11 April 2018

Glenn "Ready. Fire. Aim." Beck.

Glenn Beck was just inveighing against the Russians implying that they are the threat to world peace now. He criticizes them for vetoing a proposed U.N. Security Council resolution to investigate the supposed chemical incident in Douma on April 7 and admonishes them to disassociate themselves from a regime that uses gas on its own citizens.

Mr. Beck does many good things but on the Russia issue he's all about selling their supposedly hostile objectives and nefarious activities. Today on The Blaze TV he and sidekick Stu exhibit not the least skepticism on the subject of the "attack" and seem to be completely unaware of the astounding rush to judgment so painfully evident in the thinking of Washington elites. Neither those elites nor Beck trouble themselves with any objective data collection and analysis but rush straight to the most ludicrous, evidence-free conclusion, that of Assad's lunatic idea to use gas on civilians when he's on the cusp of total victory in the Damascus area and killing civilians serves no tactical purpose whatsoever.

That this is dishonest and reckless does not occur to Beck who assures himself that we can't not "do something" and that future "rogue regimes" need to know that their ability to use similar methods will not be tolerated.

To Beck, the U.N. is a waste of time in this situation and he obviously, like Nikki Haley, believes that the U.S. can ignore the U.N. Charter if matters in the Security Council are not resolved to our satisfaction. The opposite is in fact true. Namely, that the U.N. Charter is meant precisely to deal with security matters of critical importance where it is precisely (1) that in the Security Council situation that the great powers will be able to exercise a veto as per plan and (2) no military force may be used except in the case of self defense (which this obviously is not) or authorization from the Security Council.

Beck spared us any actual tears but chose to serve up a ton of reckless nonsense and pure Beckian sanctimony ("more in sorrow than in anger, I reluctantly must say . . . ).

There is one and only one question to be asked at this point and that is "What, if anything, happened?" The world is not served by American elites and loudmouths rushing to attack a sovereign state yet again with no @#$% period of investigation or deliberation. The U.S. and Britain are in the grip of some kind of obsession to decide complex matters overnight when a delay of 180 days would make no difference in the least to proper resolution.

No comments: