Elephant in the Room


It’s telling that the liberal “Resistance” is pinning their hopes on John Bolton to provide damning testimony in the impeachment trial of President Trump.

Bolton, the arch-neocon, is one of the more repulsive swamp creatures to inhabit the Beltway and the fact that he’s become the liberal “Hail Mary” is indicative of the weakness of their impeachment case.

Seriously, liberal elites have been trying to impeach Trump since he surprised Hillary Clinton, who had assumed herself to be the heir apparent. Since then we’ve had 3 years of non-stop Russia-gate, Ukraine-gate and now this.

But, what’s the end game? With the balance of power in the Senate favoring the Republicans its always been assumed that they would simply vote to acquit and that would be the end of it.

There had to be another angle, and recently I read an article by the Polemicist that heightened my suspicions. The author speculates that the need to have a more reliable and internationally-respected U.S. President managing a conflict with Iran might be the unseen reason behind the House sending the flimsy Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, and why Democrats are so hell-bent on replacing Trump before the election.

“The obviousness of this losing hand, and the fact that the most politically-seasoned, can’t-be-that-stupid Democrats seem determined to play it out, have my paranoid political Spidey senses all atingle. What are the cards they’re not showing? What lies beneath the thin ice of these Articles of Impeachment? If the apparent agenda makes no sense, look for the hidden. Something that better explains why Pelosi, et. al. find it so urgent to replace Trump before the election and why they think they can succeed in doing that.

There is one thing that I can think of that drives such frantic urgency: War. That would also explain why Trump’s “national security” problem—embedded in the focus on Ukraine arms shipments, Russian aggression, etc.—is the real issue, the whistle to Republican war dogs. But if so, the Ukro-Russian motif is itself a screen for another “national security”/war issue that cannot be stated explicitly. There’s no urgency about aggression towards Russia. There is for Iran.

So here’s my entirely speculative tea-leaf reading: If there’s a hidden agenda behind the urgency to remove Trump, one that might actually garner the votes of Republican Senators, it is to replace him with a president who will be a more reliable and effective leader for a military attack on Iran that Israel wants to initiate before next November. Spring is the cruelest season for launching wars.”

The author says that even as Trump gives the Israeli’s everything they want, they don’t trust him to manage the fallout from an all out Israeli attack against Iran.

“That is exactly why Serious People in Israel and the United States would really, really want to have someone other than Donald Trump as President if there is going to be a war with Iran: It’s more than a fear that Trump won’t go along with it. (After all, he despises Iran, and can usually be made to do what the neocons want.) It’s that Israel won’t, in this instance, be looking to strike some weapons depots. It will be trying to eliminate the perceived strategic threat Iran poses and any possibility of retaliation—quickly, thoroughly, and for decades at least. That means destroying as much of the country as quickly as possible. Given Iran’s size (680,000 sq. mi.), strength, and tenacity, that means Israel will use overwhelming and ruthless force—including, I think, nuclear weapons. And Iran and its allied forces will strike back against all countries and all forces it considers complicit in the attack, everywhere they can reach. In that situation, Israel will need not only US military support, but, perhaps more importantly, the backing of an American president who projects the kind of leadership that can solicit the support, or at least the forbearance, of countries in the region, European countries, and the “international community.” That is not Donald Trump.”

The elephant in the room of the impeachment trial is Israel. We discussed here how maintenance of the Petrodollar is key to US foreign policy, but support for Israel rivals this dynamic in understanding US American foreign policies the Middle-East.

Remember how Wesley Clark described in 2007, that the US was planning on starting with Iraq and finishing off with Iran? Since then the U.S. has attacked, weakened, divided, or destroyed every other un-coopted polity in the region (Iraq, Syria, Libya) that could pose any serious resistance to the predations of U.S. imperialism and Israel colonialism. The planning for these actions–the Yinon Plan–took place decades ago. The Oded Yinon Plan is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It states that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

This campaign is overseen in the U.S. by the likes of “praying for war with Iran” Mike Pompeo and Mike Pence, who together “urged” Trump to approve the killing of Iranian General Soleimani. Pence, who will become president if the Democrats succeed in impeaching Trump, is a member of Christians United For Israel (CUFI). Pompeo, characterized as the “brainchild” of the assassination, thinks Trump was sent by God to save Israel from Iran.

I know this all sounds batshit cray-cray but if the last couple years have shown us anything it’s that we’re in uncharted waters and pretty much anything is possible.

Stay tuned.





This entry was posted in neoconservatives and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s