America First — or World War III

Guest Post by Patrick J. Buchanan

“If you’re in favor of World War III, you have your candidate.”

So said Rand Paul, looking directly at Gov. Chris Christie, who had just responded to a question from CNN’s Wolf Blitzer as to whether he would shoot down a Russian plane that violated his no-fly zone in Syria.

“Not only would I be prepared to do it, I would do it,” blurted Christie: “I would talk to Vladimir Putin … I’d say to him, ‘Listen, Mr. President, there’s a no-fly zone in Syria; you fly in, it applies to you.’

“Yes, we would shoot down the planes of Russian pilots if in fact they were stupid enough to think that this president was the same feckless weakling … we have in the Oval Office … right now.”

Ex-Gov. George Pataki and ex-Sen. Rick Santorum would also impose a no-fly zone and shoot down Russian planes that violated it. Said Gov. John Kasich, “It’s time we punched the Russians in the nose.”

Carly Fiorina would impose a no-fly zone and not even talk to Putin until we’ve conducted “military exercises in the Baltic States” on Russia’s border. Jeb Bush, too, would impose a no-fly zone.

These warhawks apparently assume that President Putin is a coward who, if you shoot down his warplanes, will back away from a fight.

Are we sure? After the Turks shot down that Sukhoi SU-24, Moscow sent fighter planes to Syria to escort its bombers and has reportedly deployed its lethal S-300 antiaircraft system there.

A U.S. Marine Corps aviator describes the S-300: “A complete game changer for all fourth-gen aircraft [like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18]. That thing is a beast and you don’t want to get near it.” There are press reports that an angry Putin has ordered the even more advanced S-400 system moved into Syria.

Is Putin bluffing? Are we prepared to ride the up-escalator, at the top of which is nuclear war, if Putin, who has been boasting of his modernized nuclear forces, is also willing to ride it rather than back down?

Uber-hawk Lindsey Graham wants to send tens of thousands of American troops to fight ISIS, and refuses to work with Iran, Russia, or Syria’s Bashar Assad to crush our common enemy ISIS.

Graham prefers “allies,” like the Saudis and Gulf Arabs.

But both have bailed out of the air war on ISIS, and sent troops and bombers instead to attack the Houthi rebels in Yemen. Result: The Houthis have been in retreat and al-Qaida and ISIS are moving into the vacated territory.

Another Mideast base camp for terrorists is being created — by us.

“I miss George W. Bush!” wailed Graham in the undercard debate.

How many other Americans are, like Graham, pining for the return of a Bush foreign policy that gave us Barack Obama?

Yet, now, a rival school is taking center stage in the Republican presidential campaign, rejecting the knee-jerk hostility to working with Putin. Not only does Rand Paul belong to this school, so, apparently, do Donald Trump and his strongest challenger, Sen. Ted Cruz.

Cruz had previously disparaged the legacy of the “neocons” who prodded Bush into war in Iraq and championed a democracy crusade in the Middle East. In Las Vegas, he spoke of a new national-interest-based foreign policy, a policy that puts “America First.”

“If we topple Assad … ISIS will take over Syria, and it will worsen national security interests. And the approach — instead of being … a democracy promoter, we ought to hunt down our enemies and kill ISIS rather than creating opportunities for ISIS to control new countries.”

Cruz rejects the Manichaean worldview of the neocons and their reflexive hostility to Russia, and appears willing to work with a Russian autocrat to crush a monstrous evil like ISIS, as U.S. presidents did in working with anti-Communist dictators to win the Cold War.

Midway through the debate, Trump cut loose with a sweeping indictment of mindless American interventionism in the Middle East:

“We’ve spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that, frankly, if they were there and if we could have spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems — our airports and all the other problems we have — we would have been a lot better off. …

“We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East — we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away — and for what? It’s not like we had victory. It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, airports, and everything else that are all falling apart!”

If we do not want Syria in 2016 to become what Sarajevo became in 1914, the powder keg that explodes into a world war, the War Party Republicans, who have learned nothing from the past, should be relegated to the past.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
15 Comments
Anonymous
Anonymous
December 19, 2015 10:15 am

Christie and Graham both have about a zero percent chance of winning the nomination.

Outside of that, WWIII is inevitable as two opposing and in compatible cultures clash for dominance of the world. In the end, with nowhere left to go to avoid it, only one will survive and the other will die.

In the end there can be only one.

robert h siddell jr
robert h siddell jr
December 19, 2015 10:33 am

And that one won’t have Faggot and Feminist Flag Officers.

suzanna
suzanna
December 19, 2015 12:10 pm

admin.,

I have heard the candidates statements 2nd hand. I would not
dare actually watch/listen to them because their demeanor
and talking points would make me physically ill.

Are they being paid to state they would shoot Russian planes down?
Why else would they make such inane statements?
There are pilots flying those planes. Shooting a plane down would be murder.
So they are willing and eager to commit murder?

I fear for the US in every way. The presidential candidates are all insane.

Monger
Monger
December 19, 2015 12:44 pm

Beyond the pale,
The good ,all the clueless and this meaningless charade will be rubbed out, the bad all the remaining good will be rubbed out as well, the ugly death by war, genocide, disease, famine, exposure, totalitarian rule for the unfortunate survivors.

What our leaders are all about.

B
B
December 19, 2015 12:48 pm

Best not to hope for WW3. We are in decline. The handwriting is on the wall. Our arsenal is full of turkeys like the F-35, trillion dollar boondoggles that don’t work well and probably can not compete with the new generation of Soviet weapons. “Profits uber alles” has destroyed our defense capabilities. It took us 6 months to get a few hundred thousand troops into the Middle East. How long do you think it would take China to get 2 million troops into the Middle East (Look at a world map).
We would lose control of the oil from the Middle East in no time and without the oil, our economy and our DOD (biggest user of oil in the world) would slowly crumble. If nuclear weapons are used, it doesn’t matter. It would be game over for all of us. If they are not used, we could not compete with the Chinese and Soviet armies combined simply because of the logistics. During WW2 we converted our industrial capacity to build weapons systems. That industrial capacity has been moved to China. Maybe we could bury them in derivatives and other complex financial products?

yahsure
yahsure
December 19, 2015 1:00 pm

What can we expect with a country that has such a large military/industrial complex. We are broke and these idiots are talking about spending insane amounts of money for what? We have the largest military in the world. Rubio and most of the others sound insane. Just maintaining our current fleets is enough. I really don’t understand the need for advanced fighter jets, I figure old stuff like an f-16 and an a-10 was enough, The f-35 is a disaster. Yeah i know i am not up on current black hole military weapons. As to the Republican candidates,I wonder why most of them are on the stage?
I see Trump and Carson and Cruz as the only ones who should be up there,They could be talking about issues.
I still think we are going downhill into an economic collapse.

daddysteve
daddysteve
December 19, 2015 2:06 pm

Trump seems to be working fabulously to divide the populace.

phoolish
phoolish
December 19, 2015 2:36 pm

I don’t think the russians are trying to take over or control the world. At this moment in time, only the us and it’s associates are playing for that.

underfire
underfire
December 19, 2015 2:46 pm

Maybe I’m missing something, but has the govt. of Syria even given the US military permission to be in their country? We know the legitimate govt. of Syria requested the Russians to be there.

Even if the US has indeed been invited, I’d like to know on what grounds the US, and the candidates, think they can dictate what happens on and over this sovereign country. No fly zones should be at the discretion of the Syrian govt.

Tucci78
Tucci78
December 19, 2015 2:55 pm

“Are we sure? After the Turks shot down that Sukhoi SU-24, Moscow sent fighter planes to Syria to escort its bombers and has reportedly deployed its lethal S-300 antiaircraft system there.

“A U.S. Marine Corps aviator describes the S-300: ‘A complete game changer for all fourth-gen aircraft [like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18]. That thing is a beast and you don’t want to get near it.’ There are press reports that an angry Putin has ordered the even more advanced S-400 system moved into Syria.”
=========================
The war-waging operational approach to sophisticated enemy air defense systems like the S-300 and S-400 is to actively suppress them by ground attack aircraft. The Navy’s doctrine is called “Iron Hand.” For the Air Force, the colloquialism is “Wild Weasel.” Whichever service takes up the job, it’s incredibly dangerous, and only the best, most aggressive ground-attack aircrews are assigned. It’s their specialty, and they train – very hard – to this specific task.

Naval aviators and Air Force S.E.A.D. specialists know pretty much precisely what it would mean to tangle with the Russian aviation and air defense assets in Syria, and while they’re doubtless prepared to get their ‘game face’ on, they know that it means strikes into Russian territory or it can’t be made to work at all.

Welcome to World War Three, indeed.

The Drumthwacket Fat Boy – which is how those of us in the Garden State regard Christie – plainly knows not one friggin’ thing about such matters, and among those of ‘contrarian’ disposition – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and The Donald – I’m becoming yet more convinced that those are the ones to whom the republic should look for someone to fill the Commander-in-Chief slot.

flash
flash
December 19, 2015 4:02 pm

[img]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMBeMKjNWrw[/img]

flash
flash
December 19, 2015 4:04 pm

again..I really hope the draft applies to women this time around..

[imgcomment image:large[/img]

Sensetti
Sensetti
December 19, 2015 4:16 pm

Here’s what I know, Fourth Turnings bring War every time, and the death toll rises with each war. I hope it’s different this time. But stop and look at the World stage. Does it look like peace and tranquility are about to breakout or all Hell is about to be unleashed?

NickelthroweR
NickelthroweR
December 19, 2015 7:27 pm

Greetings,

I think these outlandish statements are an attempt by those soon to be out of the race to get back in the race with an Hail Mary Pass. Remember: there is no such thing as bad publicity and if some comment by one of these jokers got some air time and a response from Putin then it would only help them.

Trump, for better or worse, is going to be the Republican running in November.

Phil from Oz
Phil from Oz
December 20, 2015 1:34 am

Perhaps all those “Presidential Candidates” who are so very keen on confrontation, might “improve” their credibility by enlisting NOW, as ordinary footsoldiers, NOT as Commissioned ranks. They can then “prove” their “Patriotic” credentials by being the first of the first to engage “The Enemy”.

I somehow do not see this happening ever. It is so very easy to “commit” others to certain death (and make no mistake – engaging the Russian military almost on their “home soil” WILL be certain death), yet “leading by example” would be the right thing to do, so we may all rest assured that such an example will be the very last thing on their minds . . . .