A predator that loses the chase in hunt after hunt ends up
realizing he is too weak to hunt. When convinced he has been weakened so much
that he will never hunt again, he turns on the smallest and weakest among his
own and feeds on them. This is true of wild animals as much as it is among the
humans that project the image of being political animals, or the image of being
driven by an ideology urging them to take control of everything in sight to
avoid being annihilated physically.
Under normal circumstances, mutual recriminations take root
and spread inside an organization that starts to lose in a serious way after
being the leader in its field. Each partner inside the organization starts to
point a finger at the others to deflect any criticism that might be leveled
against him or her. Some criticism may be justified and some may not; some
deflection may be warranted and some may not but in the end, nothing matters
because when the sky begins to fall, it falls on everyone.
By contrast, something worse can take place when the
circumstances are extraordinary. We have an example of this in the article that
was written by Ira Straus under the title: “Fighting to lose in Iraq and Syria ” and the subtitle: “Obama's
coalition is falling apart before it can get going.” It was published on
October 20, 2014 in National Review Online. Like the title indicates, the
author sees America losing
in Iraq and Syria not because America 's turn to be the undisputed
leader has come and gone, but because someone inside the “organization” has
decided to do the unthinkable and lose the fight rather than win it.
What is worse than being a political animal is being a
political cannibal. Whereas the animal will deflect criticism away from him and
be happy with that, the cannibal will go further and do the equivalent of
burning the house to the ground to kill everyone in it in the hope that he will
escape the fate and feed on the charred remains of his own. This is what Straus
has done in this article … but he is not alone. In fact, this stance is the one
taken by the majority of Jews and their supporters; those who do to America
today what Jews have been doing to others all the time since the beginning of
time ... here and there and everywhere on the Planet.
Straus begins the article by describing a situation that
would be more in the realm of political animals at each others' throats rather
than political cannibals ripping each others' heart out of the body and
devouring it. Here is a taste of that: “the grand coalition is fraying as never
before … it is flying into mutual collision … Turks, Kurds, Shiites, and
Westerners are fighting at cross-purposes.”
Knowing how he wants to end his presentation, he starts
paving the way to make that end sound plausible. And the way he does that is
vintage Jewish style. He makes a prediction he does not have to justify and
builds on it. He expects that by the time he gets to the end, the reader will
have forgotten that the entire presentation is based on a flimsy prediction
that was neither here nor there. Here is that prediction: “Obama may go down in
history as the man who grew the Islamic State into a major threat … the man who
unraveled the global coalition and undermined NATO.”
He goes on to spin and re-spin the major Jewish and Israeli
talking points while mutilating history where he must to square circles that
refuse to square. All the while, he paints a picture of a hypocritical Obama
that says something and does something else: “The U.N. passed a resolution …
Obama pushed it through but he is unlikely to comply himself.” And a picture of
an incompetent Obama that “believes in international cooperation and
organization he does not know how to build or sustain.”
All of which forces the allies to do the things they would
not normally do, he says. For example: “Turkey has thrown away a golden
opportunity – not because it loves the Islamic State, but because we have not
been serious about leading our side strongly enough to hold it together.” And
this seals the argument exactly the way he wants it sealed. It lays all the
blame on the shoulders of President Obama – that for which he is responsible,
and that for which the allies would have been responsible.