Why Panetta? Is Slashing Defense the Real End Game Here?
Anyone familiar with Panetta’s record as a Congressman in the 1980s knows that Panetta is both a leftist and markedly hostile towards the US military establishment.
Panetta has no military backgound. he has a Budget background. He was once head of the Office of Budget Management.
What does this suggest to you?
Was Panetta specifically chosen to oversee large cuts in the US defense budget?
At a time when the US is facing Islamic terrorism, an increasingly belligerent China, a resurgent Russia, and an ongoing “red tide” in Latin America, has Leon Panetta been commissioned to take a scythe to the US Defense budget?
Mark Rudd predicted this possibility just before the 2008 election.
Mark Rudd is a former leader of the terrorist Weather Underground. In 2006, he joined with a whole bunch of communists and socialists, including his old comrades and Presidential pals Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn to found an activist umbrella organization – the Movement for a Democratic Society. In 2008, that organization begat Progressives for Obama, which Mark Rudd happily endorsed.
Mark Rudd is in a unique position to understand Obama’s long term strategy.
Mark Rudd wrote this analysis just after the 2008 elections. Note what Rudd says about defense:
Obama is a very strategic thinker. He knew precisely what it would take to get elected and didn’t blow it. He used community organizing methods to mobilize a base consisting of many people who had never voted before or who regularly don’t vote….But he also knew that what he said had to basically play to the center to not be run over by the press, the Republicans, scare centrist and cross-over voters away. He made it.By the second or third year of this recession, when stimulus is needed at the bottom, people may begin to discuss cutting the military budget…
So he has a narrow mandate for change, without any direction specified. What he’s doing now is moving on the most popular issues — the environment, health care, and the economy. He’ll be progressive on the environment because that has broad popular support; health care will be extended to children, then made universal, but the medical, pharmaceutical, and insurance corporations will stay in place, perhaps yielding some power; the economic agenda will stress stimulation from the bottom sometimes and handouts to the top at other times. It will be pragmatic…
And I agree with this strategy. Anything else will court sure defeat. Move on the stuff you can to a small but significant extent, gain support and confidence. Leave the military alone because they’re way too powerful. For now, until enough momentum is raised. By the second or third year of this recession, when stimulus is needed at the bottom, people may begin to discuss cutting the military budget if security is being increased through diplomacy and application of nascent international law.
Obama plays basketball. I’m not much of an athlete, barely know the game, but one thing I do know is that you have to be able to look like you’re doing one thing but do another. That’s why all these conservative appointments are important: the strategy is feint to the right, move left. Any other strategy invites sure defeat. It would be stupid to do otherwise in this environment…
That, in my opinion sums up what this great game is all about. America’s enemies know that America can only be destroyed if its military is humbled, heavily reduced in size and capability.
Americans will only accept the gutting of their military capability, if the economy is so fragile and prospects so dire, that they will be willing to sacrifice national security to ease the economic pain.
In the last two years the Obama Administration has done everything it could to indebt and impoverish America and Americans.
Now it is time for the socialists to harvest the fruits of their efforts.
Leon Panetta, a leftist, with ties to communists, socialists and one degree of separation from several Soviet and/or Chines agents, may well turn out to be the Grim Reaper.