she’s the “progressive”, right? That was the point of the article, agree or disagree, not Trump’s rationale for doing what he did. It was an article on the range of debate in the media, how the media pushes Trump in a particular direction. Lots could be said about Trump and Bolton, and their bullshit reasons for doing what they did, their worldview, etc., but that would be another article and a different topic.


#31

I did read the article and I’ve read Norm’s others. They are all of a piece. I think Norm is deeply uncomfortable with the Trump investigation and has been since it was announced, quite clearly. But the war nonsense this week started when our illustrious president said on Monday he’d make a decision to bomb Syria “in 48 hours” and tweeted that he might bomb Syria Wednesday. Then, of course, Secretary Mattis (as well as SaraH Sanders) appeared to put the brakes on the tweets publicly. What’s the news supposed to do when the president is tweeting he wants to bomb Syria, let alone when his Secretary is saying something different?

I think Norm is scrambled because the peace candidate of 2016 is a wreck, so he’s putting blame on others. This isn’t to say the media isn’t too war-centered—it is. But let’s be clear about who tweeted they were going to bomb Syria.

Oh, and need I mention, presidential discussion of this started right after Cohen’s office was raided Monday?


#32

What does any of that have to do with this article though? The focus of this article isn’t on Trump as a peace candidate. He mentions Trump in the article, but he doesn’t focus Trump at all. The focus of this article is on the media, its framing of the situation in Syria and it trying to push Trump in a more hawkish direction. If he wrote an article on Trump as a peace candidate, I could see your point. One of the big problems for me in the 2016 election was that there wasn’t a peace candidate. Trump might have been a bit more isolationist in his rhetoric, but he’s corrupt and would eventually do what war profiteers wanted him to. He also doesn’t know anything about foreign policy, so whatever he does, it will be those around him running things feeding him information, playing on his emotions, manipulating him, which is the case now. They sometimes leave him alone, he says something stupid, and they scramble to provide cover. Clinton was Clinton.


#33

I guess my point was broader when it comes to Norm, so it’s tough for me to narrow focus on this one article, especially when it’s the president that instigated the behavior he’s talking about. Plus, contra Norm, I feel like media this week has been on the fire Mueller tip. All week, it’s been blather about firing Mueller or Rosenstein.


#34

There was never ANY basis for the argument that Trump wanted peace with Russia on the actual merits of peace. Zilch, zip, nada.

I fought that clucking argument for months, and damned if I wasn’t right.


#35

Here’s who started the war drums this week:

It wasn’t the media, but the asshole in the White House.


#36

to add to my point (edit no longer available)…and no, any criticisms I’m directing at Norm and others in my argument are not directed AT you…

I don’t disagree with the argument that the MSM promotes war, not one bit. But that Trump need be “pushed” in that direction is absurd.

We are talking about a guy who ran on…

Big military buildup including nukes (beyond the Obama modernization program already in place)

Ban on Muslims (stoking the hate of his base, and in keeping with the most right wing aspects of the military that would engage in a religious war, and in keeping with the “war on terror”)

Confronting China militarily in the South China Sea and, with the ends of intimidating China to get concessions on trade.

Confronting North Korea, including increasing the frequency and scope of war games with South Korea and Japan, and deploying defensive missile systems (not wanted by the majority of South Koreans) long seen as in actuality offensive systems by NK, China, and Russia

Advocating that Japan invest in weapons, including development of nuclear weapons

Promising increased military engagement in the ME in confronting ISIS and that rules of engagement should be eased.

Building the clucking Wall while making Mexicans out to be the enemy.

Promising to AIPAC to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem and to back the State of Israel in its policies against Palestinians.

Advocating more torture, worse torture, and to make it legal.

And the list goes on…

My point is, the arguments made by Norm and others advocating Trump as one who was more willing to reign in US Empire and promote peace with Russia (given Trump’s known business dealings which should have made his Russia peace pronouncements suspect on the face of it) had zero merit to begin with.

Yet here he is actually embedding that argument in his VALID criticisms of MSM pushing war.

Trump never needed a push to begin with, and, given his known penchant of corruption, boundless ego, bent for authoritarianism, dog whistling racists for power, and the rest…the arguments that Trump represented some opportunity to foster peace on the world stage were patently absurd.

Trump’s first visit to any agency was to the CIA. He has surrounded himself with Generals, much in line with the advice likely given him by Woolsey who he chose as a foreign policy advisor during the campaign. Now he jumps at the chance to get Bolton, in this latest period where he has been more “unleashed” remaking his Administration.

The guy is a war monger, was always a war monger, and he lied about having been against the Iraq War prior to the start of it.

Solomon, Pilger, Greenwald, and so many others ignored the worst aspects of Trump, and refused to entertain their own intellect in imagining what an incredible danger this right wing lunatic would be with Presidential powers. Sure, they made some comments from time to time alluding to Trump’s dark side but in balance, not even close to what was merited.

And yes, I had the very same reaction to Maddow. It’s like she was struggling to find some angle that didn’t comport to tacit agreement with Trump in launching the attack.


#37

I hold a lot of rage at the US populace who go along with these wars of Empire.

That said, this notion that the US population in general, by nature, want these wars is complete and utter bunk.

If that were the case, no false flag would be necessary, no dirty secrets on US Empire would be classified “top secret”, etc.

No CIA would be needed to do covertly what couldn’t otherwise be done in the light of day.

That’s where your logic falls apart.


#38

Exorcism of the White House by The Fugs!


#39

Check out # 38 music.


#40