Friday, December 17, 2021

The Imperfect, the Bad and the Abominable

If “bad” is the opposite of good, and if “good” is what you’re trying to accomplish by avoiding the bad, then you should know that bad comes in different shades.

 

There is the bad that’s not too dreadful to live with, therefore may be viewed as the product of “inadequate” preparation. And there is the bad that’s worse than intolerable, therefore may be viewed as the product of “repulsive” intent. Knowing all this, you may want to formulate new ideas about how good something must be to satisfy your expectation.

 

This level of mental exercise is what’s missing among America’s policymakers today. They look at the events unfolding around them, and do not see the gradient of shades that separates one event from another. Instead, they see things as either black or white; as being of one extreme or the other.

 

The policy implications of this attitude are enormous because they cause America to view the various players in the world as being either friends or foes; as being “with us” or “against us.” Sadly, this is the level of diplomatic finesse to which America has sunk since the start of its contamination by the Judeo-Yiddish culture. And the world is shaking its head.

 

Before the contamination had come to America, the country never claimed to be perfect, and never expected perfection from others. Having defeated the evil powers of the time, America tolerated much of what it saw happening in the world because it was normal human behavior unfolding within the parameters of what was good and what was bad. But the advent of the Judeo-Yiddish influence changed all that. It claimed that America enjoyed a level of exceptionalism that was nearly exclusive, with the sole exception that what applies to America applies to Jewish Israel as if they were one and the same country.

 

That idea was the fuel that powered the habit of turning what used to be normal political exchange into sharp tools, even deadly weapons that could be used against those you disagree with. At the behest of its wide awake and relentless Jewish Fifth Columnists, America began to see “serious” faults in other nations, accusing them of bad behavior that ranged from violating human rights to trafficking in narcotics.

 

So, there it was, America that used to believe everyone was responsible for what they did and what happened to them as a consequence, now began to accuse its foes, even its friends of aggravating the drug problem among its own youth. It pointed the finger at the Asians from Afghanistan to Turkey, and at the Latin Americans from Columbia to Mexico, demanding that they do something to eradicate the scourge that’s plaguing America.

 

Without mentioning Israel that happens to be the mother of human rights violations, America accused many a nation of committing that very sin. A country that bore the brunt of both accusations (trafficking in narcotics and violating human rights) has been Syria, a neighbor of Israel whom the Jews hate as much as they do Iran, which happens to be a good friend of Syria.

 

In fact, there is a way that you can gauge the wrath of a Zionist pundit at the idea of America losing interest in the business of killing its own youth and squandering its own money to protect Israel in the neighborhood where it lives and where it creates trouble for itself on a non-stop basis. You can gauge that wrath by reading an article that came under the title: “Congress Muddles Washington’s Syria Strategy,” and the subtitle: “The defense bill pushes an incoherent approach, mandating a withdrawal of US forces but not a strategy to deal with Assad’s drug trade.” It was written by Jimmy Quinn, and published on December 15, 2021 in National Review Online.

 

Here, in condensed form, is what’s infuriating Jimmy Quinn:

 

“Lawmakers voted to require the administration to craft a strategy for turning America-led counter-ISIS operations to allies, a withdrawal that more hawkish members say is premature. A UN report found that ISIS continues to operate in Iraq and Syria, even in its current diminished state. Meanwhile, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad has started to reconsolidate his control over the country. The provision will require the secretary of state to submit a report detailing a timeline according to which US forces will pass security responsibilities to Kurdish forces fighting ISIS. Some hawks are furious, panning the amendment as a concession to Assad, who turned his government into one of the world’s most prolific exporters of an illicit amphetamine”.

 

But while you have the disciples of Zion advocating the measures that will serve Israel, you have authentic American thinkers racking their brains to come up with workable ideas that will serve America and its people.

 

Two thinking Americans doing just that, are Becca Wasser and Elisa Ewers of the Center for a New American Security. They coauthored an article that came under the title: “Rightsizing in the Middle East,” and the subtitle: “The US Military Should Pull Back but Not Pull Out.” The article was published on December 16, 2021 in Foreign Affairs.

 

This is a long article that must be read in its entirety to appreciate the work that went into it. What it does basically is show in great detail how, reorganizing the configuration of its military in the Middle East to operate more efficiently, America can accomplish all that it wants in that region, thus free resources to divert to other theaters such as the Indo-Pacific region.

 

Thus, by rejecting the abomination that is the spirit of Zion while accepting that the world is imperfect, we tolerate some of the bad things we see take place from time to time and live in peace with each other without the need for a heavy military presence anywhere pretending to protect one against another.