Supporting a bad status quo is easier than challenging it, and it is more rewarding to be a loud defender of a failed policy than it is to be an advocate of abandoning the failure.
If further evidence were needed that not only has the foreign policy establishment (howsoever styled) have learned nothing from Afghanistan, and in fact, they continue to double down.
I especially appreciate Robert Kelly's quotes. He's definitely somebody I would like to follow. Please make sure you submit this to the New York Times as a rebuttal.
“The reason they lash out and snarl at the Blob is because their positions are so contrary to the widespread belief about the effective use of American power internationally,” she said. “Criticism of the so-called foreign policy Blob is a way of saying, ‘I have been ineffective in persuading people that the policies I advocate are the correct ones.’”
This quotation illustrates that the Blob is still in the position of thinking that it is the judge, rather than that it is the party being judged. Obviously, the Blob has a vested interest in defending its own position and its own record. Just as no man is fit to be the judge of his own case, the Blob is not fit to be the judge of its own reputation. It would be like trying to persuade the fossil fuel lobby to accept the scientific consensus on global warming, or for that matter like trying to persuade an incumbent politician to vote for this opponent in the next election. Arguments directed at a party with a vested interest in the issue at stake are not going to persuade that party, no matter how objectively reasonable they are.
We must be unrelenting in our criticism. The Blob-Emperor has no clothes. We must adopt a "look at me, I am the captain now!" mentality. We are in a better position to do so than the blob. We didn't make the mistakes that we are now criticizing and our paychecks don't depend on it. We are just ordinary people who see the results of bad decisions born of an incorrect paradigm in American foreign policy, who want to change it.
Why should the blob worry? Most of the most prominent foreign policy actors of the last 40 years are certifiable war criminals, yet none will ever face justice and will retire in wealth and comfort.
There _is_ something of a foreign policy establishment consisting of reporters, op-ed writers, academics, and talking heads who are in favor of a strongly interventionist foreign policy. The only dividing line between them is whether they want to intervene for security reasons or human rights and "humanitarian" reasons. The noninterventionist side hardly receives a platform at all.
Thank you. Biden administration is full of Russia-gate hoax conspirators. Among them is Hillary campaign's national security advisor, Jake Sullivan — now President Biden's National Security Advisor.
Sullivan was a member of the team that concocted the Russia-gate scam of the century and has played a role in destruction of Trump’s National Security Advisor, a distinguished general Michael Flynn (whom narcissist Obama abhorred). The persecution and insults to Mike Flynn still continue to this day:
Chase bank just cancelled credit card of US general, Michael Flynn.
Reason given: Flynn is a "reputation risk"....
Truly an outrage – always remember Obama’s bank mega-gangsters and their “reputation”.
The Indictment of Hillary Clinton's Lawyer is an Indictment of the Russia-gate Wing of U.S. Media
The DOJ's new charging document, approved by Biden's Attorney General, sheds bright light onto the Russia-gate fraud and how journalistic corruption was key.
If further evidence were needed that not only has the foreign policy establishment (howsoever styled) have learned nothing from Afghanistan, and in fact, they continue to double down.
I especially appreciate Robert Kelly's quotes. He's definitely somebody I would like to follow. Please make sure you submit this to the New York Times as a rebuttal.
“The reason they lash out and snarl at the Blob is because their positions are so contrary to the widespread belief about the effective use of American power internationally,” she said. “Criticism of the so-called foreign policy Blob is a way of saying, ‘I have been ineffective in persuading people that the policies I advocate are the correct ones.’”
This quotation illustrates that the Blob is still in the position of thinking that it is the judge, rather than that it is the party being judged. Obviously, the Blob has a vested interest in defending its own position and its own record. Just as no man is fit to be the judge of his own case, the Blob is not fit to be the judge of its own reputation. It would be like trying to persuade the fossil fuel lobby to accept the scientific consensus on global warming, or for that matter like trying to persuade an incumbent politician to vote for this opponent in the next election. Arguments directed at a party with a vested interest in the issue at stake are not going to persuade that party, no matter how objectively reasonable they are.
We must be unrelenting in our criticism. The Blob-Emperor has no clothes. We must adopt a "look at me, I am the captain now!" mentality. We are in a better position to do so than the blob. We didn't make the mistakes that we are now criticizing and our paychecks don't depend on it. We are just ordinary people who see the results of bad decisions born of an incorrect paradigm in American foreign policy, who want to change it.
Why should the blob worry? Most of the most prominent foreign policy actors of the last 40 years are certifiable war criminals, yet none will ever face justice and will retire in wealth and comfort.
CFR did a survey of FP experts and more supported the withdrawal than opposed. You would think it’s only 10% from the media coverage.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ask-the-experts/2021-06-22/washington-right-leave-afghanistan
There _is_ something of a foreign policy establishment consisting of reporters, op-ed writers, academics, and talking heads who are in favor of a strongly interventionist foreign policy. The only dividing line between them is whether they want to intervene for security reasons or human rights and "humanitarian" reasons. The noninterventionist side hardly receives a platform at all.
Thank you. Biden administration is full of Russia-gate hoax conspirators. Among them is Hillary campaign's national security advisor, Jake Sullivan — now President Biden's National Security Advisor.
Sullivan was a member of the team that concocted the Russia-gate scam of the century and has played a role in destruction of Trump’s National Security Advisor, a distinguished general Michael Flynn (whom narcissist Obama abhorred). The persecution and insults to Mike Flynn still continue to this day:
Chase bank just cancelled credit card of US general, Michael Flynn.
Reason given: Flynn is a "reputation risk"....
Truly an outrage – always remember Obama’s bank mega-gangsters and their “reputation”.
The Indictment of Hillary Clinton's Lawyer is an Indictment of the Russia-gate Wing of U.S. Media
The DOJ's new charging document, approved by Biden's Attorney General, sheds bright light onto the Russia-gate fraud and how journalistic corruption was key.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-indictment-of-hillary-clintons
PS: I am sure that Hunter Biden has all his credit cards - full of money "earned" by Biden-family corruption.