October 9, 2018

"Jared is such a hidden genius that no one understands,” said Haley. “What I have done working with him on the Middle East peace plan. It is so unbelievably well done."

Said Nikki Haley, as she resigned from her position as U.N. ambassador.

265 comments:

1 – 200 of 265   Newer›   Newest»
rhhardin said...

Scott Adams says we probably won't need another new-ideas president for a while.

rhhardin said...

It's a new system, but every system has a type of person adapted to thrive on it or in it. John Gall

sooner or later.

Nonapod said...

The thing about any long term foreign policy is that you can never definitively say whether one approach was superior to another since we don't have access to a time machine and the ability to view alternate timelines. It's always supposition.

J. Farmer said...

Even more evidence of Haley's total incompetence in her position. It is fitting, though, considering that Haley's sole foreign policy experience prior to this job was making cliched boilerplate "pro-Israel" statements. Safe bet: Jared's "peace plan" will go nowhere.

rehajm said...

It's always supposition.

If they don't end up dead, in jail or on the stripper pole you did pretty good.

Achilles said...

CHAOS!1!1!1 garblearble mumpf..

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

I think it might be illegal to say anything positive about the Trump family.

MadTownGuy said...

J. Farmer said...

"Even more evidence of Hillary's total incompetence in her position. It is fitting, though, considering that Hillary's sole foreign policy experience prior to this job was making cliched boilerplate "pro-Palestinian" statements. Safe bet: Jarrett's "peace plan" will go nowhere."

FIFY.

Achilles said...

J. Farmer said...
Even more evidence of Haley's total incompetence in her position. It is fitting, though, considering that Haley's sole foreign policy experience prior to this job was making cliched boilerplate "pro-Israel" statements. Safe bet: Jared's "peace plan" will go nowhere.

Someone is bitter.

The mullahs in Iran are the only real impediment to peace and stability left in the ME.

They will fall soon.

The war in Korea is being ended.

China is finally being confronted.

The UN is being sidelined as all corrupt useless institutions should.

I don’t think there is anything the US could do that would make Farmer happy/

J. Farmer said...

@MadTownGuy:

FIFY.

Care to provide examples?

Rob said...

Hidden genius--but stable genius?

J. Farmer said...

@Achilles:

The mullahs in Iran are the only real impediment to peace and stability left in the ME.

They will fall soon.


I will bet you a thousand dollars that does not occur. You can pick the time frame. If you are interested, let me know, and I will give you my contact information.

I don’t think there is anything the US could do that would make Farmer happy/

I have repeatedly described the American foreign policy that would make me happy. Namely, less interventionist and less supportive of destructive, destabilizing policies (e.g. the Saudis attempt to starve the Yemeni population into submission and their concomitant attempts to empower salafist groups like Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula).

Achilles said...

MadTownGuy said...
J. Farmer said...

Interesting you would misunderstand J that way.

But illustrative.

John Tuffnell said...

I wonder if it takes a stable genius to nurture and appreciate a hidden genius.

JFarmer, interesting opinion. She's incompetent because she hasn't solved the ME in less than two years? Tough standard.

Total incompetence is one of the ways I describe the entire UN. I think she's done a fine job of representing what Trump wanted in a UN ambassador.

Etienne said...

If I had to live in New York City I would kill myself. She probably want's to get out of the shithole.

Original Mike said...

i”Safe bet: Jared's "peace plan" will go nowhere.”

That’s the safest bet on the planet (regardless of what’s in Kushner’s plan).

Etienne said...

If I had to live in New York City I would kill myself. She probably want's to get out of the shithole.

EDH said...

"Jared is such a hidden genius that no one understands,” said Haley.

Does no one understand Jared, or is it just his genius they don't understand?

“What I have done working with him on the Middle East peace plan. It is so unbelievably well done."

Exactly who is she lauding?

John Tuffnell said...

Trump needs to shake up the UN with Haley's replacement.

Get ready for Ambassador Kanye!

LarsPorsena said...

I'll miss Nikki. Heard rumors that Trump was jealous of her.

J. Farmer said...

@John Tuffnell:

JFarmer, interesting opinion. She's incompetent because she hasn't solved the ME in less than two years? Tough standard.

That isn't the standard. As I wrote as an off topic comment in Ann's previous post:

"Nikki Haley is resigning as UN ambassador. I always thought she was a terrible choice for the job, and with perhaps the sole exception of getting UN 2375 passed, her tenure was ineffectual. Though to be fair to Ambassador Haley, nearly anyone in that position will face an uphill battle in trying to implement the administration's foolish, monomaniacal obsession with isolating Iran."

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

The UN hate-Israel hate brigade causes rapid burnout, I would suspect.

Achilles said...

J Farmer said...

I have repeatedly described the American foreign policy that would make me happy. Namely, less interventionist and less supportive of destructive, destabilizing policies (e.g. the Saudis attempt to starve the Yemeni population into submission and their concomitant attempts to empower salafist groups like Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula).

So you want the mullahs to dump money and weapons unfettered into Yemen where they are funding a proxy war.

It just seems like you hate US allies and want our enemies to win.

That or you are stupid enough to believe the Iranian leadership just want peace and love.

SDaly said...

Last night on the TV was a National Geographic Channel special on North Korea. I guess it was done in partnership with the NYT, because all of the individuals expressing opinions were NYT employees.

It was hilariously out of date and slanted, even though it was produced *after* Trump made the Rocket Man comments. The commenters were unanimous that Trump had destroyed any potential for peace.

Bay Area Guy said...

Haley is great. One of the best UN Ambassadors, we've had in a while. Kinda like Jeanne Kirkpatrick, but younger, and, well, more "telegenic." She's only 46, but has already been Governor of South Carolina.

Probably, needs to make some dough in the private sector (book deal, speeches). Then, maybe a POTUS run in 2024.

Strong women unite!

Bay Area Guy said...

Haley is great. One of the best UN Ambassadors, we've had in a while. Kinda like Jeanne Kirkpatrick, but younger, and, well, more "telegenic." She's only 46, but has already been Governor of South Carolina.

Probably, needs to make some dough in the private sector (book deal, speeches). Then, maybe a POTUS run in 2024.

Strong women unite!

Etienne said...

He tried to bribe her with $55k curtains in her condo...

Ray - SoCal said...

Perhaps Trump was jealous of her.

Perhaps she pushed Ford.

Perhaps this was planned, 2 years is a long time to be in the middle of a fire.

It was so refreshing to have a UN ambassador that actually represented the US.

chuck said...

Lots of speculation here. Perhaps a cigar is just a cigar?

J. Farmer said...

@Achilles:

So you want the mullahs to dump money and weapons unfettered into Yemen where they are funding a proxy war.

"This article will argue, however, that the Houthis are not Iranian proxies; Tehran's influence in Yemen is marginal. Iran's support for the Houthis has increased in recent years, but it remains low and is far from enough to significantly impact the balance of internal forces in Yemen."

-Iran's policy towards the Houthis in Yemen: a limited return on a modest investment

It just seems like you hate US allies and want our enemies to win.

If that is the only frame you possess to understand the argument, then you will remain perennially confused (and incorrect).

That or you are stupid enough to believe the Iranian leadership just want peace and love.

Of course I do not believe such a thing and have never said anything remotely comparable. Try sticking to my actual arguments instead of the conjured strawman in your head with whom you seem obsessed with arguing.

J. Farmer said...

@Bay Area Guy:

Haley is great. One of the best UN Ambassadors, we've had in a while.

By what measure?

Achilles said...

That was dumb Farmer.

I remember when you tried to claim Iran wasn’t funding proxy wars in the ME and I humiliated you.

At least you aren’t going there. Now it is a limited investment.

You want to castigate the US and our allies for fighting against Iran’s attempts to destabilize Yemen.

Iran is the aggressor.

You are supporting policies that any intelligent person would see would lead to more war.

cubanbob said...

Best thing the US can do with respects to the Israel-Palestine is to cut off funding to the Palestinians and walk away. If the Palestinians want a deal, it's up to them to make a deal the Israeli's will accept. There is a far better case to be made for a Kurdistan than a Palestine.
As for Iran, we should sanction them as much as we can and force countries to either do business with us or with them but they can't have our markets and theirs. Choose wisely. They chant Death To America, we should say Death To The Mullahs.

Achilles said...

J. Farmer said...
@Bay Area Guy:

Haley is great. One of the best UN Ambassadors, we've had in a while.

By what measure?

She advanced our interests in the world by standing up for our allies and our principles.

J. Farmer said...

@Achilles:

That was dumb Farmer.

Of course you didn't actually read the argument, so I'll take your preemptive judgment of an argument you didn't bother considering for what it's worth: nothing.

I remember when you tried to claim Iran wasn’t funding proxy wars in the ME and I humiliated you.

You will have to refresh my memory. I have never made such a claim.

You want to castigate the US and our allies for fighting against Iran’s attempts to destabilize Yemen.

Iran is the aggressor.

You are supporting policies that any intelligent person would see would lead to more war.


"Almost everything Haqqani says about the war is wrong or misleading. Yemen is in no danger of being “lost” to Iran. The Houthis are still not Iran’s proxies, and war supporters’ frequent repetition of this falsehood over the last few years has not made it any more true. None of the warring parties in Yemen is capable of winning the war outright, and continuing the war risks causing massive loss of life among civilians that can still be avoided. The “legitimate” government has virtually no support in the north or south of the country, and any enduring peace settlement will have to reflect that. There is no way that a government that is widely loathed can be put back in charge of all of Yemen, and the U.S. needs to recognize that the “legitimate” government lost its legitimacy in the eyes of most Yemenis years ago."

-The Exceptionally Weak Case for Supporting the War on Yemen


gahrie said...

I'm really disappointed. I hope Ms. Haley takes a little time off and then gets involved again. She was my front runner for president in 2024. Maybe Pence retires in 2020 and she gets named the second term vice president?

Ralph L said...

By what measure?

You don't like her.

cubanbob said...

Haley is young and she has a kid going to college and another that will be going and isn't particularly wealthy. I can see her needing to make money.



J. Farmer said...

She advanced our interests in the world by standing up for our allies and our principles.

Saudi Arabia is not our ally. They are a client state, at best. And the Saudi regimes most distinct features under MBS have been the murder of Saudi political dissidents, the arming and empowering of radical salafist groups to wage war against the Syrian state, and a cruel, destructive war against Yemen. Those are "our principles?"

J. Farmer said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
J. Farmer said...

@Ralph L:

You don't like her.

I don't know her and have no personal opinion of her. I am talking about job performance, not personality.

Michael K said...

I don’t think there is anything the US could do that would make Farmer happy/

No. Haley has done what she was asked to do. She didn't mention 2024, by the way,

Maybe she will replace Sessions after the election.

narciso said...

Wars have going in Yemen for nearly 50 Years, the first was against nasserite elements where Nasser used poison gas.

J. Farmer said...

No. Haley has done what she was asked to do. She didn't mention 2024, by the way,

Maybe she will replace Sessions after the election.


That would be a disastrous choice. I don't support Halley for one simple reason: she is pro-immigration and is supportive of the exact GOP Inc line on immigration that Trump was specifically elected to repudiate.

gahrie said...

Why would we possibly want to isolate a regime that represses it's own people, has attempted to export it's religious revolution for forty years, supports terrorism, hates us and wants our destruction and has vowed to destroy our closest ally in the region with nuclear fire?

Seeing Red said...

Via Insty:

The Trump administration’s China policy swam into view, and it’s a humdinger. Vice President Mike Pence gave a guide to the approach in a speech last week at the Hudson Institute (where I am a fellow). Denouncing what he called China’s “whole of government” approach to its rivalry with the U.S., Mr. Pence vowed the Trump administration will respond in kind. He denounced China’s suppression of the Tibetans and Uighurs, its “Made in China 2025” plan for tech dominance, and its “debt diplomacy” through the Belt and Road initiative. The speech sounded like something Ronald Reagan could have delivered against the Soviet Union: Mr. Xi, tear down this wall! Mr. Pence also detailed an integrated, cross-government strategy to counter what the administration considers Chinese military, economic, political and ideological aggression.

In the same week as the vice president’s speech, Navy plans for greatly intensified patrols in and around Chinese-claimed waters in the South China Sea were leaked to the press. Moreover, the recently-entered trilateral U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement was revealed to have a clause discouraging trade agreements between member countries and China. The administration indicated it would seek similar clauses in other trade agreements. Also last week, Congress approved the Build Act, a $60 billion development-financing program designed to counter China’s Belt and Road strategy in Africa and Asia. Finally, the White House issued a report highlighting the danger that foreign-based supply chains pose to U.S. military capabilities in the event they are cut off during a conflict.

Any one of these steps would have rated banner headlines in normal times; in the Age of Trump, all of them together barely registered. But this is a major shift in American foreign policy.

Yancey Ward said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yancey Ward said...

Ambassador to the UN is one of those titles that sounds impressive for a US citizen, but actually is less influential and important than being Ambassador to, let's say, Bolivia.

J. Farmer said...

@gahrie:

a regime that represses it's own people,

We support and prop up regimes on the explicit premise that they will repress their own people.

has attempted to export it's religious revolution for forty years,

Iran has not been a revolutionary power for decades. Like any regime that functions, it is a realist state that is primarily concerned with self-preservation.

supports terrorism

See Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. One is a NATO member, and the other two have been attached to the pentagon hip for decades.

hates us and wants our destruction and has vowed to destroy our closest ally in the region with nuclear fire?

That is a complete caricature of the actual dynamics in place. As to the last point, the administration's most significant move with regard to Iran was to remove ourselves from the JCPOA, which is the most effective means we have of actually preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

Hagar said...

Golda Meir said there will be peace in Palestine when they realize they love their children more than they hate us.
Of course, that cuts both ways.
In the meantime, meddling by outsiders is just going to make things worse.

Bay Area Guy said...

Me: "Haley is great. One of the best UN Ambassadors, we've had in a while."

JFarmer: "By what measure?"

She is a foe against mindless globalism. That is the primary international philosophic dispute: globalism v. nationalism.

As for me, I don't want European bureaucrats in Brussels, imposing any type of authority over me.

Now, I'm not a mindless, jingoist Nationalist either. I don't want to, say, reimpose colonialism. But I do want strict border control and believe in National sovereignty.

So, Haley, in general, represents this point of view, which I like. United States, not United Nations.

J. Farmer said...

@Hagar:

In the meantime, meddling by outsiders is just going to make things worse.

Agree completely. My preferred policy would be that the United States had nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflicting, including not trying to broker a peace plan and not giving money to Israel or the PA.

J. Farmer said...

@Bay Area Guy:

She is a foe against mindless globalism. That is the primary international philosophic dispute: globalism v. nationalism.

I certainly agree with the second sentence. I have been saying it for 20 years now. But I don't really see how you can label Haley "a foe against mindless globalism." For one thing, she is an interventionist on foreign policy and she is pro-immigration, both of which are central planks to the globalist agenda.

As for me, I don't want European bureaucrats in Brussels, imposing any type of authority over me.

The EU has no ability to impose authority over those outside of it. And even the UN cannot impost its authority on us because we have veto power as permanent members of the Security Council.

Ray - SoCal said...

Saudi is not a client state to the US.

It's a very transnational relationship, and it has been very one sided benefiting the Saudi's more than the US. The funding of Wahhabi proselytizing worldwide by the Gulf States is a huge issue, that has destabilized a lot of countries, Pakistan is the prime example.

Yemen used the typical Iranian approach, similar to what the Soviets did, of a small amount of experts along with money and arms to back an insurgency. Low cost way of spreading their influence, that has worked well in Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, and Yemen to advance Iranian interests. Saudi's are pushing back against it. And the US is putting pressure on Iran.

Yemen is a mess, along with much of the Arab world.

Syria, another huge mess.

Trump is doing a lot of clean up of overseas political issues, and I am surprised he has kept the US out of much Military actions. I hope he can do something with the Afghanistan / Pakistan mess. I'm very impressed by what he has done to cut the Gordian Knot in Palestine / Israel. The move on Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees was brilliant, and an example of Trump pointing out the emperor has not clothes.

Trump's backing of Fracking is having a huge positive impact on the US negotiating with the Middle East. By keeping the price of oil down, it mostly hurts countries that are enemies, and helps the US economy.

traditionalguy said...

Nikki has lived in Manhattan and you can't keep her down in South Carolina anymore. She expects to get herself a share of the big money slush funds among International Corporations that need to show a women friendly appearance. And she has already put in her combat time that earned her career the favor/friendship with many wealthy Jews.

Andrew said...

Slightly off topic, but has anyone else here ever read Jesse Helms's speech to the U.N.? Great stuff.

mccullough said...

Haley was a decent figurehead, which is all the UN ambassador job requires.

Kushner is a decent figurehead, which is all the job of Ivanka’s husband requires.

J. Farmer said...

@Ray - SoCal:

Low cost way of spreading their influence, that has worked well in Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, and Yemen to advance Iranian interests. Saudi's are pushing back against it. And the US is putting pressure on Iran.

"War supporters usually frame it as a way to combat supposed Iranian “expansionism,” but the Saudi coalition’s intervention is the reason for the modest increase in Iranian involvement since 2015. When that doesn’t work, they will claim that it has something to do with ensuring the security of international shipping, but there has been no Yemeni threat to shipping. Yemenis depend heavily on imports, so it would make no sense for them to threaten their own lifeline. The only impediment to normal commercial shipping in the area has been the coalition’s onerous blockade, which has done so much to create and then worsen the humanitarian crisis. The administration also claims that it is supporting the Saudis and Emiratis to help them “defend” themselves, but they aren’t acting in self-defense and they have actually made themselves less secure by intervening.

No competent strategist would endorse such a policy. No sane realist would agree with it. It is a policy born out of a toxic brew of threat inflation, knee-jerk support for “allies” that aren’t allies, and the usual ignorance of the local politics and history of Yemen, and the results are predictably horrible."

-Our Immoral and Irrational Yemen Policy

Bay Area Guy said...

@J Farmer,

Me: "As for me, I don't want European bureaucrats in Brussels, imposing any type of authority over me."

JF: "The EU has no ability to impose authority over those outside of it. And even the UN cannot impost its authority on us because we have veto power as permanent members of the Security Council."

Way too narrow. I don't want the UN, EU, The Hague, the IPCC, NATO, Brussells, UNESCO or any international organization governing us. I answer to the US Constitution, and nothing beyond that.

mccullough said...

I agree with the fracking/oil comment. It hurts Saudi Arabia and Iran (and Russia). Let the Salafists and Twelvers kill each other with rocks and swords after they run out of oil money.

Trumpit said...

"Haley was a decent figurehead, which is all the UN ambassador job requires.

Kushner is a decent figurehead, which is all the job of Ivanka’s husband requires."

And Schlump is a fathead. Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called him a "F*cking Moron."

J. Farmer said...

@Bay Area Guy:

I answer to the US Constitution, and nothing beyond that.

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;"

Is it your position that the US should withdraw from all international agreements to which it has consented?

Achilles said...

J. Farmer said...
@Achilles:

"That was dumb Farmer."

Of course you didn't actually read the argument, so I'll take your preemptive judgment of an argument you didn't bother considering for what it's worth: nothing.

Your problem is I do read your arguments. Then I destroy them.

"I remember when you tried to claim Iran wasn’t funding proxy wars in the ME and I humiliated you."

You will have to refresh my memory. I have never made such a claim.

Consider your memory refreshed.

"It is completely false to say that Iran is "running proxy wars." Iran's involvement in Syria is in support of its legitimate government against jihadist insurgent forces. Similarly, they support a friendly government in Baghdad against similar forces in the western Iraq. The war in Yemen is also not a proxy war run by Iran but rather an aggressive war led by the Saudis in an effort to reimpose the rule of an ousted government. Iran does not control the Houthis. As for "elsewhere," what other proxy wars do you have in mind?"

5/8/18, 7:25 AM

Seeing Red said...

Of course the EU has that ability. Look at the privacy agreements with the tech companies that we’re a part of.

Achilles said...

J. Farmer said...
@Hagar:

In the meantime, meddling by outsiders is just going to make things worse.

Agree completely. My preferred policy would be that the United States had nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflicting, including not trying to broker a peace plan and not giving money to Israel or the PA.

How would that help US interests?

Be specific.

Michael K said...

Trump's backing of Fracking is having a huge positive impact on the US negotiating with the Middle East. By keeping the price of oil down, it mostly hurts countries that are enemies, and helps the US economy.

This, more than anything else he has done, is making us more secure from blackmail by enemies and secret enemies pretending to be friends or allies. The anti-fracking and anti-pipeline demonstrations under Obama were funded by the Saudis and the Russians.

Saudi Arabia became a sort of ally under Roosevelt when we needed them for the oil. The fracking boom has ended that relationship and taught MBS, the current Saudi leader, that all relations with the US are optional now.

The EU is panicky about oil and has made itself dependent on Russia for gas. They are unreliable allies, at best. They are closer to Iran than they are to us.

J. Farmer said...

@Achilles:

Your problem is I do read your arguments. Then I destroy them.

It is not my arguments I am referring to. I gave you a link to a paper that ably dismantles the myth about Yemen being run by Iran. That is the argument you did not read, did not consider, and thus have nothing to say about.

Consider your memory refreshed.

The statement of mine is as true now as it was then. Iran is not "running proxy wars." Iran's involvement in Yemen has been minimal and has not significantly altered the balance of the power on the ground.

You can also try reading this: Houthi arms bonanza came from Saleh, not Iran

You cannot destroy arguments you apparently have never even considered.

p.s. I noticed you completely ignored my offer to make a bet on the future. Do you want to put your money where your mouth is or not?

J. Farmer said...

@Achilles:

How would that help US interests?

Be specific.


It has nothing to do with US interests. That is the point. The US has no national interest in who has sovereignty over the West Bank or East Jerusalem. Similarly, the US has no national interest in who controls Cyprus and thus I do not believe we should be front and center in trying to mediate between Turkish and Greek Cypriots.

Milwaukie Guy said...

Ah, the gap year before bigger things. Pence announces his retirement at the end of his term. Haley runs as Trump's VP in 2020.

Before the Oval Office tape CNN was all wild speculation about Haley's distaste of Trump.

Diabolical.

Known Unknown said...

"If I had to live in New York City I would kill myself. She probably want's to get out of the shithole."

With enough money, New York is probably pretty livable and interesting.

J. Farmer said...

I have to admit I am totally baffled by the Nikki Haley love here. She is a poster child for GOP Inc, including endorsing Marco Rubio in the primary. How does Haley significant differ from, say, Jeb Bush?

Bay Area Guy said...

@J Farmer cites the US Constitution (which is always a good approach) and then asks:

Is it your position that the US should withdraw from all international agreements to which it has consented?

Umm, No. That's extreme. And I'm sure you know that.

"A page of history is worth volumes logic"-- Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Look at WWI and then look at WWII and then look at the Cold War. That's several hundred millions of deaths, mostly across the globe, mostly caused by others.

Due to the Communist express aims to communize the world, we were forced to fight them with many proxy wars across the globe.

Now that they are defeated, we should not excessively entangle ourselves with foreign, international bureaucracies, based on utopian visions.

If Europe wants to abandon Christianity & capitalism, to create an atheist, socialistic, unisexual, multicultural state -- that's on them. It won't last and will be easy pickens for Muslims. We, in the good ole USA, should stay away from that nonsense.

Also, we should bond with countries who also want to stay away from that nonsense.

Haley was on the right side of this philosophical struggle.

Trumpit said...

A glossectomy is the surgical removal of the tongue. @Michael K, That would be a start in stopping the nonsense that you spew in the comments until you blackout from the drugs you take. It would, at least, stop your wagging tongue.

But no human being can tame the wagging tongue. It is restless evil, full of poison. James 3:8

Achilles said...

J. Farmer said...

The statement of mine is as true now as it was then. Iran is not "running proxy wars." Iran's involvement in Yemen has been minimal and has not significantly altered the balance of the power on the ground.

You are not here in good faith.

You aren't stupid.

Let me know when you actually want to have an honest discussion.

Achilles said...

Milwaukie Guy said...
Ah, the gap year before bigger things. Pence announces his retirement at the end of his term. Haley runs as Trump's VP in 2020.

Before the Oval Office tape CNN was all wild speculation about Haley's distaste of Trump.

Diabolical.



No.

Haley is an open borders globalist.

This would be the same EXACT same mistake Reagan made putting Bush in as his VP.

It would mean another 30 years of uniparty rule if Haley is elected president in 2024.

You people need to start thin king about these things before you say them.

J. Farmer said...

@Bay Area Guy:

Umm, No. That's extreme. And I'm sure you know that.

That's why I asked it. It also reveals that you do not really "answer to the US Constitution, and nothing beyond that."

The US is party to all sorts of international agreements that limit, to one degree or another, sovereignty, including all of our mutual defense pacts and all of our so called "free trade" agreements.

I share your affinity for nationalism, but I have no reason to believe that Nikki Haley does, especially considering that she supports two of the major planks of globalism, immigration and interventionism.

mccullough said...

Haley seems much sharper than Jeb. Not sure her views are any different but she projects some energy and ability to think on her feet.

Low-Energy Jeb was a spot on insult. Jeb would not get far in life without being a Bush. It was insane how much money Jeb raised. Those GOP donors are way too wealthy if they had that kind of money to burn. Trump’s total decimation of the Bush family was great. Like the Clintons, they need to get lost.

Haley, like Rubio, is Bush lite. Pro illegal immigration. Pro getting fleeced on trade as long their friends and family are getting rich off policies that hurt most Americans. Pro fucking stupid military adventures that cost shitloads of money and get other people’s Children killed or maimed.

Haley is not MAGA. Neither is Jared.

I’m not surprised they are fast friends.

J. Farmer said...

@Achilles:

You are not here in good faith.

You aren't stupid.

Let me know when you actually want to have an honest discussion.


The fact that you are more interested in attacking my supposed motives and beliefs instead of the actual argument should indicate to you how bereft you are of actual ideas. I have given you links to several long-form arguments for my position on Yemen, and so far your best rebuttal has been, "that was dumb."

Rick said...

Achilles said...
Haley is an open borders globalist.


This struck me as wrong so a quick search reveals from wiki:

Immigration policy
Haley has stated that, as a daughter of immigrants, she believes the immigration laws should be enforced.[44] She voted in favor of a law that requires employers to be able to prove that newly hired employees are legal residents of the United States, and also requires all immigrants to carry documentation at all times proving that they are legally in the United States. Haley signed an "Arizona-style" law cracking down on illegal immigration in June 2011.[45] The law is the subject of a lawsuit initiated by the United States Justice Department on numerous grounds, including claims the immigration law violates the Supremacy Clause. Rob Godfrey, a spokesman for Haley, said, "If the feds were doing their job, we wouldn't have had to address illegal immigration reform at the state level. But, until they do, we're going to keep fighting in South Carolina to be able to enforce our laws."[46]

The problem with arguing against "globalization" is that you might as well argue against the tides. It cannot be stopped without complete isolation far more economically damaging than the effects of globalization. Moreover Trump has been pivoting from anti-globalization to better deals which mean the effects will continue once achieved (or held out as achieved). All of this means accepting globalization but not open borders is the best position conservatives are going to get. So why would this disqualify Haley?

Known Unknown said...

"I have to admit I am totally baffled by the Nikki Haley love here. She is a poster child for GOP Inc, including endorsing Marco Rubio in the primary. How does Haley significant differ from, say, Jeb Bush?"

A consideration that she knows which side her bread is buttered on now (the Trump side?)

Just guessing.

J. Farmer said...

@Rick:

All of this means accepting globalization but not open borders is the best position conservatives are going to get. So why would this disqualify Haley?

First, why do you think there is a rift between Stephen Miller and Nikki Haley on the subject of immigration? For one thing, Haley supports lots of legal immigration regardless of race or religion, which means forcing American workers to compete with foreign labor and thus having their wages compressed.

Plus, a nation is not a unit of economic maximization. It is a community of people with a shared language and culture. The demographic trends facing this country will tear that apart, and we will be balkanized. Also, inequality will worsen as blacks and large numbers of Hispanics form a personal under class ruled by a technocratic elite of whites and Asians. That will be a terrible outcome for social equality in this country.

gahrie said...

I have to admit I am totally baffled by the Nikki Haley love here. She is a poster child for GOP Inc, including endorsing Marco Rubio in the primary.

???? Rubio is now GOP establishment? Since when? The only two people more anti-Establishment were Trump and Cruz. If the GOP Establishment had been willing to give Rubio the nomination Trump would have never happened.

How does Haley significant differ from, say, Jeb Bush?

Well we can start with the fact that Haley supported Rubio instead of Jeb. Then we can move on the Haley being willing to fight instead of roll over when attacked.

gahrie said...

... Haley supports lots of legal immigration regardless of race or religion,...

Most Americans support legal immigration, even those of us opposed to illegal immigration.

It is a community of people with a shared language and culture. The demographic trends facing this country will tear that apart, and we will be balkanized

Nikki herself is a perfect example of how immigration should work. Her family moved here, worked hard, and became Americans, like millions of people before them.

rehajm said...

What Rick points out- Haley doesn't believe in the Lump of Labor fallacy, she believes in securing our borders and that immigration is a responsibility for the legislature- not the courts or the diplomatic corps. Perfect.

Achilles said...

Rick said...

So why would this disqualify Haley?

Why did Haley endorse Rubio?

There was only one reason to endorse Rubio.

Rubio was for border security until he was for amnesty.

She attacked Trump during the election because she thought it would help her standing.

She is uniparty. She can make a good senator or holder of an appointed executive position, but she will not lead us in the right direction.

She does the right thing when people around her are going that way and the wrong thing when the people around her are going that way.

Everyone in DC is going the wrong way. She needs to prove she can fight in hostile ground.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

J.Farmer: I have to admit I am totally baffled by the Nikki Haley love here. She is a poster child for GOP Inc, including endorsing Marco Rubio in the primary. How does Haley significant differ from, say, Jeb Bush?

I, too, am baffled. I'm also baffled by the overblown (usually straw-man) reactions you always get here to the foreign policy opinions you post. I would've thought by now that everybody would've developed a better sense of smell around re-warmed GOPe/neocon policy/personnel. (Even if they are being pushed/appointed by Trump.) Or at least be able to understand other people's skepticism toward them instead of going off half-cocked and accusing them of being crazed anti-American world government fanatics.

(I like to imagine that Haley was appointed to the UN because it would get her out of real politics, and be a no-cost sop to the GOPe. Not true, but nice to imagine anyway.)

Hagar said...

Having liberal immigration laws and "we don't need no steenkin' borders!" is not the same thing.

Achilles said...

Rick said...

All of this means accepting globalization but not open borders is the best position conservatives are going to get. So why would this disqualify Haley?

Because accepting globalism in this context means using trade and foreign policy to help all US citizens.

America and Americans First.

Like Rubio and the Bushes she puts herself in a different group that has lost touch.

Rick said...

Why did Haley endorse Rubio?

She thought him the best of a bad lot - just like pretty much everyone else who endorsed him thought. Why would you think Rubio's positions more indicative of her beliefs than her own statements and actions?

Everyone in DC is going the wrong way. She needs to prove she can fight in hostile ground.

Who do you think passes this standard?

J. Farmer said...

@gahrie:

Rubio is now GOP establishment? Since when?

Can you elucidate some areas where you believe Rubio parted from GOP orthodoxy? Rubio, for example, was part of the Gang of Eight immigration sell out.

Most Americans support legal immigration, even those of us opposed to illegal immigration.

Most Americans oppose both the diversity lottery and family-based immigration, which is the system the US now has in place.

Her family moved here, worked hard, and became Americans, like millions of people before them.

What is Haley's position on replacing American IT workers with H2B workers from India?

Unknown said...

To some extent, Trump's putting Haley at the UN was a twofer for him. 1) It made him look magnanimous to someone who was *not* an initial supporter and 2) It elevated Lt. Gov McMaster, who *was* a big Trump guy into the Governor's office so he can now contest the next election as the incumbent.

That's not saying anything against Haley though. She was a Tea Party candidate and handled the 2015 flooding crisis very well. She definitely is not done on the stage.

J. Farmer said...

From Haley's SOTU rebuttal:

"We must fix our broken immigration system. That means stopping illegal immigration. And it means welcoming properly vetted legal immigrants, regardless of their race or religion. Just like we have for centuries.

I have no doubt that if we act with proper focus, we can protect our borders, our sovereignty and our citizens, all while remaining true to America’s noblest legacies."

In other words, Haley believes in the nation of immigrants myth. What exactly makes Nikki Haley think that modern American can assimilate millions and millions of foreign born individuals? When the country becomes nearly half Hispanic, how amenable to conservative values do you think it will be?

gahrie said...

Can you elucidate some areas where you believe Rubio parted from GOP orthodoxy? Rubio, for example, was part of the Gang of Eight immigration sell out.

Tell you what..why don't you explain why he was unacceptable to the GOP Establishment? Again, if the GOP E had been willing to accept Rubio he would have won the nomination. The Establishment hated Rubio and Cruz more than Trump.

gahrie said...

In other words, Haley believes in the nation of immigrants myth.

The United States isn't a nation of immigrants? Ellis Island is fake? Deep down I always thought I was an Indian.....

rehajm said...

We must fix our broken immigration system. That means stopping illegal immigration. And it means welcoming properly vetted legal immigrants, regardless of their race or religion. Just like we have for centuries.

I have no doubt that if we act with proper focus, we can protect our borders, our sovereignty and our citizens, all while remaining true to America’s noblest legacies.


This is not proof of belief in a politically designed ideological 'myth', it's a prudent policy prescription based on empirical analysis.

J. Farmer said...

@gahrie:

The United States isn't a nation of immigrants? Ellis Island is fake? Deep down I always thought I was an Indian.....

The Englishmen who traveled to the original thirteen colonies were not immigrants. They were settlers. See Huntington's Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity.

J. Farmer said...

@rehajm:

This is not proof of belief in a politically designed ideological 'myth', it's a prudent policy prescription based on empirical analysis.

It is very bad empirical analysis. For one thing, the post-1965 immigration is nothing that we have been doing "for centuries." Immigration is also not one of "noblest legacies." Alexander Hamilton, for example, was an immigration restrictionist. You can read some of it here.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

gahrie: Tell you what..why don't you explain why he was unacceptable to the GOP Establishment? Again, if the GOP E had been willing to accept Rubio he would have won the nomination. The Establishment hated Rubio and Cruz more than Trump.

Tfw when torn between face palm and laughing like a hyena.

J. Farmer said...

p.s. It is worth remembering that Haley's remarks about immigration in the SOTU rebuttal were thinly veiled denunciations of Trump's immigration policy. She, along with Rubio and most of the GOP establishment, seems to have bought hook line and sinker the post-2012 autopsy which claimed the GOP would need to get behind "comprehensive immigration reform" in order to remain competitive in national elections. Trump won by specifically repudiating that advice.

Ray - SoCal said...

I view Yemen as a mess, and I don't have any great solutions for it.

Iran has been VERY busy in the Middle East since the revolution. From the Mecca siege, US Barrack attack (Khobar Towers), to actions in Iraq, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Yemen. Not to mention their activities in South America, that are usually not talked about (Jewish Center in Argentina bombed). Plus the attempted bombing in the US of a Saudi Official. The Iranians have done an amazing job with limited resources. The US has basically ignored them for the most part, with some exceptions during Reagan. Trump has changed that.

Yemen is a mess, full of Shia and Sunni tribes, along with Al Queda and QUDs stirring things up. The previous President, Saleh, played every side and managed to stay on top. He finally got killed by an Iranian linked tribe (Houthani, that are Shia). The missiles fired from Yemen have been stopped by Patriot Missiles, which has hurt Iran's reputation.

I have been surprised at how well the Saudi's have done on fighting in Yemen. There was a fear that they could not. The civilian massacres are being used by both sides, but since it's not the US doing it nobody really cares. And the Saudis are just ignoring it, which upsets the Iranians.

North Yemen and South Yemen are unified, but...

And there was an Egyptian forces under Nasser that were involved in another civil war.

And there is an issue of water and over population in the area. And growing Qat, instead of crops to feed people.

Iran in Syria is mostly using Shia's from other countries to take the casualties. Lots of Iranian money going to keep Assad in power, which is causing anger in Iran. Hezbollah is supporting Assad with excellent soldiers, but taking casualties. Israel is playing whack a mole in Syria. Not to mention the US is there, along with Turkey, Russia, and Iran. Another huge mess I don't have any grand solutions for. I pray the Kurds come out OK and are not abandoned again. Kurds have a Russian connection, due to previous support by the Soviet Union.

Somehow Trump is not expanding the US presence in the Middle East, which I appreciate. I wish something could be done to solve the Afghan mess.

J. Farmer said...

Tfw when torn between face palm and laughing like a hyena.

The notion that the establishment "hated Rubio and Cruz more than Trump" seems like an opinion from the Bizarro World. Cruz and Rubio were never repudiated by the establishment. They were repudiated by voters.

rehajm said...

People want to come to the United States, work, pay taxes, start businesses, buy houses, and join our society. Why are we keeping them out?

J. Farmer said...

@Ray So-Cal:

I have been surprised at how well the Saudi's have done on fighting in Yemen. There was a fear that they could not. The civilian massacres are being used by both sides, but since it's not the US doing it nobody really cares. And the Saudis are just ignoring it, which upsets the Iranians.

If by "well" you mean getting lots of innocent people killed and being no closer to their objective today than they were three years ago when they launched the war, then I suppose you are correct. And the US is deeply involved in the Saudi-Yemen War.

Also, the Houthis are not Iranian proxies, and Iran does not have the ability to control the Houthis. From International Affairs:

The Houthis, however, are not Iranian proxies; Tehran’s influence in Yemen is
marginal. The civil war in Yemen is driven first and foremost by local and political
factors, and is neither an international proxy war nor a sectarian confrontation. It
is primarily a domestic conflict, driven by local grievances and local competition
for power and resources. The Houthis and Saleh seek to overturn the political
order that emerged after the uprisings of 2011: Saleh wants to return to power,
having lost the presidency in the wake of popular protests, while the Houthis
want a greater say in national affairs. In other words, the Houthis want in, Saleh
wants back in, and members of the Hadi-aligned bloc want to keep them out.

J. Farmer said...

People want to come to the United States, work, pay taxes, start businesses, buy houses, and join our society. Why are we keeping them out?

Because we would rather look like Japan than Yugoslavia.

James K said...

So... it's curtains for Haley?

I thought Haley was a pleasant surprise for exactly the reasons J. Farmer dislikes her: Her willingness to stand up for Israel amidst the den of vipers that is the UN. We can debate how much of a strategic interest the US has in having and supporting a strong ally in the Middle East, but the UN's anti-Israel obsession requires a rebuke, and that's what she did.

As to her immigration stance: From what I've seen, she supports *legal* immigration, and enforcement of immigration laws. How much legal immigration seems up for discussion.

James K said...

And I meant to add: The speculation is not that she would replace Sessions, but that Lindsey Graham would replace Sessions, and she would replace Lindsay Graham. That makes more sense.

rehajm said...

Because we would rather look like Japan than Yugoslavia.

Are you a non US citizen who's never studied or experienced the US economy in any meaningful way?

Oh Yea said...

Secretary of State Kushner in the Haley Administration

J. Farmer said...

@rehjam:

Are you a non US citizen who's never studied or experienced the US economy in any meaningful way?

No, I am the exact opposite...an American citizen who created a still thriving professional business that employs more than two dozen people. And unfortunately it was not in a profession that I got to import from abroad at lower wages.

And as I said before, society is not simply an economically maximizing entity. National identity is very important to social cohesion. If you think you can replace the Anglo-Protestant core of this country with a patchwork of polyglot ethnicities and still have the same society, then I think you are living in a dream world.

narciso said...

proxies mean support and training, Hezbollah has differences of opinion with the ruling council, but their goal is promoting shia proselytizing in Lebanon and increasing on the coast of arabia, aqap seems to be more a client of Qatar, as are the militias in Egypt and Libya, take fmr Egyptian army officer ashnawy

narciso said...

Despite graham's recent goal score, sessions was put in as the hardliner on immigration, I don't think trump would risk that despite other priorities, on another blog, I noticed all the cabal players, sans Rosenstein, in their mutineering post from mueller to james baker, from march 2004

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

I thought Haley was a pleasant surprise for exactly the reasons J. Farmer dislikes her: Her willingness to stand up for Israel amidst the den of vipers that is the UN. We can debate how much of a strategic interest the US has in having and supporting a strong ally in the Middle East, but the UN's anti-Israel obsession requires a rebuke, and that's what she did.

That is not why I dislike here. I dislike her because she is an interventionist. The "UN's anti-Israel obsession" is a trope that has no real meaning in the context of international affairs. It is a feature of the General Assembly, which has no real power. Plus, the US has used its position on the Security Council to protect Israel for decades. Haley brought nothing new in that regard.

Michael K said...

The speculation is not that she would replace Sessions, but that Lindsey Graham would replace Sessions, and she would replace Lindsay Graham. That makes more sense.

Interesting idea.

Dr Weevil said...

Is it true that "there has been no Yemeni threat to shipping"? An easy Google search brings up this Reuters article, about a Turkish cargo ship carrying wheat to Yemen, hit by a missile fired by what appears to be the Houthis just 4 1/2 months ago. The article also says:
"Saudi and Emirati state media said on Wednesday that the Saudi-led coalition had foiled attacks in the Red Sea by explosives-laden speedboats deployed by Houthis against commercial vessels, including an oil tanker."
Are the Saudis and Emiratis lying about that? Maybe, but consider the next paragraph:
"Last month, a Saudi oil tanker was hit off Yemen’s main port city of Hodeidah, suffering limited damage, in what coalition forces said was an attack by the Houthis. The Houthis said they had targeted a coalition warship."
In other words, the Houthis didn't deny they did that one, so it's certainly plausible that they did the others. And the single instance proves that the quotation from which I began is simply false.
P.S. Eleven months ago, Jane's Defense Weekly published an article entitled Yemeni rebels unveil anti-ship missiles. The very act of unveling them seems an obvious threat to me.

rehajm said...

No, I am the exact opposite...an American citizen who created a still thriving professional business that employs more than two dozen people. And unfortunately it was not in a profession that I got to import from abroad at lower wages.

Well, we have common ground there! ..and our businesses are of similar size...We're paying up for the lottery to keep one intern who is Irish, and are considering paying up for a second who is on a visa. We'd hire three more people if we could find them...

Funny how your experience doesn't impact your philosophy. I'll let you get back to fretting over your national identity.

mccullough said...

Haley’s statement that we can “vet” immigrants well enough regardless of “race and religion” is W like nonsense.

Our legal immigration should be cut back in number (1,000,000 a year in green cards is to high), get rid of chain migration, get rid of the diversity lottery, and limited to certain countries and the best people from those countries.

We haven’t even integrated blacks close to well enough into the US yet. It’s not that long ago that the various white ethnicities lived in enclaves and distrusted each other.

Fewer than 4,000,000 kids are born in the US every year. It’s fucking nuts to admit 1,000,000 people on top of this.

Dr Weevil said...

J. Farmer quotes 'International Affairs' on the situation in Yemen:
"Saleh wants to return to power, having lost the presidency in the wake of popular protests". He does? The Saleh who lost the presidency in the wake of popular protests was assassinated ten months ago: that was Ali Abdullah Saleh. His nephew Tareq Saleh is a general in the pro-Saudi faction, but was never president. It takes a remarkable degree of ignorance and arrogance to quote such obsolete stuff as if it were current while arguing about the present situation in Yemen.

narciso said...

Note the byline date:

https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-washington-post/20080915/282961035937202

J. Farmer said...

@rehajm:

Funny how your experience doesn't impact your philosophy. I'll let you get back to fretting over your national identity.

You're right. I am not selfish and self-obsessed. I actually care about "our posterity." Now where have I heard that phrase before.

I mean, why should I care about low-skilled Americans having their wages compressed by a huge influx of low-skilled immigrants. After all, I am not low-skilled. So fuck em, right?

Take a look at the racial politics that have been playing out over the last decade. How do you think a continual increase in ethnic diversity in this country, as projected over the next several decades, will impact that. Again, if you all you care about is yourself and not having America transformed into Brazil, then you have nothing to worry about.

J. Farmer said...

@Dr Weevil:

It takes a remarkable degree of ignorance and arrogance to quote such obsolete stuff as if it were current while arguing about the present situation in Yemen.

The article, which I linked to, was published in May 2016 and is thousands of words long. The point of it was to refute the notion that Houthis were Iran-controlled proxies and does an able job at that and nothing in the intervening 18 months has happened to change that.

narciso said...

now this old blog post from last year, before blogger made it impossible to post new info,

http://narcisoscorner.blogspot.com/2017/02/reckoning-in-yemen-raid-on-yemeni.html?view=sidebar

J. Farmer said...

p.s. And given that the war started in 2015, an analysis a year later is not "obsolete stuff."

Francisco D said...

I appreciate J. Farmer for his willingness and ability to engage in rational and coherent dialogue with people who disagree with him.

That is a refreshing change from the childish taunts, superficial arguments and smug condescension of the usual suspects here.

rehajm said...

low-skilled Americans having their wages compressed by a huge influx of low-skilled immigrants

The wages of low skilled workers are not 'compressed' by low-skilled immigrants. You are attracted to a decades old fallacy that's constantly refuted by cold hard facts.

...and fuck you for calling me selfish because I don't conform to your twisted and ignorant view of the world.

rehajm said...

An Obama economy of 1% malaise is one where workers fight over crumbs. In a 4%+ economy growth is constrained by a lack of workers, not a scarcity of well paying jobs.

rehajm said...

I appreciate J. Farmer for his willingness and ability to engage in rational and coherent dialogue with people who disagree with him.

He blew it.

Khesanh 0802 said...

OT Can you believe that America's crime couple are brazen enough to hit the road for a "speaking tour? Will we ever be rid of those two? Inevitable death seems to be the only relief we can expect.

narciso said...

some interesting bits from a former mi 6 operative,


news came today with the memoir of the third declared asset in al queda, after the Moroccan omar nassiri, and the Danish morten storm,
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31700894 unlike morten storm, the former Danish biker hooligan, and more like the mystery asset compromised in 2012, he came from comfortable surroundings, he didn’t have particularly devout family, his father worked for Aramco, his grandfather had been police chief in Iraq in the 20s, he seems to have little trouble going to bosnia, in the mid 90s, for reasons spelled out here http://narcisoscorner.blogspot.com/2016/05/jabberwocky-injiddah-2-so-why-was-there.html?view=sidebar, it was a project of the current king, but formerly prince salman, who follows a different drummer, than say his father. Somewhat like Alexander 2nd was from his father Nicholas the 1st, another is the high value target, of this raid, which was considered controversial at the time :https://narcisoscorner.blogspot.com/2017/02/reckoning-in-yemen-raid-on yemeni.html?view=sidebar, he met in brighton in the uk,, and he had an undisclosed Bosnian connection. Which further evidence suggests he provided the tip from his contacts back in the emirates,

J. Farmer said...

@rehajm:

The wages of low skilled workers are not 'compressed' by low-skilled immigrants. You are attracted to a decades old fallacy that's constantly refuted by cold hard facts.

See George Borjas. Here, for example:

"Both low- and high-skilled natives are affected by the influx of immigrants. But because a disproportionate percentage of immigrants have few skills, it is low-skilled American workers, including many blacks and Hispanics, who have suffered most from this wage dip. The monetary loss is sizable. The typical high school dropout earns about $25,000 annually. According to census data, immigrants admitted in the past two decades lacking a high school diploma have increased the size of the low-skilled workforce by roughly 25 percent. As a result, the earnings of this particularly vulnerable group dropped by between $800 and $1,500 each year.

We don’t need to rely on complex statistical calculations to see the harm being done to some workers. Simply look at how employers have reacted. A decade ago, Crider Inc., a chicken processing plant in Georgia, was raided by immigration agents, and 75 percent of its workforce vanished over a single weekend. Shortly after, Crider placed an ad in the local newspaper announcing job openings at higher wages. Similarly, the flood of recent news reports on abuse of the H-1B visa program shows that firms will quickly dismiss their current tech workforce when they find cheaper immigrant workers."

...and fuck you for calling me selfish because I don't conform to your twisted and ignorant view of the world.

Fuck you for being selfish. And for completely ignoring my point on national identity.

narciso said...

this illustrates even through the page breaks the complex nature of our relationship with the kingdom

narciso said...

there were some further details, which on retrospect I chose not to repeat,

J. Farmer said...

@narciso:

"If the latest outrage from Mohammed bin Salman [the murderof Jamal Khashoggi] changes anything, it should at the very least put an end to the absurd description of the crown prince and his allies as “reformers” once and for all. Reformer is a label that Western pundits and politicians use to describe foreign leaders when they want to express approval and support. It is often not intended to be an accurate statement about the leader’s record, but rather serves to distract from the worst parts of that record in order to sell the leader to Western audiences. Foreign leaders know that they can win a lot of supporters in the West just by saying the right things about a handful of issues, and as long as they keep up appearances their Western boosters will overlook or even defend the worst excesses.

All Mohammed bin Salman had to do was talk about moderate Islam and diversifying the Saudi economy and then emphasize his hatred for Iran, and his fans were immediately hooked by the promise of what he might do in the future. In return, they studiously ignored the many horrible things he was doing in the present, they shifted blame for the war on Yemen to others, or they made lame attempts to spin his purge as an “anti-corruption drive.” The problem for his fans was that Mohammed bin Salman’s pattern of reckless behavior didn’t stop and wasn’t limited only to his foreign policy debacles. The cruelty and incompetence that the Saudi coalition has displayed in the war on Yemen have been replicated in Saudi Arabia’s internal affairs as well. The kingdom’s intensifying repression and arbitrary arrests have scared off foreign investment, caused massive capital flight, and exposed the makeover that pro-Saudi P.R. firms have tried to give the kingdom as the sham that it always was.

The crown prince has already proven himself to be an impetuous, clumsy, inept, and brutal ruler, and no one should have any illusions at this point about what the Saudi government is going to be like as long as he is in power. The war on Yemen was the earliest, biggest, and most destructive proof of this, and there have been many more examples in the last three and a half years. By itself, Khashoggi’s murder should severely strain relations between Saudi Arabia and its Western patrons. As the latest in a string of outrages and crimes, it should force a serious reassessment of the current relationship that the U.S. has with Riyadh. That relationship is noxious, and it can’t be allowed to continue in its current form."

-End the Noxious U.S.-Saudi Relationship

James K said...

It is a feature of the General Assembly, which has no real power. Plus, the US has used its position on the Security Council to protect Israel for decades. Haley brought nothing new in that regard.

Wrong. One of the last gutless moves of the Obama administration was to abstain on a Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements in "occupied Palestinian territory" including, unbelievably, East Jerusalem in which Jews had lived for nearly 2,000 years until they were forcibly expelled in 1948, and only returned in 1967.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

rehajm: The wages of low skilled workers are not 'compressed' by low-skilled immigrants. You are attracted to a decades old fallacy that's constantly refuted by cold hard facts.

Ah, the perennial "lump of labor fallacy" fallacy. Like "comparative advantage", it's a meaningful and useful concept that gets thrown around in cartoon form by people who like to call other people economically ignorant, while straining otherwise useful and meaningful economic concepts past the breaking point. (E.g., people who seriously believe that the law of supply-and-demand can never apply to wages.)

.....and fuck you for calling me selfish because I don't conform to your twisted and ignorant view of the world.

Well, being so non-ignorant yourself, instead of just getting huffy, perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us on why non-economic factors simply don't matter; why J.Farmer's views on the importance of what he calls the Anglo-Protestant cultural core of the U.S. is irrelevant to America continuing to be what it is, why it's not possible that current trends in immigration could "Brazilianize" the U.S, etc.

That would be interesting. (That is, if you can go beyond "nation of immigrants" schmaltz and bumper-sticker econo-slogans.) You know, instead of just sneering at the very idea that rational, informed people could consider non-economic factors to be of importance re immigration policy.

Oh, and I'd also be interested in why J.Farmer's views qualify as "twisted", regardless of whether he is ignorant or not.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

Wrong. One of the last gutless moves of the Obama administration was to abstain on a Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements in "occupied Palestinian territory" including, unbelievably, East Jerusalem in which Jews had lived for nearly 2,000 years until they were forcibly expelled in 1948, and only returned in 1967.

UN 2334 had next to no impact and simply restated what has been US policy for the last 40 years. Every US administration since Nixon has considered East Jerusalem to be occupied territory and the settlements to be illegal. This also happened to be the opinion of the chief counsel to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, Theodor Meron, in 1967.

Your point also ignores that just two months before the vote, the Obama administration approved the "largest pledge of bilateral military assistance in US history," providing Israel with $38 billion of taxpayer money over 10 years, an increase of over $700 million per year.

MadisonMan said...

I've seen plenty of Democratic-ish comments on this (on Facebook and Twitter) that make me think they don't believe Haley when she says there's no real reason for leaving now.

Why don't Democrats believe a woman when she says something?

Alex said...

J. Farmer is throwing another tantrum because another sunrise came and... Israel still exists.

Alex said...

Forget about peace processes and other things.. What drives the left utterly mad is that Israel continues to exist. Don't ever forget it!

J. Farmer said...

@Alex:

J. Farmer is throwing another tantrum because another sunrise came and... Israel still exists.

Strange. When I argue that the US should not provide military assistance to Egypt or Saudi Arabia, I am never accused of being secretly motivated to want those countries to not exist or of having an anti-Arab complex.

As I have said repeatedly, I am a nationalist. I believe the US government should put American self-interest front and center of its policy. If I was an Israeli, I'd argue the same thing about Israel. I don't expect Israel to solve American problems, and I don't expect America to solve Israeli problems. It's actually a pretty simple and straightforward argument that doesn't require the existence of some purported irrational hatred.

Forget about peace processes and other things.. What drives the left utterly mad is that Israel continues to exist. Don't ever forget it!

One, I am not on the left. Two, I have said repeatedly that I do not believe the US should be involved in a peace process. Three, the fact that some on "the right" immediately resort to SJW tactics on the subject of Israel should tell you something.

Alex said...

J. Farmer - I don't really care if you're coming from the left or antisemitic intentions. Regardless, you share that idea that Israel deserves no special protections. That they are somehow 'evil' and are committing injustices to Arabs. I wonder if you've even read any objective history of the founding of Israel and the subsequent wars or you get your 'history' from Howard Zinn.

J. Farmer said...

@Alex:

Regardless, you share that idea that Israel deserves no special protections.

That is certainly true. And that's not an idea I confine to Israel. I do not believe that any country "deserves...special protects." Countries have a right to defend themselves and it is their job to do so.

That they are somehow 'evil' and are committing injustices to Arabs.

I have never made any such statement, and the notion that a country can be "evil" is ridiculous. People can be evil, policies can be evil, actions can be evil. But it is foolish to describe the construct of a country as "evil." It's not even a term I really use. As for "injustices to Arabs," I certainly have opinions about things like the Israeli settlement in Hebron. But they are simply that, opinions. I don't believe that the US government should do anything about it. I don't believe the US government should sanction Israel or try to use pressure to change its behavior. I don't think it's any of the US government's business. But I also don't think Israel, a rich and powerful country, should get US taxpayer welfare.

I wonder if you've even read any objective history of the founding of Israel and the subsequent wars or you get your 'history' from Howard Zinn.

It's not a subject I devote a particular amount of time to outside of normal historical interest. I am much more interested in European history than Middle Eastern history, but I have read the works of Benny Morris and Efraim Karsh from their relative ideological perspectives and, as is usual, I think the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Jim at said...

I'd forgotten how tedious J. Farmer threads are.
Thanks for the reminder.

J. Farmer said...

@Jim at:

Thanks for the reminder.

You're welcome.

mccullough said...

Whether people agree with him or not, Farmer brings his game.

Michael K said...


@Alex:

J. Farmer is throwing another tantrum because another sunrise came and... Israel still exists.

Strange. When I argue that the US should not provide military assistance to Egypt or Saudi Arabia, I am never accused of being secretly motivated to want those countries to not exist or of having an anti-Arab complex.


Maybe because they are not democracies in a hostile environment. There was a lot of concern when Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood or Morsi.

Saudi Arabia was once essential to our national security because of oil. They are not because of fracking.

Egypt has little in the way of existential risk. Israel does.

The Saudis have a serious risk from Iran and we are helping them to fend off Iran which is our enemy too.

Yes, Farmer, the threads with lots of your comments are tedious.

J. Farmer said...

Yes, Farmer, the threads with lots of your comments are tedious.

Easy solution: don’t read them.

Michael K said...


Blogger J. Farmer said...
Yes, Farmer, the threads with lots of your comments are tedious.

Easy solution: don’t read them.


I don't. You do remind me why I am not a Big L Libertarian.

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

I don't. You do remind me why I am not a Big L Libertarian.

I've never been one.

Birkel said...

Smug.
Comfortably smug.

mccullough said...

Farmer posts way fewer comments than most people here. He is also civil.

He makes a good point that Haley’s views are much more aligned with Bush (and Romney and others who think the US should keep going abroad looking for monsters to destroy) than Trump on foreign policy and immigration.

So her resignation is no loss for those who share more of a Trumpian view.

Based on the comments toward him, there seems to be a consensus that the job of US ambassador to the UN is to stick up for Israel at every turn. Haley was excellent at that. Why she and Jared are tight no doubt.

n.n said...

So, who are our allies, friends, neighbors, and employees? And on what basis are they formed and sustained?

Whether it is a corporation, a community, a nation, a community, or a family, we form coalitions, pay wages, offer allowances, hold barbecues, in some fashion, with some motive, and for some purpose.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

I don't find J.F.'s comments tedious. I do find the reaction to them tediously knee-jerk and unthoughtful for the most part, though.

Jay Elink said...

Yancey Ward said...
Ambassador to the UN is one of those titles that sounds impressive for a US citizen, but actually is less influential and important than being Ambassador to, let's say, Bolivia.
*************

Uh huh. Just how many billions in US funding does Bolivia ask for and depend on each year?

Francisco D said...

This is getting somewhat frustrating.

After months of dealing with leftists who are idiotic (Inga), juvenile (Howard), arguably insane (Ritmo), smug (Freder) and dishonest (Cookie) we have a discussion with a well informed and opinionated commenter (J.Farmer) that is on the verge of degenerating into the usual annoying back and forth insults.

Let's have some perspective. I have criticized J. Farmer for being pedantic in the past. (He has improved or I have changed my impression). Whatever stylistic impressions I have, they are far more positive than my impressions of the contemptible usual suspects.

I have a very strong pro-Israel bias that J. Farmer doesn't share. He is not going to convince me to change and vice versa. It's not personal. It's political opinion. I don't see the value in getting upset about our differences.

rehajm said...

Ah, the perennial "lump of labor fallacy" fallacy

Not a thing.

rcocean said...

There's a certain kind of Republican that is ALWAYS attracted to people like Haley. She's a person of color and she's a woman, Woo Hoo! Nominate her for President!

These same kind of people were pushing for Condelezza Rice, and before her, Colin Powell for POTUS.

Haley was a never trumper. She's not a particularly good politician and there's no evidence she'd make a good President.

rcocean said...

She's constantly dropped hints and leaked things to make sure all "the right people" understand she still one of the "cool Kids" and isn't a great friend of Trump.

Elect her, and you'll just get Jeb Bush with a nice tan.

Robert Cook said...

"I think it might be illegal to say anything positive about the Trump family."

It's not illegal, but it would almost always be untrue.

Jon Burack said...

Farmer: "Safe bet: Jared's "peace plan" will go nowhere."

Well of course it's a safe bet, based on all the other "peace plans" advanced since Oslo. You have to have TWO partners who actually want peace to get a peace plan going. That condition has never been met. The growing anti-Semitism in the West, on the left as well as the right, has helped the Palestinians obscure and hide their utter disinterest in a peaceful settlement short of the elimination of Israel. Israel is not eliminatable, hence all "peace plans" will go nowhere. But Nikki Haley's great contribution is to call out the UN for its complicity in this deception and put pressure on it to finally begin to confront its institutionalized bigotry. Will it work? No idea. At least it works to let the SOBs know they are not fooling us, for now.

Robert Cook said...

J. Farmer is the single most worthwhile participant here. To call his comments "tedious" is to admit one has no effective refutation of what he has to say.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“After months of dealing with leftists who are idiotic (Inga), juvenile (Howard), arguably insane (Ritmo), smug (Freder) and dishonest (Cookie) we have a discussion with a well informed and opinionated commenter (J.Farmer) that is on the verge of degenerating into the usual annoying back and forth insults.”

As IF Francisco D doesn’t most often start the ugly back and forths. What a hypocrite and I suspect he is perpetually drunk and when he’s not drunk he behaves as a dry drunk does. Any psychologist who behaves as he does is either lying that he is one or probably in need of some serious therapy himself.

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

"Saudi Arabia is not our ally. They are a client state, at best. And the Saudi regimes most distinct features under MBS have been the murder of Saudi political dissidents, the arming and empowering of radical salafist groups to wage war against the Syrian state, and a cruel, destructive war against Yemen. Those are 'our principles?'"

You ask rhetorically, I answer seriously: Yes, they are.

Seeing Red said...

Someone has to sell the oil to Cali so it can function.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“It's political opinion. I don't see the value in getting upset about our differences.”

How unselfaware can a self reported psychologist be? Laughable.

walter said...

She's leaving so she can properly resume her affair with Trump...who Tapper reports has a giant mushroom head penis...

walter said...

"This is CNN"

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga...Allie Oop said...

Blogger Jim at said...
“I'd forgotten how tedious J. Farmer threads are.”

Thanks for the reminder.”

Jim could only hope to understand even a percentage of what J Farmer is talking about, that’s why it’s tedious to him.

Birkel said...

J. Farmer,
I can name the time frame so we will bet that $1000 based on a time frame of 10 billion years. The world will be destroyed by a supernova sun and there will be no problem with Mid East peace, owing to the fact that land mass will not exist. I will win the bet but we will both be dead. You can have the option to mail the check now or after the Earth is destroyed.

Birkel said...

Royal ass Inga disagrees with J Farmer on every particular.
The same is true of Robert Cook.

So this is fun to witness.

mccullough said...

Haley is leaving so she can make money. Now is the time to cash in.

And UN Ambassador has been a chick’s job for the last decade.

J. Farmer said...

Royal ass Inga disagrees with J Farmer on every particular.
The same is true of Robert Cook.

So this is fun to witness.


Yep. People disagree with me, and I don't take it personally. What a crazy topsy-turvy world.

Birkel said...

J. Farmer,
Do you not see the humor? As a pedant I know it is unlikely.

Also, I won the bet. I thought you would appreciate a pedantic response.

J. Farmer said...

@Birkel:

Missed you, buddy. Hugs and kisses.

Michael K said...


@Michael K:

I don't. You do remind me why I am not a Big L Libertarian.

I've never been one.


Well, then, many similarities in opinions.

Inga approves of you, though.

The Crack Emcee said...

That woman did a remarkable job, and, if we don't see her as presidential material now, there's something really wrong with us.

The jury's still out on Jared. The show's not over yet.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Inga approves of you, though.”

Inga approves of his style and that he keeps his cool while making his points and countering you people. Very few of us can argue this way, me included, I give J Farmer a great deal of credit.

Birkel said...

You see, the joke is that Inga believes annoying the people she doesn't like is a worthwhile thing. You annoy because of your style. You exude smug.

But your opinions are anathema to the Leftist Collectivists. Many of your opinions would find wide support on these pages, if not for the stridency with which you present your views. Little allowance is made for interpreting facts differently. Little allowance for different first principles. And as such there is little to be gained from reading those comments a second time. I can faithfully represent your views.

The joke is Inga's vapidity.

In my opinion the best commenter here is narciso. I have to carefully read those comments and they can be thought provoking. And they are not, as yet, unpredictable.

Birkel said...

They are unpredictable.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

The joke is Birkel... period.

J. Farmer said...

@Birkel:

Many of your opinions would find wide support on these pages, if not for the stridency with which you present your views.

I'll live.

The joke is Inga's vapidity.

Okay.

Birkel said...

Oh, I know you don't care. That is part of why you wear Smug so well.

Guildofcannonballs said...

While Farmer is no Octoseal, he done chawed up real good the emoters here.

Time passes us all by, it's only a matter of.. days. Or centuries sometimes too.

But mostly just days. Mere days.

narciso said...

The choice is not to side with plucky little Yemen, but between the kingdom and Iran, it's a little like Cyprus in 74.

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

Well, then, many similarities in opinions.

For example?

J. Farmer said...

@Birkel:

Oh, I know you don't care. That is part of why you wear Smug so well.

Indeed.

Guildofcannonballs said...

This is a link to obliterate Farmer and his minuscule points of vision ability.

You can't argue it, you can't stop it, you had better submit.

"Sunny
Yesterday my life was filled with grey"

J. Farmer said...

@narciso:

The choice is not to side with plucky little Yemen, but between the kingdom and Iran, it's a little like Cyprus in 74.

I think that's a false choice. And to increase my vulnerability among those here, I have been arguing for a rapprochement with Iran since about September 12th, 2001. Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett's work in this area has been influential to my thinking.

J. Farmer said...

@Guildofcannonballs:

This is a link to obliterate Farmer and his minuscule points of vision ability.

You can't argue it, you can't stop it, you had better submit.


Ha. Pushing on an open door with me. I've been to Tel Aviv several times. Great gay nightlife.

Francisco D said...

As IF Francisco D doesn’t most often start the ugly back and forths. What a hypocrite and I suspect he is perpetually drunk and when he’s not drunk he behaves as a dry drunk does. Any psychologist who behaves as he does is either lying that he is one or probably in need of some serious therapy himself.

The favorite tool of mindless leftists is projection, for obvious reasons. Along with denial, it is the most primitive of psychological defenses.

Here is example # 3,543,987, 851. Inga is only responsible for a few hundred of those examples.

When projection no longer works, she will be screaming at the moon and clawing at the doors of the Supreme Court. If younger she would be smearing her menstrual blood in the Senate hearing room.

The combination of mental illness and utter stupidity explains the mob mentality we have been witnessing. That is Inga.

narciso said...

Well I beg to differ on that point, and the Rhodes show probes the point, Moynihan at his best challenged the peanut gallery that is the general assembly.

Dr Weevil said...

Whether J Farmer is tedious or not is a matter of taste, since each of us draws his own line in deciding when increasing tedium becomes intolerable. There is no doubt that he is dishonest. My 2:47 comment refuted his 12:29, and he made sure not to acknowledge that the Yemenis have not just openly threatened shipping, but hit it with missiles at least once, probably more. My 2:55 showed the gross ignorance in his 2:23, and his 3:01 reply seems designed to cover up the fact that the Saleh mentioned in the few dozen words he chose to quote from the thousands in the article is in fact dead, so any analysis made before that is now obsolete. I don't believe he was aware that the Saleh being talked about now is not the same Saleh.

narciso said...

But we can debate the point civilly, now I think Qatar has tried to wrest the leadership of the wahhabi from the kingdom.

J. Farmer said...

@Dr Weevil:

As I said before, the point of linking to that article was to refute the notion that the Houthis are Iran proxies, which is the stated purpose of the article. I quoted a paragraph from the article after writing, "Also, the Houthis are not Iranian proxies, and Iran does not have the ability to control the Houthis." Saleh's assassination last year does not refute any of that information and the notion that it is therefore "obsolete" is incorrect.

Birkel said...

Rapprochement with Iran?

When people chant they want my death, I believe them.
I am simple that way.

J. Farmer said...

@Birkel:

Rapprochement with Iran?

When people chant they want my death, I believe them.
I am simple that way.


You're right. You are simple.

Known Unknown said...

"And Schlump is a fathead. Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called him a "F*cking Moron.""

C'mon. You can do better than this. Even Bipolar Alex offers up crueler commentary than this. Sad!

Birkel said...

It would be nice to get the style book for when to believe the words of people and when not to believe. What faith shall I put in various claims? What weight to written versus oral?

Because when I hear death to that guy in particular, I think it matters.
But self-serving statements like "we are not running proxy wars" are not to be believed?

Standards?
Sure, we have several.

narciso said...

The first rule of proxy wars is,you don't talk about proxy wars. Mugniyeh was the son of a,Lebanese mullah he was trained by force 17, but recruited by the revolutionary guard , opinion varies but probably general ashghari, the source behind the 2007 nie.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 265   Newer› Newest»