Re: Neocon Crybabies
- I totally agree with this article, I'm tired of all the neocon
propaganda, total disregard for human rights, they threat the people
worse than cattle and the media here in the US is just the lap dog of
the government, we live in an insane world. I don't have faith in
humanity anymore. bunch of hypocrite neocons. McCain says that in
this century nations don't invade nations, what a hypocrite. I'm not
mad at the government anymore than I'm mad with the idiot general
public that do nothing against this kind of bull they're being fed
on, not only they don't do anything but they even go along with it
and this what makes me sick the most. Arrrrggggghhhhh!!!!
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Dan Clore <clore@...> wrote:
> News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
> Neocon Crybabies
> by Steven LaTulippe
> Although the unfolding drama in the Caucasus has been a tragedy for
> innocent victims, the response by America's political and media
> has been an entertaining and delusional farce.
> To recap events, the government of the former Soviet Republic of
> launched a surprise invasion of South Ossetia (an autonomous
> within Georgia that has been functionally independent since the
> of the Soviet Union). On the night of August 8, the Georgian
> armed and trained by America and Israel -- stormed through South
> and overran the region's putative capital city (leaving it a
> ruin). Thousands of Ossetian refugees poured northward to Russia,
> bringing harrowing tales of Georgian brutality. As the Georgian
> swept through the countryside, they encountered groups of Russian
> peacekeepers, who had been stationed there years ago to monitor a
> previous ceasefire. Several of those Russian soldiers were killed
> advancing Georgian forces.
> As anyone with a remote understanding of Russian history (and human
> nature) should have been able to predict, the Russians reacted
> badly. Before the Georgians could consolidate their "victory," the
> Russians unleashed a devastating counterattack.
> All in all, the Russian operation was a fairly impressive combined
> campaign that involved tactical air support, armor, mechanized
> and naval assets. The Georgian air force was destroyed on the
> and the Georgian navy was sunk or neutralized. Russian forces
> retook all of South Ossetia and seized critical chokepoints along
> Georgia's highway system, effectively cutting the nation into three
> The smoke had barely cleared when the Bush Administration, the
> neoconservative pundits, and our lapdog media started crying foul.
> Russian leader Vladimir Putin was, inevitably, likened to Adolf
> Georgia was portrayed as an innocent victim of unprovoked
> The Ossetian victims were quickly relegated to the Orwellian memory
> Although I am not a fan of Vladimir Putin (he is certainly not a
> libertarian), it's hard to garner much sympathy for the Georgians.
> Russian counteroffensive merely gave the Georgians a stiff dose of
> precisely the same medicine they were planning to give to the
> All in all, it was a humanitarian tragedy, but hardly a
> tale of Georgian victimhood.
> But America long ago ceased to analyze events with anything
> resembling an objective moral standard. Nowadays, the only
> our imperial elites understand are power and self-interest.
> Over the past seven years, the Bush Administration strove
> Russia by establishing Georgia as a regional proxy. This was
> followed by the now-familiar horror-show of Washington special
> groups. The petroleum lobby wanted to control a vital pipeline that
> transports Caspian oil to the Mediterranean. The military coveted
> Georgian territory for "lily-pad" bases. The arms industry saw
> as a lucrative market for its new geegaws and gizmos.
> It was a wonderful little playground, and everything was going
> swimmingly until Putin came along and kicked over the apple cart.
> But from all the whining in the media, you'd think it was the
> who actually started the war.
> The most telling example I've seen of neoconservative bellyaching
> published by Leon Aron (a Russia scholar at the neoconservative
> Enterprise Institute) in the August 13 edition of USA Today. Most
> article consists of ad hominem attacks on Vladimir Putin and petty
> ethnic slurs against the Russian people, but the real meat of the
> involves Aron's description of a newfound menace he
> "Putinism" is, he claims, a dangerous crypto-fascist ideology that
> engulfing contemporary Russia. In the article, Aron lists the main
> tenets of "Putinism," and, in the process, reveals more about
> and the American Enterprise Institute than he does anything about
> or its leaders.
> There are, according to Aron, five major characteristics
> 1. The intensely personal system of power in which the "national
> rather than democratic institutions rule.
> 2. The state propaganda themes of loss and imperial nostalgia.
> 3. The idea of the besieged fortress Russia surrounded by cunning,
> ruthless, and plotting enemies on every side.
> 4. Spy mania
> 5. The labeling of political opposition as the "fifth column"
> To the wearied libertarian ear, this newly discovered ideology
> sound eerily familiar.
> In truth, each and every one of these principles has already been
> embraced -- and even glorified -- by the very neoconservatives who
> so viciously denounce Putin.
> Take the first tenet, for example. The intensely personal system of
> power in which the "national leader" rather than democratic
> Haven't the neocons been claiming that our president reigns supreme
> times of war, and that he is free to discard the constitution's
> limitations on his power as he sees fit? Haven't they supported
> that allow the president to finger anyone as a "terrorist
> -- a designation that permits our government to imprison suspects
> without access to a lawyer or a court? (Or, even worse,
> detainees to overseas dungeons for a healthy dose of "enhanced
> interrogation techniques"?)
> As for the part about "state propaganda," didn't the Pentagon get
> paying pundits to plant pro-war op-ed articles in American
> Haven't the neocons been glorifying war as a necessary and
> strategy for American "benevolent world hegemony"?
> As for the part about "spy mania" and fomenting paranoia, can
> rival the neocons in that department? It was the Bushites -- not
> Vladimir Putin who gutted the Fourth Amendment with a massive
> telephone and email wiretapping program -- all executed without
> court-approved warrants. And what about the endless stories of
> grandmothers and handicapped people being roughed-up and strip-
> at airports because we are allegedly "surrounded by cunning,
> and plotting enemies on every side"?
> And what about the Putinesque strategy of "labeling political
> as traitors." I vividly recall, during the run-up to the Iraq
> that anyone who disagreed with the administration's war plans was
> promptly smeared and driven from public life by packs of slobbering
> neoconservative pit bulls. (Has anyone heard from General Shinseki
> And let's not forget some of the other memorable moments on the
> highlight reel.
> Did Vladimir Putin suggest to his cronies that they should paint
> warplanes with UN colors and buzz Georgian cities (thus providing a
> convenient casus belli if the Georgians should shoot one of them
> Did Vladimir Putin sow fear among his people with stories of an
> attack by fictitious, chemical-spraying drones?
> Given recent history, the rest of the world must be watching
> Washington's anti-Russian hissy fit with slack-jawed disbelief.
> Although the reptilian nature of our ruling class long ago ceased
> amaze me, there is one question that still piques my curiosity:
> elites write articles like this one in USA Today, are they aware of
> their hypocrisy? Are they totally deaf to the screams of their own
> irony, or are they coldly cognizant of their actions?
> To put it another way, when the doors are closed and the cameras
> turned off, do the neocon pundits kick back in the paneled AEI
> room, light up a few cigars, and laugh at how stupid they think we
> are? Or does some massive wall in their psyche prevent them from
> true insight into their own nature?
> Either way, I agree with Leon Aron about precisely one thing:
> -- as he defines it -- IS a dangerous and destabilizing ideology.
> needn't go all the way to Moscow to find it.
> August 18, 2008
> Steven LaTulippe [paleoliberty@...] is a physician currently
> practicing in Ohio. He was an officer in the United States Air
> 13 years.
> Dan Clore
> My collected fiction: _The Unspeakable and Others_
> Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
> News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
> Skipper: Professor, will you tell these people who is
> in charge on this island?
> Professor: Why, no one.
> Skipper: No one?
> Thurston Howell III: No one? Good heavens, this is anarchy!
> -- _Gilligan's Island_, episode #6, "President Gilligan"