Rex Tillerson – #AlwaysAssad Partisan & Pragmatically Distributed Lurker

We told Secretary Tillerson to back Assad.  And now he has.

His reasons for endorsing Assad are good because they are Pragmatically Distributed’s reasons:

As #NeverTrump did during the election, their opposition to Assad is justified while either avoiding what the alternative to their #NeverCandidate is guaranteed to be, or deluding themselves in the hope there is a viable third candidate to save everyone from two undesirable options.

Few things in foreign affairs are as certain as the fact there is no Democratic 3rd option in Syria.

The time for #NeverAssad to have their say was in the primaries between Assad, ISIS and other equally loathsome terrorist groups, and those ever elusive Islamic “moderates”.

Primary season is over; the general election is now, and those Westernized moderates – as always happens in Muslim “democracies” – were beheaded on the floor of the party conventions by amphetamine-addled delegates, their wives and children sold into chattel sex slavery, and their Western bank accounts stripped clean of every digital penny.  You can believe us when we say no one throws a nomination convention quite like ISIS!

This obscenely Darwinian process has selected for a simple binary choice between two tyrants –

  • Bashar Assad
  • The various Islamic terrorist rebels opposed to Assad, the most powerful of which is ISIS

Setting aside any delusions that the world can enjoy #NeverAssad without #AlwaysBaghdadi, and understanding that only one of these two characters can win, Pragmatically Distributed gets to the point and asks what condition will Syria be left in following an Assad or rebel victory:

We applaud Tillerson taking our informed advice that a post-Assad Syria will be no more interested in human rights than post-Gadhaffi Libya now is.

We do question the wisdom of the Russia-Turkey backed peace plan.  Their proposal would have Syria divided into three zones of influence with Assad the titular head of all three but leaving a degree of local autonomy for the various Syrian factions in each zone who are now at each other’s throats.

We would prefer Assad simply lay waste to any remaining zones of resistance – civilian casualties be damned – and rule the entirety of Syria with an iron fist.  Granting regional privileges seems to us just a temporary truce that will be broken by pro-ISIS Syrians once time is used to regroup, rearm, and position themselves for a new civil war.

It is a sad commentary on the state of modern day Absolutism that neither Putin nor Erdogan, both genuine authoritarians, remember how to run a true scorched earth campaign in the examples set by the Romanovs and Ottomans.

But we suppose it will do for now to squash the deadliest threat facing the Syrian people – allowing Syrian Muslims the freedom to choose their own leadership.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Rex Tillerson – #AlwaysAssad Partisan & Pragmatically Distributed Lurker”

  1. ISPs – The changes are really a maintenance of the status quo.

    The two articles you linked are interesting but flawed in two respects. I get the impression the authors believe the administrative state tilts the balance of powers too far in favor of the Executive. This is incorrect. The Technocratic system has been working for over a century to drain power from the other three branches – including the President – to empower the state.

    To the extent the founders envisioned an administration existing with the Executive, it was assumed the administration would not be independent from the will of the President.

    Actually undermining the President as we see it doing in its decayed state is not anything that could be justified in the Constitution. Jefferson wanted the powerful Executive envisioned by Hamilton checked by the states, legislature, and judiciary. An unelected administrative state was never anything Jefferson would have argued for since they were also distant from the will of the people.

    Restoring balance of powers actually means eliminating the 4th branches independence completely, not rebalancing the normal 3 branches as intended by the Constitution.

Comments are closed.