[Duffleblog] World leaders met at the United Nations today to beg the United States to use military force to stem the ever-growing humanitarian disaster in Syria, knowing full well they will then turn around and blame the US shortly thereafter.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said, “We call upon the world’s greatest nation — the United States — to help bring peace to this terrible civil war, because, f--k it, none of us want to.”
“And the best part is, when this whole thing goes to hell in a handbasket — which, quite frankly, happens almost every time you intervene in a multi-sided civil war in a God-forsaken third-world country — none of us are responsible for it!” Ki-Moon added.
The “Blame America First” policy is a time-honored tradition in international relations, dating back to the outrage over the US Air Force’s targeted bombing campaign against the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, followed by consternation over America’s idleness while the same Khmer Rouge murdered millions of their own countrymen.
“It’s pretty shameful, but hey, it got me a Pulitzer prize,” said Sydney Schanberg, whose two-faced coverage of the war in Cambodia in the New York Times inspired the Oscar-winning film, The Killing Fields.
“Amateurs tend to blame America first and then they’re done with it,” said anti-war MIT Professor Noam Chomsky. “Just this past week, Vox’s Amanda Taub blamed the U.S. for the entire Syrian Civil War instead of blaming, well, the Syrians themselves.”
“But that’s the type of ‘Blame America First’ coverage that gets you a few thousand clicks at best,” Chomsky continued. “If you really want Oscars, Pulitzers, and charity donations, you have to sucker the US into intervening, then blame America!”
“Just look at Somalia: Send the U.S. military to help deal with a famine, then, boom! A firefight, a downed Black Hawk helicopter, and before you know it, a blockbuster movie from Michael Bay!” he concluded.
Schanberg pointed to the fact the “Blame America First” strategy hasn’t always mired America in pointless tribal conflicts.
“We thought we had a real winner with the whole ‘Stop Kony’ campaign, and even the whole ‘Bring Back Our Girls’ thing. But the US just responded with a whole bunch of Twitter hashtags,” Schanberg said.
“Which just goes to show you, for Obama, black lives just don’t matter, I guess.”
British Labour Party candidate Jeremy Corbyn had already prepared a statement denouncing U.S. actions should it, indeed, be suckered into sending military forces to resolve the Syrian refugee crisis.
“The U.S. has flagrantly placed its flag all throughout the world: invading Iraq, Afghanistan,” Corbyn said. “Just who do they think they are? Us?”
#3
I have to say - I am happy to see Russia and Iran - and possibly even China - proceeding to pour blood and treasure into fighting ISIS in Syria and Iraq. May the carnage go on for 10 years.
#4
Russia wants to pet the burning dog? Let's watch.
Assad owes Russia a lot of money? And Putin can't get a kopeck if Assad is left hanging like the last Afghan....what was that puppet's name when Russia pulled out and left the dude twisting naked in the wind by his neck on the steps of the Interior Ministry in Kabul? Cigarette burns all over his blackening body and Afghan paper money( folded into little party favor fans ) pressed into his ass crack.
Russia was driving through the Pamir passes about that time headed home.
I predict more of the same , just give it time. Russia wants to pet the burning dog? yeah. Go for it.
#5
AlanC, the difference is that when Gen. Napier was in charge, the British were ruling India. In Afghanistan, the US is merely a guest. We must bow to their culture.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
09/29/2015 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Let the Afghans know that we will not tolerate that nonsense and if they don't like it we can leave. They can ask Iraq how well that went when the US pulled out of there. If I were a guest in a house and the owners were torturing/raping children upstairs I could hardly be expected to stay. And in fact if I had a gun they might expect to be shot before I left, hosts or not.
In Nazi Germany prior to WWII. Officers who opposed Hitler were killed; other officers seemed to accept the killing of fellow officers--they remained silent. See the book "Defying Hitler" by Sebastian Haffner for an account.
While reading the referenced document, I was struck by the following:
Therefore, India should consider asserting her strategic autonomy on issues having a direct bearing on her strategic and security interests and not be seen as being overly cautious to the sensitivities of the US. In doing so, India must strengthen her ties with Iran so as to maintain her influence in the region. Just as the US continues to have its relationship with Pakistan, which is separate from India's own relationship with it, India's relationship with Iran should not come in the way of India's continuing good relations with the US. The recent statement of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh regarding opposition to further rounds of sanctions against Iran and India's participation in the nuclear conference hosted by Iran could be viewed as a step in the right direction. Why is India's strategic thinking always to unalign with the US? Does India see a nuclear Iran as a counterweight to Pakistan? How would that affect India's relationship with Israel? If China aligns with Iran (and why wouldn't it) wouldn't that put an even bigger squeeze back on India?
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
09/29/2015 11:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
