Thirty years ago the Mujahidin were fighting against an evil Russian installed regime in Afghanistan. I think we all knew that the Mujahidin were not very nice people either but your enemy’s enemy and all that and so we in the West, gave them stacks of guns and money. Among the lucky recipients was that fellow Osama Bin Laden who sure showed his gratitude to the West and the USA (the largest donor of guns and money) at a later point.
And so we turn to Syria where Mitt Romney, after consulting with his dressage horse for the tax implications, says that the US should provide weapons to the Syrian rebels – the FSA: not the UK financial regulator or the body trying to stamp out the evil that is home made jam, the other FSA. In making this statement Mitt is trying to outhawk the vile Clinton woman and her boss Obama who also wish to assist the FSA but have yet to say they wish to arm the rebels. Perhaps they could all send over some homemade WI chutney to the rebs. That would really scare President Assad.
As I have noted before BOTH sides in Syria are vile. The Assad regime engages in wholesale human rights abuses, murders civilians but at least they are tolerant of all faiths. They run a sort of multicultural (except for the wicked Jews, ‘natch) non-democracy. The rebels engage in wholesale human rights abuses and murder civilian as well but are not so hot on that multi-cultural bit. That the rebels kill fewer civilians than Assad may be because they have fewer guns. But Mitt wishes to redress that imbalance.
Will Western intervention make us any friends? Of course not. Both sides hate the “Imperialist, war mongering Jewish run monster” that is the USA in an irrational and burning way. After the war is over, both sides will still hate the USA and the more she intervenes the more she will be hated. As you may have noted, her intervention in Iraq, Egypt and Libya has not changed attitudes towards the Great Satan much. If anything the USA is more loathed after intervening than before when folks could focus their loathing on home grown monsters.
And so Romney/the vile Clinton woman will no doubt press on with their plans for “guns for grief:” the USA hands over the guns to assist the slaughter and the recipients send back some grief in a few years time. That America is running a huge budget deficit and its debt to GDP metrics are zooming into pre-Grecian territory seems not to matter.
During his first campaign to become President Bill Clinton flew home to Arkansas to ensure that a murderer with an IQ of below 80 (Rickie Ray Rector) was executed even though he was clearly not mentally capable of standing trial. He asked if he could save the pudding his pre-execution slap up dinner for “afterwards.” Clinton showed no pity. He had an election to win. You do not lose votes being soft on murderers of whatever variety. This General election neither candidate wishes to be seen as being soft on evil Muslim dictators. Bashing Assad wins votes. That it will be a costly and futile exercise and that the US will be backing men who are just as evil is irrelevant. Romney’s call is not about what is right or sensible but about votes.comments powered by Disqus