Friday, October 31, 2014

John Kerry, "My job is really, really hard" - Not like those folks in the past, when "The Cold War was Easy"

Remarkable. “The Cold War was easy compared to where we are today,” the secretary of State said Thursday . . .
Q: How does Afghanistan fit the strategic plan . . . ISIS . . . where does it fit . . .?
A. Well, it's very straightforward . . . and let me say to everybody that we're living . . . the Cold War was easy compared to where we are today . . . and the immediate post war . . .

Q. Is Putin trying to make it easy for you again, bringing it back?
A. I hope not.
So, the modern world - the world we live in today - is "very straightforward" but not "easy" like the olden time "Cold War" era. Clear enough for you?

No wonder we are wallowing in international affairs.

Another quote from Mr. Kerry:
So now, you have more countries with more economic power in a globalized world. … They're going to automatically react and say, Well, wait a minute, now. Do we really want the behemoth United States, superpower of the world, telling us all the time what we have to do?" Kerry said. "So you have to approach these things a little differently. It requires more diplomacy. It requires more dialogue. It requires more respect for people, more mutual interests."
Imagine the nerve of other countries thinking they have the right to manage their own matters, thus complicating U.S. foreign policy. Having to exercise more "diplomacy," don't you know. So much work dealing with India, Japan, South Korea and all those Europeans. But isn't that why we have a Secretary of State and all the minions in the State Department? Isn't this "complicated" world of free and economically stronger countries what we fought wars, both hot and cold for?

Isn't the main complicating factor now the combination of rogue states, including Russia, Iran and North Korea, and non-state forces like ISIS and al Queda? The former don't respond to diplomacy because . . . they know the threat force causes the dis-unified western nations to cave in and toss, say, Crimea and other chunks of Ukraine or Georgia off the sled to fend off the Russian wolves. And ISIS/AQ, being stateless but funded (in part) by states, know they have top cover so that diplomacy is a waste of time.

But where did our "nuance" in dealing with such bullies come from? Who pushed the "reset" button with Russia. Who drew quickly erased "red lines" in the sand? Who looks to cut a deal with Iran? Who decided to get out of Iraq without finishing the fight? Who announced "set in stone" withdrawal dates for troops in Afghanistan?

And, Mr. Interviewer - - - "Strategic plan?" What strategic plan would that be?


Video here.


  1. Kerry was (and probably always will be) a clown.

    I struggle to name one American politician who has been around as long as he has and been consistently wrong on EVERY international event of the past 40 years.

    Seriously - name one international even where the position Kerry took turned out to be the correct position as judged by history? A broken clock is right at least twice a day (non digital) but this guy has managed to be on the wrong side of history consistently for decades.

    At least he is consistent. Find out what Kerry wants to do and pick the opposite course - odds are very much in your favor that whatever the course is it will turn out to be the correct one.

  2. Maybe if we give him a Nobel prize like his master has, he will go away?