“That the missiles are called tomahawks must enrage a lot of Native Americans.”
Sorry, no, that’s not parody. It’s the editor of Mother Jones Magazine, Clara Jefferey, confirming the right’s favorite kind of stereotype about lefty outrage queens. Sometimes you’ve just got to shake your head and laugh at the absurdity that is our national discourse. Just… stop. Please.
In addition to the basic silliness of Tweeting outrage, Clara tips her hand in a manner that mi amigo Rick Schwertfeger from down Austin, Texas, way nails right in the X-ring:
If they are enraged, I assume that “Native Americans” will speak out about it themselves. Apart from whether or not it’s a silly point, it’s fascinating that ol’ Clara apparently doesn’t see the paternalism in her statement.
While I’m at it, I guess I’ll weigh in on the Syria strike: Trump did the right thing. Obama should have rained tomahawks down on the Assad regime’s assets when the flagrantly crossed his “red line” in a far worse Sarin attack. We have to keep the use of chemical weapons stuffed in the verboten box, elsewise it will become normalized in that laboratory of hell once known as Syria, and we’ll see more use there and elsewhere. Barrel bombs, starvation and exile are horrible in themselves for the beleaguered Syrian population, caught between a brutal regime on one hand and psychotic Islamic fundamentalist nihilists on the other. But chemical and biological weapons have, since World War I, been regarded rightly as a special category of horror. The world cannot afford to become desensitized to their deployment.
I have zero confidence that the strike is tied to a coherent Syria policy (to the extent that such a thing is possible). I firmly believe that it had more to do with Trump’s daughter being upset at the horrible images of hideously dying Syrian children. And I’m sure there was some political calculation that a military strike would take some pressure off a floundering administration and boost approval ratings, as flexing muscle always does. It can’t hurt Trump right now to be seen in opposition to Putin’s aims and desires, right? I won’t even address the rank hypocrisy of Republicans who did everything they could to prevent Obama from acting, now praising Trump’s strength and decisiveness. Rank hypocrisy is, after all, the coin of the realm in the Imperial City.
We can kick at the gigantic expense of the “message” Trump sent and question the effectiveness of the strike itself, which appears to be less bang than you might expect for $83 million, but ultimately, it is a good thing to put consequences on the use of chemical weapons. A tomahawk to the head works for me.
Magua is outraged.
Cort Horner says
$89M extremely well-spent, in my opinion. It was a flashy, humanitarian, timely (given the strike occurred AT…THE…MOMENT…Trump was meeting with Xi) reminder to the world that there’s a new Sheriff in town and the namby-pamby attitude of the U.S.A. is hindsight now. It was also an extremely effective move against Russia. To quote a friend with permission: “The combination of the Syrian chemical attacks and Trump’s missile strike might be the biggest defeat for (Iran and) Russia since the end of the Soviet Union. Under Asad, Syria was a joint colony of Russia and Iran. Its collapse was a defeat for both, but through sheer carnage fatigue, global revulsion at Daesh, crisp intervention, and dithering by Obama, Russia was about 95% toward getting global consensus (even partly *realigning Turkey*) that Asad had to return to national power, with billions in global aid, to end the death and destruction. But Asad misread the situation, and Trump pounced, wasting all that progress at a stroke. No such consensus will ever re-form. It’s a matter of time, but “Chemical Asad” is ex-dictator walking, Syria eventually will regain independence, and Russia and Iran are finished there.”
And Gorsuch was confirmed during the media frenzy to figure out how to paint the President in a negative light on this one, despite overwhelming support both from the American people and Congress for the strike.
Trump and his administration continue to show an uncanny understanding of Sun Tzu’s teachings.
JimC says
I’d like to think the admin was as cunning as you depict it. (McMaster certainly is; he, at least, knows Sun Tzu). I have my doubts.
Black Tyrone says
Who really is this inconsequential editor????? Ha Ha Those of high self esteem could care less. Those with low self esteem remain so.. regardless.
Joey Paxman says
Last year, under our Nobel Peace Prize president, the US dropped 12,197 bombs on Syria.
You don’t officially become full CEO of the country until you’ve dropped a bomb. I guess Trump has finally taken the reigns.
But of course it was just hours before Trump fired his Tomahawks that Hilary advised him to “take out Assad’s airfields.” (See the full HRC interview on the Independent.)
So now we’re left to wonder if Trump will fulfill ALL of HRC’s campaign promises or perhaps just this one as a conciliatory gesture for her loss of the election.
JimC says
LOL.
It’s easy to get cynical. I know I am. The root of this poisoned plant is our ill-conceived invasion of Iraq in 2003. Worst geostrategic mistake in our history.
deuce says
…and yet, ol’ Dubya still deigns to bequeath to us policy advice from time to time. How blessed we are! Truly, a statesman for the ages.
I would have no problem voting in a referendum to have the entire Bush clan spayed and neutered. It’s the only way to be sure.
JimC says
From From a Bush aide (almost certainly Karl Rove):
“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
The most hubristic statement ever made. And, given what study of “what they do” revealed in the fullness of time, grotesque.
J.F. Bell says
I think grotesque is a pretty fair description of Karl Rove.
One of those individuals who continually pops up in the news and, as of yet, me and my circle of associates can’t figure out why. Must be a familiarity thing among the networks…certainly not based on any achievements so far as can be discerned.
But I digress. Back to our regularly-scheduled outrage.
JimC says
Hard to understand sticking with an analyst who is consistently and stubornly wrong about just about everything.
J.F. Bell says
…our present political system in a nutshell.
Meteorology and politics are the only professional fields where being catastrophically wrong nine times in ten allows for a long and profitable tenure rather than a summary dismissal.
JimC says
Hah!
Dick says
Sad to think that we (“the civilized world”) have apparently become desensitized to the use of barrel bombs, starvation, massive distributions of land mines, etc. as tactics of war. To me, these are just as horrid as chemical and biological weapons — none of them should be considered “normal”. But as to a solution — you got me. We can’t seem to ever un-ring the bell that tolled at the conclusion of WWI.
JimC says
The point is valid. The Rwandan massacres were carried out almost entirely with machetes. I’ll wager that being hacked to death with a machete is no less horrible in its way than drowning in your own chemically-liquified lung tissue.
Nevertheless, I still believe that chemical/biological weapons have to be treated as taboo (BTW, I understand that you are not arguing AGAINST a taboo on chem warfare). Probably, at root, it’s more feeling than logic, but I’ll quote from Max Fisher in The Washington Post in defense of the argument:
“…to understand what makes the norm against chemical weapons so important, you have to understand that it’s chemical weapons’ strengths as well as their weaknesses make them so dangerous. They’re very, very useful for killing large numbers of civilians indiscriminately, but they’re actually much less practical for winning conventional battles. A chemical war, then, is not just a war that kills more people; it’s a qualitatively different kind of war. Their use encourages militaries to seek victory by destroying civilian populations, which becomes much easier to do when you use chemical weapons, than by overcoming the enemy military on the battlefield.”
Certainly, a lid was ripped off a box full of devils in 1914-18 and they continue to dance despite our pretensions to enlightenment.
Mike says
kill a chicken to scare the monkeys…
David Snell says
Am understanding, but not underwriting, your views re: the tomahawk.
An understanding of native-American outrage isn’t something picked up on the fly, or routinely absorbed while toeing through the ballet of daily pursuit. Some quiet time alone with some especially knowlegable and effective speakers could, I have no doubt, change your mind.
I rember the old days, when only crazy people complained about smoking in public.
Greg Marshall says
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Saddle Tramp says
Jim…
Yourself along with all the others here have provided some very thoughtful comment all with points well stated. This post opens up a huge area of discussion. As you and your readers are well aware, the ineptitude of policies or lack thereof as it appears to many are rife with consequences unknown and yet to be seen. The paradoxes or outright hypocrisy’s are blatantly evident to me. Regarding the appropriation of Tomahawks, I would not want to be drug into a debate about the appropriateness or not of the use of Native American weaponry or not. Broken Arrow is another term given to a very serious concern. I stop short at this being a derogatory term as used here. If you have a disdain at weaponry in the first place this may be an issue. That is a debate without end. I think many Native Americans take offense at the sports team’s use of their heritage. Myself, I personally view it as complimentary as sports is about winning and who would want to choose the symbolism of losers as their mascots. But it is not my place to choose for them.
I myself am just hoping there is a straight arrow among the quiver of what appears to be the gang that can’t shoot straight. A new red line has been scribed now and are we prepared to go the distance to enforce it (everywhere and every time) or is it a case of ( I really did not mean it that way ) when it becomes less convenient or popular. The horridness of it all is unnerving and heartbreaking to say the least whenever it comes to innocent children no matter by what means. However, I agree Jim that chemical warfare is especially heinous and was banned for good reason. There is no shortage of cruelty in this wide world. I accept any signs of humaneness from Trump, but well Trump is Trump whatever that is.
Strangely or not the same individual (George Creel) who helped get Woodrow Wilson reelected with the slogan HE KEPT US OUT OF WAR some few months after that reelection had to turn heel with that view and was then put in charge of the (CPI) U.S. Committee On Public Information (Propaganda) for the war effort of World War I (the war to end all wars)…
Ironically, another slogan from another oppressed minority during this time turned around another slogan of Wilson’s admonishing him to
MAKE AMERICA SAFE FOR DEMOCRACY
That is a work in progress still…
Wait and watch. That’s about all we can do in these strange and scary times. No predictions from me on this one. Nobody ever said it has to make sense…
JimC says
As always, appreciate the thoughtful engagement. I think this outfit has a pretty good grasp of the complexity and tragedy (in the Classical) sense of human endeavor– in s way that is not much in evidence elsewhere.
Saddle Tramp says
* Mike… kill a chicken to scare the monkeys…
OR:
Another direct translation:
Kill the weak to scare the strong…
john roberts says
God help us if the Scots find out we have the Claymore mine.
JimC says
Well played. Game-set-match to JMR.
Paul McNamee says
ultimately, it is a good thing to put consequences on the use of chemical weapons. A tomahawk to the head works for me.
Yes.
I started viewing American Experience: The Great War last night. Again reminded of the horror of gas.
Brings to mind the H. P. Lovecraft and Robert E. Howard debates concerning “civilization vs. barbarism.”
Gas is a production of science and chemistry and civilization. Its employment in war is perhaps the most savage & ‘barbaric’ act of all. Nothing noble or honorable about it.
As The Kinks sang;
This is the 20th century
A mechanical nightmare
Wonderful world of technology
Napalm, hydrogen bomb
Biological warfare
JimC says
That lyric is on point — totally forgot about it.
Saddle Tramp says
Perhaps apropos the documentary film The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara is airing again tonight on PBS. I have seen it twice before, but in my opinion it is well worth watching again (and again)…
JimC says
Gotta DVR that. Thanks.
Tommy says
Sir well said!
JimC says
Thx.
Tommy says
You are welcome Jim.
Buzz says
So her tweet, got her national attention, must have been a slow news day or fit the ” Drive by” narrative. Did she offer any suggestions to change the name?
JimC says
Nah, tweeting outrage is its own reward;)
lane batot says
Them dang sioux-cider bommerz always WASTING themselves on innocent citizens–why the HELL don’t one a them fellers take a bit more trouble and do everbody some good, and take out that thar Syrian president, or such like?….. And I hear Cowboys, Sooners, and Vikings are soon to protest being utilized as sporting mascots(ahem!)…..and incidentally, in the Magua photo; I believe us Xtra Coureur De Bois were somewhere up on that ridge behind Wes Studi, taking a nap in the shade, tired of Michael Mann shooting every shot in the humid August heat, over and over and over and over and over and over, infinitum! If you listen closely, you can hear him screaming between takes: “WHERE ARE THE GODDAM COUREUR DE BOIS!!!!!!?????!!!!!”