Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Senator Bernie Sanders and Ex-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger:
One Polish Jew in Search of Socialism; the Other, a German Jew in Search of Realpolitik and Immortality!
I was compelled to write about two Jews who have captured the front page of the NY Times in a most bizarre twist of fate on this propitious date, February 15, 2016, President’s Day. Most of you know by now that I had worked for Larry Eagleburger [Henry’s surrogate] at the State Dept. during the end of the Nixon and Ford eras. I knew a lot about Henry’s personal dynamics and past real/ presumed accomplishments when I had entered the USG as a Council on Foreign Relations Fellow. Yet, I expressed my reservations personally to Larry and proceeded to serve the State Dept. as a DAS for Management. 
At the time I came into the State Dept., I knew absolutely nothing about Henry’s background; other than the fact that he and his family had fled Germany [just like mine from France] in 1938 to come to America.

For me, that is an important distinction to be made about anyone who comes to this country and ascends the political pole of the Republican Party. President Nixon also saw in Henry an intellect and strategic mind that matched Nixon’s own brilliance [even if somewhat faulty at times].The truth is that Nixon had initiated most of the policies [China, Soviet] that were accredited to Henry –including the good, the bad, and the ugly[Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia].

Whatever else might be said of Henry Kissinger, one can read in the British historian’s, Niall Ferguson, highly textured biography of Henry during combat operations in WWII and his peacekeeping efforts immediately after WWII. I was extremely impressed by the fact that Henry was battered around the army bureaucracy until he ended up to become of the most sophisticated/capable Counter Intelligence Operatives [CI] in occupied Germany. He served with acumen, empathy and efficiency. Henry has always surrounded himself with some of the brightest, most talented professionals I have ever met. Men like Winston Lord, Hal Saunders, Larry Eagleburger, Charlie Hill, Dick Soloman, John Negroponte, Peter Rodman et. al. [In order to understand Henry’s earlier years in military/civilian leadership, I strongly recommend that you read Ferguson’s book, Kissinger, 1923-1968.]

In contrast, Bernie Sanders was born in Brooklyn, NY.  His parents were Polish Jews who eked out a meager living. As far as I know, Bernie did not rise to the heights of academic achievement as did Henry; nor was he as ambitious to make his mark on history. Bernie went to the University of Chicago which was not, at the time, anywhere near the intellectual gravitas of Harvard or MIT. Then, Bernie did what most American born Jews do—avoid the draft. In his case, it was simple-dying in a useless war was against his faith.  So he requested automatic dismissal from military service on the basis that he was a conscientious objector. Ironically, the neocons [also from the Univ. of Chicago] also avoided the Vietnam Draft; as did many liberals and so-called “intellectuals”, who made certain that they extended their learning/teaching careers throughout that misbegotten war. 

Bernie was such a man. I don’t fault him; nor, do I praise him. He is like many of his university classmates, the neocons, a master wordsmith without the vaguest idea of what war or combat is really all about. These men, like the four Bush sons, were the new leaders of a country that no longer wanted or thought they needed a draft [a big mistake]. For the most part, Bernie and his counterparts, the neocon Jews, quickly entered the legislative branch of our government, espousing all types of ideas that sounded wonderful; but, were quite impossible to implement. In a shorthand way, I can call Bernie Sanders, “the Idealist”. Therefore,  Henry Kissinger, the Realpolitik practitioner, becomes a  pragmatist with a wide variety of successes and failures.
Who is better to serve?
The realist has forced our nation to pay a very large price for unnecessary wars in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam. The idealist insists that we must spend money to alleviate all injustices created for and by the citizenry of our country.Ideology has become the nectar of wishful thinking in American politics. If you are a conservative, you fight wars. On the other hand, if you are an idealist or socialist, you avoid confrontation and embrace isolationism with a fervor that one day will be costly, in terms of lost opportunities.
Perhaps the most important contribution that Henry made was to take over the helm of foreign policy while Nixon was deteriorating both physically and mentally. As for Bernie, I cannot judge him accordingly. Has he been tested in the same crucible of fire and found wanting?
I don’t think so.
However, times have changed. And “draft dodgers” are aplenty in this race where everyone agrees that they want to destroy ISIS and other virulent terrorist groups.Yet who has had the necessary experience in counter-terrorism to implement an effective policy? Who is capable of surrounding him/herself with the talent to do so?

Bernie? Hillary? Cruz? Rubio? Jeb? Or Trump?
The narcissistic hounds are afoot and let us see which one can finish the race without too much prevarication and wishful thinking.
Shakespeare said it best:
“Such as we are made of, such we be.”    


  1. Found dead with a pillow over face and officially pronounced deceased from natural causes by a backwater muni judge (who is actually named after a cartoon character) with no attending MD, or coroner present. Immediately enbalmed and fluids disposed of.

    You couldn't write a better plot for the fictional account of a key figure being edited to make way for the massive shift towards irreversible tyranny.


    Hey Charlie?

    Yeah Boss?

    Have them write the sequel immediately and make sure its the black guy this time. I dont want to lose this creative momentum.

    Sure thing Boss!

  2. Dr.P thank you for providing a balanced and objective view on these two people. I only disagree with your inclusion of John Negroponte among the talented people around Kissinger. Negroponte is a malfactor from head to toe, as opposed to individuals like Winston Lord.

    I have less positive to say about Kissinger than yourself however. He wrote a horrible book about nuclear strategy in the 1950s which was frankly laughable. He did so because he was stuck away at Harvard and wanted in on the strategic thought circles at Rand and MIT so he tried to break through by writing his book, but it was a joke. Furthermore his ideas about diplomacy are similar without merit. He was a student of Mitternicht and central European power politics in the 18th and 19th centuries, but this had no bearing on the Superpower issues of the last half of the 20th century. Take his philosophy about Vietnam. He insisted that the US couldn't simply withdraw such would, in his view, undermine American commitments elsewhere. This was nonesense. All of America's allies were appalled by America's war in Vietnam and desperately wanted the US to exit post haste. THERE WAS NO AMERICAN ALLY WHICH VIEWED THE U.S. ACTION IN VIETNAM AS A COMMITMENT TO THEMSELVES. This utterly absurd view of his, if that was his real motive, led to his horrific acts of bombing not only in Vietnam but in Cambodia, which led to the collapse of the neutralist-seeking government there and the success of the Khemer Rouge.
    In all Kissinger's policies had the worst of outcomes, whether in southeast asia or in 1973 in the Yom Kippur war or in Chile....he was a blood-soaked disaster. In the Yom Kippur war Kissinger created a commitment to Israel which persists to this day to the detriment of American interests and values on a colossal scale. I will never understand WHY Kissinger came to the defense of Israel at that juncture, arming it and facing down the USSR with no American interest in the matter whatsoever. And this lead not only to the Arab oil embargo which strengthened the Saudis and OPEC to the degree that even today they control the supply and price of oil to the detriment of our vital interests. And this may need never have come about except for Kissinger's insane support of Israel.

    1. Kissinger wears a purple hood and dons a full blown shiney black satin gown covered in gold idol trinkets while he leads the worship services at Lucifer's footstool. Humans are a disposable commodity to him and his god playing homosexual actors attempting to rule a world for which they never felt they belonged.

      Descended from the ooze left of Sodom, Henry's only legacy which sits on an endless pile of dead mans bones, shall be that of a man who betrayed his fellow man.

      Sanders is only a worthless rabble rousing street rodent who after crawling out from the gutter, learned at an early age that stacking the soap boxes made his shrill voice travel further.

      Was that too heavy?

  3. When I was at MIT/Harvard in the mid-1980s the groundwork was being laid for the commercial relationship with China, which was spearheaded by Kissinger Associates among others. The strategic value of converting China into a trade and industrial player turned out to be an illusion. Less China did open up to the world but it's communist government will never give up power and it's vast new wealth makes them even more dangerous not to mention their unfair trade relations has sunk the American economy. The US has colossal trade deficits with China decade after decade, and all this is the fruits of the Kissinger-led/Harvard crusade of the 1980s to bring the ChiComs into the market economies of the globe.

    Bad idea.

  4. As for Sanders there are so many things about him that I deplore that I cannot list them all. He's an old-style New York Leftee socialist of the paleo kind.
    However despite these faults he's what America needs at this time. The Liberal establishment and Democratic party since Carter have morphed into NeoLiberal pro-Wall Street and pro-Corporate toadies.
    Under Clinton Welfare was eliminated, Glass-Stegall was abolished, Capital Gains taxes were slashed, the FCC was gutted, NAFTA and GATT were pushed through. The Democrats became pro-Corporate and pro-Wall Street and this has resulted in not only an increase in poverty but the stagnation of wages and "hollowing out" of the middle class.
    While poverty and opportunities are lost the rich get richer and richer and they dominate politics and political spending.

    This situation is such that never before has there been so much merit to arguments from the Left. The Left can point to the deterioration of life in America as well as the weakness of the American economy and point to all these pro-business changes as the cause.
    The business class has engineered all these changes in their favor and the results are clear. It's been a desaster for everyone except the rich and the corporations.

    And the problem has been the Liberal class and the Democratic party which has brought about all these neo-Liberal pro-business reforms.

    That's why only someone from outside the neo-Liberal establishment such as Sanders can define these issues.

    I don't care if Sanders can actually do anything about them.

    It's progress enough that he DEFINES them.

  5. I believe the election of Mayor DiBalzio was the "watershed" event in the beginning of what will be the turn of America to socialism.

    Sanders may or may not win, however the Democratic party will seek out more and more anti-neo-Liberal figures such as himself.

    IMHO the pivitol characters in the political future of America will be the intellectuals of the recent Left... Noam Chomsky after his death will be known for a thousand years as a prophet. The political culture of America will be Chomskyite. And this will never change. America will become socialist as Germany and Sweden.

  6. Pat Buchannon advocates for a 30% tariff on all imports. That would raise 600 billion in taxes overnight...

    Not a bad idea.

  7. As astronomical as the Federal debt has become it can actually be paid off.

    Eliminating the pro-rich taxes of the Bush II era plus returning tarriffs would erase the deficit and put the Federal government into a surplus.

    The debt is SOLELY the result of the loss of revenues from the slashing of import tarriffs and the Bush tax cuts.

    1. The problem with putting the books back in the black is the well intended, never held a real job, give it all away now, idiot socialists like your friend Sanders.

      The company is bankrupt! Its time for it to be liquified and all employees who contributed to its failure put into the sewers for the rats they are.

    2. "Liquified?"

      You want assets to be "liquified?"

    3. Liquidated. Ty grammar police! 😂

  8. I would ask the question, when have they ever been right on a macro scale? I can think of one occurrence, that is when Bush senior whacked Saddam and left him in power in a weakened state.

    Other than that, our errors seem to compound upon themselves, especially with the women in power under the Obama regime.

    Kissinger just returned from a meeting with Putin. Obviously he was representing the interests of the Neocons, Saudis, et all.

    What came out of the meeting? A huge Sunni army backed by Israel war gaming on Saudi territory threatening to remove Assad by force.

    We may see the nuclear gamesmanship end in the first use of neutron bombs in the Iraq desert if this army decides to move north.

    Imagine that, a whole Sunni expeditionary force cooked in their equipment with the Shiites just walking in, picking up the equipment and driving away.

    Putin has played a cool hand and he has made his decision. He has no options if he wants his Christian nation to survive in its present form.

    What would the Bern do if he was president under these types of conditions? I would guess that he would work against the neocons and attempt to work with the Russian Federation under some terms. Trump would do the same.

    One side wants war. The other side (Trump-Sanders)is tired of war.

    So where does the foreign policy establishment fit in? On the side of the majority or some small special interests?

    That is not hard to answer.

    1. I don't think Kissinger is advancing any neocon interests. If you recall the neocons hated Kissinger in the 1970s and the neocons got their start opposing Kissinger's detente with the USSR. Kissinger and the neocons have been enemies since day one. The fist neocons got their start in Henry Jackson's Senate office which opposed everything Kissinger did.

  9. The Bern will be 75. Who will be prez when his ticker burst would be the question. Who is the Bern sussing for his VP. Anyone know?

    1. That's a huge question. I think he will choose a woman, maybe that woman from Massachusetts everyone likes. Or maybe he will choose someone like Chris Hedges or others from the progressive movement. Personally I like Hedges. Like Sanders he has some wacky views but like Chomsky he's right more than he's wrong and he's right where it matters.