Saturday, August 30, 2014

The Sisterhood of the Traveling Warmongers who have destroyed Libya: Hillary Clinton; Susan Rice; Samantha  Power!
The recent article in the Huffington Post, by Eline Gordts, entitled ‘How Libya Became A Country On The Brink of Collapse’, August 26, 2014, describes in detail how a USA led invasion of Libya resulted in a complete imbroglio in Libya resulting in ‘2 parliaments and 2 prime ministers’.
Clearly, this is not a new revelation to the American people that an unnecessary invasion of a country like Libya, results in chaos and further destabilization of the North African region.  Ladies, you’ve come a long way baby to contradict the myth that women in charge of a country are less likely to initiate a war than a man. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Libya where the cry of ‘regime change’ against Qaddaffi was spoken loudest by our most pre-eminent Lady War Hawk, Sec State Hillary Clinton, who, like Senator McCain, never failed to fight a war she could never win. 

Replete with rationalizations, obfuscations and blatant lies, Hillary in her usual Machiavellian manner cries for ‘regime change, not only in Iraq, Afghanistan, but in Libya where a ‘tyrant’ who has helped America in its war on terrorism has to be ‘overthrown’ in the name of ‘democracy’.  However, thanks to the Sisterhood of Traveling War Mongers, including the well-known pacifists such as Ambassador Samantha ‘Mrs Genocide’ Power; as well as, Ambassador Susan ‘Sunday Morning Lies’ Rice, who both chimed in to the hysteria of demanding a war in Libya against the sagacious restraints of our military leaders, mainly Gen. Martin Dempsey and others.
As you know,  we went in there with all the armaments that we, the French and British could muster and blasted the ‘holy hell’ out of that country in the name of ‘preventing Genocide’ and installing “Democracy”.
What happened next?
Just like the Paul Wolfowitz-Rumsfeld-Cheney Phenomenon of ‘dumb and dumber’,  no one had the inclination or intelligence to even consider the post-invasion scenario.

We have embedded in our national security apparatus a civilian corps of ‘draft dodgers’ like Wolfowitz, Cheney, Bush Jr, Jeb,  Neocons and ‘liberal interventionists’—as well as women who have never been in combat and do not understand the dynamics of ‘mass killing’ and are completely ignorant by choice and inclination of any notion of nationstate building.
In my experience, I have never met a military officer who encouraged the use of force in any occasion without considering the consequences, the collateral damage and the post-war build out of that area or country that had been invaded.  We can see the effects on America of not having a President with any military experience in the past three decades.  Consequently,  Americans have witnessed more conflagrations in those thirty years than in the preceding thirty years. 
Such ignorance of war and war-making consequences constitute malpractice in EXECUTIVE ACTIONS.  Americans have not yet held any of our miscreant past leaders accountable for anything other than Bill Clinton’s Fellatio in the White House.  We have a White House, populated by ideologues who have never been to war or even understand the dynamics of warfare and it’s horrible consequences.
Like Bush jr and Obama,  they even have to lie about one or another reason for sending our warriors into Harm’s Way without ever understanding how a man/woman can be killed, maimed or mentally destroyed for no apparent reason other than a political whim that turned into a massive civilian lie.
So far,  Americans have been fortunate to have General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff, who can and will veto most if not all actions, initiated by a novitiate group of women warmongers, like Hillary, Power, and Rice who fancy their inclinations for massive destruction of innocent civilians overseas to be in the best interest of America.
General Dempsey has taken on the mantle of what General Eisenhower had to do in both North Korea and Vietnam: stop the former war initiated by Truman; and, try to prevent the latter from spreading at the behest of the French Colonial regime in Indochina. My experience teaching at Ft McNair in Washington DC demonstrated to me that most military students understood all too well that starting a war was simple.  Any fool can do that.  Managing a war is far more complicated.  Ending a war is close to impossible.

I am afraid that once General Dempsey and his ilk leave our country’s service,  I do  not see a civilian leader who can be reigned in by the wisdom of our ‘soldier scholars’ or an old man who fought one too many battles in his life…. Me!! 
I see that the Sisterhood of Traveling Warmongers will arise like a phoenix and demand to sacrifice our men and women to wars that will eventually destroy the very core of our fighting military capacity.  I leave this warning to our future generals and admirals: caution is the better part of valor.


  1. It is an epic disaster in the making. With NATO planning on dropping a 10,000 man force in the Ukraine war with Russia is really going to happen if they need the diversion. They will need the diversion.

    We are warring with what should be an ally in what looks like a 1000 year war with Islam.

    The desire for the natural resources of Russia is just too strong. The Western powers are played out economically without control of Russia and its resources.

    This type of leadership is based on keeping control of the World thru the Anglo American powers of old when the world has changed and is really changing fast. War and chaos is their only hope to keep power as they see it slipping from their grasp in the next 100 years.

    Nobody could be as stupid as they appear to be. There must be a method to their madness. Who is the director? Satan himself?

    1. If I were there I would have done about the same as they did.

      Kaddafi had gone from place to place with his band of sub-saharan negro mercenary rapists and butchers putting down an enormous uprising, largely led [as in Syria] by disaffected officers from his own government. This little army from hell was about to close in on the last, though large, baston of resistance when NATO finally out of pure embarissment stepped forward and acted.

      The real problem is why NATO, and the US in particular didn't act sooner, but waited until a huge bloodbath was certain....and thereby if they'd done nothing would have complicit in the most craven kind of indifference.

      What's happened since really isn't the issue. At the time there was no alternative.

      From 1971 to 1980 CIA worked with Kadaffi in assisting him in his campaigns of terror against Israelis, Englishmen, Spainish citizens, etc...etc.....

      CIA did this because of their indifference for the lives of anyone not's not their job....and their zeal to protect the lives of Americans at any cost and using any means.

      Since 2002 he tortured and received from the UK and US scores of people accused of Islamist opposition to the those two nations, largely because of their invasions of muslim countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.

      During the cold war I was opposed to imposing any kind of monsterous government on others simply because such regimes would stamp out communism, and in reality any progress of any kind in the process...

      I don't think supporting Kadaffi in his last murderous campaign could have been justified by seeing the chaos which has followed.

      As Milt Bearden is fond of saying, "the world is a complicated place," and there was never any acceptable outcome for Libya once the revolt started.

      The sad facts of Arab society is that the conflicts there are between corrupt and murderous criminal regimes AND their zealous muslim opponants.

      In places like these where the costs of opposing government are so terribly high the only people willing to become "the shooters" in a war are zealous people.

      This is ALWAYS the problem with insurgencies and violent revolution and social change. If you want to overthrow a malevolant status quo the only people you have to work with are almost always zealous nuts.

      Examples such as the American revolution and the resistance to communist regimes in eastern Europe, etc. are not the same because the repression of those existing governments didn't routinely involve cutting off your hands, raping your daughters....the kind of extreme repression common in the Arab world.

    2. After WWI it was the zealous, brutish homsexual Ernst Rohm who the anti-communists relied on to fight in the streets with the communists and save Germany from Leninist revolution.

      Rohm was zealously dedicated to the nationalism and anti-communism of Adolf Hitler. Hitler relied on his physical strength to protect and defend him from every kind of violent assault and conspiracy.

      But after Hitler finally was given power Rohm's zealousness translated itself into a compulsion to assume power himself over the military and other traditional institutions of state as well as the SS.

      The military and everyone else of importance urged, begged Hitler to eliminate Rohm. However Hitler owed his life to Rohm a dozen times over. It was Rohm whose physical courage and LOYALTY had saved Hitler and allowed him to survive.

      But in the end even this deepest bond of loyalty between Hitler and Rohm had to be sacrificed because Rohm's zealousness could never be tempered by rationality and reason.

      Hitler had no choice but to kill his most loyal friend.

  2. Dr Steve, I wonder if the Whore Of Babylon Hillary and her minions know anything about what's written in this article 'LIES ABOUT TANKS IN UKRAINE'
    Some time before 2 August 2014, Ukraine bought these old Russian T-72 tanks from Hungary for 8,500 dollars each.
    Reportedly, Ukraine planted these ancient tanks near the border with Russia, in order to frame Russia.
    On 30 August 2014, the BBC (which is reportedly run by MI6 and its friends) showed photos of T-72 tanks, painted with Russian markings, in Eastern Ukraine and claimed that this is proof of a Russian invasion.

  3. Like I said in an earlier blog post, if the Clintons or Bush's get re-elected I am going to put a disproportionate amount of my retirement savings in pharmaceutical stocks that produce the next generation of anti-depressants because the future looks bleak with all this war mongering from these two families.
    Man's logic... Satan's folly, comes to mind dltravers.

    1. That and something called "malignant ignorance"....i.e. " I don't know, and I don't want to know" mentality....or as Hillary has stated " What difference does it make?"

  4. Learn from history! You said "Satan's folly" Go to these sites below and you'll realize you couldn't have said a more realistic thing than that!!
    'Who Is Who, And To Whom They Sold Their Souls'
    'Hillary Clinton & Doris Duke--Illuminati Grande Dames'
    Hillary "the high priestess of evil” Clinton

  5. Libya in happier times...

    1. That's right. Beauty. Not penis-envy afflicted ogresses. Beauty will save the world.