Wednesday, September 10, 2014

What is that definition of insanity again?

"Doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results."

Why can't we get the Mexican drug cartels to line up for a photo op like this?
The United States has a serious problem with drug cartels physically venturing into US territory to expand their base of operations.  Do we go to the UN and ask that they put together a coalition to come help us?  Do we put in calls to France or New Zealand or South Korea and ask them to come to our aid?  NO!  It's in OUR back yard, making it OUR problem.

So why does the world always start chanting U...S...A... when it hits the fan in the Mid East?  In case you weren't aware, Turkey is a formidable power in that region.  So is Iran.  And obviously so is Israel.  And don't forget Saudi Arabia and Egypt.  If ISIS succeeds in Syria / Iraq, those countries have an immediate problem.  It's in THEIR back yard.  (America's problem with ISIS will be a bit longer range.) 

What I want to know is, what are THOSE countries gonna do about ISIS?  IMO those countries should be in the starting lineup.  We should be in the bull pen.  Those countries have their own planes and bombs.  We know this because WE sold them to them (along with Russia, the UK, France, and a few others).  

They save their weaponry for parades and fly-overs (and occasionally crushing a dissident group at home) while we expend ours.  While they spend their money on massive social programs for their citizens, our infrastructure crumbles, our schools struggle for adequate funding, and our food banks have trouble meeting demand.

Ever since Vietnam showed the world our military Achilles heel we haven't been able to defeat a guerrilla-style enemy.  That's because we value life.  We won't wipe out a city block to get one bad guy for fear of killing innocent civilians.  It happens, and we agonize over it, but we do make a valiant effort to prevent it.  Our guerrilla enemies have no such conscience.

We've become a foreign policy "Jack of all trades, master of none".  We try to be everywhere, but we actually accomplish very little.  Trying to prop up "countries" that were just figments of some post-WWI European diplomat's imagination is a lost cause.

I say let "those people" thrust and parry among themselves.  Let them decide their own borders.  Let them organize themselves by clan or tribe or whatever.  Let them establish their own balance of power.  It will be bloody, yes, but even if we try, we can have very little (if any) lasting influence.  It's called "reality".

We need to be backing up the Mid East regional powers who are truly on the front lines, and not the other way around.

Just sayin'.



  1. Well said. At the very least if the oil rich countries like Saudi Arabia expect us to get involved they could cough up some of their gazillion dollars to pay for it. Instead we end up spending billions in payoffs and rebuilding what everyone else tears down.

  2. I don't think it is that simple, but I'm not sure why...maybe it is that simple! What the hell sticking our nose in doesn't ever seem to work over there so...

    1. You're right....I'm sure it isn't all that simple. But I do think we try and "fix" things that aren't fixable, at least not by us.

  3. The last time we stepped in to help other countries successfully was the Marshal Plan post-ww2. Perhaps Korea too. Since then it's been either helping the wrong side, or just screwing up a country, like Iraq.

    Difficult to get the countries in that area to work together, or even alone. The sheer malevolence between different religions, or even within factions of one religion, is difficult for us to imagine here in the west. Also most of those countries are tribal in nature, vs. nationally-focused. They don't care about what happens to one tribe if it's not theirs, even within the same country.

  4. Point well taken. But they do seeming willing from time to time to practice "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". This might be one of those times.

  5. The IS in ISIS stands for Islamic State, as you probably know. If these killers are allowed to create an Islamic State, a modern Caliphate, their choice for a capital city is obvious--the number one holy site in the Islamic world--Mecca. The last time I checked Mecca was in Saudi Arabia, one of the wealthiest nations on earth. Since every member of the House of Saud would be put to the sword I say let them pay for this battle, and sending a few thousand Saudi soldiers to fight ISIS wouldn't be a bad idea. I'm with you about not doing the heavy lifting for these people anymore.

  6. I agree with you. And boy, would it be fun to put you into a room with a lobbyist from one of those big defense contractors... *Thinks of buying popcorn and pulls up chair*

  7. What I want to know is what the heck these bad guys call themselves. First we heard "Eye-suss". Then the Prez insisted on calling them "Eye-full". And tonight Susan Rice was on teevee calling them "Iss-full". If we can't identify them, how are we gonna defeat them?