McCain's "Bloodletting"

John McCain is attempting to step up the game of the United States' role in Syria, petitioning the federal government for the authority to provide arms and munitions to the Syrian Rebels involved in the Syrian Civil Conflict. He reportedly made the request, saying "the bloodletting has got to stop".

Unfortunately for McCain and the continual US War Machine, the bloodletting will not stop by arming the rebels... in fact, it is impossible to say WHAT will happen in the short term or long term by shipping arms to a conflict zone. However, let's take a look at some examples and try to see the brilliance behind McCain's idiocy:

In a proxy war with the Soviets, the United States provide arms, munitions, and training to the Taliban in a remote landlocked nation called Afghanistan. The move to invade Afghanistan was Soviet aggression in spreading Socialism in the region, and true to the nature of the Cold War the US was there to confront them. The training of the Taliban, an aggressive nationalistic group of Muslim fundamentalists who otherwise were powerless, led to the eventual battle hardiness of the group as they fended off a world super-power. The arms and training provided by the United States were eventually used to destroy the country, implementing fundamentalist Islamic rule, destroying centuries old religious relics, and gave rise to a Mr Osama Bin Laden. The US won this proxy war in the short game, but there are more than three innings in this ballgame, folks. Bin Laden used his training and skills to create a rogue organization of Islamic Criminals, arguably starting World War III. The United States has been fighting a war against the Taliban for over ten years... the same Taliban to whom we once provided arms and munitions.

The story is the same in Iraq. We provided arms and munitions in support of Saddam Hussein. The US backed the Iraqis in another proxy war with the Soviets, where they backed Iran. The two countries fought brutal wars for many years at the hands of the two world super powers providing arms and munitions to both sides. The US entered into the country, waging one of the most controversial wars of US history to topple the regime that it helped build.

In Libya, the United States intervened, assisting the Libyan Rebels without any knowledge of 'who' these rebels actually were. As the Libyan conflict continued, it became more clear that the secular regime was being over-run by the Islamic fundamentalist enemy to the United States, Al-Qaieda. Thanks to the support of the US forces, the very organization responsible for attacking the United States in 2001 has now been given a country, an army, nasty munitions, and legitimacy.

In Egypt, the US backed regime who was responsible for an extended era of peace with Israel in the region, the 'Arab Spring' saw the overthrow of the secular regime in favor of a Muslim Fundamentalist Oligarchy. Though the military is technically still in control of the country, it is apparent that the nation has been over-run by Islamic fundamentalists. Burkas are now common, beaches are now segregated by sex, violent crime is rampant, and Christians are under extensive attack. The US President did not provide arms, but he did provide the full faith and allegiance of the United States, turning his back on the once allied Egyptian Government.

And not to be left out, the 1990's provided us with Kosovo, in which Bill Clinton armed and encouraged the Ethnic Albanians (Muslim) to declare independence, leading to a horrific armed conflict and eventual genocide of Albanians in the region.

Case after case the United States has intervened in these conflicts, and time and again the impact has been MORE loss of life, MORE war, MORE bloodletting, followed by LESS freedom, LESS religious liberty, and LESS stability.

Mr McCain, Neo-Cons, and War Democrats... hear me. Giving guns to the radical elements of this Islamic Arab Spring is not just a bad idea, it is historically immoral! It may seem popular or a means to an end to try and topple these regimes - but you're replacing secular nationalism with Islamic fundamentalism. I will take a small proud nation over a religious fundamentalist nation ANY DAY. War is not the answer. Arming the radical Islamic elements in these struggles is not the answer. It is about damned time that the United States (and her glorious leaders) shut the hell up and let these people fend for themselves.

The State of the World *Amended for a friend

Firstly, I apologize to my two loyal readers for my long absence. Life has been so busy that I shan't even start down that path!

I wanted to discuss the state of the world. As a brief overview, these are the things that are really sticking out in my mind:

US/Russo relations are further strained by Russian response to European missile shield, and begin Soviet sorties over the Arctic ocean. They are also laying claim to the North Pole, dissolving their government, and instilling a strong sense of national pride in "youth camps". Sounds like the cold war isn't over... but I have to admit, Bush's foreign policies regarding Russia have been the protagonist in this epic play.

Iran is really being a pain in the rear... which is a double edged sword. The PEOPLE of Iran are unhappy with their leadership, like the US is with theirs... but the two governments are locking in to a war of words, and per Iran, a Final Answer (similar to the Final Solution of Hitler?) on October 12th. And the huevos that the Iranian President has, wanting to lay a wreath at the WTC Ground Zero site... really... like you would expect the US president to be allowed to lay a wreath at the old US embassy in Tehran in remembrance of the Marines killed and the hostage situation of the early 80's. PLUS, Iran has been working with Syria to mount chemical weapons onto missiles, pushing for nuclear weapons, and most likely trading nukes with North Korea. I was a little concerned about Iran before, but now I fear that war with them is inevitable... which is going to bulk up support for the government and eliminate any hope for change from the people.

Syria was just bombed by Israel for trying to smuggle nukes in from Iran. Of course Syria was the country of least concern, until the Nancy Pelosis of the world began visiting them and giving them any sort of legitimacy... now we are seeing assassinations by Pro-Syrians in Lebanon, inevitable war with Israel, and more problems in Iraq from the increasingly rogue country.

And I had a discussion with a liberal friend up in Washington State as I was visiting over the weekend. She was touting the Bush/McCain immigration "reform", i.e. amnesty plan. She was talking about how she was having construction done on her house, and the first group of union workers were crap, so they fired them and brought in (what were potentially) illegals, who worked longer hours for cheaper pay with better quality. My first thought was that the union guys are a product of the union environment... where you don't have to work long and/or hard to keep your job... you have strength in numbers and that trumps any working standard (I've seen this in action... ). Then she argued that we should work to build up Mexico so we don't have them running across the border. I told her that the problem with "world government mentality" is that the US becomes some sort of a nanny to the other countries. Our country ends at the borders, therefore our constitution ends at the borders, and our involvement should end at the borders. IF the Mexicans want a better living situation, go home and fix the problem. Please come back when, and only when, you plan to accept American culture and American Loyalty... but of course the liberal agenda has worked wonders in destroying American Culture... and expanding it around the world... so now borders are blurred, and it makes no sense that governments fight because "we are the people of one world"... well... needless to say it was an interesting conversation, and as I was discussing the issues I was being bashed for my views... a common liberal tactic. Of course if you try the same tactic you can expect a lawsuit or some crap like that. (In my humblest opinion)

Anyway... I have been gone, but I have not been uninvolved! I look forward to sharing some more ideas with you all more regularly now!

God Bless!

Middle East - Ticking Time Bomb

The ever evolving conflict in the Middle East has taken yet another turn. Al Qaeda has given a two month ultimatum to the Iranian government to cease all ties to the Iraqi Shiite government or face war.

This is the "spilling over" that we had been warning neighbors in the region about... so by arming radical elements and funding their operations, even if just the US, is now going to start spilling across international borders.

This is at the same time when Iraqi politicians are invoking the US second amendment, and urging the citizens to take arms and defend themselves, as a last line of defense against criminals and terrorists. In the wake of the deadly attacks over the weekend, one which killed over a hundred innocent civilians, the Iraqi government has finally asked the people to start taking responsibility for their own safety... (this may be the first step in them understanding the need to fight for their own survival and freedom, and stop depending on the government for a socialist solution)

So as the US is in a showdown this week, where the answer may be given as to when the US will be pulling battle forces out of Iraq, the tensions in the region are escalating... perhaps in anticipation of the US withdrawl. The US congress is debating a defense spending bill, and with Republicans jumping off of the President's war-wagon, it is likely that we will have a timetable for troop withdrawl... What this will look like, what bases will remain, what forces will remain is all to be decided.

What I see as happening if the US withdraws all forces, bases, etc, is as follows:

• Al Qaeda makes good on their promises to attack Iran
• Iran invades Iraq as a response, since Iran houses the terrorist group
• Turkey invades Iraq from the north to secure northern oil fields in the wake of the Iranian invasion
• Iraqi-Sunnis begin fighting Shiites who support the Iranian invaders (this is already taking place)
• Syria and Jordan move forces into the Iraqi desert to secure their borders, and ensuring the violence and/or the Iranians do not move into their country.
• Iraqi government surrenders to invading forces, agrees to disband and divide country to newly recognized borders.
• US liberals begin outcry as to the lack of our involvement in the humanitarian crisis during this war

I have suggested 7 events that may take place due to our withdrawl in the face of escalating international pressures. Each event is a cascade from the previous event... and it only makes sense considering the current tensions bundled with the previous hostilities between the regional neighbors...

The point is that the people of Iraq are at the point where they see the necessity defend themselves, thus building a sense of national pride and will to self govern... and that Al Qaeda, seeing the potential for a wider regional conflict, is willing to pull Iran into this knowing that it will increase the body count... and the US is powerless throughout this entire unfolding because we have been emasculated by socialist-world-government-liberal-Americans.

It is like a choose your own adventure book... Total chaos by US withdrawl, or an increasing sense of stability by US presence?

Hell, we are still in Germany and Japan after more than 60 years of post WWII peace... what about that don't the Liberals understand? Stability takes time, and American Unity...

God Bless...