Is Hillary Receiving Bad Advice?

And if so, could that bad advice lead us to war? I was perusing the Wikileaks site under Clinton's e-mails, and I came across this one. It's from Sid Blumenthal, a trusted HRC advisor, and it's very problematic.

Look at item #4. Note that the date was 6/28/12, this was before the rise of ISIS. He states that a grave danger in Lebanon is that Syrian agents will conduct bombings and assassinations in an effort to frame the Lebanese Salafist militias there. Assad's agents are the danger, not the actual Salafists, according to Sid.

Fast forward four years, and we find that there have in fact been many bombings and other acts of terror in Lebanon, yet these have all been executed by actual Salafi terrorists. Many have been arrested or killed, and there is no evidence that anyone except the Salafi and their allies were involved, to the contrary, huge networks have been exposed. From the mortar attacks directed at Christian areas (Palestinians) to suicide bombers in Dahieh, a Shia neighborhood in south Beirut (ISIS), these attacks were conducted by the usual suspects. The one instance I am aware of wherein Syrian intel may have been involved was a Sunni mosque in the north, several years ago, long before this e-mail.

This was fairly stunning to me, because I realized that Hillary, and others at the highest levels of government may be badly misinformed. I had assumed that they knew exactly what they were doing, but it dawned on me that they might be basing their decisions on faulty data points. If one were to assume that the Salafi won't launch terror attacks, and that the terror attacks that occur are actually conducted by Assad's intelligence force, then the obvious conclusion is that Assad must go, and that the Salafi can be trusted to govern. Thus we get headlines like this.

Now it's possible that Hillary does in fact know exactly what is going on. If that were true though, why would she support the Syrian rebels, who are overwhelmingly Islamist, and almost guaranteed to make a bloodbath of what's left of Syria? Can she actually want to create a failed state? Enable the "Caliphate"? I don't think so. I tend to believe that there is a critical lack of understanding at the apex of government, due to group-think and heavy reliance on unreliable sources.

If someone believes that Assad, and by extension, his allies, Iran and Russia, are largely responsible for the export of Islamist terrorism (a belief that defies both facts and logic), then supporting the Syrian rebels, confronting Russia and Iran, and defeating Assad all make sense.

If, by contrast, someone believes that Saudi Arabia, and similar states are largely responsible for supporting Islamist terrorism, a completely different conclusion would be drawn. In this scenario, what would make sense would be to cut ties with the rebels, and work with the Russians and Iranians to achieve a cease-fire, and hopefully, peace. Assad would either be retained, or alternately, Syria could be partitioned to accommodate three or more groups who can't co-exist.

From the e-mails it looks like Hillary relies heavily on certain key advisors, Blumenthal being one, and it also looks like she's being fed lousy intelligence. Only bad results can come from acting upon bad intel.

What do you think? Who is the greater enemy, ISIS, Nusra and Saudi Arabia, or Assad, Iran and Russia? If we fight one and ally with the other, what would peace look like?

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

If you look at U.S. foreign policy, incompetence explains a lot of the blunders. President George W. Bush famously did not know about the Sunni vs. Shia divide in Iraq just prior to ordering the illegal invasion that triggered a fateful civil war.

Some people try to spin bogus conspiracy theories that assume elaborate and carefully coordinated schemes are afoot, when in fact the right hand often doesn't know what the left hand is doing. Recently it was revealed that CIA-backed fighters in Syria had clashed with Pentagon-backed fighters.

I think the goal of Hillary’s neocon friends like PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan is to keep those unwinnable wars halfway around the world going for the defense contractors, and if possible re-start the even more profitable Cold War with Russia. It's a stupid and dangerous plan, and it is out in the open. There isn't a secret code name for it.

up
0 users have voted.

"We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty."

dervish's picture

My thoughts too. It looks like anyone who goes against the group-think gets side-lined. I get the part about continuing the perma-war, what I don't get is picking the wrong side, unless, as you say, conflict with Russia was the goal in the first place.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

riverlover's picture

That woman has many tells.

up
0 users have voted.

Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.

Big Al's picture

not simply enriching the MIC. That's what its really all about in the end, world domination. Or maybe that's just another CT.

up
0 users have voted.

There is a problem with "world domination" by military means. We are spending more on our military than the whole rest of the world combined (including our allies), winning tactically but not strategically because the leaders in Washington don't have a coherent strategy. So it looks more like imperial overstretch than domination.

up
0 users have voted.

"We've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty."

... and showing worse judgment. It is not a coincidence that many Neocon leaders are also first and foremost pro-Israel, and that their policies foment division and war in the Muslim lands. US policies have done a great deal to stoke Sunni-Shia hatreds, and we see the consequences all across the Middle East today.

Stoking a new Cold War with Russia is a whole different level of suicidally stupid, though. Hillary's advisers no doubt think that putting the country back on a perpetual war footing would be good for business, and better for helping them maintain power. It's enough to make Donald Trump look like George McGovern.

up
0 users have voted.

Please help support caucus99percent!

dervish's picture

back in 2012 or so, and equally amazing how wrong so much of his advice turned out to be. I imagine that the information she's relying on today isn't much better or different. I think war with Russia is quite likely, if she is elected.

The whole damned world looks like nails to these people.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

She's gotten hers, so to hell with the rest of us - especially if she can speed the process up.

up
0 users have voted.

Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.

dervish's picture

is how difficult it is for her to change course, or adapt. It seems characteristic of her to stick to a certain course or policy, in spite of changing circumstances or new intel. I fear that we'll end up confronting Russia, and for all of the wrong reasons.

We're going to party like it's 1914.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

jwa13's picture

typical of repugnicans.

Gosh, who would have guessed --

up
0 users have voted.

When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.

detroitmechworks's picture

and her accountant is ecstatic about it.

With regards to running the country? Oh, well I'm sure whatever Kissinger said was right...

up
0 users have voted.

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

dervish's picture

was reading the e-mail. It's sort of like eavesdropping, this a communication not intended for public consumption, yet it appears that she's swallowing obvious CT without a second thought.

Yeah, "whatever Kissinger said..." is about right.

If you assume that your opponent is responsible for all conflict, you'll be blind to new threats popping up, as she was clearly blind to the threat of ISIS. It's just one more massive display of bad judgment and a lack of critical thinking.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

danger to our country and the world? She's running for fucking president and so is he! Maybe it's not them but the hands up their asses controlling them. Either way Our Gov't is the leading terrorist group out there. Body count, completed strikes in Sovereign Countries, extra judicial killings, rendition. . .fuck it, I give up for now.

up
0 users have voted.

Ya got to be a Spirit, cain't be no Ghost. . .

Explain Bldg #7. . . still waiting. . .

If you’ve ever wondered whether you would have complied in 1930’s Germany,
Now you know. . .
sign at protest march

Big Al's picture

are "around here someplace"? They're supporting the Syrian rebels to try to overthrow the Assad government and balkanize Syria. Clinton is basically a neocon and Syria and Libya were on the list (Clark's list). She knows exactly what's going on. Clinton helped create ISIS and Al Nusra is another U.S. aided terrorist group used for these purposes. The enemy thing is all in the sheeple's heads. The only real enemy here is our own government which is causing and instigating these wars and conflicts for the ruling elite. In fact, in February, the real enemy just might be Clinton, who knows exactly what she wants.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

They are one and the same in Hillary. The Goldwater girl is the one who rooted for Goldwater’s racism and is also now the Wall St. girl.

It is said of Trump that what you see is what you get. With Hillary what you see is what you don’t get. Trump provides some clarity, albeit distasteful, but shows what America has been and still largely is. This may lead to conflict upon election which may lead to change, the 1960s again! Hillary is not what you see—she will lead to thousands of people killed in her illegal invasions abroad, as her history makes clear but she obfuscates today, all the more reason she is dangerous. She already the other day again said that she will get rid of President Assad. Yet she cries foul about her election here influenced by Russia.

Great article from counterpunch
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/05/the-goldwater-girl-and-the-wall-s...

Hillary’s bloodthirsty and warmongering past means war in the future and more murders of women and children, not to mention men.

The similarly bloodthirsty drone Obama had the gall as well to say that she needs to be elected to complete his work. At first in 2008 it was that of hope and change. It did not happen, so he urged voters to let him in 2012 complete what he started. After 8 years he still has not done what he promised he would do in 2008—close Guantanamo and immigration reform and there is still no single payer health care. Apparently he and Hillary take us for fools, and they are basically right.

Hillary isn't getting bad advice, she is putting the same people who wrote the PNAC on her staff.
Her supporters say that she only voted for the AUMF to give the inspectors more time, but we have seen videos of her saying that Saddam was working with Al Quada and other bullshit.
Besides, the people who wrote up the PNAC went to Bill and wanted him to remove Saddam. Anyone believe that Hillary wasn't aware of this?
And how many times has she said that the things she has done were mistakes ?
Being responsible for over a million deaths doesn't qualify as a mistake in my book.
It's a cold calculated decision and has no regard for how many innocent civilians or troops are killed.
If she met a plane loaded with caskets coming back from a war zone do you think that the grieving parents would accept her saying Oops, my bad?

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Voting is like driving with a toy steering wheel.

smiley7's picture

up
0 users have voted.
smiley7's picture

from Bill, William Jefferson Clinton, who forsook the future to bring plenty during his reign.

up
0 users have voted.
Hawkfish's picture

I'd say yes.

up
0 users have voted.

We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg

think of all her "pet" people who will have roles in her administration should she pull off a miracle and win in November. Blumenthal, Brock, DWS, Mills, and the list goes on. I think I'm going to be sick!

up
0 users have voted.
jwa13's picture

coming from? My best guess is that it probably isn't coming from the Assad regime in Syria. OTOH, we KNOW that members of the Saudi royals have donated money to the Clenis Foundation over the years -- is it possible that donations also have made their way to The $hill's campaign? If that is the case, I wonder which interpretation of current events is most likely to be adopted by The $hill?

up
0 users have voted.

When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.

Hawkfish's picture

You mean like Chalabi?

The neocons and the neolibs share a stunning arrogance towards the world's brown people, which repeatedly ends in them being played.

The first thing a con artist does is pump up the marks ego. It helps if it is already overinflated.

up
0 users have voted.

We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg

dervish's picture

She's getting information that is transparently worthless, yet she keeps accepting it from the same small circle of people. This crappy analysis may lead us to war.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

She's a neocon, and part of the PNAC world domination plan is to destroy any possible competition for domination, any countries that aren't subservient to us. Libya went from the poorest country in Africa to the richest under Gaddafi, with education and medical care for his people. He gave up his nuclear weapons when we asked him to. Oops. He was also talking about an alternate currency for oil with other African countries, rather than the dollar. Can't have that.

up
0 users have voted.

The one where the "Morning Joe" crew ask Trump who advises him, and he says he listens to himself? Whenever I see that ad(plays a lot of Hulu for some reason) I automatically hear them ask Hillary, and hear her say, " I listen to Sid Blumenthal, a man with No security clearance who Obama would not let me hire. I listen to Henry effing Kissinger, considered a war criminal by much of the thinking world. I listen to the clusterfuck PNAC who whispered into George W.'s ear.And of course, I listen to the guys who crashed the economy back in '08." If Trump were halfway campaigning he would be running ads like this now.

up
0 users have voted.
dervish's picture

Why is she listening to the usual suspects, and why isn't anyone saying anything about it?

They were wrong then, and they are wrong now, yet we keep lurching towards doom.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

Yes, from the getgo from those she says encouraged her to run for the presidency.

And it has all gone downhill from there.

If not for the courage of Senator Sanders, in his david versus goliath stance, to step up to run against her, think how different the whole primary would have been.

Just remembering that tiny little press conference, so sparsely attended, when he announced warms my heart. The only one with the courage at that time to challenge the coronation that she expected.

up
0 users have voted.