Trending Topics:

Neocons and liberal interventionists are back in the saddle again — though ‘nobody wants a big war’!

Media Analysis
on 35 Comments

The news is filled with threats of a renewed American war in Syria. This morning President Trump warned Russia and Syria that missiles would be coming “nice and new and smart.” Two days ago the warmongering John Bolton took over as national security adviser. Three days ago Israel bombed a military base in Syria, and Iran has since warned Israel that it will pay for the killing of seven Iranians.

What’s remarkable about these threats is the instant support they are gaining inside the Beltway from neoconservatives and liberal interventionists, the two great hosts of the Iraq war runup 16 to 20 years ago. From Clintonites to Cottonites, the old duopoly of hawkish foreign policy is strong– even as moderating voices express fears about the potential for wider conflict and even world war. Here is a brief tour.

Neocons are thrilled about the prospects for a war with Iran in Syria. The New York Times publishes an op-ed from Michael Doran of the neoconservative Hudson Institute, urging a US-Israeli war with Iran in Syria. Notice the belief in war as a form of diplomacy:

Imagine if Washington and Jerusalem were to develop a joint military plan designed to contain and degrade Iranian forces in Syria.

Even a limited American military commitment to a coordinated United States-Israeli strategy would immediately change the balance of power on the ground. It would most likely engender more diplomatic cooperation from Mr. Putin while sending a powerful message to Tehran about the necessity of respecting American demands regarding its nuclear program.

The Weekly Standard editorial is crazed: “The U.S. must bring hellish consequences on the dictator of Damascus.” That means “enormous U.S. and allied firepower” to “bring heavy consequences on the Assad regime.” Sounds a lot like regime change, with Israel as our loyal partner again.

The Obama administration was willing to cede Syria to Iran and Russia in order to preserve the Iran nuclear deal, then in its final stages…

[Today] U.S. credibility is at stake. Lobbing a few cruise missiles at an airfield may satisfy some high-ranking members of the foreign policy elite, but it won’t punish the Assad regime or deter it from future chemical attacks. The American response must involve enormous U.S. and allied firepower and bring heavy consequences on the Assad regime and its leader. The Israelis began the work with a Sunday night attack on the Tiyas Iranian airbase, but we hope the U.S. won’t let the Israelis do the hard work of retribution.

Israel is also enthused that it finally might be getting the war it has pushed for. Asaf Ronel from Haaretz tweets news:

Very dramatic threat from a “senior Israeli official” quoted today by Alex Fishman in : “there won’t be a trace left of the Assad regime and Assad himself if a wide conflict develops between Israel & Iran in Syria”

Trita Parsi reflects a similar view:

EU diplomat tells me his assessment is that Israel is seeking to provoke a response from Iran in order to spark a larger conflict… “Israel on high alert, prepares for possible Iranian retaliation after strike on Syrian base”

As in the Iraq war buildup, neocons have liberal interventionists on their side. Centrist Democrats are  mainstream is out in force in favor of intervention. “Nobody wants a big war,” says Ambassador Ryan Crocker, an Obama appointee, on NPR today. But the last retaliatory strike of a year ago was just a “signal” and this time there has to be “long-time destruction,” he says. Crocker was echoed by UK General Sir Richard Barrons on BBC today, saying that the strikes by the U.S. a year ago were “small tokens.”

We need “significant military resources” in Syria, says the Clintonite Center for a New American Security. Ilan Goldenberg of CNAS rips Trump’s notion of last week to get out of Syria, by citing the wisdom of the “mainstream.”

“It’s insane, there’s no one who supports [abrupt withdrawal] in the mainstream, absolutely zero support across the foreign policy spectrum.”

Lauren Fish, another CNAS expert– who formerly worked for neoconservative hero Tom Cotton– advocates for readying forces for “multi-domain conflict” and saber-rattles us about Chinese and Russian “revisionist ideas,” whatever that means.

As China and Russia begin to aggressively project their military might and revisionist ideas, the Pentagon must develop operational concepts aimed at outpacing technologically sophisticated nation-states.

These thinkers actually seem to visualize world war. Though Ryan Crocker warned on NPR today that the array of world powers gathered in Syria is reminiscent of the onset of World War I.

More from the hawkish center. The Times op-ed page published a piece by Janine di Giovanni: “Is Trump Sowing the Seeds for ISIS 2.0?” She called for U.S troops to stay in Syria, and echoed the Israeli mantra, oft-stated at AIPAC, that if the U.S. doesn’t fill the power vacuum, the Iranians will gain a “land-bridge” from Iran all the way to Lebanon.

In parts of Damascus, I was told, Iranian military officials are buying up real estate using Syrian businessmen as their front, turning it into an Iranian mini-fief within Syria. Their dream of an Iranian “land bridge” that allows them access to the Mediterranean is not quite there, but their influence will surely grow, as it has in neighboring Iraq.

As for the Russians, the withdrawal of American troops is a huge victory. Without them, the war will come to a faster, more brutal end, a win for Mr. Assad and his patrons

di Giovanni is vague about how much war is needed, but the piece hints at bombing. Kassam Eid, a Syrian friend, tells di Giovanni: “But after seven years of atrocities, do you know what my friends and people around the Middle East are saying? That America is the enemy again. Because they see the Russians bombing us and the United States doing nothing. Now they pull out — when they could have been our friend or ally.”

Of course the Russians are saying that an attack on Russian assets will be met with retaliation. Haaretz:

Vladimir Shamanov, a retired general who heads the defense affairs committee in the lower house of parliament, said in televised remarks Tuesday that a U.S. strike in Syria could hurt Russian servicemen and trigger Russian retaliation.

He said that Russia has “the necessary means for that and the Americans and their allies know that quite well.”

Another part of the runup to war with Iran is the mainstream whitewash and celebration of Iranian foe Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, now touring France after his successful tour of US media. “America is fawning over Saudi Arabia’s repressive dictator. A man presiding over a brutal war is being received like a celebrity,” observes Zack Beauchamp at Vox.

In his interview with the prince, Jeffrey Goldberg did not demur when bin Salman made the extraordinary claim that Iran is worse than Hitler because its supreme leader wants to conquer the entire world.

About his bête noir, the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Prince Mohammed said, “I believe the Iranian supreme leader makes Hitler look good. Hitler didn’t do what the supreme leader is trying to do. Hitler tried to conquer Europe. … The supreme leader is trying to conquer the world.”

“We are pushing back on these Iranian moves. We’ve done this in Africa, Asia, in Malaysia, in Sudan, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon. We believe that after we push back, the problems will move inside Iran. We don’t know if the regime will collapse or not—it’s not the target, but if it collapses, great, it’s their problem.”

Goldberg brought up the US-Saudi destruction of Yemen, but allowed the prince’s self-serving falsehoods a free pass:

We had a coup d’état in 2015 against a legitimate government in Yemen. And from the other side al-Qaeda tried to use this move for its own sake and to promote its own ideas. We fought to get rid of extremists in Syria and Iraq and then they started to create a haven in Yemen. It would be much harder to get rid of extremists in Yemen than Iraq or Syria. Our campaign is focused on helping the legitimate government and bringing stability. Saudi Arabia is trying to help the people of Yemen. ..

What I want to say here, to make it simple, is that sometimes in the Middle East you don’t have good decisions and bad decisions. Sometimes you have bad decisions and worse decisions. Sometimes we have to choose the bad option.

“The cause of war is preparation for war,” (writes a friend) “and, by this legitimating interview, Goldberg again is proving serviceable to the policy faction that is preparing a disastrous Middle East war.”

Goldberg did this for the Iraq war, you’ll remember, with bogus intelligence gleaned who knows where. It strains belief that to be taken seriously in Washington you have to have been for the Iraq war, which was the biggest blunder in US foreign policy in more than a generation. But that’s how establishments work, they’re a protection racket. “Welcome to the Dick Cheney administration,” Stephen Walt writes at Foreign Policy: 

True, Bolton was a vocal supporter of the Iraq War, but that hardly makes him a weirdo. As I’m sure he’d be the first to point out, a lot of other people drank that particular Kool-Aid, including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, James Steinberg, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Susan Rice, Robert Gates, and a long, long list of other “respectable” figures. And don’t forget that the other geniuses who dreamed up and sold that disaster — people such as William Kristol, James Woolsey, Robert Kagan, Bret Stephens, Max Boot, Eliot Cohen, David Frum, Paul Wolfowitz, etc. — are still respected figures in the foreign-policy establishment despite having never admitted they were wrong or expressed any public regret for launching a disastrous war in which hundreds of thousands of people died.

As it was in Iraq, it’s the outs — the left, conservatives, and realists– who are strenuously opposed to US militarism. Though joined by some in the middle. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia is trying to restrain the rush toward war. What about U.S. interests, Chuck Todd  pressed him on Meet the Press.

We don’t want a president any president, being able to start a war… I don’t think the US policy toward any country should be, we get to change out your leaders…. That’s for Syrians to decide.

Kaine says Obama’s Libyan intervention was illegal. “I said then I agreed with the Republicans in the House that rebuked President Obama and said that he had exceeded his authority.”

The environmentalist Jeffrey Sachs is again a leading voice against war. He writes at the Sanders Institute– and Boston Globe— on the illegal and dangerous nature of U.S. intervention in Middle East wars.

This naive approach to foreign policy — overthrow the governments we don’t like and replace them with ones we do like — is the crux of the US foreign policy problem. As a result of this approach, the United States has been enmeshed in nonstop wars of regime change in the Middle East and North Africa, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya. Trump once talked about quitting Afghanistan, but the United States remains there too since the security state wants it that way.

The US wars of regime change violate international law, cost trillions of dollars, undermine US democracy as the wars are conducted with secrecy and non-stop lies, and almost always fail in their aims. Either they overthrow the government only to be followed by violence and instability (as in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya) or they fail to overthrow the government, and instead provoke an ongoing bloody war (as in Syria).

Here is Sachs’s analysis of the causes of the Syrian war, in geopolitical struggle.

It’s time for the US public to understand the Syrian war. The mainstream media have antiseptically described it as a civil war. It has been nothing of the sort. Since its start in 2011, it has been a war pushed by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, and others, to topple Assad and force Iran and Russia out of Syria.

Since a direct US-led war on Syria would have been a violation of international law, Obama unleashed the CIA to operate covertly with Saudi Arabia and other countries. The CIA and Saudi Arabia teamed up in an operation code-named Timber Sycamore to back anti-Assad Syrian forces and jihadists from outside Syria. There was, of course, no vote by Congress, no honest leveling with the American people, and no UN vote.

The US-Saudi efforts were effectively countered by Syria, Iran, and Russia. In 2014, some of the jihadists broke away to form ISIS and declare a caliphate, after which the United States began to fight ISIS too. The United States backed Kurdish fighters to combat ISIS, eventually driving an irate anti-Kurdish Turkey into an implicit alliance with Russia.

After six years of war, destruction, and failure in Syria, it’s time for the Syrian bloodletting to end, most importantly by ending US support for anti-Assad forces. Yet the security state remains fixated on the presence of Iran and Russia in Syria.

Daniel Larison is also prudent at the American Conservative, commenting on Donald Trump’s open-ended promise to make Syria and Russia pay for the images of the evident chemical attack:

The U.S. is once again about to commit acts of war against another state on the whim of one man, and he probably isn’t even going to explain the reason for that illegal action before he takes it.

There is a real chance that U.S. strikes on the Syrian government could provoke retaliation from Russia, Iran, and Syria. Depending on how extensive the attack is, there is a decent chance that it will kill Iranian and Russian military personnel. That could potentially put the U.S. in a state of war with as many as three other states, one of which is a nuclear-armed major power.

Former Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter at the American Conservative also warns of a “rush to judgment” based on unclear evidence, while Pat Buchanan does what many on the left are doing, questioning who benefits from the nerve-agent attack in Britain and the gas attacks in Syria. He says these attacks have only served the reunited “war party” in the U.S.

Why would Putin, with the prestige of hosting the World Cup in June on the line, perpetrate an atrocity that might have killed hundreds and caused nations not only to pull out of the games, but to break diplomatic relations with Russia?

U.S. foreign policy elites claim Putin wanted Trump to win the 2016 election. But if Putin indeed wanted to deal with Trump, why abort all such prospects with a poison gas murder of a has-been KGB agent in Britain, America’s foremost ally?

Tucker Carlson of Fox News has also emerged as an antiwar voice, “Foreign Policy by Viral Video.”

Tucker Carlson blasted those who feel the latest gas attack targeting Syrian civilians is a call to declare war on Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad.

Carlson said “talk-show generals” and war hawk politicians like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have “no real idea what happened.”


To be continued.

Thanks to Donald Johnson, James North and Adam Horowitz. 
Correction: this post originally said that Israel had bombed a base in Iran. It was Syria.

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

35 Responses

  1. Citizen on April 11, 2018, 12:52 pm

    At the end of Tucker Carlson’s rant against jumping into war with Assad based on disputed “evidence” he killed a bunch of his own country’s children with chemical warfare, as the whole rest of the cable tv news folks are preaching war, he asked some southern congressman, what interest does US have in Syria? The congressman looked dumbfounded for a moment then replied, “Well, if you care about Israel.”
    On that note the news segment ended.

    • on April 11, 2018, 4:59 pm

      Wow – straight up – the US congressman points to Israel’s well being as the reason for striking Syria.

      Let’s hope more people ask Tucker’s question. – what interest does the US have in Syria?

  2. marc b. on April 11, 2018, 1:25 pm

    Three days ago Israel bombed a military base in Iran, and Iran has since warned Israel that it will pay for the killing of seven Iranians.

    they bombed a ‘military base in Iran’? huh? what’d i miss?

  3. eljay on April 11, 2018, 1:48 pm

    … Three days ago Israel bombed a military base in Iran, and Iran has since warned Israel that it will pay for the killing of seven Iranians. …

    Using jon s’ “logic”, Israel could easily justify the massacre of those Iranians by saying they were “not innocent”. Iran would then have no choice but to accept the necessity of their murder.

  4. marc b. on April 11, 2018, 1:55 pm

    Jeffrey Sachs, the ‘environmentalist’. ho ho. Bernadine Dohrn, Jeffrey Sachs, . . . some piss poor liberals wading into the ME mess. and the causes of the war pre-date 2011.

    A December 13, 2006 cable, “Influencing the SARG [Syrian government] in the End of 2006,”1 indicates that, as far back as 2006 – five years before “Arab Spring” protests in Syria – destabilizing the Syrian government was a central motivation of US policy. The author of the cable was William Roebuck, at the time chargé d’affaires at the US embassy in Damascus. The cable outlines strategies for destabilizing the Syrian government. In his summary of the cable, Roebuck wrote:

    We believe Bashar’s weaknesses are in how he chooses to react to looming issues, both perceived and real, such as the conflict between economic reform steps (however limited) and entrenched, corrupt forces, the Kurdish question, and the potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist extremists. This cable summarizes our assessment of these vulnerabilities and suggests that there may be actions, statements, and signals that the USG can send that will improve the likelihood of such opportunities arising.

    this is around the time that Mohamed Merah’s step-brother was arrested in an al-Qaida safe house in Syria on his way to Iraq (sure he was), Merah being the Toulouse shooter. all these takfiri links to western goals is disconcerting.

  5. JLewisDickerson on April 11, 2018, 2:06 pm

    P.S. ENHANCED VERSION: What an unmitigated FAT ASS our president is!

  6. Ozma on April 11, 2018, 2:31 pm

    Does Israel have a death wish?

    There are both Russian and Chinese troops in Syria. In order for Israel to grab Syria’s resources, it will have to defeat both of these nuclear powers. Even with America’s “help”, Israel and America are subordinate in population to Russia and China, quickly becoming subordinate in world economic output, and equal in suicide to their nuclear arsenals.

    The terrifying “dictator” Assad won the last Syrian election by 88 percent which is quite an achievement without Diebold machines. The moderate terrorist “freedom fighters” didn’t even have an election. As soon as they had a chance, Syrians voted with their feet and left areas “liberated” by the head-choppers and rejoined the government.

    This whole war makes about as much sense as Napoleon and Hitler invading Russia in the winter and Japanese “patriots” building Fukushima. If Israel has a death wish, do we have to join them?

    • marc b. on April 11, 2018, 3:08 pm

      this smells like the burning plastic of psycho-pathology as much as anything political. jewish trauma requires us to fight a new world war to cleanse certain types of any inferiority complex for less than full participation in the last big show. i think there was some talk of israelis participating in the ukraine cluster fuck.

    • Tuyzentfloot on April 11, 2018, 4:17 pm

      Why would Israel have a death wish? If you look at plausible outcomes then either other powers get involved more deeply or the conflict remains contained while Assad’s side is weakened again. And the US can stay longer.

      • marc b. on April 11, 2018, 4:51 pm

        they’re not capable of having a death wish. their view of the world is sitting atop a platform, eating popcorn and masturbating while the IDF shoots fish in a barrel. no appreciation of consequences at all with the US skirt to hide behind.

  7. Tuyzentfloot on April 11, 2018, 2:35 pm

    I believe the risk of uncontrolled escalation is high. During the cold war there were margins of error which were larger: larger warning times so more time to find out whether an alert is false. They didn’t have missiles on the Russian border then.

    And there was an awareness of the danger of the situation. Like a dangerous crossing where the drivers are aware of the danger. And even then there were multiple close calls. That means we got lucky.
    The end of the cold war allowed for the rise of more bellicose figures, because they were good for business or just for the purpose of popularity. The attitudes we see now were not present then. There’s no fear, not just with the loonies in the white house but overall in the West. The Russians are scared but we aren’t. You can hope to last a few crises that way but not a century.

  8. Maghlawatan on April 11, 2018, 3:52 pm

    The reality is that Israel – and Netanyahu in particular – has badly misread the trajectory of Russia’s re-engagement in the Middle East, which has created in the very kindest interpretation the context for Iran’s projection of its influence ever further west and ever closer to Israel’s borders.

    Why all this matters in the current febrile context following the latest alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria, is that Israel’s misjudgments sit at one corner of a dangerous matrix of unpredictability, perhaps unseen – as James Hohmann arguedin the Washington Post – since the secretary of state Dean Acheson suggested in 1950 that Korea was outside the core defence perimeter of the US.

    On the American side that uncertainty around intentions has seen Donald Trumpflip-flop so dramatically that in a handful of days he has somersaulted from suggesting first that his country was rushing for the exit on Syria to a situation where military strikes seem likely.

    Israel, a wounded Netanyahu – who has built an entire political career on promising to be a bulwark against Iran – is now being confronted with his rhetoric and the consequence of his actions, not least his bloody public pricking of Iran in a way that Tehran may now find hard to discount.

    In the final corner there is Putin, whose calculations are opaque because that is his intention – not least over his ambitions and red lines.

    The result is a highly combustible situation in which no party to the conflict – direct or otherwise – can be certain of the assumptions that the others are operating under.

    All of which has created what Stephen Pinker describes in his illuminating book on violence and war, The Better Angels of Our Nature, as a classic “security” or “Hobbesian” dilemma, a situation where actions by a state ostensibly to heighten their security can prompt other states to act pre-emptively, risking a fugue of escalation. As more violence seems likely, what is also troubling is that the key mechanism for avoiding such an escalation – the UN security council – seems profoundly weakened by the further weaponisation of the US and Russian vetoes under both Trump and Putin.

    History teaches us that wars – from the first world war to Korea, the six-day war and the Falklands – are often fuelled by failures of messaging and interpretation.

  9. Maghlawatan on April 11, 2018, 4:23 pm

    Israel and the US are both led by the wrong people given the risk level. Trump promised to take the US out of Syria last week. Now he has flip flopped. Netanyahu has been scaring the shit out of Yossi Israeli for years with the Persian bogeyman. Israel can’t subdue the Palestinians so it would not have a hope with the Shia. Dimona could be taken out. The Golan could be lost. What would the Golani brigade do about it?

    • echinococcus on April 12, 2018, 2:51 am

      Trump promised to take the US out of Syria last week. Now he has flip flopped

      Not flip-flopped. His master whistled.

      … First, there was the order given from Above:

      Israeli officials: the “U.S. must strike in Syria” because “Assad is the angel of death, and the world would be better without him”

      Then there was the summoned servant’s immediate reply:

      Trump: “Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria. […] President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price” .

      The most amazing thing is not that the subservient slave reacted like the subservient slave that he is. The most amazing thing is that the pretext used in this announced false flag was announced by Nikki Haley at the UNSC on March 12th, almost one month ago! That, and the fact that Trump probably did not realize that he was told to threaten only Syria and not Russia and Iran. Although, who knows, maybe the rabidly psychopathic Neocons who now run the White House actually did tell him to bark up Russia and Iran too, I would not put that past them.

      • on April 12, 2018, 8:09 pm

        Good article from a source unfamiliar to me – thx for sharing

  10. Ozma on April 11, 2018, 6:35 pm

    @marc b. and Tuyzentfloot

    “They’re not capable of having a death wish. their view of the world is sitting atop a platform, eating popcorn and masturbating while the IDF shoots fish in a barrel.”

    I don’t know, marc b. As I understand it, psychiatric patients don’t know they have a death wish. It’s up to highly paid analysts to uncover a death wish by decoding confusing dream imagery on the basis of unproven psychological theories. I can’t think of anything that fits Israel better.

    If Israel doesn’t have a death wish, it certainly acts like it does. Christians supporting Israel are rapture-ready; Jews supporting Israel are Masada-ready; and billionaires are investing in uber-pricey nuclear bunkers. (See “Why The Super-Rich Are Rushing To Buy Nuclear-Proof Bunkers.”) These are bad omens.

    What I don’t understand is why all of the gleaming teeth news commentators are so anxious to “support” Israel by bigger and better games of nuclear chicken. Someone needs to say, “Jim Jones died for our sins.” If he already did a Masada, then none of the rest of us have to do a repeat–just recognize a cult when you see it.

  11. Donald on April 11, 2018, 6:36 pm

    Some of the American left and I include myself here, failed miserably in opposing the American covert war on Syria. It doesn’t matter how bad Assad is— the issue for Americans should have been the same as it was with Iraq in 2003 or Libya in 2011. We had no right to intervene.

    What makes it worse was that the US intervened, pouring billions of dollars of weapons into the hands of “ moderate “ Syrian rebels so they could kill at least 100,000 Syrian soldiers and militia and an unknown number of civilians and keep the war dragging on but just to add a touch of Stalinist mockery to it all, our press and politicians claim that we failed Syria by not intervening.
    So now half a million are dead and now we might start a war with Syria, Iran, and Russia.

    God bless America.

  12. Atlantaiconoclast on April 11, 2018, 7:23 pm

    I want every one to just imagine how Trump would respond and even how Obama would respond if DC was surrounded by hostile Islamic terror militias, rebels if you will. Does anyone really think they wouldn’t make Assad look like Richard Simmons?

    This demonization of the secular and womens’ rights protecting Assad is just stupid.

    As HRC was revealed to have said in Wikileaks, the Syrian intervention has been for Israel.

  13. JLewisDickerson on April 11, 2018, 9:40 pm

    RE: President Trump warned Russia and Syria that missiles would be coming “nice and new and smart.”

    PRESIDENT TRUMP: Show those Ruskies that you and Bolton are not girly men!
    Nuke ’em! Nuke ’em big time!
    After all, like you famously said, what’s the point in having nukes if they aren’t used?!?!

    • JLewisDickerson on April 11, 2018, 10:17 pm
      • JLewisDickerson on April 11, 2018, 10:22 pm

        “So much larger than life!”, e.g., “The Image, A Guide to Psuedo-Events in America”, by Daniel J. Boorstin –

        Peter Gabriel – Big Time

        . . . My parties have all the big names and I greet them with the widest smile
        Tell them how my life is one big adventure
        and always they’re amazed when I show them ’round my house to my bed
        I had it made like a mountain range with a snow white pillow for my big fat head
        And my heaven will be a big heaven, and I will walk through the front door

        Big Time, I’m on my way I’m making it, big time, Huh!
        Big time, I’ve got to make it show yeah, big time
        Big time, so much larger than life
        Big time, I’m gonna watch it growing, big time
        Big time, my car is getting bigger Big time, my house is getting bigger
        Big time, my eyes are getting bigger
        and my mouth
        Big time, my belly’s getting bigger
        Big time, and my bank account . . .

      • JLewisDickerson on April 11, 2018, 10:49 pm

        RE: The US’s use of biological warfare in North Korea (Hypocrisy, thy name is America!)
        “Wormwood” ~ In 1953, Army scientist Frank Olson takes a fatal plunge from a hotel window. In 1975, a bombshell report ties his death to a top-secret experiment.
        Stars: Peter Sarsgaard, Molly Parker, Christian Camargo . . .

      • JLewisDickerson on April 12, 2018, 3:42 pm

        Peter Gabriel – Games Without Frontiers, War Without Tears

      • annie on April 12, 2018, 3:50 pm

        dickerson, i just posted that awesome song on twitter the other day.

      • JLewisDickerson on April 14, 2018, 3:29 pm


        Commonwealth Games
        From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ~

        The Commonwealth Games is an international multi-sport event involving athletes from the Commonwealth of Nations. The event was first held in 1930, and has taken place every four years since then (with the exception of 1942 and 1946, which were cancelled due to World War II).[1] The most recent Commonwealth Games are being held on the Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia from 4 – 15 April 2018. The Commonwealth Games were known as the British Empire Games from 1930–1950, the British Empire and Commonwealth Games from 1954–1966, and British Commonwealth Games from 1970–1974. . .

        📷 The ‘lily-white’ British Empire and Commonwealth Games

  14. wondering jew on April 12, 2018, 7:40 pm

    Hire an editor. This is a falsehood in the first paragraph: “Three days ago Israel bombed a military base in Iran”. It was a military base of Iranians, true. But it was located in Syria.

    • on April 13, 2018, 9:38 am

      It’s known as an error, Yonah. Yours are what are called falsehoods. Again and again and again and again….

      • Mooser on April 13, 2018, 2:09 pm

        “It’s known as an error, Yonah. Yours are what are called falsehoods.”

        That’s the one ‘hood where “yonah” is always at home.

      • wondering jew on April 13, 2018, 8:31 pm

        my comment got the editor to fix his error.

      • Mooser on April 14, 2018, 12:37 pm

        “my comment got the editor to fix his error.”

        There’s “yonah” back in the old ‘hood, singing doo-wap with the old gang of his at the corner of Pretense and Fantasy streets.

      • marc b. on April 14, 2018, 5:01 pm

        The error was pointed out a day before you arrived on the scene you supercilious boob.

  15. James Canning on April 13, 2018, 10:39 am

    Syria has been eager to make peace with Israel for many years now. This fact is usually ignored by US news media. Iran was willing to accept Syria’s making peace with Israel. This fact is also ignored by US news media. Neocon warmongers, and foolish liberal interventionists, are promoting chaos in the Middle East, to benefit Israel.

  16. JLewisDickerson on April 14, 2018, 4:25 pm

    RE: “Another part of the runup to war with Iran is the mainstream whitewash and celebration of Iranian foe Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, now touring France after his successful tour of US media.” ~ Weiss


    P.S. Oh drat! Now I’ll never have my very own French chateau, über-yacht and fake da Vinci! What a pi**er!
    Well, I guess there’s always the Queen Miri!

Leave a Reply