OMG, and Hillary throwing logs on the fire:
"A Scary Fantasyland
As scary as these dangers are, there remains a huge gap between the real world of the Middle East and the fantasyland that is Official Washington’s perception of the region. In that land of make-believe, what matters is tough talk from ambitious politicians and opinion leaders, what I call the “er-er-er” growling approach to geopolitics.
Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton joined in that growling on Wednesday at the Brookings Institution, which has become home to neocons such as Robert Kagan and a host of “liberal interventionists,” such as Michael O’Hanlon and Strobe Talbott.
Though she formally endorsed the nuclear agreement with Iran, former Secretary of State Clinton insulted both the Iranians and the Russians. Noting Russia’s support for the Syrian government, she urged increased punishment of Moscow and Russian President Vladimir Putin — aimed at forcing Russia to abandon the Assad regime.
“We need a concerted effort to up the costs on Russia and Putin; I am in the camp that we have not done enough,” Clinton declared. “I don’t think we can dance around it much longer,” she said, claiming that Russia is trying to “stymie and undermine American power whenever and wherever they can.”
Clinton appears to have learned nothing from her past support for “regime change” strategies in Iraq and Libya. In both countries, the U.S. military engineered the ouster and murder of the nations’ top leaders, but instead of the promised flourishing of some ideal democracies, the countries descended into anarchy with Sunni terrorists, linked to Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, now controlling large swaths of territory and engaging in widespread atrocities.
Yet, for Clinton, the higher priority is to come across as super-tough, proving her value to Official Washington’s influential neocons and liberal hawks. Thus, a potential Clinton presidency suggests an even more warlike foreign policy than the one carried out by Obama, who recently boasted of ordering military strikes in seven different countries."
It is my understanding that Taliban are not listed as "terrorist organization" but as "enemy combatants" (aka POWs). Therefore, these 5 would be released anyway under the Geneva Accords. If the were accused of "war crimes", then marched off to the World Court as was done with several Serbs.
It is my understanding that Taliban are not listed as "terrorist organization" but as "enemy combatants" (aka POWs) therefore these 5 would be released anyway under the Geneva Accords. If the were accused of "war crimes", then marched off to the World Court as was done with several Serbs.
Interesting report out by Sy Hersh in London Review of Books on Syria and the 2013 DOD intell analysis on Syria--basically "DO NOT REMOVE ASSAD AS ALL HELL WILL BREAK OUT!"
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2015/12/httpwwwlrbcoukv38n01seymour-m-hershmilitary-to-military.html#comments
OMG, and Hillary throwing logs on the fire:
"A Scary Fantasyland
As scary as these dangers are, there remains a huge gap between the real world of the Middle East and the fantasyland that is Official Washington’s perception of the region. In that land of make-believe, what matters is tough talk from ambitious politicians and opinion leaders, what I call the “er-er-er” growling approach to geopolitics.
Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton joined in that growling on Wednesday at the Brookings Institution, which has become home to neocons such as Robert Kagan and a host of “liberal interventionists,” such as Michael O’Hanlon and Strobe Talbott.
Though she formally endorsed the nuclear agreement with Iran, former Secretary of State Clinton insulted both the Iranians and the Russians. Noting Russia’s support for the Syrian government, she urged increased punishment of Moscow and Russian President Vladimir Putin — aimed at forcing Russia to abandon the Assad regime.
“We need a concerted effort to up the costs on Russia and Putin; I am in the camp that we have not done enough,” Clinton declared. “I don’t think we can dance around it much longer,” she said, claiming that Russia is trying to “stymie and undermine American power whenever and wherever they can.”
Clinton appears to have learned nothing from her past support for “regime change” strategies in Iraq and Libya. In both countries, the U.S. military engineered the ouster and murder of the nations’ top leaders, but instead of the promised flourishing of some ideal democracies, the countries descended into anarchy with Sunni terrorists, linked to Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, now controlling large swaths of territory and engaging in widespread atrocities.
Yet, for Clinton, the higher priority is to come across as super-tough, proving her value to Official Washington’s influential neocons and liberal hawks. Thus, a potential Clinton presidency suggests an even more warlike foreign policy than the one carried out by Obama, who recently boasted of ordering military strikes in seven different countries."
Where the 5 exchanged, though, considered "terrorists" or "enemy combatants", were they part of the group that held the Sgt?
It is my understanding that Taliban are not listed as "terrorist organization" but as "enemy combatants" (aka POWs). Therefore, these 5 would be released anyway under the Geneva Accords. If the were accused of "war crimes", then marched off to the World Court as was done with several Serbs.
It is my understanding that Taliban are not listed as "terrorist organization" but as "enemy combatants" (aka POWs) therefore these 5 would be released anyway under the Geneva Accords. If the were accused of "war crimes", then marched off to the World Court as was done with several Serbs.