Thoughts, essays, and writings on Liberty. Written by the heirs of Patrick Henry.

“Free speech, exercised both individually and through a free press, is a necessity in any country where people are themselves free.”     Theodore Roosevelt

July 21, 2008

Analysing John McCain’s Foreign Policy Wish List – No Ponies For Little Girls

by tarran

Calvin\'s Christmas ListJohn McCain must hate little girls. It is one of many inescapable conclusions that arise from reading his National Security position paper, which promises all things to everyone – well almost everyone. His foreign policy plans promise more submarines, more ships, more aircraft, more divisions, more security, more military assistance for allies, more attacks on enemies, more purchases from the military-industrial complex. About the only thing he does not promise in the document is to give every little girl in America a pony. I presume that this is not an oversight. Sen McCain is very focused on foreign policy and military matters, and I cannot imagine that the omission of free ponies was anything but intentional.

Don’t believe me? Well, let’s go through the document together and we can look at all the things he does promise, and you will see the glaring omission of ponies for little girls in this fantastic proposal.

In a dangerous world, protecting America’s national security requires a strong military. scratcccccchhhhhh

Wow, one sentence in, and I can already see Sen McCain’s famed courage – I see this was published without being reviewed by an editor who knew how to write English well! This is the public relations equivalent of going commando. Just as charging recklessly at the pillbox can get you shot needlessly, Sen McCain has opened himself up to an attack – Do we really want a president who wishes to defend that national security apparatus of the United States? What happened to defending American’s who are not involved in national Security? Of course, this attack is unfair. Rather, Sen McCain or a staff member merely screwed up the topic sentence of one of his more high profile position papers.

Starting again:

In a dangerous world, protecting America’s national security requires a strong military. Today, America has the most capable, best-trained and best-led military force in the world. scratcccccchhhhhh

Does anybody remember the strategic surprise of the Russians capturing that airport in Kosovo? Osama bin Laden’s escape from Tora Bora? The first attempt to smash Fallujah? The U.S. military gets away with a lot because they have an overwhelming amount of firepower, and have faster communications than the little tin pot dictators or rudimentarily armed militias they’ve been fighting. If the U.S. military has the best officer corps in the world, then we must be entering into a new age of prosperity and peace since all the other militaries must be officered solely by incompetents without a single officer of average intelligence amongst them.

But much needs to be done to maintain our military leadership, retain our technological advantage, and ensure that America has a modern, agile military force able to meet the diverse security challenges of the 21st century.

John McCain is committed to ensuring that the men and women of our military remain the best, most capable fighting force on Earth – and that our nation honors its promises to them for their service.

And here we go!

The global war on terrorism, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, threats from rogue states like Iran and North Korea, and the rise of potential strategic competitors like China and Russia mean that America requires a larger and more capable military to protect our country’s vital interests and deter challenges to our security. America confronts a range of serious security challenges: Protecting our homeland in an age of global terrorism and Islamist extremism; working with friends and partners overseas, from Africa to Southeast Asia, to help them combat terrorism and violent insurgencies in their own countries; defending against missile and nuclear attack; maintaining the credibility of our defense commitments to our allies; and waging difficult counterinsurgency campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Wow! It seems that the United States taxpayer must take part in every fight on Earth! Let’s review the conflicts:

The occupation of Iraq

The occupation of Iraq is a purely discretionary exercise. Iraq does not, nor did it ever pose a threat to U.S. citizens living within the borders of the United States. If the United States were to withdraw all its forces as fast as possible, it would be decades, if ever, before whatever gang took over and proclaimed itself as the government of Iraq had mustered up the firepower to launch a significant attack on the people of the U.S.

It did however threaten the Saudi monarch, and John McCain understands that preserving freedom at home requires sending U.S. soldiers overseas to die to prop an unpopular king on his throne.

The occupation of Afghanistan

Many people consider this to be required to defend the U.S. from attack. Certainly, if you accept the need to fight a global war on terrorism, the occupation of what was Al Queda’s rear areas is a requirement. Of course, this occupation is going badly; Slowly but surely, the United States is controlling less and less territory there. Occupying Afghanistan so weakened the Russian military that it collapsed. the U.S. army’s experience is similar to the Russian one – an seemingly easy early conquest followed by a slow war of attrition that saps men and wrecks equipment. Every month is harder than the previous one.

The Taliban who were bankrolled by the Saudi King (the guy U.S. soldiers are dying in Iraq to protect), the Pakistani government (who were trying to counter Iranian influence in Afghanistan) and increasingly by the lucrative heroin trade (high profits courtesy of the U.S. War on (Some) Drugs. The Taliban were also bankrolled by al Queda which purchased their protection.

The War on Al Queda

Al Queda’s mission is the overthrow of the Saudi king (whom U.S. soldiers are dying in Iraq to defend). They targeted the United States because the United States loans soldiers to defend the Saudi King, builds the bases he uses to secure his territory and supplies him with weapons, ships and aircraft. The leadership of al Queda, many of whom survived the vicious Egyptian security forces (funded and trained by the United States) who viewed the religious conservatives as a threat to their power (the Egyptian rulers being old school pan-arab socialists who were bankrolled by the soviet Union until the U.S. government offered to give them taxes collected from U.S. citizens), have developed a hatred of the United States for bankrolling their attackers.

Iran

The Iranian government is unpopular. It levies heavy taxes on the population, harasses young people looking for love, meddles in school curricula, and has pursued an inflationary monetary policy which is wrecking the economy. And like every powerful government that is screwing up domestically, they try to play up external threats. They make noises about how they are surrounded by enemies and that other governments pose a threat to the Iranian people, in an attempt to awake nationalist feelings. And they can easily make this case; their substantive negotiations with the U.S. state department in 2002 were shut down by the Bush administration. Most of the nations bordering Iran have U.S. bases with combat troops stationed in them. And the U.S. government, which initiated a war against Iran in 1954 has been obligingly threatening to bomb them… with nuclear weapons…

Officially, the purpose of this new proposed war is to keep the Iranian government from using nuclear weapons (which they don’t possess) against Israel.

Did I mention that Iran has a population that is much larger than that of Iraq? And that the terrain is pretty mountainous. And that they have the capability to cut the southern supply lines of the U.S. army occupying Iraq (in order to help prop up the Saudi King on his throne?

North Korea

North Korea tried to build a nuclear bomb. It didn’t work. They flooded most of their farm land and now have a permanent famine going. They pose a threat to … South Korea. Except that South Korean soldiers are better fed and have more modern weapons and have prepared defenses, and have a larger population to draw upon. If the United States Government would quit subsidizing the government with food aid, it would probably have collapsed already.

China

Having largely abandoned central planning, the Chinese economy is booming, allowing the government to levy the taxes to build ships, submarines and aircraft that would have been modern in the late 1970′s. the Chinese people do allot of business with people living in the United States. They have territorial ambitions over a few sections of Central Asia and over Taiwan, and have absolutely no interest in attacking the United States.

Russia

The Russians have loads of natural resources and little else. While their government is moving in a fascist direction, their territorial ambitions are focused on “defending” slavic peoples’ hegemony in the Balkans and Eastern Europe.

The Equipment Needed When Seeking Out New Enemies

To take on all these enemies, which do not directly threaten the citizenry, McCain proposes a massive arms build up to “modernize ” the U.S. military. he proposes increasing the size of the U.S. military dramatically. He proposes expanding benefits offered to veterans. He promises that the U.S. will prop up more governments that face popular rebellions, thus increasing the number of people who view the U.S. people as enemies fighting against them. He promises to increase intelligence gathering world-wide – more spies, more expensive spy satellites, more payoffs to local insurgents to provide the U.S. with intelligence (payoffs which all too often fund terrorist attacks against U.S. enemies).

Who Pays?

John McCain famously commented that he didn’t know much about economics, and this paper proves it. These new divisions, their equipment, the aircraft, ships, submarines and satellites, the bombs and ammunition required for this adventure in world domination will not be produced by elves working at Santa’s workshop on the north Pole. They will be paid for either by taxes on the U.S. citizenry, or by debasing the U.S. dollar. Unless John McCain is going to eliminate medicare, the U.S. citizenry will be paying for these things at a time when they have little wealth to spare. rather than producing consumer goods or other forms of wealth, the labor of people making or shooting the weapons will be wasted economically speaking.

Fantasy

There is one word to describe this proposal: fantasy. this plan will never happen. The United States economy will implode well before McCain has raised half of the divisions he needs to put his plan of world domination into action. and since John McCain is throwing unrealizable wishes left and right in this paper, it’s a shame he decided not to throw in a pony for every little girl in the U.S. Who knows, that is one wish that Santa might have granted…

The rest of the paper.

The rest of the paper continues banging the drums of war in much the same vein as what has already been commented on.I am therefore going to leave reading the rest as an exercise to the reader.

TrackBack URI: http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2008/07/21/analysing-john-mccains-foreign-policy-wish-list-no-ponies-for-little-girls/trackback/
Read more posts from
• • •

8 Comments

  1. Ironic that you mention McCain’s poor editing, than go on to discuss the “governemtn of Iraq” And there’s the whole capitalization issue too.

    Comment by Simon — July 21, 2008 @ 10:34 pm
  2. Grammar and syntax are not the point.

    I support a strong defense for America, but there are many strategies for how to obtain such a strong defense.

    As I consider Senator McCain’s perspective, I can’t help but think of a drunken bully in a bar who, having just cheered on the prior bar tough as he beat a weak loudmouth senseless, is confronted by looks of doubt and budding horror. Undaunted, he determines the only way to escape those looks is to wipe the flecks of spittle from his mouth and crank up the intensity. Meanwhile, prior neutral parties in the saloon are mumbling to each other, waiting for their chance to risk all and take him down. With every beating he calls for, more neutral parties join the mumbling.

    Yes, crazy-eyed bar toughs can obtain short-lived fear that simpletons might mistake for respect. But with every beating – no matter how pathetic the victim – precious energy is wasted. Sooner or later, the bully gets winded and the crowd turns on him. No one can fight everyone.

    Comment by Akston — July 22, 2008 @ 12:43 am
  3. Ironic that you mention McCain’s poor editing, than go on to discuss the “governemtn of Iraq” And there’s the whole capitalization issue too.

    Silence! I never make mistakes! :)

    I went back and fixed the more egregious errors.

    So there.

    Comment by tarran — July 22, 2008 @ 4:26 am
  4. Maybe John should face what’s really bugging him – that the US lost Vietnam, that we let him rot there for 5 years while the Secretary of Defense was picking out which particular grass huts to drop bombs on, and now he wants to somehow prove that it wasn’t all in vain, or that the US is really good after all, or… something…

    Comment by tfr — July 22, 2008 @ 9:20 am
  5. I don’t think this is a result of any hypothetical insecurities McCain may have in regards to Vietnam.

    I thoroughly agree in a strong military force. However, the kind he describes is unnecessary…unless of course he plans on invading Iran, which I would not discount. Furthermore, we cannot keep spending more on the military and continue to sustain the welfare state as well. Not without raising taxes by a significant amount; even then I have doubts as to the feasibility.

    Comment by David Wilson — July 23, 2008 @ 7:10 am
  6. When you knuckleheads say you want a strong military force, ask yourself what politicians do with strong military forces.

    Comment by Joshua Holmes — July 24, 2008 @ 8:41 pm
  7. Joshua,

    According to the ads on TV, the purpose of aircraft carriers is to airlift pallets of bottled water to tsunami victims. ;)

    Comment by tarran — July 26, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
  8. It seems pols always want to buy fancy new equipment capable of causing all kinds of chaos and destruction. That’s all fine and dandy, but no matter how expensive or fancy the equipment it still has to be maintained by some soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine. For all the rhetoric, the pols never really talk about the people that make the equipment work. How about strengthening the people?

    I do think the Sen. McCain is stuck in a bit of a time-warp focusing on that equipment – like the planes he used to fly. When you are a soldier on the ground and you can see the face of the enemy soldier you are about to kill, it’s something very different than dropping bombs from above. That said, I don’t think Sen. Obama knows much about it either.

    Comment by Pepe Johnson — July 30, 2008 @ 8:22 am

Comments RSS

Subscribe without commenting

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by: WordPress • Template by: Eric • Banner #1, #3, #4 by Stephen Macklin • Banner #2 by Mark RaynerXML