RETIRED COLONEL TO REPUBLICANS WHO WANT US GROUND TROOPS: ‘LET’S DRAFT YOUR KIDS’

If there’s one thing America loves more than a scantily-clad teenage pop singer, it’s blowing crap up. But if there’s anything that America loves more than blowing crap up, it’s having other people doing the fighting. Yet while Americans have mostly remained war-weary and wish to remain out of the Middle East’s internal conflicts, the spread of ISIS and its unspeakable acts of violence in Iraq has certainly brought back the war drums.

Even if Bush’s invasion of Iraq created ISIS, this is mostly a problem from the Sunni/Shite countries of the Middle East to sort out. We can no longer be the parent that keeps bailing out its drug addict kid; the Sunni nations of the Middle East must commit their OWN ground troops to fight ISIS.

But thanks to FOX News and its priapism for permawar (they need a new “shock and awe” war for ratings) a recent Quinnipiac poll showed that 62 percent of voters support sending ground troops back to Iraq. This, of course, angered Colin Powell’s former chief of staff and retired army general, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson.

Here was Wilkerson responding to the poll:

“If 62 percent of voters want to use ground forces against ISIS in Syria or Iraq or wherever, then I suggest we have a draft and we draft those 62 percent to lead the way,” said Wilkerson on All In With Chris Hayes. (Crooks and Liars)

I’ve always believed that conservatives never-ending love for war would disappear faster than Miley Cyrus’ clothing if we reinstated the draft. They are all too willing to have someone else’s kid pay the ultimate price for their lust for permawar and bettering Lockheed Martin’s bottom line. I hate to say it, but the colonel is right: if we want to see that 62 percent disappear, we need to bring back the draft.

Republican Candidate Wants To Go To War With Mexico And Impeach Obama

Republican congressional candidate Mark Walker in North Carolina takes no issue with going to war with Mexico over undocumented immigrants crossing the border. Walker also supports impeaching the President.

He stated that he supports going all “laser or blitz” on the border.

Via Daily Kos:

Question: Mr Walker, I want to ask you how you feel about military, using the military to secure our southern border? I know a lot of people holler Posse Comitatus, that’s when the military out enforcing local laws, guarding the border is not the same thing. And we’ve got other people, other countries going, “Why can’t we guard our own?” 

Walker: Well, my first answer for that is we need to utilize the National Guard as much as we can. But, I will tell you If you have foreigners who are sneaking in with drug cartels to me that is a national threat and if we got to go laser or blitz somebody with a couple of fighter jets for a little while to make our point, I don’t have a problem with that either. So yea, whatever you need to do.” 

Moderator: “I hope you wouldn’t have any qualms about starting up a little war with Mexico.” 

Walker: “Well, we did it before, if we need to do it again, I don’t have a qualm about it.”

What is a “little war” exactly?

Watch courtesy of Daily Kos:

Liz Cheney Whines: President Obama Is ‘Slandering Patriots’ Like Her War Criminal Dad By Admitting America Used Torture

Liz Cheney has another bone to pick with President Obama and she promptly embarrassed herself on Fox News to whine about it.

During an interview on Hannity with fill-in host Monica Crowley to discuss President Obama’s recent remarks about torture being used by the Bush Administration in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Cheney accused Obama of “slandering” people like her war criminal daddy Dick Cheney. She also claimed that what “patriots” like her father did to Guantanamo prisoners wasn’t torture and that the activities kept America safe. “You know Monica, this president is an utter disgrace,” Cheney said.

He’s got a situation where, as your last two reports showed, you’ve got crises erupting around the world. And he is expending more time, more energy, more passion, more aggressive activity in targeting and going after patriots, heroes. CIA officers and others who kept is safe after 9/11. He’s lying about what they did, he’s slandering them, he went to Cairo and did it in 2009. Today he did it from the podium of the Oval Office. It’s a disgrace. It’s despicable.

Here’s the video via Raw Story.

Still Don’t Think Dick Cheney is a Disgusting Hypocritical War Criminal? This Clip From the Archives Should Change Your Mind

It seems like a lifetime ago when Bush, and his cronies like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, were beating the war drums back in 2002 and 2003 about how “grave” a threat Iraq was to the security of the United States. I can still remember the day the war started and the day just a few weeks later when Bush ridiculously landed on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit declaring “mission accomplished.”

Yet here we are, it’s 2014, and Iraq is back in the news as radical Islamic militants known as I.S.I.S. continue to take over numerous cities within the country.

Recently I ran across comments made in 1991, by a Republican of all people, who essentially predicted the chaos we’re now seeing in Iraq if we were to ever invade and overthrow Saddam Hussein:

I think that the proposition of going to Baghdad is also fallacious. I think if we were going to remove Saddam Hussein we would have had to go all the way to Baghdad, we would have to commit a lot of force because I do not believe he would wait in the Presidential Palace for us to arrive. I think we’d have had to hunt him down. And once we’d done that and we’d gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and his government, then we’d have had to put another government in its place. 

What kind of government? Should it be a Sunni government or Shi’i government or a Kurdish government or Ba’athist regime? Or maybe we want to bring in some of the Islamic fundamentalists? How long would we have had to stay in Baghdad to keep that government in place? What would happen to the government once U.S. forces withdrew? How many casualties should the United States accept in that effort to try to create clarity and stability in a situation that is inherently unstable? 

I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force. I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force. And it’s my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq.

Afghanistan Veteran on Food Stamps Writes Letter to ‘Caring’ Conservatives

Some people measure a society’s condition by the lifestyles of the rich and famous — and those people are usually the rich and famous. For the rest of humanity, a society’s success is measured by the living conditions of the poorest. And who exactly the “poorest” are.

This letter, posted on September 19th by a combat veteran named Jason, speaks volumes of what American poverty looks like on the side streets of our society, and of the people who sleep on them.

“My name is Jason. I turned 35 less than a week ago. My first job was maintenance work at a public pool when I was 17. I worked 40-hours a week while I was in college. I’ve never gone longer than six months without employment in my life and I just spent the last three years in the military, one of which consisted of a combat tour of Afghanistan. 

Oh, and I’m now on food stamps. Since June, as a matter of fact. 

Why am I on food stamps? 

The same reason everyone on food stamps is on food stamps: because I would very much enjoy not starving. 

I mean, if that’s okay with you: 

…Mr. or Mrs. Republican congressman.

…Mr. or Mrs. Conservative commentator.

…Mr. or Mrs. “welfare queen” letter-to-the-editor author.

…Mr. or Mrs. “fiscal conservative, reason-based” libertarian.

I do apologize for burdening you on the checkout line with real-life images of American-style poverty. I know you probably believe the only true starving people in the world have flies buzzing around their eyes while they wallow away, near-lifeless in gutter. 

Hate to burst the bubble, but those people don’t live in this country. 

I do. And millions like me. Millions of people in poverty who fall into three categories. 

Let’s call them the “lucky” category, since conservatives seem to think people on welfare have hit some sort of jackpot: 

Those living paycheck to paycheck? They’re a little lucky.

Those living unemployment check to unemployment check? They’re a little luckier 

Those living 2nd of the month to 2nd of the month? *ding* We’ve hit the jackpot! 

The 2nd of the month being the time when funds gets electronically deposited onto the EBT card, [at least in NY] for those who’ve never been fortunate enough to hit that $175/month Powerball. 

I fall into the latter two categories. But I’ve known people recently - soldiers in the Army – who were in the first and third. They were off fighting in Afghanistan while their wives were at home, buying food at the on-post commissary with food stamps. 

And nobody bats an eye there, because it’s not uncommon in the military. 

It’s not uncommon – nor is it shameful. It might be shameful how little service-members are paid, but that’s a separate issue. 

The fact remains anyone at a certain income level can find it difficult from time to time to pay for everything. And when you’re poor you learn to make sacrifices. Food shouldn’t be one of them. 

The whole concept is un-American. People living here, in the greatest country on Earth, with the most abundant resources, should be forced to go hungry because of the intellectual notion of fiscal conservatism and the ideological notion of self-reliance.

Are you fucking kidding me? 

I didn’t risk my life in Afghanistan so I could come back and watch people go hungry in America. I certainly didn’t risk it so *I* could come back and go hungry. 

Anyone who genuinely supports cutting food stamps is not an intellectual or an ideologue –they’re a bully. 

And nobody likes a bully. Except other bullies. 

It’s time for regular Americans to stand up to these bullies. Not cower in the corner, ashamed of needing help. Because if there’s one thing life has taught me, it’s that you never know when you’ll be the one in need.”

There are some who despise the American poor because in their minds, you’re not “poor” unless you look like this:

But the people who look like that live in the poorest nations on Earth. We can’t start applying those standards to our own society, because that’s the quickest way to become just like them. Standards slip from the bottom like a foundation sliding downhill. In America, we’re rarely OUT of food…we’re just out of food that won’t kill you.

Say what you will about the idea of “American exceptionalism,” but we have to draw the line somewhere. We have to draw the line at a place that we will not accept…a place we can look at and say “We’re better than THAT.”

Intellectuals like Rand Paul don’t see us as a society…they see us as a Petri dish for their thought experiments. And because they’re smart, a certain number of idiots will stand behind them.

But when we start believing that these guys

are fighting to come home to the living standards of these guys

then we truly have lost everything that it means to be American.

We owe soldiers like Jason a better nation than that.

Absolutely Nothing: A Veteran’s Savage Indictment of the Iraq War

All we fought for in Iraq.

All we fought for in Iraq is on the cusp of vanishing.

That’s what Mitt Romney says.

We fought for. We fought for. We.

Oh, so it’s we now, is it, Mitt?

We.

I must have missed you over there, but it was a busy place. We. The guy who helped set up “pro-draft” rallies and yet somehow managed to avoid service in Vietnam is upset about losing what “we” fought for? We.

Yeah, fuck you, Mitt.

And you’re all welcome to quote me on that.

Somebody stepped into my office yesterday and asked how I felt about it. He wanted to know how I felt about “losing” Iraq.

How do I feel about losing all we fought for?

I don’t know.

First, I’m going to need somebody to explain to me exactly what it was that we were fighting for.

What was it? What is it that we gained, according to Mitt Romney? And what is on the cusp of vanishing? What is that? No, really, somebody please explain it to me.

Because I’d love to know.

Massacre In Iraq: Congratulations GOP! You Built That!

The Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIS), the Al Qaeda splinter group that took Iraq by storm last week with the capture of two major cities, has done something so reprehensible that even George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, or any other framer of the Iraq War, would call it reprehensible.

A series of images posted to a militant web site appear to show ISIS “freedom fighters” (or whatever they are calling themselves these days) loading captives onto a flatbed truck. The group’s victims are then forced to lie down in a shallow ditch, arms tied behind their backs. 

With rising GOP support for yet another invasion of Iraq in light of ISIS’ capture of Mosul and Tikrit, we’re reminded that, without United States intervention in Iraq ISIS would not have been able to become the richest terrorist organization in the world.

Without the Bush regime’s lies and manipulations aimed at an Iraq invasion, Saddam Hussein would have remained a stabilizing force in Iraq. Killing Saddam Hussein may have been gratifying on some level, but removing him from power opened Pandora’s Box in the region, allowing an explosion of sectarian violence.

Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, no matter how much right-wingers still wish to claim, were not allies. In 2002, Daniel Benjamin wrote in the NY Times:

Iraq and Al Qaeda are not obvious allies. In fact, they are natural enemies. A central tenet of Al Qaeda’s jihadist ideology is that secular Muslim rulers and their regimes have oppressed the believers and plunged Islam into a historic crisis. Hence, a paramount goal of Islamist revolutionaries for almost half a century has been the destruction of the regimes of such leaders as Presidents Gamal Abdel Nasser, Anwar el-Sadat and Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, President Hafez al-Assad of Syria, the military government in Algeria and even the Saudi royal family.

To contemporary jihadists, Saddam Hussein is another in a line of dangerous secularists, an enemy of the faith who refuses to rule by Shariah and has habitually murdered Sunni and Shiite religious leaders in Iraq who might oppose his regime. During the Persian Gulf war, Omar Abdel Rahman, the radical sheik now imprisoned in the United States, summed up the Islamist view when he was asked what the punishment should be for those who supported the United States in the conflict. He answered, ”Both [those] who are against and the ones who are with Iraq should be killed.’

Republicans Won’t Rest Until We’re at War with Iran

Upon hearing the news that a temporary deal had been reached concerning Iran’s nuclear programs, I knew without even seeing a single comment that Republicans were going to be against this six month trial run of diplomacy.

Because that’s all this is.  It’s a six month deal to see if all parties involved will keep their word.  At that point, another deal can be reached that takes bigger steps towards peace with Iran and preventing the Iranian government from building nuclear weapons.

But I knew the moment I heard the news that Republicans would throw some kind of hissy fit following this announcement.  After all, when have Republicans really ever endorsed diplomacy?

The truth of the matter is pretty simple though — Republicans won’t be happy until we’re at war with Iran.

To Republicans, almost all attempts at diplomacy are signs of weakness.  “We’re the United States, we don’t compromise!”  Then again, that’s the entire GOP philosophy these days anyway.  To conservatives, the idea of compromising is just as vile as the idea of becoming a “filthy America-hating liberal.”

If Republicans had their way, we’d sit there with Iran, tell them they’re going to do whatever we say and if they don’t like it — well, too bad.

Now this might sound like I’m defending Iran, and I’m absolutely not.  Their government for too long has been corrupt, shady, deplorable and sensationalistic.  I absolutely don’t trust them, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give them a chance.

It wasn’t like this deal was only struck between the United States, China, Russia and Iran.  We had other allies involved such as Germany, France and Britain.  Of course Israel hates the deal, but as time goes on, I’m simply getting tired of the rhetoric coming from that country.  While I get why we support them, too often lately they remind me of that tiny friend who always likes to cause a lot of problems, yet can’t handle them on their own.  Always asking their more powerful friends to come help them out.

But I’m absolutely convinced Republicans won’t rest until we’re at war with Iran.  Hell, I believe had the Iraq War gone the way Bush thought it would (you know, a few months and over — “Mission Accomplished!”), Iran would have been their next target.

Republicans have built this platform that any nation which might be breeding grounds for terror must be dealt with.  Basically, if they feel a nation supports terrorism, we should go to war with that nation.

In other words, the United States would be perpetually at war.  Then again, war is great for big defense companies — which are huge supporters of the GOP.

So of course they oppose any mention of diplomacy with Iran, because that’s not what they want.  The Republican party has nearly always been the party for massive defense spending.  And what better way to facilitate more money for defense spending than by starting more wars?

Oh, and let’s not forget about big oil.  They would love greater access in countries like Iran.

I’m sure it’s just a pure coincidence that the Republican party is supported by huge sums of money flowing in from big oil and big defense — and the last two Republican presidents started wars in the Middle East. However, when it’s all said and done, this nuclear deal is nothing more than an attempt at diplomacy between nations that for many years have scoffed at any mention of such an idea.

Will it work?  Who knows.  I hope it does.  But if it doesn’t, we’ll take the appropriate steps at that moment.

At least if we end up having to take harsher actions towards Iran in the future (deeper sanctions, military action) history will have shown that we attempted diplomacy — and it simply failed.

Republicans, on the other hand, would rather shoot first and ask questions later.  Which is the exact kind of short-sighted ignorance that got us into the war in Iraq, resulting in the deaths of over 4,000 brave American men and women serving in our armed forces.

One Veteran Spoke The Truth And Totally Stunned The Crowd, Then He Brought Them To Their Feet

This clip starting making the rounds while the Iraq War was still going on, and it was so interesting to me because I'd never seen a veteran address these things in such a brutally honest fashion. And I found myself nodding in agreement, even clapping along with the crowd. See if you do, too. 

John McCain’s War

Apparently Senator John McCain’s senility and dementia has reached a new level. He wandered into Syria over the weekend thinking it was Wal-Mart and he was there to buy pleated Dockers and plaid button up shirts. Yes, sadly, senility has finally set in for ol’ John Boy. He’s lost control of his faculties, clearly. No one would just sneak into a country being ripped apart by a bloody sectarian civil war that neither side really looks like the ones we want to partner with for some Memorial Day Weekend barbecue. Well, unless you’re just suffering from some kind of memory loss brought on by being completely and utterly senile. Otherwise it would almost look as if the old buzzard was trying to get America involved in a war all on his own.

Quelle Reagan.

Is this what all Republicans do in their Golden Years…fund little illegal wars? Maybe it’s like Viagra to them and they can’t get off unless they know they’re funneling armaments to shady people that will turn around use their weapons and training on us. McCain’s hawkishness over the years has been rather vulgar and increasingly embarrassing to the country at large. Remember, he’s the one who joked about bombing Iran during the 2008 presidential campaign, he’s the guy who wants us in Iraq and Afghanistan forever, and he still goes on record everywhere he can — most notably during Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’s confirmation hearing – as defending not only the legality and necessity of the Iraq War, but the success of it too. He’s one of a handful of people outside of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld who actually think the Iraq War wasn’t and will remain the worst foreign policy decision of our lifetimes. McCain has a hard-on for war for like very few we’ve ever seen.