Michael Stuart Kelly

Obama's State of the Union and War

Recommended Posts

Obama's State of the Union and War

I just caught the State of the Union address.

Most of it was platitudes as usual, but there was one thing that honked at me from in between the lines: the way he talked about Iran and taking out Assad in Syria.

All I can think is: Oh crap. We're going into a new war for real.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael:

I have always been rather surprised by the surprise, not yours, but the general public's when a Democratic administration gets us into a war.

Except for Bush II, they have an unbroken record for the last century.

My fear has been precisely what you just expressed.

Brant, whose instincts I give great weight to, has also believed that we will be in a war, by, I believe, late summer, or early fall.

Adam

praying we three are wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*deleted*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has only registered with you NOW?

Steve,

Of course not. Who said it just now occurred to me? Especially since I have been discussing it for months on this very forum.

But then again, you have eyes and you read this forum, so you already know that.

Yet you make that one-liner snark.

Why?

Does it make you feel good to look down your nose at others?

(I really dislike fundamentalist ideologues. I'm beginning to think they are another form of bigot.)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Lord Obama has gone into Full Alinsky Mode. He is peddling his collectivist clap-trap under the disguise of "fairness". God Forbid that one person should make more money that another. Beware of what follows. Review the legend of Procrustes and has one size fits all bed.

Next to Luddites and Zits I hate Equalizers the most.

Whenever I hear the word "fairness" I reach for my phasor and it is NOT set to Stun.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The coming war with Iran has four facets: (1) oil (purported, this is for the blinkered military); (2) currency (Iran, like Libya, threatens to stop using the dollar to trade its oil); (3) nuclear weapons (The Israeli connection); (4) the up-coming U.S. election. There will be a careful orchestration of crises by the master politician in the White House to an inevitable climax this summer. The U.S. has enough influence to keep Israel on a leash until then. There is no need or real use for Israeli participation unless America craps out, in which case Israel will go it with the help of the Saudis combining Israel security concerns with an internecine religious geo-political conflict. Israel is not strong enough to actually succeed in any attempt to take out Iran's nuclear threat except by using nuclear weapons. The U.S. cannot conquer Iran on the ground for various reasons, but can put in ground units at various locations to achieve post-strike followup and confirmations.

There are ways to achieve regime change in Iran without overt war, but that would not remove the nuclear program and threat to Israel. The military is by far the strongest force in Iran but that is two-pronged and somewhat self-conflicted necessitating a coup.

I could go on and on with complications and details and unforeseen consequences, especially that things are always harder than imagined before a war starts. Just remember that this will not be an oil war. That's complete bs. It will have a huge impact on world oil prices. The military people will not grok, however, how much the U.S. is so much concerned with maintaining the dollar as the world's reserve currency. They will grok that war is coming and are preparing for this one in particular. There will be weeks and weeks of air strikes by the navy and air force using non-nuclear weapons.

This insanity started with the creation of Israel and the U.S. immediately relieving Britain of the burden of the mess it had made there. These things just build on themselves as one context is replaced by another.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This insanity started with the creation of Israel and the U.S. immediately relieving Britain of the burden of the mess it had made there. These things just build on themselves as one context is replaced by another.

--Brant

Solution: Let Israel look to its own defenses. The Israelis have a fine biblical example: recall the story of Samson..

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This insanity started with the creation of Israel and the U.S. immediately relieving Britain of the burden of the mess it had made there. These things just build on themselves as one context is replaced by another.

--Brant

Solution: Let Israel look to its own defenses. The Israelis have a fine biblical example: recall the story of Samson..

Ba'al Chatzaf

That'd be one of several problems, at best.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact checking the President's State of the Union speech which was, apparently, written at an eighth grade reading level [http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/01/state-of-the-union-registers-at-th-grade-reading-level-112236.html] is addressed in the following Glenn Kessler posting:

Fact checking the 2012 State of the Union speech

Posted by Glenn Kessler at 01:45 AM ET, 01/25/2012

A State of the Union address is often difficult to fact check, no matter who is president. The speech is a product of many hands and is carefully vetted, so major errors of fact are so relatively rare that they sometimes can become big news (think of George W. Bush’s “sixteen little words” about Iraq seeking uranium in Niger). At the same time, State of the Union addresses are very political speeches, an argument for the president’s policies, so context (or the perspective of opponents) is often missing.

Here is a guide through some of President Obama’s more fact-challenged claims, in the order in which he made them. As is our practice with live events, we do not award Pinocchio rankings, which are reserved for complete columns.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-the-2012-state-of-the-union-speech/2012/01/25/gIQAa5CTPQ_blog.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has only registered with you NOW?

If I find another from Steve, I'll be suprised.

--Brant

edit: this is Steve's last

Edited by Brant Gaede

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...