In particular, Meyer recently pointed to criticisms at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQNitCNycKQ

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZeSCDrviaM

I’ve got news for y’all: The entire promotion system that produces our leadership? It is corrupt. The products of that can’t be anything but corrupted, themselves. Mattis is no better than any of the other assclowns who’ve managed to beclown themselves; like Petreaus, he’s a flawed and corrupt rat bastard himself, just like the majority of the politicians who he served. I have no doubt that Petreaus would have crucified anyone under him for the security violations and marital infidelities he committed; meanwhile, doing all that is just fine for him. Different spanks for different ranks; Mattis had no problem doing what he did with Amazon representatives for the JEDI contract, and I would bet money that if you went and looked, you’d find several cases where he recommended punishment for Marines who did the exact same thing, while he was Corps Commandant.

Fuck the lot of them. In the ass, with a pineapple.

Afghanistan, Chile, Columbia, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Georgia, Grenada, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Libya, Nicaragua, Panama, Serbia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Turkey, Ukraine, Viet Nam, Yemen.

Not one of those countries attacked us or any of our allies, yet we attacked, invaded or organized coups in them.

On the public to do list are: China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Venezuela.

Much fun there. What’s a few American cities, if we can have that much fun.

Mattis and his ilk are NOT patriots. They ARE war criminals, in the exact same sense that Goebbels, Guderian, Rommel, MussolinI, Tojo, Yamamoto, Stalin, Hirohito and Hitler were war criminals. They all organized and lead wars of aggression against peaceful states.

In a just American, nearly every senior officer and politician in America would be hanged for war crimes.

This has been interpreted by Mrs Grasspunk as “Drink your own coffee before you bother making anybody else’s.”

Expect to make mistakes and always remember the other guy is going to make mistakes too.

When I was younger and looking for guidance, I feel victim to wounded Samaritans, who wanted to try to guide others in order to feel better than themselves. They bungled it, of course.

You can’t lead until you know the way. You can’t defend others if you can’t even defend yourself. You are the center point of your sphere of control, or else you haven’t got a sphere of control.

I’ll take the dogma of what works over what doesn’t work any day of the week. The rigidity of self-certainty is the commonest thing on the planet, but people knowing what they are talking about is rare and precious. How to tell the difference? Watch what they do, and what happens as a result. Then you’ll know whether to listen to what they say.

Do 99% of Americans think and talk in this missionary way all the time? Is it deemed impossible to cooperate with others without doing it with this mindset?

“When it comes to the defense of our experiment in democracy and our way of life, ideology should have nothing to do with it.” Solid in many ways, especially in the context of the sentence which follows. I can’t decide if the passage is also meant to imply that ideology has nothing to do with the first clause, which is either spectacularly naive or appallingly manipulative. Also, does anyone left not speak of America in terms of an “experiment in democracy”? Is it just a country with a history for anyone, or even just a set of discrete values/ideological propositions?

On that last, ever so subtle passage- has discussion truly reached the point at which the definition of America having allies and cooperating with other nations more broadly actually requires that mode in which the US ‘leads’ by subsuming its interests to the framework demanded by the allies, subsidizes their efforts, and demands little in return, and everything has to be institutionalized? There is no other way of operating short of having no friends and telling everyone else to f off? Also, “Returning to a strategic stance that includes the interests of as many nations as we can make common cause with, we can better deal with this imperfect world we occupy together.” ‘As many nations as [the US] can make common cause with’ is going to need more parsing and some context.

And lastly, “we can better deal with this imperfect world we occupy together”. Which of the authors wrote this patronizing, kindergartenish exhortation?

Sorry. Living in Canada I’m taking a daily mental bath in this sort of guff. One would have hoped a USMC general called Mad Dog would, whatever his specific views on these issues, not just repeat the institutional cant in its own cant phrases.