Nearly all the Republican presidential candidates are showing their muscles, supporting the war on terror and a robust military while also vowing to do whatever it takes to disarm Iran. They know that it is essential to play the jingoistic “American exceptionalism” card, and they understand that being president also means becoming commander in chief of America’s armed forces with the responsibility for committing U.S. soldiers to die for their country. But how are they qualified to do that? Of the sorry lot on display, only Ron Paul and Rick Perry have ever served in the military in any capacity, Paul as a U.S. Air Force medical officer and Perry as an Air Force pilot. The dramatically bellicose Newt Gingrich, who wants to coordinate a joint military operation with Israel to attack Iran, did not serve during the Vietnam War. He received deferments because he was a student and because he was, at the time, married to his first of three wives. Other candidates, including Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman, are too young to have been subject to the draft, but neither volunteered for military service. Santorum entered a law firm, and Huntsman went to Indonesia as a Mormon missionary before stepping into the business run by his father.
But perhaps the most spectacular chickenhawk of all is Mitt Romney, frequently cited as the likely Republican candidate, who alone among GOP aspirants to the highest office in the land has advocated increasing the size of the Defense Department. Romney apparently is not aware of the foreign policy misadventures of the past 10 years and is eager to double down on a formula that has not worked very well. He believes that the correct response to the many threats in the world is to throw more money at the Pentagon. He also apparently has not noted the sinking economy, which might suggest to anyone but the politically ambitious that retrenchment would be preferable to more interventionism. But as an experienced self-described “businessman” he is not afraid of running up a little more debt.
Romney has several times declared that Iran will never acquire a nuclear weapon if he is president, suggesting that the other candidates are pusillanimous on the issue and implying that he alone will attack the mullahs “preventively” if such a development appears to be imminent. The willingness to start a war with a country that can hardly threaten the United States is the cornerstone of his foreign policy, which he describes as dealing with the world from a position of strength. If that sounds a bit like the Bush Doctrine, it should.
Romney’s personal history suggests,
however, that his hawkishness might well be a recent affectation, carefully
crafted to suit the presidential persona that he would like to present
to the voting public. In particular, he has never been inclined
to place either himself or anyone close to him in harm’s way to advance
the wars that his country has been fighting, wars that he defends both
in principle and in detail.
Mitt Romney was born in 1947, the son of George Romney, a former senior General Motors executive and governor of Michigan. The birth date means that he was eligible for the Vietnam War draft when his student deferment ran out upon graduation from Brigham Young University. But, before he graduated, instead of being drafted or enlisting in one of the military services, he obtained a two-and-a-half-year deferment to leave school temporarily and go to France as a Mormon missionary. The deferment described him as a “minister of religion” even though he had received no formal training as a clergyman. At the time, large numbers of young Mormons avoided military service in that fashion.
While in France converting the heathen Roman Catholics, Romney clearly learned a lot about foreign cultures, something that undoubtedly will stand him in good stead as president. He recently described his astonishment when encountering an old-style toilet that had the tank up on the wall and was activated by pulling on a handle connected to a chain that released the water. Romney had never seen such a device, which probably means he had never traveled to New Jersey or other backward regions during his formative years.
Toilet hydraulic engineering aside, Romney managed to avoid the Vietnam draft. His father, George, apparently had become an opponent of the war, though he did not speak out openly against it, and Mitt might have also quietly opposed it. He then went into business and founded Bain Capital, which is certainly worth a separate story all by itself. He went from being a rich man’s son to becoming a very rich man in his own right. Eventually, he followed in his father’s footsteps and wound up in politics, first as governor of Massachusetts and later as head of the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics Committee. Now he wants to become president.
Along the way, Mitt fathered five sons: Tagg, Matt, Josh, Ben, and Craig. You might have thought that at least one of the sons of a man with national political ambitions would opt for either a tour in the military or government service of some kind. At a minimum, it would demonstrate a tad of respect for and engagement in the state’s institutions. None did. Mitt was challenged on the campaign trail about the lack of noblesse oblige exhibited by his offspring, and he replied that “one of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping to get me elected.”
All of this is not to pick on Mitt Romney, though his family’s avoidance of military service is notable particularly when measured against the candidate’s own willingness to use force around the world when the United States is not actually threatened. It has often been suggested that if the children of leading politicians and neocon pundits were required to take up arms to carry out the schemes concocted by their parents, the desire to engage in frivolous wars would quickly vanish. Be that as it may, Romney is far from unique in that one does not see the children of Huntsman, Santorum, Bachmann, and Gingrich rushing off to enlist either. To give Sarah Palin her due, her eldest son did join the Alaskan National Guard and did do combat duty in Iraq, so she, at least, put her money where her mouth most assuredly was.
One can easily argue that President Barack Obama is even worse than the Mitt Romneys of this world, because he was elected in large part by antiwar voters but he has brought more war and a frightful expansion of the state security apparatus, including the indefinite military detention and even assassination of American citizens. But that is to avoid the issue of how a country that so desperately needs peace and reconstruction can produce so many clueless but hawkish politicians who are themselves completely ignorant of war and soldiering except insofar as they follow the Gingrich model of reading about it in books. Nevertheless, the poor fools persist in mouthing the slogans of empire. And it has consequences. Constant warfare might well mean the end of our experiment in republican government and could quite possibly bring about the impoverishment and death of many of us.
Read more by Philip Giraldi
- The New World Order is Unimpeachable – May 22nd, 2013
- Boston Becomes Toxic – May 15th, 2013
- Gatekeeping for Zion – May 9th, 2013
- Kristol Clear – May 1st, 2013
- What Has Bibi Been Doing? – April 24th, 2013





RickR30
December 21st, 2011 at 10:42 pm
Given that US presidents are increasingly irrelevant figures in their own administration, it doesn't matter what experience the person has or doesn't have. The question is, can this person sell whatever needs to be sold to the American people and the world? The only thing politics has to offer to Americans, the only thing America has to offer to the world is war, marketed as national security/defense. It's the single issue America stands for. Foreign policy has become domestic policy. Wars are DC's labor policy and since the battlefield is everywhere including the homeland, local police are tools of war, too, and more and more militarized- thanks to generous handouts from the USG.
Of course first these clowns have to be able to sell themselves to the electorate. If they manage that, they get to be the cheerleader-in-chief of whatever the real shadow government is doing. The traits required to be a president are fewer and fewer. "Leadership" used to be important. Not anymore, the shadow-government-on-autopilot doesn't want a thinker and leader to suddenly start wondering and questioning what on earth is going on, why we are insisting on more expensive and pointless wars when the country is broke and Americans jobless and homeless. Heck, presidents, don't even have to be able to formulate a paragraph anymore, let alone pronounce words correctly. The dumber and malleable, the better. Candidates know full well that is what is required of them and they sure present themselves as dumb and malleable on stage. How tiring is it to watch half a dozen bozos chanting the same chorus again and again: Iran, threat, bomb, I heart israel, security, defense, strength, etc. etc. Aren't Americans tired of this same sick ritual every four years? For once there is an option to get us out of this death spiral that is going to make the Aztecs look like prophets- Ron Paul.
Johnny in Wi.
December 21st, 2011 at 10:52 pm
Great essay Phil. But about George Romney. He was President of American Motors which had a lot of plants here in Wisconsin. He was a leader in producing small, fuel efficient cars. He also was quite critical of the monopoly powers of both General Motors and the United Auto Workers. He wanted them both broken up and the American auto industry to be more competitive among America companies. If he had been listened to perhaps we would have more of an American car industry today. George, while Governor of Michigan, was the leader for the Republican nomination in1968. He turned on the war during that campaign. When asked why, he famously said that he had been brainwashed by the military during a trip to Vietnam. That comment was used against him and destroyed his campaign. Senator Eugene McCarthy the Democrat antiwar candidate said he wasn't brain washed. It was just a light rinse. His campaign ended in ridicule and laughter. May I hope the same happens to his son.
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 1:27 am
You ask, Phil, "…how a country that so desperately needs peace and reconstruction can produce so many clueless but hawkish politicians who are themselves completely ignorant of war and soldiering… Nevertheless, the poor fools persist in mouthing the slogans of empire. And it has consequences. Constant warfare might well mean the end of our experiment in republican government and could quite possibly bring about the impoverishment and death of many of us."
The "POOR FOOLS" are not the cluelessly hawkish politicians, but the terminally ignorant and inert citizens of this nation who continue to place their full trust, faith, and confidence in these miscreants to actually honor and fulfill their Constitutionally-mandated duty and responsibility to "Preserve and Protect" the Life, Liberty, and Security of this Nation, Land, and People.
…tbc…
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 1:28 am
… Our experiment with republican government is over. We, the People, turned our backs on it in favor of Lies, Shams, Hoaxes, and Scams, all in the hope of getting more Bread and Circuses. Franklin was prescient when he warned that we would lose it because we wouldn't and thus couldn't keep it.
Rest assured that the consequences of losing the republic will not be suffered by the Chickenhawks when they scurry back to their gated enclaves. Rather, it will be experienced and suffered by those who gave them wings.
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 1:43 am
PS: You almost make it sound like there are no Democrat Chickenhawks.
NONE of the insanity, obscenity, and abomination of the so-called international and domestic so-called "War" Against so-called "Terrorism" — from September 12, 2001 up to this very moment — would or could have possibly happened without the complete and total compliance, concurrence, and thus complicity of the Democrats: Afghanistan, USA PATRIOT (I and II), Iraq, Indefinite Detention….. NONE of it could or would have happened without The JackAsses.
Smithboy
December 22nd, 2011 at 5:42 am
The courts may be our salvation. If a sucessful lawsuit could be brought by soldiers and their families, who suffered because of a purposely bogus war started by GW Bush, Cheney and the Iraq War Group, a group whose task it was to "Sell" the invasion of Iraq to the American people, then future politicians may think twice about using this country's military as an extension of the Israeli Lobby.
If tobacco companies can be held responsible for the death and suffering their products produced, then certainly 4500 dead, 30,000 wounded and the several thousand marriages broken up because of long deployments in both of these unnecessary wars deserve a trillion dollars to divided among themselves. Of course, I would also like to see a criminal trial in which all of the neocons were charged with crimes against humanity.
anonymous
December 22nd, 2011 at 7:04 am
It was very clear after that last debate that Bachman is ready to take out Iran ASAP as is Santorum. Neither have a chance in hell of jumping in front of Paul so I guess they're irrelevant.
My point is it's not ultimately fair to point out the pro-war sentiment of Romney and Gingrich without noting that ALL of the puppet hopefuls (excluding the one person who isn't a puppet, Ron Paul) on either side of the proverbial left-right aisle are ready to pounce on Iran immediately. The number of non-saber rattling, anti-war, pro civil liberties politicians can be counted on one hand.
Thankfully, people seem to be waking up to this fact in mass quantities. Sites such as yours have a lot to do with pushing an honest libertarian such as Dr. Paul to victory by continuing to point out the needless suffering caused by these endless pointless wars.
Bruce Richardson
December 22nd, 2011 at 7:28 am
Great article, vintage Giraldi. Can anyone really be surprised that Mitt, the Mormon Missionary and millionaire, born with the proverbial 'silver spoon' in his mouth would loath active military service? Or that three times your out romantic, Newt 'the beaut' Gingrich would as well shun being shot at? And these examples of the future of the US Presidency, while quick to shrink away from personal service are just as quick to commit our troops to harms way and thereby reap millions in hidden contributions from the 'military industrial complex' are the worst kind of opportunists. How is it that junior legislators emerge after a career of moderate compensation to later become multi-millionaires? War is profitable, a strong military can seize control of oil and other high-value resources under the guise of national security or fighting terrorism while corporate makes money building bombs and bullets for the conquerers.
Weekly Standard: In The Hunt? – NPR | Conservatives for America
December 22nd, 2011 at 7:45 am
[...] 5, 2011 in Salem, New Hampshire. Former Utah governor and republican candidate for president …Meet the Republican ChickenhawksAntiwar.comHuntsman campaign blasts Romney for laying off NH workers as his firm made [...]
<b>Meet</b> the Republican Chickenhawks « Meet « Hooking Up Online
December 22nd, 2011 at 8:30 am
[...] Meet the Republican Chickenhawks by Philip Giraldi, December 22, 2011 Nearly all the Republican presidential candidates are showing their muscles, supporting the war on terror and a robust military while also vowing to do whatever it takes to disarm Iran. … Read more on Antiwar.com [...]
Smithboy
December 22nd, 2011 at 8:58 am
Remember when asked why his sons did not serve in the military…. Romney replied, " My sons are serving their country by helping out with my campaign." That shows his family's depth of commitment.
joe
December 22nd, 2011 at 9:27 am
all chicken hawks are bought and sold by israel. they are hawks because israel wants wars against its enemies.
these bootlicks will oblige.
liberranter
December 22nd, 2011 at 10:33 am
"Chickenhawk syndrome" isn't something that afflicts just politicians, but millions of ordinary Amoricon sheeple as well. I cannot count how many times in the last ten years that I, a veteran with combat experience, have been told by brainless jingoists who have never served a single day in uniform, let alone in combat, that I am "a coward," "a traitor," a "terrorist lover," and "ignorant" for wanting to bring the troops home and dismantle the Empire. Of course my suggestion that these armchair chickenhawks suit up, grab a rifle, and fly over to Iraqpakghanistan, at their own expense if necessary, to fight the wars with which they are so deeply enamored and which they believe are so essential to Amerika's survival, is met with scorn and waffling, which exposes them for what they really are: loudmouthed, brainless sheep.
As I've posted in response to other articles on this site before, Amoricons like Mutt Romney and his followers will NEVER lose their lust for war until they and their loved ones, like all other Amoricon armchair chickenhawks, are on the receiving end of a Hiroshima, Dresden, or Fallujah.
WhichWaldenPond
December 22nd, 2011 at 10:48 am
You might have mentioned that the Salt Lake City Olympics bid was the most corrupt ever, involving mass bribes and misuses of public money. Was Mitt Romney aware of these illegalities, or even party to them?
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:38 am
That's an awfully big "MAY" and an even bigger "IF."
Which courts did you have in mind? The same ones that have gone completely along with every aspect of this international and now domestic so-called "War" Against so-called "Terrorism" ever since Day 0, September 11, 2001?
The only war criminals who are ever tried, convicted, and imprisoned or executed are the ones on the losing side. Until Washington, DC is Invaded, Liberated, and Occupied, there will be no charges for crimes against humanity.
There will only be more crimes.
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:53 am
When the war crimes trials begin, the FIRST charges should be brought against those by whose acts of ommission and/or commission enabled the so-called "Terror Event" of September 11, 2001 to happen.
As a direct result of the failure of these people to fulfill their Constitutionally-mandated duty and responsibility to preserve and protect the life, liberty, and property of the American people, 3000 humans were killed, 10s of thousands were injured, and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of private and public property was destroyed, damaged, or lost.
Senior officials of the Cheney, Clinton, Bush, and Carter Regimes will be the ones so charged.
But first… the Invasion, Liberation, and Occupation of Washington, DC.
baz
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:55 am
all this iran bashing over a phantom nuclear bomb program is making me sick….
lets talk about what poses the REAL danger to the US and all the world…
Everybody knows about israels nuclear warhead stockpile, but far more dangerous is their biological weapons program which has been expanding extremely aggressively over the last decade and has the capability to wipe out most human life on earth with the various militarized strains of smallpox, anthrax, etc, which only jewish Israelis would possibly receive any vaccinations for…
this stupid racist country is going to be the end of us all and we dont even realize it
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:58 am
The REAL bootlicks are the American people who continue to allow the insanity and obscenity to be perpetrated and perpetuated — IN THEIR NAME — and, even more importantly, continue to pay for it, or to saddle their children and grandchildren (assuming the nation continues to exist that long) with the bill because they, through their elected representatives, have figured out how to put the whole thing on an open, running tab.
ANU News.net Meet the Republican Chickenhawks
December 22nd, 2011 at 1:39 pm
[...] One can easily argue that President Barack Obama is even worse than the Mitt Romneys of this world, because he was elected in large part by antiwar voters but he has brought more war and a frightful expansion of the state security apparatus, including the indefinite military detention and even assassination of American citizens. But that is to avoid the issue of how a country that so desperately needs peace and reconstruction can produce so many clueless but hawkish politicians who are themselves completely ignorant of war and soldiering except insofar as they follow the Gingrich model of reading about it in books. Nevertheless, the poor fools persist in mouthing the slogans of empire. http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2011/12/21/meet-the-republican-chickenhawks/ [...]
Jaime
December 22nd, 2011 at 1:40 pm
How interesting to read and realize how irrelevant foreign lives are to Americans, even so-called enlightened ones. How "sad" that 4500 and 30000 SOLDIERS, that is men who willingly went to war and engaged in wanton killing, raping, maiming and plundering, died and were wounded. We, the rest of the world however, do feel VERY sorry for the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of victims and millions displaced in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places because of a war planned in Washington but carried out by these criminals in uniform. Therefore, your indifference will bring a similar response when your time comes too.
Sam
December 22nd, 2011 at 3:16 pm
What is very depressing is how these guys (+ the AEI crew) are ready to play with the lives of other people kids, while avoiding military services for themselves and their loved ones.
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 3:35 pm
So……. let me ask you — and anybody else following this thread — a Question, baz.
What should be done about the threat of Israeli use of weapons of biological mass destruction?
And by Whom?
In short, So What? Now What?
Who and/or What is going to DO anything about this? And HOW are they going to do it?
HasteinD
December 22nd, 2011 at 7:19 pm
I was in Michigan in 68. Of course he, and all of us were brainwashed. (I was 17 then, and soon thereafter joined the Marines, not learning until much later, from combat Marines, just how much American Citizens were being brainwashed) The Democratic Party rank and file learned to admit that truth, and turned against the War. Mitt Romney has learned quite another "Truth". If you can't beat the brainwashers, join them….
HasteinD
December 22nd, 2011 at 7:21 pm
Are there any debeaking tools around?
Elessar Telcontar
December 22nd, 2011 at 7:30 pm
I only have one issue with this otherwise great article: the characterization of LDS missions as draft-dodging. Mormon men having been serving proselytizing missions (at our own expense) since 1830…the only times we have not sent out young men as missionaries is during World War 1 and 1940-1954 (World War 2 and Korea).
All our boys are taught since childhood to look forward and prepare for Church missions – Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman Jr. are no exceptions.
I have a much bigger problem with Romney (and Huntsman to a lesser extent – though he is more a globalist) on the warmongering. Our Book of Mormon clearly declares that we are not allowed to go to war unless we are attacked first, and are never to go seek out enemies and destroy them in their own lands before they can attack us….but we are to be prepared to fight and defend our lives, liberties, families, religion – to meet the enemy if they come against us in our own lands.
Unfortunately, most of those here in Utah are gung ho Romney or Huntsman – just because they are LDS, (and most of the peeps are GOP)…yet they seem to all have forgotten the high esteem that we put of the Constitution, and the need to follow America's Founding Fathers (I argue with my father on this all the time – (Korea War vet who thinks the military can do no wrong) – but last night he was watching the video I sent him by Ron Paul's campaign on foreign policy and the real meaning of blowback :)
I am LDS – born & raised in California, and a life-long Republican/Constitutionalist who will only vote for Ron Paul. Always wanted to serve in the military, but the Cold War was ending right after High School, and by the time I graduated college, the USSR ceased to exit and the military was turning away anyone not a doctor or engineer.
Angelo S
December 22nd, 2011 at 7:57 pm
2012 Is About Abolishing Slavery In America
We're on the verge of abolishing slavery in America.
Ron Paul's aim is to abolish the debt slavery & tax bondage of the FED/IRS Complex.
Over the last 100 years of slavery we have gradually lost most of what America set out to be, do and have.
We are not free. We are slaves.
Put aside all of the non-essential issues and focus on abolishing slavery.
Let's start there.
Our first priority is to regain our liberty, peace and prosperity.
This is the narrative, the context for all of my campaign communications with others. It shuts down all of the nattering and competitiveness over the flavor-of-the-month candidates.
No other candidate is cognizant of, or focused on abolishing the crushing debt slavery and tax bondage as a social issue.
Without our liberty, nothing else matters.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 8:43 pm
Very powerful words and even more powerFull thoughts, Angelo S.
i have but one simple Question for you and All who support Dr Paul:
How is President Paul going to abolish debt slavery and tax bondage if he is an absolute Minority of One (or even Two, if we include his son) in that Babylon by the Potomac?
When he proposes legislation to that effect, will he not require the Advice and Consent of the Congress? Does anyone in their wildest fantasies think that he will get it from the band of jackals that will be joining him in DC in 2013?
And when his Executive Orders freeing the slaves are challenged on the basis of constitutionality, are there any legitimately extant reasons for believing that this Supreme Court will find in his favor?
The first time slavery was abolished in this country, it took a Civil War and almost 700,000 military casulties (no estimate on collateral damage to civilian populations is available) to make it possible.
Is there any reason to believe that the Second Emancipation will be, would be, could be any different?
MoT
December 22nd, 2011 at 9:45 pm
That's so true. They clamor for what they've never had the displeasure of receiving. I venture their tune would be loud and long were it to ever happen. But would they ever admit they were so stupid? Nah!
MoT
December 22nd, 2011 at 9:50 pm
Angelo, all the other so called "issues" that these phony candidates babble about will in no way free people from the slavery they presently are bound by. I only hear Paul saying anything about property rights and THAT is what true freedom starts with: My own personal freedom and from there everything else branches forth.
MoT
December 22nd, 2011 at 9:55 pm
But this is exactly what MUST happen. Someone who is elected by the majority of people seeking to be free and THEN the corrupt forces in Congress will then be unmasked and thus doomed by their arrogance and stone walling. They need to be shown for what they are and let the publics anger crucify each and every one. If things go they way they've gone for generations then all you can lay claim to is the growing knowledge that you are indeed a slave and your slave master will demand even more of you. You can fight and fall or get down on your knees and break out the chap stick.
Nelson_2008
December 22nd, 2011 at 10:05 pm
All that an honest President would have to do to clean house would be to launch a real investigation into 9/11. That would bring down the whole house of cards. Just the threat of that would enable a President to have his way.
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 10:08 pm
i doubt it. i think that it would get her or him immediately killed.
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 10:13 pm
i invite you to ask everybody you come in contact with from now until Christmas Eve the following Question (and if you or they have seen V FOR VENDETTA, it will be familiar):
If individuals, offices, agencies, or departments of the US federal government participated in the planning, resourcing, and execution of the Terror Event of September 11, 2001, would you want to know? Would you really want to know?
How many Americans do you think would answer that Question in the affirmative?
jgmoebus
December 22nd, 2011 at 10:19 pm
WHAT must happen? Another Civil War with 700,000+ casulties? Is that what you are saying? If so, are you prepared for yourself and those you love to be among those casulties?
And do you honestly and sincerely believe that "the majority" of Americans seek "to be free"?
And that even if Dr Paul were to get the votes of a majority of the American people (given what happened in 2000 and 2004 and, for all we know, 2008, as well), that he would still take the Oath of Office on January 20, 2013?
Remember what Papa Joe said: "It ain't who votes that counts, but who counts the votes."
baz
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:00 pm
they have been expanding this program with (perhaps not full) knowledge by the CIA and NSA and if fact with help from US pharma companies with interests in israeli companies whos names i will not mention. …
It is all a ploy. these so called legitimate isreali companies are all tied in to the IDF and have been seeking alternatives to nukes as a deterrent against overwhelming conventional superiority and also against the day the west abandons israel as a strategic priority. it is a scary situation. Israels bio – chemical program is the most aggressive in the world and could easily kill hundreds of millions without the use of a singe nuke ( which if used in the region could do more harm to israel proper..
just ask yourself this.. if we ever cut israel off and make friends with iran, what do you think will be our fate? will we have a friend or a nuclear armed and biologically armed foe with the capability to hit anywhere on earth and cause hundreds of millions of lives in casualties?..
the zionists dont give a damn about muslims or gentiles… we are all goynim to them (meaning we are all scum)
baz
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:04 pm
jgmoebus,
sorry i did not answer you r question. I do not know what we can do about this. It has passed the point of no return. in short, we are screwed..
baz
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:08 pm
i would rather vote for someone who appreciates life and has brought life into this world than a racist selfish opportunist who just wants to make a buck
baz
December 22nd, 2011 at 11:12 pm
jfk…..
jgmoebus
December 23rd, 2011 at 12:25 am
Thanx, baz…. for being honest and correct and true. That's a pretty rare characteristic these days.
You most definitely did not answer my Question. But that's ok….. nobody ever does.
And don't be so sure that The (let alone "a") "point of no return" has been passed. Every Ending is a Beginning; every "point of no return" is where the Journey begins. Because if you can't return, you have no choice but to keep on going forward and away from where you were and thought you wanted and needed to get back to.
Pretty simple. But definitely not at all easy.
C.R.
December 23rd, 2011 at 12:29 am
I'd like to add to what Elessar Telcontar had to say about the coverage of Mitt Romney, plus comment on his father, George. I am NOT a Mitt Romney fan – and I take a lot of heat for that, being a member of the same denomination. Growing up in the suburban Detroit area, I slightly knew him during the one year I attended the same school he attended (I was 7th grade, he was 8th). I was not close to him and seriously doubt he would remember me. But I knew him well enough to know he stood out among the boys near our ages as a truly nice, decent guy. It's his politics I object to. Do I doubt his basic moral character? In a word, "No." If someone told me he cheated on his wife or transacted an illegal business deal, I'd actually be very surprised.
As for him "avoiding" the draft, I take strong issue with that. As an already married adult convert, going on a mission was never an option for me, but I know enough about the Church to know that drawing a conclusion about Mitt's motivation for serving a mission is totally out of bounds unless Mr. Giraldi knew him personally at the time. Mr. Giraldi didn't get his facts even remotely close. Romney went on his mission when he turned 19 (minimum age to serve a mission), THEN came back and transferred to BYU to be around his now-wife. By the time he graduated, his #300 in the draft lottery meant he would NOT be drafted. Then to claim Romney's mission was entered without proper qualifications as a minister, is to wholly misrepresent both that program, as well as the law at the time. That's how the government categorized "Mormon" missionaries, not some dodging tool by Church members claiming to be more than they were. It was totally up front and a wholly legitimate deferment. Cheap shots Mr. Giraldi.
As for George Romney, I met him, followed him politically, supported his presidential run, and was furious at how he was railroaded into abandoning his campaign. He came back from Viet Nam and TOLD THE TRUTH: we were being lied to. Mr. Giraldi, your assertion that "he did not speak out openly against it," is blatantly false. That's what was turned into all sorts of bogus reasons he should not be President, much as Ron Paul's positions are being distorted beyond any sense of reality to keep him from becoming President.
Other items: George Romney was president of American Motors before becoming Michigan's governor, not a GM executive. (Once again, nice going on your fact-checking Mr. Giraldi.) And Giraldi's sarcastic, low blow comments about Mitt "converting the heathen Roman Catholics" is clear evidence of a desire to trash Romney in any way possible.
Bottom line, despite being an active Latter-day Saint, you won't find me supporting either Huntsman or Romney – because of their politics, not because I question their character (if I questioned either one's character, it would actually be Huntsman – though I won't go any further with that one).
WhichWaldenPond: You also either don't have a clue about Romney's history and are trying to imply that an assumption of yours is worthy of consideration. Go check out just a tiny bit of history and you'll learn Romney was brought in to straighten out the mess that existed BECAUSE of the corruption. It was hoped he could clean up their image, as well as lift it out of a catastrophic money losing venture. He did both masterfully. If you don't want him to be your president either, at least go find a legitimate political reason for your prejudice.
Oh – and by the way Mr. Giraldi. I grew up in a substantially different economic class than did Mitt Romney, partly a reason for my not continuing at the school we both attended (it was private, and our family could not continue to fund it). Even with my much lower socioeconomic status compared to Romney's, I never saw a wall-mounted toilet tank growing up either. So what was that all about in your article? C'mon Giraldi – can't you find something reasonable to pick on Romney for? You attacked his social status, wealth, and religion, fantasized your own reasoning about why he didn't serve in the military, and seemed to avoid much information at all about his politics – which should be the criteria, not your own bias. I have zero reason to defend Romney as a presidential candidate. I just hate seeing articles that use the politics of destruction to sabotage candidates, instead of reasoned, researched background information.
Friday Articles » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog
December 23rd, 2011 at 11:14 am
[...] Philip Giraldi: Meet the Republican Chickenhawks [...]
MoT
December 23rd, 2011 at 3:39 pm
The war never had to happen. Think about it. If Lincoln had wanted to go about a peaceful solution and dialogue, over bullets and cannon shells, then he could easilly have done so. No one need have been sacrificed. It was HIS decision and HIS alone that cost all those lives. Nobody put a gun to his head, except maybe for the bankers and profiteering industrialists. And likewise "secession", even peaceful, is entirely possible. The only way to starve the beast, ultimately, is to cut off his lifeblood, the treasure they so gleefully steal from you every day, and tell them to go to hell. Now you have greater control over your destiny. Stop being so scared about what "may" happen and start acting on what you "can" do. They're counting on lazy, stupid, cowardly people to coast along further into slavery. You care to join them?
jgmoebus
December 23rd, 2011 at 5:26 pm
1. i know all about Lincoln and the Civil War and why it was fought, which was most assuredly NOT to free the slaves. i've read just as much so-called "revisionist" history as you have, MoT, i'm sure.
But i don't think anybody can argue that the black slaves in the Slave States would have been freed WITHOUT that War. How were they to have been freed? Who was going to free them without the destruction of the political system that maintained and enforced slavery; ie, the Confederacy? Do you think they could have achieved freedom without the defeat and destrruction of the Confederacy? ,,,tbc…
jgmoebus
December 23rd, 2011 at 5:34 pm
2. As to a "gun" at his head: how do you think Lincoln got into the White House in the first place, if NOT by the "invisible hand" of the "bankers and profiteering industrialists"?
Who HAS gotten to the White House EXCEPT at the behest of and on behalf of the bankers and the corporations? What makes you think Dr Paul will be any different?
And yes, you are right: peaceful secession is indeed "possible" in North America, just as secession from the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Bloc was possible back in the late 80s-early 90s.
But this is not the Soviet Union. And there WILL be no peaceful secession. Hell, the kids in the Occupy Movement can't even peacefully stage a sit-in without getting pepper sprayed and billyclubbed… At the next level, it will be nerve gas, tanks, and helicopter gunships. …tbc…
jgmoebus
December 23rd, 2011 at 5:52 pm
3. Ultimately and finally, exactly what do you call "the lifeblood" of this beast, this Fourth Reich? Revenue from taxes? And is that how to "starve" the beast: by refusing to pay income, property, sales, inheritance, and other taxes? Is that what you mean?
i have no fear of what "may" happen, MoT. What i feel is sorrow and rage at what HAS happened, what IS happening right now, and what is ABOUT to happen.
If you examine all my posts on antiWar.com over the past several weeks, you will see that the one recurring theme is the attempt to answer the Question: HOW is the Fourth Reich to be confronted, combatted, defeated, and destroyed? And by WHOM?
You say "act on what you 'can' do." i respond: i CAN do anything, but, the real question is, What MUST i do to accomplish the above-stated objective?
You care to join me?
jgmoebus
December 23rd, 2011 at 6:05 pm
And finally… 4. Are you claiming that the Confederacy would have ended slavery as a result of "peaceful solution and dialogue"? Do you actually believe that?
Slavery was built into The Constitution. It is the ONLY way that the United States could come into existence: if slavery was not outlawed by its core document. If The Constitution outlawed slavery, the representatives from slave-holding colonies would not have joined in signing it and declaring it the Law of the Land, and there would have been no United States of America. There would have been two separate nations (not necessarily a bad idea).
Besides blockade and embargo, what other "peaceful" leverage did Lincoln have? And remember, the secession wasn't about slavery. It was about tariffs and taxes. And individual State autonomy.
MoT
December 23rd, 2011 at 8:35 pm
Very good points. Do I believe it was necessary to destroy the constitution to save it? Absolutely not! But the rest of the world had already shown it wasn't necessary to go to war over slavery. Britain proved that. You won't hear me argue that the constitution is fatally flawed. I'm very much Spoonerian on that point.
jgmoebus
December 24th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Thanx, MoT, for acknowledging my "good points." But…. you didn't answer my Question:
"Ultimately and finally, exactly what do you call "the lifeblood" of this beast, this Fourth Reich? Revenue from taxes?"
Or, perhaps do you call it compliance with The Law: federal, state, and local?
Or WHAT? What IS the "LifeBlood" of The Beast, this Fourth Reich???
jgmoebus
December 24th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Britain may have proven that it isn't (or wasn't) necessary to go to war over slavery, but the US isn't Britain.
WAR is what we do. WAR is what we are. WAR is US.
MoT
December 25th, 2011 at 5:26 pm
Taxes? Exactly. But with taxes comes some twisted desire to order people to kill others on the other side of the planet no less. What is stolen is then redistributed under threat with more strings than any puppet could endure. Just because some belicose bastard makes "law" doesn't mean you should be forced to endure it forever. And I fully believe this "reich" or "empire" we currently live in needs to be cut up once and for all. If as a whole it doesn't listen to us then it should be forced to enjoy a smaller sandbox in which to play. See how long they can play with fewer stolen goodies. That's why, saving a miracle, I fully expect violence to occur. Why? Because when the peasants rise up our so-called "leaders" will rightfully fear for their worthless lives and will violently put anyone in camps or the grave or both. They deserve to swing from the lamp posts in DC for all of their thievery and lies. In jail? Hell no! Why continue to pay to keep vermin alive who have stolen from you from day one. Either the gallows or eternal exile upon pain of death. And not before they spill all the beans, even waterboarded into telling all, and leave with nothing but their lives and the shirt on their back. Family as well… and the rules apply to them, too. This is the only way to break the endless cycle of where our elites behave as annointed royalty. Start over and toss the old Constitution out the window because it laid the foundations for the hell we currently suffer with. We can do better and should.
MoT
December 25th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
The US you speak of is not ME nor I imagine YOU. It is what blood thirsty robots do who suffer from chronic cognitive dissonance.
Jim
December 26th, 2011 at 2:49 am
No MOT, it is you. It's either you or our friends who own our country and it can't be them so it must be you.
James
December 29th, 2011 at 6:54 am
Ron Paul vs. the Neocons: http://tinyurl.com/ronpaulvsneocons
Neocon Warmongers: http://tinyurl.com/neoconwarmongers
Meet the Republican ChickenHawks
December 29th, 2011 at 7:08 am
[...] http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2011/12/21/meet-the-republican-chickenhawks/ Posted in Zionist Threat « Weimar and Washington [...]
Republican Chickenhawk Hall of Fame | Welcome to the Blog of Jim Craven
June 30th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
[...] the Republican Chickenhawks by Philip Giraldi, December 22, 2011 Print This | Share [...]
Is the GOP a Threat to National Security? « Palomino Road
November 4th, 2012 at 9:05 pm
[...] to be on the offense. He is not ringing the war drum for Iran. In contrast, to trigger happy Republican Chicken Hawks, who clamor for more war, brag about how much they’ll do for oil companies, and beat their [...]