- It’s OK to kill someone today if there is reason to believe they may do something wrong in the future: Senator Lindsey Graham January 3, 2020. “This was not an act of revenge for what he had done in the past. This was a preemptive, defensive strike planned to take out the organizer of attacks yet to come.” Apparently only the US has this right.
- Assassinating foreign leaders is OK and does not constitute an act of war. Trump, Graham, Ben Shapiro, and too many neocons to count.
- Declared wars, who needs em? Bush, Obama, Hillary, Trump. Rand Paul Mocks the idea October 15, 2019. “Senator Graham and Hillary Clinton stood together to support Islamic extremists in the Syrian civil war. America should come first,” said Paul
- It will be a short war: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld November 2002
- Keeping US troops in Iraq will only cost $3.9 billion: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld 2003
- It’s OK for the US to fight everyone else’s war: Bush, Cheney, Obama, Hillary, Trump, and every neocon, too many to name. In contrast, “I’m tired of America always paying for everybody else’s war,” said Rand Paul, February 4, 2019.
- Crippling economic sanctions are not an act of war. Who cares how many starve to death? Too many neocons to count.
- “We Came, We Saw, He Died!”: Hillary Clinton joked in 2011 when told of news reports of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi death at US hands. Libya is now a Jihadist wonderland led by ISIS and Al Qaueda.
- Iran’s retaliation in response to Trump’s Assassination of a foreign leader was an “Act of War” but the assassination was not: Senator Lindsey Graham, January 7, 2020.
- “In order to get elected, Barrack Obama will start a war with Iran”: Donald Trump November 29, 2011.
Here’s a bonus 11th. “We have to get them over there so they don’t get us here.”
That goes back at least to the wonderful domino theory and false flag incident that kicked off the Vietnam War.
Iran History Lesson
Iran has every reason to mistrust if not hate the US for its role in the 1953 Iranian Coup D’état.
The coup the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953, orchestrated by the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project or “Operation Ajax”) and the United Kingdom (under the name “Operation Boot”). It was the first covert action of the United States to overthrow a foreign government during peacetime.
In August 2013, sixty years afterward, the U.S. government formally acknowledged the U.S. role in the coup by releasing a bulk of previously classified government documents that show it was in charge of both the planning and the execution of the coup, including the bribing of Iranian politicians, security and army high-ranking officials, as well as pro-coup propaganda. The CIA is quoted acknowledging the coup was carried out “under CIA direction” and “as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government”.
This is what led to the Iranian revolt years later under President Carter.
CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran
Foreign Policy Magazine reports CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran
In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq’s war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defenses. U.S. intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Hussein’s military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent.
The intelligence included imagery and maps about Iranian troop movements, as well as the locations of Iranian logistics facilities and details about Iranian air defenses. The Iraqis used mustard gas and sarin prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on U.S. satellite imagery, maps, and other intelligence. These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq’s favor and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration’s long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn’t disclose.
U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.
“The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew,” he told Foreign Policy.
Saddam & Rumsfeld Shaking Hands
And where did Iraq get the chemical weapons? Some allege the US.
At a minimum, the US looked the other way.
Here’s a nice video clip of future Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein on December 20, 1983.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QwxlygaDHA
Donald Rumsfeld was then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan.
Trump Treats US Allies Like Tainted Dog Meat
On May 8, 2018, Trump unilaterally withdrawal from a nuclear accord with Iran that China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Germany signed.
Every country but the US said Iran was following the accord.
The UK, Germany and France, which all opposed the sanctions, set up an alternative payment mechanism aimed at helping international companies trade with Iran without facing US penalties.
Unfortunately, the payment mechanism has been a big failure. Iran has been unable to sell more than minimal amounts of oil.
US Steals Iran’s Assets and Returns Them
Ben Shapiro made the claim today the the money for Iran’s attack on the US in Iraq came from the US.
This lie stems from the fact that under the accord, Iran gained access to more than $100 billion in assets frozen overseas.
We impound Iranian assets, return them, and the likes of Ben Shapiro act as if we “gave” Iran money.
US, By Far, the Global Leader in State Terrorism
The US, by far, is the leader in state-sponsored terrorism. No other country comes close.
Mind you, the US overthrew a democratically elected Iranian leader and replaced that person with a US puppet to steal Iranian oil.
Start there. https://t.co/R8b9FD1zvE
— Mike “Mish” Shedlock (@MishGEA) January 8, 2020
“Sissy!”
If you don’t support war, you get accused of being an Incomprehensible America Hating Sissy.
Let’s make that Warmongering Idea Number 12.
John Bolton’s Warmongering Notes
Image from John Bolton’s Warmongering Notes by Brian McFadden on The Nib.
Not Black and White
Yes, the US has done a lot of good.
And as I have pointed out many times, the US has the largest, most open capital markets in the world. Google, Apple, and Microsoft could not exist in the EU because the EU would bust them up in the name of competition.
Google thrives because it allows people free use of its search engine. People use it because they like it. Those who don’t like it are free to try something else. From its enormous search engine profits, Google started the entire new field of autonomous driving.
Earlier today someone asked me why I am in the US, as if my opinion on warmongering mattered.
To answer, because this is where I want to be.
But that does not mean one can never criticize the US or US leaders.
Might Is Not Right
One should never accept the principle that might makes right, or that US leaders can do no wrong (or right). For discussion, please see the Number One Person Afflicted with TDS is Trump.
The fact is, Trump’s actions are far removed from what the constitution would allow. We have gone from one undeclared war to another to another.
The second fact is the US has wasted trillions of dollars on not only stupid, but counterproductive wars.
The asinine decision to invade Iraq and take out Saddam Hussein, our once ally on the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” thesis led to the creation of ISIS.
Rational Decision by Iran
When you look at 7 decades of US policy and belligerency towards Iran, they would be nuts to not want a nuclear bomb. Their top reason would be to defend themselves from the US.
Few in the US can put themselves in someone else’s shoes. If you lived in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, or Afghanistan and a US drone killed your kid, you would have every reason to want to strike back, wouldn’t you?
Instead, the mindless US public, brainwashed by neocon and the warmongering media, couldn’t care less about collateral damage. Note that the Left Wing “Liberal Media” Cheers War and Assassinations
Questions Abound
What do we have to show for two decades of endless wars?
We have wasted several trillion dollars for what?
What?
Did might make right?
Could we not make better use of that money on US infrastructure than blowing up the world and making enemies in the process?
Nah. That kind of thinking is for sissies. Real men are willing to kill innocent men women and childrens with drones and blow up cultural sites in the name of peace.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Underlying all your points, is the, everywhere equally myopic and idiotic, indoctrination-end-result, that “our” specific Junta is always somehow more legitimate than all the other Juntas.
It doesn’t matter where one hails from, nor whether one’s Junta’s supposed “legitimacy” stem from adherence to Marx, some supposed god, divine birthright or silly rituals involving orange haired clowns and dimpled chads: Once the indoctrinati has been indoctrinated sufficiently thoroughly to believe their particular Dear Leader have some sort of legitimacy other Dear Leaders lack, they can reliably be counted on to support whatever silliness his designated Men on TV say is important for “National Cockamaity” or whatever is the buzzword of the day.
Best analysis of American foreign policy I’ve seen.
How can we apply this to China, where I don’t believe we’ve killed anyone yet? What if the US simply 1) ceased trade talks, 2) stopped trading with China and 3) gave full diplomatic recognition to Taiwan? Xi Jinping would have an epileptic fit. Would we care?
Surely the US could survive without Chinese trade. There are plenty of other nations we could get all those paper products from.
Would the Chinese government collapse, and the US needn’t have fired a shot? We simply walked away.
What is the justification for even planning a war with China? Has China killed any US/Allied citizens in an act of war, or attacked / invaded an ally? The Chinese are only competing vigorously in the economic sphere, and getting the better of the US there. That is why the US now targets China with war. Who is the aggressor (and idiot) here? But one thing for sure – the US will lose its empire if it starts a war with China.
You’re right, there is no justification within the normal confines of military warfare. However, nowadays there is also economic warfare and cyber warfare, neither of which was existent when the US Constitution was written.
China has been conducting economic warfare against the US ever since Nixon gave them recognition and the capability to do so. They’ve been conducting cyber warfare for the last 15 years or so.
So what should the US do? Certainly Trump is responding with economic warfare. We may not hear about US cyber warfare for a while.
The costs of warfare have become irrelevant, as any country that wants to conduct a war, simply does so with digital currency, ie issue more bonds. No attention paid to debt by anyone. Nevertheless, from what I hear, the Chinese may collapse economically before the US, so there won’t be any need for a military war. Perhaps Trump will just intimidate the Chinese, as he’s done with Iran & Venezuela, disregarding sanctions being an act of war. Trump sure can be intimidating.
“They hate our freedoms”
I bet those dastardly Iranians, Syrians, Iraqi’s, and such just sit over there stewing all day about how they hate our freedom and how to get us for it.
If their issue really was that they hated our once-were “freedoms”, they would all be loving us by now.
You have left off the one that goes, “We are denying them space in which to plan their attacks.”
Questions Abound
For Answers Either:
Catch Dems on the back foot. Remember when not backing W’s Iraq invasion adventurism was equated to weakness and a lack of patriotism.
[1] I have yet to hear anyone explain how killing Soleimani (for planning large actions in the future) has in fact cancelled those plans. Did all those plans include a key performance by the General himself? This claim is not even coherent.
[2] I have also yet to hear anybody list any American combat soldiers killed by “bad guy” Soleimani. The claim is based on the use of allegedly Iranian manufacture of EFP’s. But these have been used since WW2, and there is documentary evidence of their manufacture in Baghdad shops. The chain of reasoning is further that that 17% of casualties during the invasion of Iraq were related to Shia groups, so of the thousands of soldiers who have died, more than 600 are Soleimani’s fault. But Soleimani was not in control of Shia factions during the occupation war, and, in fact, the idea that all these “proxies” are under direct control of Soleimani is fanciful. The PMUs (People’s Militia Units) have been more effective than the Iraqi militiary because they are defending their own people, not some abstract government. Do you think the lions of Babylon, an Iraqi Christian militia, takes orders from a Persian Muslim? Making Iran or Putin responsible for everything that happens is equivalent to saying that Trump or Obama is a mass murderer because a million Iraqi have lost their lives. In fact, the last claim has far greater merit.
Looks like Rand Paul and Mike Lee will vote to limit war powers of the president. For decades Congress wanted to have it both ways after authorizing AUMF after 9/11. They never thought a president would use it for something else.
Can You Locate Iran? Few Voters Can.
“28% of registered voters could point out Iran on a zoomed-in map of the region.”
23% could point out Iran on a world map.
I am not commenting on whether the recent US interaction with Iran was right or wrong, as I have no information other than what various media outlets tell me.
That said, here are two warmongering excuses I remember bitterly:
“They hate us for our freedoms.”
and
“We have to make the world safe for democracy.”
This wasn’t an assasination,this was a mob hit!Talk about a 3rd world banana republic,is this the US or the Nicaragua?US has reached a level of depravity that rivals the Nazi’s! Slaughtering thousands with drones is no different than what the Nazi’s did at Auchwitz!
You are stupid
He was a military officer in uniform in theater
That’s just killing a soldier in combat
Another idiot with no military service, yapping
Mish you need to watch Syriana (again). That has a better portrayal of reality in the middle east vs life here in the United States. Without the United States the world would be worse off not better off.
Better off?
Millions dead or maimed for life all across the MENA, including women and children. 100s dying every month in Iraq. Only a sick person could say the MENA is better off today.
You have ‘Observed’ NOTHING. If you had, you wouldn’t call yourself ‘Casual’, sicko.
That is mostly MENAs governments fault. Besides it is such a small part of the world that matters less with each passing day. One day the US.will leave and there will be a nuclear war in MENA and it wont be because the US started it.
The US role in the world is better described by time than region. We did show magnanimity on occasion, but that ended shortly after WW2. During the Cold War we were arguably more bad than good, but after the fall of the USSR we’ve been downright awful for most of the world.
The Chinese, who are busy constructing an Orwellian social credit system, are now better for the world than we are. At least they build things, we only seem interested in destruction.
I can’t fathom why you think we’re leaving the ME. There are resources we’re obviously interested in, plus our only two true friends in the world are there. We’re an empire now and empires don’t shrink voluntarily. We don’t have 800 bases in 70-80 different countries by accident.
Your view is a bit extreme. Do you think China became what it was without the US? The world for the most part is better off because of trade. Notice I didn’t say the US. The US has driven living standards higher in emerging economies. I would know since I came from a closed economy in asia in the 70s.
China and a lot of other emerging economies benefited from US consumer spending. Now that consumer is tapped out and living on credit card debt.
We didn’t do this out of the goodness of our hearts, we did it so our executive class could lower costs and raise bonuses. We hollowed out our own country in the process, leading to the rise of populist and socialist politicians. The feeling of anger in the country has become palpable.
Put another way, we don’t even care about our fellow Americans. Why would we act with any kindness toward the rest of the world?
We are actually kinder to the rest of the world than we are to our citizens. That is finally ending now under Trump. The forgotten citizens will never be forgotten. They always rise up and throw a monkey wrench into the establishment’s “plans”.
Yes the US has been good for the world in the area of trade and economics (until recently at least). But there was / is absolutely no moral justification for the US to interfere in other countries under any pretense. If a MENA country is ruled by a despot, let the people of that country handle it. The suffering is always greater when the US interfered compared to letting the people work it out themselves.
Thanks for the history lesson. I think very few Americans realize how much harm the US has caused Iran – and I am not sure what we have gained except the loss of many American lives and dollars that could have gone to much better causes. Now I wish we could educate the American public about the lies of Saudi Arabia as the great American ally – but another day.
Yes, US making cannon fodder of US soldiers for no reason at all is “ironic”
Curious, Mish, what branch of the US Military did you serve your country in?
None
If drafted I vowed not to go and I am damn proud to be on the right side of history on that.
Let’s not equate “serving” with patriotism. The patriots refused to go to Vietnam.
Funny that killing national leaders is a war crime, but national leaders making cannon fodder of their sons and daughters is moral. Anyone see the irony here??
Starting wars (“aggression”) is the worst and the root of all other war crimes. Killing a national leader travelling on a diplomatic mission is definitely an act of war, and, therefore, a war crime. War is in fact simply an state organized crime wave.
I think in discussions like this it would be good to go over WHY successive US administrations have pursued war polity pretty much continuously since WWII. Why?
What purpose does war serve?
Who or what is behind the drive to wage them?
How much of a huge tanker within the body politic is it, and how feasible is it to expect such long-standing tendencies to be turned around?
Of course, this is not easy. Because as we all know, the first casualty of war is the truth.
(My suspicion is that a deal is in the works but a precondition for any progress was getting the very influential Soleimani out of the picture before upcoming Iraqi elections which might indicate that part of the deal will be reducing Iranian influence in Iraq in return for something. But we’ll see. The PNAC agenda is seemingly still in effect, in which case regime change in Iran is a priority in which case fomenting revolt is more likely the US approach than dealing with the Ayotollah regimes in good faith.)