America First is Populism in Action

America First is Populism in Action | american-flag | Society US News
Most people associate the term America First with foreign policy. While the implication speaks loudly for a pro national stand, most ignore the tradition that Populism is at the core of the movement. In order to understand the heritage, one should examine the most overt aspects of this tradition. Professor Ralph Raico, states  the case for an American First foreign policy in his book –
The Failure of America’s Foreign Wars. He refers to the following motto used by Richard Cobden, the libertarian theorist of international relations:

“The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is — in extending our commercial relations — to have with them as little political connection as possible.”

While the sordid history of mindless interventionism is widely available, most detractors want to rely upon the canard that isolationism from world affairs is the goal for advocates of the America First philosophy. How insincere, such a reproach is and disingenuous are these critics. Clearly those who accept the wisdom of Washington and Adams, understand that it applies today and has the same validity as when the nation embarked on its unique journey in self governance.

So what is the nature of the fear within the internationalist camp, that requires them to deny our own history, distort the facts and often falsify the significance about our heritage? Their dread stems from an aversion toward liberty, especially when it is practiced by individuals of integrity. The populist movement of the late nineteenth century had a strong alignment with rural interests. If Thomas Jefferson championed the populace, William Jennings Bryan spoke for the populist. When Alexander Hamilton advanced the elites, Woodrow Wilson served the masters of internationalism. This conflict in mindset and orientation is at the core of the uninterrupted political struggle.

The domestic character in the America First movement, is largely unsung because the shapers of the political culture have gone to great lengths to dispel the meaning of individual sovereignty. Populism is the embodiment of rightful authority. Legitimacy of political institutions rests in the consent of citizens, and has as its only purpose, the benefit and advancement of their interests. Elites and their minions need not apply for positions of privilege. Special treatment, corporate domination and coercive compliance all promote cronyism of the few, over the prosperity of the many. While the control and creation of money was fraudulently expropriated through the Federal Reserve swindle, the convergence of people control was extended with the perpetual war for global domination strategy.

For the underlying objective in all internationalism policy is not just the expansion of an empire, but ultimately is the enslavement of each individual. Individual Liberty is the preeminent archenemy of the mattoid elite. Populism represents the pro active political underpinnings that recognizes that the Statist is the supreme enemy of the Republic. Those who lust after power for no other reason than to enrich and protect their own narrow appetites, are the unfeigned problem. The reason that the people must be shielded from the common sense of Populism, is reducible to the fear that elites have, that the regular folk will wake up to the fraud of the two party, one NWO voice, political system.

America First is the sensible and honest alternative to the continuous failures of the last century. The reason is simple. More of your friends, neighbors and family would become empowered to attain the fruits of the national dream, when they are able to live their lives as free and responsible citizens. Yes, an America First mindset, invokes obligations. But our mutual duty is directed towards people, not government. Only individuals possess rights. The State exists to serve the real master of government; namely the people.

Don’t be confused that genuine Populism promotes any form of “collectivism”. The emphasis is always on what will enhance the interests of the individual. Society never has the authority to claim they can establish subjugation for the ‘common good’. The test of validity for domestic policies will accept the standard that government must be controlled and not be the controller. That is why the definition within the name of America First is so appropriate.

The point that the government is NOT the nation, has been made repeatedly. It is time to put that theme into practice. The Corporate/State axis is the evil twin. The solution is restoring a real free enterprise economy and scale back and severely limit the role of central government. That is the goal for Populism. It is the American tradition and it deserves to be put FIRST, whenever public policy is considered.

So when you hear the smears against the only sane and prudent course, ask who benefits from those cat calls and who profits from that policy? The Republic is now dead with the enactment of the Patriot Act and now the Homeland Defense Act. Nothing illustrates more animus towards the prospects of freedom than these domestic draconian dictates of the elites. Populism is the political answer, American First is the correct policy, and Liberty is its eternal reward. Laugh in the face of the toadies for the elites. Virtuous and honest citizens know better. America First is your legacy!  Can you count yourself among their ranks? Will you defend it or will you continue to pay tribute to the illicit betrayers of our Constitutional Republic?

Save

Save

The post America First is Populism in Action appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Trump’s Self-Inflicted Policy Failures (VIDEO)

Trump's Self-Inflicted Policy Failures (VIDEO) | trumps-wall-street-cabinet-pics | Multimedia Politics Sleuth Journal Special Interests Trump

Even the most avid and enthusiastic Trump supporter needs to be critical of their most hopeful America First president. For a dose of reality and objective conviction, who better to rely on than Pat Buchanan? His article, Israel First or America First concludes with the fateful warning for President –Elect Trump. “Having America publicly reassert herself as Israel’s best friend, with “no daylight” between us, could have us ending up as Israel’s only friend – and Israel as our only friend in the Middle East. Bibi’s Israel First policy must one day collide with America First.”

No other foreign policy issue can or will destroy Trump’s administration as clearly as becoming the lap dog for the Likudnik sociopaths. They relish in their apartheid subjugation of the descendants of Ishmael, who are more Semitic than the Khazars that made their exodus from Eastern Europe and Central Asia to occupy the lands of Palestine.

Being born, raised and establishing his real estate empire in what Jessie Jackson called “Hymietown”, it is no surprise that Donald Trump has adopted the kosher culture of Jewish Supremacism. Metro New Yorkers are not known for their scholarship in authentic historical analysis, but are well renowned for their media manipulation in ‘Political Correct” purity and social uniformity of anti-traditional viewpoints.

The Trump family daughter Ivanka preferred the company of Jewish men. She converted to Judaism before she married Jared Corey Kushner. The praxis of Zionism is well established in their private and public life. Since both are slated to be intimate advisors in a Trump administration, it should be expected that the influence of Jewish Son-in-law Kushner Guided Trump’s Triumphant AIPAC Speech, will be substantial.

So when Trump selects his trusted bankruptcy attorney David Friedman to stake out properties to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, the reaction received push back. According to Chemi Shalev, Trump’s Ambassador, Makes Netanyahu Look Like a J Street Lefty.

“This is not an ambassador that a rational U.S. administration would send if it had any plans whatsoever to advance the peace process. This is an ambassador who will please Evangelicals, delight Jewish settlers and bring pleasure to Land of Israel zealots far and wide. In many ways, Friedman will seem like a turbo-charged Ron Dermer, courting the extreme right in his host country while shunning all the rest. It will upset many Israelis, including, possibly, Netanyahu himself. The prime minister is always concerned more about his right-wing flanks than his opposition on the left: The last thing he needs is a U.S. ambassador who supports his most feared rivals.”

Even the New York Times is having a hemorrhage as reported in Donald Trump’s Israel Ambassador Pick Is Hazardous to Peace.

“After his election, Mr. Trump suggested that he wanted to bridge divisions within our country. Mr. Friedman proudly announces that he wants to widen and deepen those divisions. Will Mr. Trump’s stated desire to heal or will Mr. Friedman’s divisive calls define the direction of the incoming administration?”

Complicate these concerns with the historic Secretary of State John Kerry farewell speech that Israel must adopt two-state solution for lasting peace. Well, Trump jumped on the Orthodox bandwagon with both feet. While Trump Slams Obama “Inflammatory Statements”, Tells Israel To “Stay Strong, Jan 20 Is Fast Approaching” the path is laid to adopt such a pro Zionist intervention that even the most hostile Neoconservative might start to warm up to Rabbi Trump.

The prospects that the United States will broker a negotiated Trump style mediation on the most dysfunctional region in the Middle East and upon quintessential eternal enemies in all of human existence are total folly. The veritable art of the deal can and only come when all parties embrace that their own existential survival is contingent upon renouncing violence as a means of extermination for deep enmity towards their never-ending feud.

There is no essential American national interest in dealing with intractable zealots that view coexistence as tribal suicide. Continuous military support for Israeli’s nuclear blackmail is irrational. Trump is risking everything by allowing AIPAC a veto over our own foreign policy.

The warmongers within the Republican Party such as Senators McCain and Graham have thoroughly demonstrated their Neocon insanity and will do more damage to sabotage any Trump effort to put into place a non-interventionist shift in policy. By what fantasy rationale could Trump use to ignore empirical reality to further Zionist imperialism? Forget coherent American self-interest, supporting Israel threatens World War III.

Now turn your attention to the economic character of continuing the strangle hold over money and commerce. The Wall Street model for crony capitalism is a charade of free enterprise. A market economy has been dead for over a century with the imposition of the Federal Reserve.

Watch the video, Wall Street’s Goldman Sachs Is Big Winner In Trump Election Victory.

Trump has capitulated to the powers of the corporatist elites with his appointments that Make America Goldman’s Again (#MAGA): The Swamp Is Now Full. “Removing all doubt about the Parasite Guild theory, Donald Trump rolled out his latest Jewish vampire squid pick as chief economic adviser: Goldman Sachs COO (((Gary Cohn))). Cohn’s specialization is total debt strangulation.”

Even Forbes admits Goldman Sachs Wins Again As Trump Eyes Gary Cohn For Top Economic Post. This appointment is especially ominous.

“With Cohn advising President Trump, Goldman Sachs will have one of its own advocating on economic policy. Much has been made of Trump’s decision to add Wall Street-types to his administration, including some with former ties to Goldman, like Trump’s pick for Treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, and Trump’s top White house adviser, Stephen Bannon. But Mnuchin and Bannon have not worked at Goldman Sachs for years.

On the other hand, Cohn has worked at Goldman Sachs since 1990 and has been a partner since 1994.”

The New American weighs in this assessment, Trump Picks Another Goldman Sachs Executive.

“A global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities,” was the wording of a Trump TV commercial late in the presidential campaign, complete with the face of the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, Lloyd Blankfein, on the screen.

Yet President-elect Donald Trump has named Blankfein’s friend and associate, the chief operating officer of Goldman Sachs, Gary Cohn (shown), to lead the National Economic Council (NEC), the third Goldman executive tapped for either a staff or Cabinet post.”

The reason why placing the perpetual clan of banksters to control the levers of government monetary and economic policy is so detrimental to the well being of working Americans is well stated in how Goldman Sachs: Making Money by Stealing It.

“It makes money the old-fashioned way, through market manipulation, the scamming of investors, bribing political Washington, having its executives in top administration posts, and getting open-ended low or no interest rate bailouts when needed.”

By continuing the placement of Goldman Sachs in charge of Treasury and the NEC, the Trump revolution lost the first major battle. It also proves that international finance rules every administration. Review the List of Goldman Sachs employees in the White House for additional documentation.

If Trump is going to make America Great Again, he will need to refinance the national debt. With a highly overpriced dollar, now is the time to shift short term Treasury borrowing into long term debt. Issue a fifty year bond and retire T-Bill obligations so that when the dollar sinks (as it surely will) the government can retire (don’t hold your breath) relatively low interest rate obligations with cheap money.

Somehow, Goldman shylocks have seldom manifested national sympathy for American taxpayer citizens. Just maybe some dual loyalist bankster will want to fund the perennial deficit in order to keep the funds flowing to pay for those newly delivered F-35 fighter jets to continue Bibi’s Israel First policy.

Donald Trump could have avoided these missteps if he was confident that the establishment could be defied directly. Sadly, the reality is that Trump already has a bulls- eye target painted on his administration and that cutting Israel loose and firing the money-lenders may just be one bridge too far.

As a strong supporter of the Trump Nation, the hopes and faith in his middle class revolution was always a long shot. Getting elected was certainly a political phenomenon, but being able to effectively defy the entire federal government career class of establishment sycophants would be a miracle.

America First is not very popular within the chambers of government corruption. The reign of terror system of bureaucratic governance fears that Trump actually wants to drain the swamp. He is walking a tightrope already and cannot afford adding complications of his own making by doing the bidding of the viper den bourse for derivative speculation. Sincere and goodwill citizens need to give support and have patience so that the populist movement can take root.

The post Trump’s Self-Inflicted Policy Failures (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Will Trump Change US Imperial Policy? Hold the Cheers!

usa-empire-imperial-war

Trump won’t end US imperial wars. America’s military/industrial complex depends on them. Prioritizing global peace and stability would wreck its bottom line interests. Would he dare defy a far greater power than his own, perhaps assuring his demise if he rejects its demands?

Don’t bank on it, but here’s a partial wish list for positive geopolitical change – if achieved would make his tenure historic:

• better relations with Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela;
• halt color revolutions and wars for regime change;
• end the threat of Washington declaring war on Syria, risking direct confrontation with Russia if launched;
• wage real, not phony, war on ISIS and other terrorist groups; partner with Russia to defeat this scourge;
• halt support for terrorists called moderates, Trump saying “we have no idea who these people are;”
• prioritize diplomacy over endless wars; and
• negotiate what Trump calls “the ultimate deal…the deal that can’t be made…for humanity’s sake” – Israeli/Palestinian peace after decades of endless conflict, dashing hopes for resolution.

Hopefully his ascension to power means fewer, not more, US wars, ending support for putschists waging war on Donbass freedom fighters, acting responsibly to clean up the mess US-led NATO made in Libya, and following through after saying he’ll consider “let(ting) NATO go,” adding:

“When we’re paying and nobody else is really paying, a couple of other countries are but nobody else is really paying, you feel like the jerk.”

He’d “call up all of those countries…and say ‘fellas you haven’t paid for years. Give us the money or get the hell out.’ “

“(Y)ou’ve gotta pay us or get out. You’re out, out, out…Maybe NATO will dissolve, and that’s OK, not the worst thing in the world.”

Separately on Sunday, according to a Syrian military source, anti-government terrorists in eastern Aleppo were given 24 hours to lay down their arms and leave areas they control.

According to the source, “(t)hose who want to remain alive must lay down their arms and in return we ensure their security. After the deadline ends, our attack will start, using the most precise weapons.”

“(R)ecent victories of the Syrian army and popular forces…caused the terrorists to grow hopeless, paralyzed and depressed…accusing each other of betrayal.”

US-supported terrorists in eastern Aleppo failed to heed earlier calls to cease fighting. It’s doubtful they’ll agree now.

A large-scale government attack on their positions, perhaps aided by Russian warplanes and naval forces offshore, may begin early this week otherwise.

Liberating Aleppo entirely may come sooner, not later, Washington perhaps doing nothing to stop it – with Trump succeeding Obama in January.

A Final Comment

Last year, Trump said, if elected, he’ll cut all ties to his business and take no salary, not even a dollar. “That’s not a big deal for me,” he stressed.

After becoming president-elect, he tweeted, “(a)s far as the salary is concerned – I won’t take even one dollar. I am totally giving up my salary…”

Jack Kennedy took no congressional or presidential salary. Herbert Hoover donated his to charities and for extra staff compensation. All other US presidents took theirs.

Today they earn $400,000 annually plus a $50,000 expense account, aside from what they get in lavish perks.

 

The post Will Trump Change US Imperial Policy? Hold the Cheers! appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

No Change In Foreign Policy From 2016 Standard-Bearers

No Change In Foreign Policy From 2016 Standard-Bearers

Getty Images Illustration via CNN.

With all the turmoil and uncertainty coming from this election cycle, one constant is already known. U.S. Foreign Policy is well under the control of the international interventionists. The career globalists on the American payroll continue to push for more and greater engagements. Step back and consider the premise. Seldom is there an international involvement that is not eagerly embraced, funded and expanded. Based upon this premise, the record of continued failures is better understood. The systemic decline of a once great nation has developed into a pathetic deterioration of an imperial empire. 

If you think anything will materially change with the inauguration of a new President, get serious. The prescribed instrument of establishment newspeak on international affairs is Foreign Policy magazine. Stephen M. Walt writes in The Big 5 and the Sad State of Foreign Policy in 2016. 

“A Clinton foreign policy will look a lot like Barack Obama’s, but with a decidedly more hawkish edge. 

Here’s the real worry: Clinton and her advisors are deeply committed to the familiar strategy of liberal hegemony the United States has followed ever since the end of the Cold War. This worldview sees U.S. leadership as “indispensable”; has never seen an international problem it doesn’t think Washington could fix; and routinely forgets that other states have interests, too, and aren’t always grateful when the United States throws its weight around. Americans like to think “global leadership” is their birthright, but the U.S. track record since 1993 is a mixed one at best. Today’s world is very different than the one of the 1990s — when liberal hegemony was in its heyday — and many elements of the old U.S. playbook aren’t working that well. If you think that events in the Middle East, Europe, Asia, and Africa might require not a bunch of tired verities but some real creativity, the well-worn Clinton team might not be your best bet.” 

Harvard professor Walt provides the following assessment on Trump, Cruz and Sanders. “The real worry is that we have no idea what Trump’s foreign policy would be.” “A Ted Cruz presidency would probably make George W. Bush-style “unilateralism” seem like a Quaker meeting.” “For Sanders, foreign policy is mostly an afterthought. He’s not going to squander lots of money on idealistic foreign-policy crusades, and he’s not likely to pick fights with countries that aren’t directly threatening the United States.” 

From these brief comparisons, one might presume that Sanders has a more prudent outlook. But before one concludes that the NeoCons are in retreat, their selected mouthpiece still has entrenched support. Also from the Foreign Policy essay: 

“Marco Rubio’s political career has been bankrolled by backers with solid neoconservative beliefs (such as Paul Singer, Norman Braman, and Sheldon Adelson), and he’s reportedly getting advice from the same Project for the New American Century–types who led the United States to disaster under George W. Bush. Indeed, in a remarkably tone-deaf bit of advertising, Rubio’s campaign website opens by asking, “Are You Ready for a New American Century?” Gee, where have I heard that one before? It’s therefore no surprise that Rubio’s foreign-policy pronouncements read like old Weekly Standard articles or that neoconservative David Brooks of the New York Times keeps writing columns touting Rubio’s alleged virtues.” 

It should be clear, with the implosion of Rand Paul and the unlikelihood of a successful Sanders’ election; no one is left in the race for POTUS that will buck the Foggy Bottom feeders. While Trump could be a surprise, as all the concerted effort to sabotage his Republican chances from the GOP backstabbers illustrate, the real prospects that the beltway institutional bureaucrats would subvert any attempts to shift away from a permanent war of terror policy. 

Elections never result in abandonment from a globalist designed foreign policy that only benefits the supra-elite. A return to an America First world view is never allowed to be adequately debated, much less implemented. The prolific protectionism of internationalism is at the core of the entrenched establishment. 

This is the most probable deduction any seasoned observer of the way the District of Criminals actually operates. An opposing appraisal from the orthodoxy of the Foreign Policy elites comes from former CIA analysis and patriot Michael Scheuer. His elation in the article, WELL DONE MR. TRUMP!!! Israel-First, Neocons to join Hillary, all America’s enemies in one party, pulls no punches.

 “What makes the current Israel First/Neocon seizure so hearteningly severe are not only Trump’s words and apparent America-First foreign policy inclinations, but the fact that he is getting so very many votes. “Could it possibly be,” ponder the likes of Bill Kristol, George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Max Boot, Eliot Cohen, Robert Kagan, Michael Bloomberg, Peter King, Elliott Abrams, Eric Edelman, Michael Chertoff, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and John Bolton, “that Americans are not genuinely happy, proud, and eager to have their fellow citizens and soldier-children dying uselessly in wars motivated in large part by the U.S. interventionism we advocate and by America’s subservience to a country that does nothing but degrade the republic’s security and drain its treasury?” “Could it be,” the IF/NC’ers are wondering, “that Trump and the increasing number of voters supporting him know that we Israel-Firsters and Neocons have played them for fools, corrupted their political system and media, and done our best to keep their kids dying in wars meant to serve a foreign nation’s interests at the cost of their own?” Well, it is too soon to tell, but the words of the Israel Firsters and Neocons and their fierce hatred of Trump surely suggest that they fear their war-causing disloyalty has been identified and — at long last — their jig is about up.” 

Mr. Scheuer’s hope that the apprehension over Trump’s lack of acceptance of the standard interventionism might be real certainly is bold. Yet the War Party establishment seems to be reacting as if “The Donald” has more in common with an Ayatollah than a John Quincy Adams, who was cited in the essay. 

Even if the counterfeit conservatives left the Republican Party and rushed into the open arms of a Clinton Democratic Party, the influence of the beltway technocrats remains within the agencies intercession club and the Pentagon careerists. All the time the lobbyist industry will resist any departure from the proven formula of wasting national blood and treasure in the pursuit of a Greater Israel. 

Nothing would be more welcome news if some viable political party would adopt a truly America First foreign policy. The problem is that the entire system runs on a culture of war. The wishes of the people are being thwarted for all to see. The power of the establishment is rallying to prevent the electorate from voting for a peaceful revolution. A Sanders’ campaign is calling for a Revolution. Trump is leading the charge against the Old Guard. Both have popular support that the party bosses are ignoring.  

The accepted 2016 Standard-bearers are Clinton and Rubio for the party elites. Each will be obligated to the institutional forces that never foster a prosperous and secure nation. Rubio will be road kill on March 15th. The Hildebeast will be looking for a pass from prosecution so she will not be forced to pardon herself upon taking the oath of office as President. 

This farce is the way the establishment transitions into a new Clinton era. Trump is the only person to mobilize the disenfranchised to go to the polls. However, the power elite within the GOP would rather destroy Trump and even vote for Clinton before they would abandon their corporatist and warfare roots. 

John Kaminski asks, Is Donald Trump another Obama? His answer while guarded is less than optimistic that Trump is a real alternative or that he could dismantle the prevailing order. 

The Washington cartel views themselves as above the hoi polloi. No populist movement will strip power from the government cabal. Circling the wagons is in full effect. The presstitute media drumbeat is deafening. Stop any chance of losing control. 

You have never seen this drill played out with more earnest because the masses are waking up. The conditions are building to tap John Lennon’s sentiment from Imagine – “Nothing to kill or die for”. Sanders supporters should hold out and demand a different foreign policy. Nonetheless, the anti-war cause has sunk into the ground under the pressure of societal apathy. 

The inconsistency between a greater awareness and a somber outrage about the War Party seems difficult to define. Even if Trump is the second coming of George Patton, let’s have a little faith that any campaign would be swift, complete and victorious.

This might be the best that could be expected. Under Clinton, the Foreign Policy wonks will be sharing lunch with the list of NeoCons that Mr. Scheuer provided. 

Is it possible to have an election Coup d’état? As improbable as it seems with the immense intimidation forces at their disposal, the imperial hessian bureaucracy still has no legitimacy to base their authoritarianism upon.  

If you want a balance and rational foreign policy in the next administration, start with making Michael Scheuer Secretary of State. Thusly, that would not happen, so prepare that continued doom will be official policy.


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at .

The article No Change In Foreign Policy From 2016 Standard-Bearers published by TheSleuthJournal – Real News Without Synthetics


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Pre-emption And Unilateralism

foreign policy war

Foreign policy affects everyone, but few concern themselves with the details. The “Big Picture” is ignored for the fallacy of immediate gratification. Instant satisfaction defies enduring security. The trap that most citizens fall into, is that the subject is just too complex to bother with, what can one person do? The experts know best, they will protect us! If this mindset is realistic, why is the world such a political mess?  But more to the point, why does the United States have so many antagonists, devoted to restraining a suspect super power?

If foreigners perceived US policy as benevolent towards their own well-being, the rush to ally themselves to the red, white and blue would be the prevalent attitude. Tragically, that’s not the case. Regimes will take the bribes of carrots, but resent the conditions attached to the money. No wonder the reaction to pre-emptive use of force is so unsettling.

The lesson of existent self interest is universal. So don’t be surprised when it eventually leads to action. Unsophisticated souls conclude that unilateralism is equivalent with the use of the pre-emptive prescription. The former is really a design for a method, while the later is a strategy for implementation. Pre-emption is not a policy, but it can cause a remote ordeal to become a deadly blowback. You are supposed to accept the promise that it’s a solution. Preventive medicine isolates the virus, but does it cure the cancer? Yes, renewed interest examines such a medical connection; yet in foreign affairs, admission that a durable remedy requires underlying treatment – goes ignored.

The Gulf War was perceived, by much of the world, as justified because of territorial incursion. The Iraqi invasion is globally viewed quite differently. Calls condemning U.S. unilateralism are usually self serving. One man’s rogue terrorist cell is another’s liberation brigade. A platoon of freedom fighters combating a troop of intruders doesn’t confer moral high ground upon either side. Both may be unprincipled. However, the error that the vast majority adopt is that a world community must give approval to indigenous self interest. Knowing what constitutes valid utility on a national scale is even more snarled and risks a fundamental mistake. The parallel that a county is identical with any government’s interest for state preservation, is a terminal blunder.

Mix into this equation competing civil powers and you have a recipe for eternal conflict. An example may illustrate the clash of cultures. If nuclear proliferation carries with it the greatest risk for annihilation, does that mean that aspirant countries must be prevented from joining such an exclusive club? Depending upon your orientation and where you reside, the answer may be quite different. Consensus in not unqualified. If North Korea possesses the “bomb” and Iran has a strong hunger to achieve a regional deterrence, what makes such aims so alarming? Official pronouncements condemn such regimes as outlaw threats. It is not instructive to assert that any country has an absolute right to acquire the means of total destruction. But it is informative to demonstrate that what separates the specifics of a foreign policy is the ultimate goal of imposing the objectives of a stronger state upon a weaker country.

When Israel acquired the technology for enriched uranium, where was the outrage? When Mordechai Vanunu exposed the existence of the Dimona plutonium separation plant, where was the apprehension? And when Israel provided South Africa with key collaboration in weapon development and purchased 550 tons of SA uranium, where was the concern? ‘So Called’ chosen allies, receive especially favorable treatment.

Now speculate the U.S. response if Japan decided that it was in their national interest to counter the North Korean atomic menace. Do you think that a genuine Asian partner would get the same special handling? Hideki is dead, but the Tojo mentality lives in a world based on distrust and hostility. How well did the Japanese do with their sneak attack?  Pre-emption perfecto, par excellence. What exactly was the lesson learned? Koukyo palace didn’t prevent Hiroshima.

Maybe Germany will discover a new found slogan – fraternity – with their EU French cousins and acquire a pipe line for heavy water. Now that the Stasi is mainstream and those Israeli nuclear ballistic submarines, built and paid by Germans, are operational; perhaps ThyssenKrupp will reminisce over Bismarck. What would the Kaiser in the White House do? Mobilize the reserves at Ramstein . . . What did that pre-empted Barbarossa operation beget – Stalingrad and Kursk!

Unilateralism acknowledges that no country has actual allies. A country has interests, that vary over time. Other nations may periodically share goals and objectives, but to conclude that there are continuous concords, is asinine. Significantly, governments are often at odds with their own populations.  If a State is frequently in conflict with its own society, by what miracle of assurance, will separate countries seek similar and congruent foreign policies?

The naiveté of basing your own interest upon a coalition of erratic affiliations of diverse cultural, economic and social systems should be apparent to even the unseasoned spectator. For the professional diplomat the obvious must be shielded from the general public. The bureaucrat has their vested interest in the government they serve. Inconsistency with the welfare of the populace are usually resolved in favor of the State. The accords that bind countries, regularly enslave their own people. Why then is there so much loathing for a foreign policy that truly advances the real interests of a domestic population?

Your answer is provided in the dark side of our own history. The White Fleet of Teddy Roosevelt was the stick that every port sought to avoid. The Philippine-American War was a study in a failed pre-emptive colonial struggle that lasted for fourteen years. Wilson’s war to end all wars was a mistake, stemming from abandoning an established policy of rightful unilateralism. In these cases the lack of legitimate national self interest is illustrated. The cause of Filipino independence was broken, because of an urge to maintain a sphere of influence. Making the world safe a double-faced democracy, was the outcome from repudiating our traditional foreign policy, dating back to Washington, Adams and Jefferson. FDR’s war was a direct result of bellicose interventionist intents, dubious ally deceit, internal treachery of ill-considered commitments, and an insatiable impulse to centralize and expand the size and scope of the federal government.

A justifiable unilateralism would have been satisfied with internal development and domestic redress of nationwide issues. There would be no need for a pre-emptive intrusion into the affairs of Asia or Europe. Even under the ambitious precepts of the Monroe Doctrine, defining unilateralism applicable to our own hemisphere, is much more than should be eagerly accepted.

The inability to recognize true national self-interest is the basic failure of U.S. foreign policy for well over a century. We should not care a damn what other countries think or say about our own affairs. However, to achieve such a noble objective, our first order of pursuit is to mind our own business. The impotency of the last super power is the consequence from adopting a distorted and farcical design for international expediency. America First is the correct course to steer this ship of state. When will Americans ever learn?

It just may take the growth of proliferation in nuclear nations to drive home the basic point. Without a nuke, you just might get invaded. What a morose legacy that passes as the rubric of altruistic foreign policy. Full Spectrum Dominance is not consistent with the American dream. Nor are pre-emptive strikes a force for expanding freedom. Unilateralism to extend an empire is just as idiotic. While, unilateralism to defend our own borders is a true patriotic cause. Baghdad for the Iraqis, and the north border of the Rio Grand for Americans. The assault upon our own territory is both pre-emptive and unilateral. The flows goes one way. Our mass relocation is a departure for garrisons abroad. Does this make sense to you? Then why continue down this same road of internationalism which has literally destroyed our nation.

The call to promote a phony solution called democracy is not new. It will fail once again. Denying valid self determination is a very shameful record. When alien aspirations collide with a preconceived version of tribute to the protector of the NWO, they are crushed. Dissent is not tolerated, only favored puppets, are supported. It’s long overdue. Restore a viable American First respect for the rest of the world, AND FOR OURSELVES. “It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world”. George Washington’s Farewell Address is the standard for a tangible foreign policy which actually protects our own vision of a free nation, with limited government and liberty for our own people.


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at .

The article Pre-emption And Unilateralism published by TheSleuthJournal – Real News Without Synthetics


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Hillary’s Foreign Policy: Endless Wars Of Aggression

Hillary’s Foreign Policy: Endless Wars Of Aggression

A Clinton presidency would be disastrous for America and humanity. She represents pure evil – the most reckless and ruthless of all current aspirants – a rogue actor on steroids, a real threat to world peace and stability.

The late historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. once called the New York-based Council for Foreign Relations (CFR) a “front organization (for) the heart of the American establishment.” It publishes only what it wishes the public to know.

It was Clinton’s venue for her Thursday foreign policy address, focusing on the Middle East, advocating escalated US military intervention, a reckless jingoistic proposal risking direct confrontation with Russia, possible WW III – using US-created ISIS and so-called “radical jihadism” as the pretext for her advocacy.

She called for America to lead “a worldwide fight…It’s time to begin a new phase and intensify and broaden our efforts,” she said. Assad is a vital part of the solution in Syria. She called him the problem, urging the  deployment of greater numbers of US special forces, invading Syria lawlessly without Security Council authorization.

She urged establishing no-fly and safe ground zones, lawless if implemented on and over sovereign Syrian territory, acts of war along with Washington’s illegal bombing campaign – directly challenging Russian control of all Syrian airspace, authorized by its government.

She wants America’s bombing campaign escalated – solely targeting Syrian infrastructure and government targets, not ISIS or other terrorists as claimed. She supports stemming the human refugee flood to Europe by keeping them in US-established internal “safe areas.”

She disgracefully called popularly reelected Bashar al-Assad “a vicious dictator,” blasting Russia and Iran for responsibly supporting him – at the same time, ignoring Obama’s aggression, affecting the entire Syrian population, using ISIS and other takfiri terrorists as proxy foot soldiers.

She outrageously accused Putin of “making things somewhat worse” – arrogantly stressing “no alternative to a political transition” excluding Assad, ignoring his popular mandate.

She wants other regional nations joining more forcefully with Washington in the fight to replace his legitimate government with a US-controlled puppet regime.

She blasted Iran, calling its government a regional “threat,” saying the Islamic Republic and ISIS represent equal challenges, wanting Iranian sovereignty eliminated like Syria’s.

She urges greater Israeli involvement in helping Washington establish unchallenged Middle East control. She wants “an updated authorization to use military force” (AUMF) for unlimited, unrestrained preemptive war.

“The time for delay is over,” she blustered. “We should get this done.” She wants Washington “go(ing) after terrorists wherever they” are – code language for endless wars of aggression against humanity in the name of fighting a US-created terrorist threat, as well as assaulting the remnants of homeland freedom, eliminating them altogether on the pretext of protecting national security.

“(E)very pillar of American power” should be used, she ranted. A  Clinton presidency would be  nightmarish for Americans, world peace and humanity, assuring endless wars of aggression and likely full-blown homeland tyranny.

It bears repeating. Her agenda is pure evil, combining the worst of Bush and Obama, representing America’s permanent war agenda and its profiteering beneficiaries – a real threat to humanity’s survival.

A Final Comment

Clinton’s candidacy is symptomatic of longstanding US rogue state policy, intolerant of democracy at home and abroad, committed to endless wars of aggression for unchallenged global dominance, risking humanity’s survival to achieve its objectives.

No matter who succeeds Obama in January 2017, the same pure evil agenda will continue. The only solution is popular nonviolent revolution. Nothing else can work. Voting is a waste of time.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html Visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com.

The article Hillary’s Foreign Policy: Endless Wars Of Aggression published by TheSleuthJournal – Real News Without Synthetics


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS