For unknown reasons the GOP is unable to accept that the Cold War ended a quarter-century ago.
Every candidate – with the exception of Rand Paul – is saying “we need a stronger military.” Carly even gave us numbers. But… why? We already have the strongest military in the history of the known universe.
Why do we need a stronger military? Why does the GOP keep demanding it? Because Reagan demanded – and got – it? That was during the Cold War and we needed it. But – we won the Cold War; it’s over.
Should we never go to war without the goal, strategy and tactics of complete victory? Sure – but – where, exactly, do we need to go to war? What, exactly, is worth the lives of our sons & daughters? Islam? Ukraine? Iraq? How many of your sons would you sacrifice for Ukraine? Why? They don’t even believe in their own future enough to populate it (Total Fertility Rate=1.3) – so what is the purpose of sacrificing your son to it?
That’s just stupid.
(The requirement of the GOP to insist on more ships, bombs & bullets may be existential for the GOP. This may be an artifact of the lack of something around which to organize a party whose raison d’être is “Leave me alone;” how, exactly, does one organize a group of people around leaving each other alone? One can organize around the Cold War (1950 – 1988), around anti-crime (1968, 2016), around anti-immigrant (2016), around Rule of Law (2010, 2012, 2014, 2016), or around “gimme all your dough” (Democrats), but how does one organize around “leave me alone”? Libertarians have been trying it for decades to no avail – and to American’s loss.)
The Cold War is over, and it is time to pay attention to that fact before we go getting more Americans killed in wars we – absolutely – do not need to fight and will refuse to win.
But… We need to confront China!
If China is going to join the mercantilist world – and they are – and if we have pressed them to do more in the world, particularly in regard to disasters – and we have – and if they need safe shipping lanes to ship their products to us, and empty containers back to them – and they do – why not celebrate that they are building a blue water navy instead of whine about it? Let China spend to protect the shipping lanes. Let them kill the bad guys on the high seas.
We sure as hell aren’t killing the pirates costing shippers and insurers millions. Bad guys hijack ships… and all we do is make movies about it.
Put China’s navy there and see how long those pirates last. Just because the West has become ball-less in defending lives & property doesn’t mean the East has. If China decides to destroy the islamists causing their country murderous violence – and harming their customers in europe and America, why should that concern us?
Look – the GDP of europe is a bit higher, but about the same as ours. If europe needs defending from Russia, let europe do it; and if europeans don’t think europe is worth defending from Russia – why should we?
But… Putin is in Syria!
So what? Russians have been in Syria since the USSR. Syria houses their only warm water naval port. So they are moving in more folks. And…?
But… Putin is a bad actor!
If we could ally with Stalin to kill NAZIs – after the Purges, when we knew beyond doubt he was a bad actor, why on earth can’t we ally with Putin to kill ISIS? Or at least leave him alone to do so? Even NAZIs didn’t hang POWs by a chain and burn them to death, or put them in a cage and then burn them to death.
ISIS needs to be killed. I have no problem with Russia doing it. Why does the GOP? It is amazing what one can get done when one doesn’t care who gets the credit.
If there’s a rabid dog in the neighborhood, why would I care if my neighbor killed it instead of me? It’s still dead – as radical islam needs to be.
Someone needs to kill ISIS. America has – under Obama – refused to do so, and created a multi-billion-dollar refugee catastrophe in europe. (If you wanted to expand the caliphate into europe and America, what would you do that Obama has not done?)
Russia is choosing otherwise. Because it needs to be done, why would we care that Putin has decided to spend his money and lives to do so?
Maybe he’ll get real intelligent and just nuke the bastards. It’d be best for all concerned, least costly, and quickest, as well.
But it will mean regional hegemony for Russia and their new allies, shia Persia and shia Syria!
I’d rather have semi-Western hegemony by Russia than non-Western hegemony by shia Persia.
We know Russia is sane – or we would’ve had a nuclear war decades ago. What we know about shia Persia is that they are not sane: they have an end-of-days belief the requires them to kick-off global chaos: Their cult requires man-caused chaos to bring about the return of the 12th imam.
What will they use to create this Jim-Jones-on-Steroids nonsense? Not Kool Aide – nukes. Thanks, Obama & Democrats!
Who is willing to stop them?
Not Obama – we already know this. He is encouraging it.
Putin? Worth a try, right?
One can fantasize that shia hegemony is not going to happen anyway, and one can fantasize that it is not the foreign policy goal of the bastard America elected as president, but that’s all it is: Fantasy.
If Putin can keep shia Persia under control, as we kept the Shah under control, what is the problem?
Radical islam needs to be stopped. Russia has been engaging islam with violence in Chechnya to the handwringing of the bedwetters for some years. Let them keep engaging it. Why is that a problem? If something needs doing, and if we refuse to do it, why get our panties in a knot if Russia goes and does it?
Frankly, if Putin had real balls, he’d offer NATO an exchange: NATO can have Ukraine if they will just shut up about whatever Putin does in Chechnya. Works for me – why not for you?
Putin is very aware of what an Islamized europe would mean to Russia’s economy. Why preclude the head of Russia from acting in the defense of his nation?
We went to war 10,000 miles away to “protect” America: Why can’t Putin go to war in – his – Caucuses and on – his – southern border to defend – his – nation?
Obama’s choice not to stop ISIS is predicated on his desire to expand shia islam – no other logical reason exists – and no one has accused Obama of being illogical. (Many say he’s incompetent, but they are ignorant of the broader view: the expansion of shia islam always has been his goal – he’s never attacked shia, only sunni – look at a map:
We are approaching a war on the North-South fault line between modernity and pre-modernity. The players on the stage, Russia, America, perhaps China (not europe, they’ve given up on any future but tomorrow’s latte) will, sooner or later, have to go to war – real war – against the South: Islam. We – America – have let-loose the furies of islam (thanks, Jimmy Carter), a pre-modern cult – and a “religion” by no stretch of that Western word. If Russia kicks-off the N-S war by killing enemies of modernity en masse, this is a VERY GOOD THING.
Take the long view: Are the nations abandoned to self-determination by countries (Britain, Germany, France) under the rule of law decades too soon (centuries, in some instances) better or worse off than when they were under the thumb of an imperial master? Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who, I daresay, knows better than you or I, argues that they were better off before imperialism left town; I heard her make that argument at Claremont McKenna College in SoCal.
The subjects/citizens of each of the following were better off before America began toppling the strongmen keeping at-bay the islamists: Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Syria (by destabilizing Iraq), Libya – and by extension Mali. And now Qatar, Yemen, the UAE, Saudi Arabia all are undergoing varying levels of indigenous violence due to Bush’s choice to destabilize the entire region – for no reason of American national security whatsoever.
The entire Middle East / South Asia region was better off before the colonial masters pulled anchor and sailed away. Only those seriously ignorant of history can deny this.
American ignorant leadership seems to think all nations are ready and willing for local self-determination and Western liberal democracy.
Is self-determination always good? Only half of the US voter pool even thinks so – the rest vote for totalitarians who stand and cheer an imperial president telling the legislative branch they, and by extension the Rule of Law, are irrelevant.
- Hillary insisted on bombing Libya into self-determination – and unleashed catastrophe in Libya and Mali, and got our ambassador murdered in Benghazi.
- Obama demanded “better” self-determination in Egypt – and they self-determined the Muslim Brotherhood and local crucifixion of Egyptians for pleasure.
- Bush insisted on self-determination for Iraq – and got ISIS. (Sure – ISIS grew from Obama’s inattention, but if anyone thinks Saddam would’ve let that cancer metastasize, they’re just nuts.)
If Putin becomes the imperial master of the muslim world, let’s not pretend they will be any worse off. By any measure they’ll be better off.
The historical ignorance of most Westerners leaves them unable to differentiate between the Good, the Bad, and the Oh, well.
- Muslim self-determination: Bad – Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen…
- Islam being hammered until they stop killing everyone who doesn’t believe their death cult: Good
- Does it really matter if it’s Russia or America (or even China?) hammering islam until they go back into their 7th Century cave? Nope: Oh, well.
If Putin wants to expand into – or at least settle down – the slaughterhouse on his southern border, and use their oil to help his (modern) economy, improving his ability to trade with the West – and the economies of europe and America in doing so, that is not a bad thing.
Will the locals be better off? They can’t be worse off.
If Putin can put back the stopper on the Khomeini lantern that Jimmy Carter rubbed into global islamist terrorism – great.
But the GOP needs to get off this kick of pretending that the Cold War isn’t over, that other great powers cannot act in their best interest – and that it is better if America sends troops to kill ISIS than if Russia does it.
If Russia will kill ISIS – more power to them.
Rand is the ONLY candidate who grasps these fundamentals.