Is Hillary Receiving Bad Advice?
And if so, could that bad advice lead us to war? I was perusing the Wikileaks site under Clinton's e-mails, and I came across this one. It's from Sid Blumenthal, a trusted HRC advisor, and it's very problematic.
Look at item #4. Note that the date was 6/28/12, this was before the rise of ISIS. He states that a grave danger in Lebanon is that Syrian agents will conduct bombings and assassinations in an effort to frame the Lebanese Salafist militias there. Assad's agents are the danger, not the actual Salafists, according to Sid.
Fast forward four years, and we find that there have in fact been many bombings and other acts of terror in Lebanon, yet these have all been executed by actual Salafi terrorists. Many have been arrested or killed, and there is no evidence that anyone except the Salafi and their allies were involved, to the contrary, huge networks have been exposed. From the mortar attacks directed at Christian areas (Palestinians) to suicide bombers in Dahieh, a Shia neighborhood in south Beirut (ISIS), these attacks were conducted by the usual suspects. The one instance I am aware of wherein Syrian intel may have been involved was a Sunni mosque in the north, several years ago, long before this e-mail.
This was fairly stunning to me, because I realized that Hillary, and others at the highest levels of government may be badly misinformed. I had assumed that they knew exactly what they were doing, but it dawned on me that they might be basing their decisions on faulty data points. If one were to assume that the Salafi won't launch terror attacks, and that the terror attacks that occur are actually conducted by Assad's intelligence force, then the obvious conclusion is that Assad must go, and that the Salafi can be trusted to govern. Thus we get headlines like this.
Now it's possible that Hillary does in fact know exactly what is going on. If that were true though, why would she support the Syrian rebels, who are overwhelmingly Islamist, and almost guaranteed to make a bloodbath of what's left of Syria? Can she actually want to create a failed state? Enable the "Caliphate"? I don't think so. I tend to believe that there is a critical lack of understanding at the apex of government, due to group-think and heavy reliance on unreliable sources.
If someone believes that Assad, and by extension, his allies, Iran and Russia, are largely responsible for the export of Islamist terrorism (a belief that defies both facts and logic), then supporting the Syrian rebels, confronting Russia and Iran, and defeating Assad all make sense.
If, by contrast, someone believes that Saudi Arabia, and similar states are largely responsible for supporting Islamist terrorism, a completely different conclusion would be drawn. In this scenario, what would make sense would be to cut ties with the rebels, and work with the Russians and Iranians to achieve a cease-fire, and hopefully, peace. Assad would either be retained, or alternately, Syria could be partitioned to accommodate three or more groups who can't co-exist.
From the e-mails it looks like Hillary relies heavily on certain key advisors, Blumenthal being one, and it also looks like she's being fed lousy intelligence. Only bad results can come from acting upon bad intel.
What do you think? Who is the greater enemy, ISIS, Nusra and Saudi Arabia, or Assad, Iran and Russia? If we fight one and ally with the other, what would peace look like?
Comments
Incompetence explains a lot
If you look at U.S. foreign policy, incompetence explains a lot of the blunders. President George W. Bush famously did not know about the Sunni vs. Shia divide in Iraq just prior to ordering the illegal invasion that triggered a fateful civil war.
Some people try to spin bogus conspiracy theories that assume elaborate and carefully coordinated schemes are afoot, when in fact the right hand often doesn't know what the left hand is doing. Recently it was revealed that CIA-backed fighters in Syria had clashed with Pentagon-backed fighters.
I think the goal of Hillary’s neocon friends like PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan is to keep those unwinnable wars halfway around the world going for the defense contractors, and if possible re-start the even more profitable Cold War with Russia. It's a stupid and dangerous plan, and it is out in the open. There isn't a secret code name for it.
"We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty."
No doubt
My thoughts too. It looks like anyone who goes against the group-think gets side-lined. I get the part about continuing the perma-war, what I don't get is picking the wrong side, unless, as you say, conflict with Russia was the goal in the first place.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
She has already told us the code name: Yoga.
That woman has many tells.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Actually the PNAC agenda was for a New American Century,
not simply enriching the MIC. That's what its really all about in the end, world domination. Or maybe that's just another CT.
The problem with "world domination"
There is a problem with "world domination" by military means. We are spending more on our military than the whole rest of the world combined (including our allies), winning tactically but not strategically because the leaders in Washington don't have a coherent strategy. So it looks more like imperial overstretch than domination.
"We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty."
Anybody fully behind Bibi Netanyahu is getting bad advice
... and showing worse judgment. It is not a coincidence that many Neocon leaders are also first and foremost pro-Israel, and that their policies foment division and war in the Muslim lands. US policies have done a great deal to stoke Sunni-Shia hatreds, and we see the consequences all across the Middle East today.
Stoking a new Cold War with Russia is a whole different level of suicidally stupid, though. Hillary's advisers no doubt think that putting the country back on a perpetual war footing would be good for business, and better for helping them maintain power. It's enough to make Donald Trump look like George McGovern.
Please help support caucus99percent!
It's amazing how heavily she was relying on Sid
back in 2012 or so, and equally amazing how wrong so much of his advice turned out to be. I imagine that the information she's relying on today isn't much better or different. I think war with Russia is quite likely, if she is elected.
The whole damned world looks like nails to these people.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Bad Advice (To Us) Is All She Seeks
She's gotten hers, so to hell with the rest of us - especially if she can speed the process up.
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
What strikes me about her
is how difficult it is for her to change course, or adapt. It seems characteristic of her to stick to a certain course or policy, in spite of changing circumstances or new intel. I fear that we'll end up confronting Russia, and for all of the wrong reasons.
We're going to party like it's 1914.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
That trait happens to be a psychological characteristic
typical of repugnicans.
Gosh, who would have guessed --
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
I'm sure she's getting very good advice...
and her accountant is ecstatic about it.
With regards to running the country? Oh, well I'm sure whatever Kissinger said was right...
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
I guess the amazing for me
was reading the e-mail. It's sort of like eavesdropping, this a communication not intended for public consumption, yet it appears that she's swallowing obvious CT without a second thought.
Yeah, "whatever Kissinger said..." is about right.
If you assume that your opponent is responsible for all conflict, you'll be blind to new threats popping up, as she was clearly blind to the threat of ISIS. It's just one more massive display of bad judgment and a lack of critical thinking.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Who's the greater
danger to our country and the world? She's running for fucking president and so is he! Maybe it's not them but the hands up their asses controlling them. Either way Our Gov't is the leading terrorist group out there. Body count, completed strikes in Sovereign Countries, extra judicial killings, rendition. . .fuck it, I give up for now.
Ya got to be a Spirit, cain't be no Ghost. . .
Explain Bldg #7. . . still waiting. . .
If you’ve ever wondered whether you would have complied in 1930’s Germany,
Now you know. . .
sign at protest march
Is this like Bush not having good intelligence, those WMDs
are "around here someplace"? They're supporting the Syrian rebels to try to overthrow the Assad government and balkanize Syria. Clinton is basically a neocon and Syria and Libya were on the list (Clark's list). She knows exactly what's going on. Clinton helped create ISIS and Al Nusra is another U.S. aided terrorist group used for these purposes. The enemy thing is all in the sheeple's heads. The only real enemy here is our own government which is causing and instigating these wars and conflicts for the ruling elite. In fact, in February, the real enemy just might be Clinton, who knows exactly what she wants.
The Goldwater girl and the Wall Street girl.
Great article from counterpunch
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/05/the-goldwater-girl-and-the-wall-s...
Hillary isn't getting bad advice, she is putting the same people who wrote the PNAC on her staff.
Her supporters say that she only voted for the AUMF to give the inspectors more time, but we have seen videos of her saying that Saddam was working with Al Quada and other bullshit.
Besides, the people who wrote up the PNAC went to Bill and wanted him to remove Saddam. Anyone believe that Hillary wasn't aware of this?
And how many times has she said that the things she has done were mistakes ?
Being responsible for over a million deaths doesn't qualify as a mistake in my book.
It's a cold calculated decision and has no regard for how many innocent civilians or troops are killed.
If she met a plane loaded with caskets coming back from a war zone do you think that the grieving parents would accept her saying Oops, my bad?
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
Yes, from Bill.
oops hit publish, too soon...
from Bill, William Jefferson Clinton, who forsook the future to bring plenty during his reign.
From her cerebrum?
I'd say yes.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
Just hit me like a ton of bricks...
think of all her "pet" people who will have roles in her administration should she pull off a miracle and win in November. Blumenthal, Brock, DWS, Mills, and the list goes on. I think I'm going to be sick!
...where's the money going into The $hill's campaign
coming from? My best guess is that it probably isn't coming from the Assad regime in Syria. OTOH, we KNOW that members of the Saudi royals have donated money to the Clenis Foundation over the years -- is it possible that donations also have made their way to The $hill's campaign? If that is the case, I wonder which interpretation of current events is most likely to be adopted by The $hill?
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
Unreliable Sources
You mean like Chalabi?
The neocons and the neolibs share a stunning arrogance towards the world's brown people, which repeatedly ends in them being played.
The first thing a con artist does is pump up the marks ego. It helps if it is already overinflated.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
No, I mean like Sid Blumenthal
She's getting information that is transparently worthless, yet she keeps accepting it from the same small circle of people. This crappy analysis may lead us to war.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Yes, Hillary does want failed states.
She's a neocon, and part of the PNAC world domination plan is to destroy any possible competition for domination, any countries that aren't subservient to us. Libya went from the poorest country in Africa to the richest under Gaddafi, with education and medical care for his people. He gave up his nuclear weapons when we asked him to. Oops. He was also talking about an alternate currency for oil with other African countries, rather than the dollar. Can't have that.
Her anti-Trump ad screams for a satire
The one where the "Morning Joe" crew ask Trump who advises him, and he says he listens to himself? Whenever I see that ad(plays a lot of Hulu for some reason) I automatically hear them ask Hillary, and hear her say, " I listen to Sid Blumenthal, a man with No security clearance who Obama would not let me hire. I listen to Henry effing Kissinger, considered a war criminal by much of the thinking world. I listen to the clusterfuck PNAC who whispered into George W.'s ear.And of course, I listen to the guys who crashed the economy back in '08." If Trump were halfway campaigning he would be running ads like this now.
That's my whole point
Why is she listening to the usual suspects, and why isn't anyone saying anything about it?
They were wrong then, and they are wrong now, yet we keep lurching towards doom.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Is Hillary Receiving Bad Advice?
Yes, from the getgo from those she says encouraged her to run for the presidency.
And it has all gone downhill from there.
If not for the courage of Senator Sanders, in his david versus goliath stance, to step up to run against her, think how different the whole primary would have been.
Just remembering that tiny little press conference, so sparsely attended, when he announced warms my heart. The only one with the courage at that time to challenge the coronation that she expected.