Meet the Press December 25, 2011

Source

Meet the Press December 25, 2011

Since it is Christmas I wanted to limit my criticism of the news media but there are several issues which I wish to address.

First it is incredibly hard for everyone outside of DC and the media to take anything the media says very seriously since they are exceptionally well paid entertainers who which not to pay their fair share of taxes and have enjoyed two decades of tax holidays at the expense of the American people. By the media’s lack of paying taxes they have muted their own biased opinions.

Second as per Obama’s national security and Foreign Policy wins;

A) Killing Osama Bin Laden

B) Ending the war in Iraq

C) Afghanistan

I think both parties are guilty of failures in these areas. Both parties have been involved in these wars to prolong powers they should have long ago lost to poor management. The media who has been an accomplish through this entire war really is in not position to tell anyone in this country how to feel about anything especially since they haven’t been making the sacrifices the rest of America has endured.

So let’s being with point A) President Obama’s killing of Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt that Bin Laden was a rogue CIA asset but wasn’t that a mission for the CIA to hunt him down and kill him? There is a compelling argument that this war would have been over years ago with smaller foot prints in the desert. It should also be noted that terrorism in any form is mass murder and is the most easily detected and stopped in criminal justice.

Most certainly it has been a horrific waste of resources for our country to go and get one sick elderly fellow in Pakistan which by the way we funded Pakistan to the tune of 500 billion dollars. If anything Osama Bin Laden had been living quite large at the expense of the American Taxpayer while our troops were being killed and crippled by IED(s). What the media is not reporting is that most of those IED(s) came out of China and not Iran.

But I would argue no matter which party is in the White House Osama Bin Laden’s death would be very anti-climatic given the blood and treasure that went into one man’s death which the CIA could have easily and readily resolved.

To Point B) The end of the War in Iraq. Given Iraq has better relations with Iran now then the USA this too is a huge disappointment. Sadly, there will be decades of instability in Iraq as it partners with Iran. And that will increasing place pressure on Israel.

And finally to Point C) Afghanistan is a mess. It is not only a mess for the obvious reasons but also for the reason they are partnering with Pakistan which continues to training terrorists in their country.

In Summary

Not matter which party had accomplished these feats they would have been viewed as foreign policy flops. So it is not a direct insult to Barack Obama but simply an evaluation of the cost benefit ratio in the war in the Middle East.

Saddam Hussein was executed and there was absolutely no proof he had weapons of mass destruction. There was no proof Saddam was involved in 9/11 nor was there concrete proof Osama Bin Laden was involved and even if there was we trained him. Bin Laden was our recruit who went rogue.

Now also what the media is not reporting is the money from Saddam Hussein which our military has supposedly confiscated. Saddam was too paranoid to actually spend the money which he received in the Food for Oil deals. All of that cash is just sitting in a bank somewhere, perhaps South Korea, which could be returned to the very souls who were stuck with the check for this war; the tax payers. And that would be the actually people who have paid taxes for the last two decades and not the ones who dodged them in the name of their own personal wealth.

And please don’t write to me about the weapons used against the Kurds. Donald Rumesfeld delivered those to Saddam in the 1980(s). Leadership in this country suffers from selective memory. They remember themselves far grander then the rest of us.

For me a foreign policy success would be to repatronize al that money from Iraq back into the USA economy and not to corporate America but to those who actually got stuck with the check.

And to be clear this is not a partisan hub at all but a simple stated of the facts. There can be no political win when the taxpayers have funded the missions. It is the taxpayers win and these wars came at a far too high price of treasure and blood with an exceptionally small reward of one dead terrorist who had lived off if foreign aid from Americans for years. This is not a political success but a political disaster especially when Americans are suffering everday just to find food, shelter and if they are lucky employment for beneath a living wage.

And maybe it is time the USA owns it makes it own monsters and then are surprised when those monsters come back to bite them. Saddam wouldn't have been who he was had he not been involved with British Intelligence and lived in Iraq. It is insanity for the USA to expect to ever have a different raltionship with Ira. The same tactics yield the same results. USA foreign policy is very much like watching everyone reinvent the whell and then watching them be shocked it rolls. There needs to be an entirely new bag of tricks for foreign policy preferrably tricks that don't involve funding terrorist states to the tune of 1/2 a billion dollars. But that looks unlikely untilt here is a complete change in leadership in Washington DC. They have completely failed this country.

More by this Author


Comments 2 comments

Credence2 profile image

Credence2 4 years ago from Florida (Space Coast)

JT, if you ask me, it was all a fools errand. We spent far too many resources, lives and treasure hunting down some hermit in the desert. Someone had to answer for the 9-11 attack, but the egg is in our face when we expend so much to get at the culprit. Why Iraq, that was multi-billion dollar diversion? Was the war there and in the surrounding areas really about terrorism or is it something else?

Nice Article, Cred2


JT Walters profile image

JT Walters 4 years ago from Florida Author

Cred2,

You know as well as I do Condi Rice wrote that plan to invade Iraq in 1993. It was about getting the money back from Saddam which he did not spend and about putting our aribases in Iraq for free. USA and the British got free airbases there.

You only have to read centcom's webpage to know what that mission is all about but I don't know if anyone outside of Florida can read it. I think it is pretty clear what the stradegy has always been.

9/11 was a recruiting day. And the cost benefit ratio of any and all wars in the Middle East have not been worth it except for the very few on top. Both parties will pay dearly for this as well and not just one of the parties. Of course this is the news no one wishes to speak about. It is like DC is the redheaded ugly step child of America who will never be able to find their way back into the good graces of the people and perhaps they shouldn't.

Thanks Cred2!! You are a pal and I always enjoy your comments.

Happy New Year My Friend!!

JT

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working