March 1, 2014

David Brooks defends Victoria Nuland's previous misadventure

From the NYT last year:
The Next Scapegoat 
By DAVID BROOKS 
Published: May 13, 2013     424 Comments

Twenty years ago, when she was a young Foreign Service officer in Moscow, Victoria Nuland gave me a dazzling briefing on the diverse factions inside the Russian parliament.

So, that's why David Brooks' opinions on who were the good guys and who were the bad guys in Russia in 1993 turned out to be so on the money.
Now she is a friend I typically see a couple times a year, at various functions, and I have watched her rise, working with everybody from Dick Cheney to Hillary Clinton, serving as ambassador to NATO, and now as a spokeswoman at the State Department. 
Over the past few weeks, the spotlight has turned on Nuland. The charge is that intelligence officers prepared accurate talking points after the attack in Benghazi, Libya, and that Nuland, serving her political masters, watered them down. 
The charges come from two quarters, from Republicans critical of the Obama administration’s handling of Benghazi and intelligence officials shifting blame for Benghazi onto the State Department. 
It’s always odd watching someone you know get turned into a political cartoon on the cable talk shows. But this case is particularly disturbing because Nuland did nothing wrong.

Perhaps, but has Nuland ever done anything right? She seems to skate from one misadventure to another without ever becoming a scapegoat, rising up the hierarchy of power all the time.

For instance, does anybody expect her career to take a hit because her policy of Bear-baiting in the Ukraine contributed to a violent putsch that set off a large and predictable but basically pointless international crisis?
   

29 comments:

5371 said...

It's not whether she did anything right, it's that she is someone right. The aspens, their roots connect them.

Anonymous said...

Rawmuslglutes on Hollywood muscle:

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/02/28/the-miraculous-muscleheads-of-hollywood/

Anonymous said...

who is Vicky working for? didn't she just deliver Crimea to Putin?

were the ostensibly mindless provocations in Georgia and now Ukraine designed to gift Vlad territory and power?

are they building the bogeyman up? how about linking tea partiers to the bogeyman: the social conservative axis

then they can take care of their enemies foreign and domestic eg the Putin lovers stateside just set off a nuke!

Dave Pinsen said...

You can get muscular without steroids, but it takes longer, because you will require longer recovery times. The harder part (unless you have naturally ecto-meso genetics) is to look chiseled like those guys in the 300. That's more from radical dieting than anything else.

Reg Cæsar said...

working with everybody from Dick Cheney to Hillary Clinton… --Brooks

That's quite the range, Dave.

Miguel S. said...

What's the point of all this conspiracizing? She didn't even have the guts to say whether Jerusalem is (or isn't) Israel's capital. She's a mouse, not an 800 pound gorilla.

Anonymous said...

Reminds me of the April Glaspie disaster in Iraq. Believe it or not The Economist magazine wrote a puff piece full of praise for Ms Glaspie a week after her catastrophic misjudgement.

There is a strong strand of pseudo affirmative action ie protecting incompetent women from the abuse similarly incompetent men would get.

Anonymous said...

"who is Vicky working for?"

The oligarchs ultimately. They're the ones playing these destabilizing games around the world with EUSUK moving in to place the banking mafia's chosen stooge in charge afterwards.

.

"For instance, does anybody expect her career to take a hit"

Not if the rest of the media shield her like Brooks. They might blame Pyatt instead.

Peter the Shark said...

Dividing Ukraine makes perfect sense for the EU and for Russia. It's just a shame they couldn't do it peacefully (and that the Ukrainians themselves probably mostly disagree). The likely outcome will create a pro-EU Western Ukraine that will restore to Poland, Hungary and Austria trade and economic access to the traditional Galician hinterland, and benefit Russia by creating a far more stable and politically reliable Eastern Ukraine that will probably function along the Belarussian model. Kiev is the problem, because all sides have a claim on it, and the main reason why a division of Ukraine could go tits up. I'm not sure how any of this benefits the US in the long run. I assume the deep Staters hoped they could pry all of Eastern Ukraine away from Russia with no consequences.

AmericanGoy said...

Can't see the forest for the trees...
"basically pointless international crisis"...

There is a pattern.

Yugoslavia was a trial run; Russians were historically considered the Serbs' protectors (same religion, culture, etc). When Russia did not lift a finger, the West tried another provocation - tear Kosovo away from them (Kosovo was considered Serbs' original lands since ancient history).

No response? Must mean Russia is weak.

Next up on the agenda was sending 1500 American soldiers as advisers to Georgia (alongside unknown number of Israeli "private" security contractors) to train Georgian military so that they could stage a blitzkrieg into Ossetia on the opening day of Beijing Olympics.

When Russia went in to prevent genocide of Ossetians (considered 2nd class citizens by Georgians), all American TV "news" shows had one lead line for the news: "Russia invaded Georgia, which is a Western friendly government!".

Now, another olympics... It's a bit behind the timetable (Sochi is over and it would look bad for Putin if he had to send in the army during the olympics) but whateva...

We have Israeli, er, volunteers (ex special forces, perhaps "ex" special forces is more apt):

http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-militia-commander-fights-to-protect-kiev/

We have already profiled by Steve-o Vikky Nuland (the family's original surname being Nudelman) and wife of Robbie Kagan (co-founder of PNAC) openly, on open cell phone line with no hashing, no code, in the OPEN saying who will be what (whom/whom) in the Ukraine after the, er, "people's revolution".

Speaking of which, from the Times of Israel article:

“I saw unarmed civilians with no military background being ground by a well-oiled military machine, and it made my blood boil,” Delta told JTA in Hebrew laced with military jargon. “I joined them then and there, and I started fighting back the way I learned how, through urban warfare maneuvers. People followed, and I found myself heading a platoon of young men. Kids, really.”

The other ex-IDF infantrymen joined the Blue Helmets later after hearing it was led by a fellow vet, Delta said.

As platoon leader, Delta says he takes orders from activists connected to Svoboda, an ultra-nationalist party that has been frequently accused of anti-Semitism and whose members have been said to have had key positions in organizing the opposition protests.

(snip...)

“The driving force among the so-called white sector in the Maidan are the nationalists, who went against the SWAT teams and snipers who were shooting at them,” Cohen told JTA.

Still, many Jews supported the revolution and actively participated in it.

Earlier this week, an interim government was announced ahead of election scheduled for May, including ministers from several minority groups.

Volodymyr Groysman, a former mayor of the city of Vinnytsia and the newly appointed deputy prime minister for regional policy, is a Jew, Rabbi Azman said.

“There are no signs for concern yet,” said Cohen, “but the West needs to make it clear to Ukraine that how it is seen depends on how minorities are treated.”

Simon in London said...

Take a hit? But America has just taken over half of Ukraine from the Russians, possibly forever, without losing a single soldier! A triumph! >:)

Anonymous said...

At first I too thought of April Glaspie. But she was small potatoes, doing the bidding of Mssrs. Bush & Eagleburger. Nulands rise is classic ethnic nepotism 101. Brooks is doing his media rearguard duties on behalf of the tribal managerial elite , nothing more or less. It's the same neocon echo chamber of amens and blowhard character references ("I know _______, she/he is [insert Jewish personality trait here-shrewd, tough, single minded, determined, savvy, intelligent, or for light hearted paeans "a real mensch").

It'd be funny if there wasn't b/trillions of $ of money our govt doesn't have and blood loyal Americans need not spare.

Anonymous said...

Brooks fawning is tribal nepotism, this stuff is endemic once you realize it.

Anonymous said...

I would not be surprised if Soros/Soros NGO is funneling money to Nuland directly.

Harry Baldwin said...

Like David Brooks, I tend to give my friends the benefit of the doubt in all possible instances, even defending them when a more objective person might regard them as having been in the wrong. Unlike David Brooks' friends, though, mine aren't determining American policy.

Harry Baldwin said...

For instance, does anybody expect her career to take a hit . . .

If Kathleen Sebelius's career hasn't taken a hit I expect no one's will. (Though I suppose old Kathleen will elect to retire after her Obama leaves office rather than expect anyone else to put her in charge of something important.)

fish said...

Perhaps, but has Nuland ever done anything right? She seems to skate from one misadventure to another without ever becoming a scapegoat, rising up the hierarchy of power all the time.

So a perfect fit for both the Bush and Obama administrations....to say nothing of the State Department in general.

Auntie Analogue said...


Anyone care to guess when, at the behest of our unelected State Department geniuses, selected U.S. cities be welcoming large blocs of resettled Ukrainian refugees? Because Diversity is our Strength! Because we will continue to submit to being forcibly culturally enriched! Because, as that lame old Three Dog Night song goes, we "care about evil and social injustice" in exactly the ways in which our Dear Rulers force us to "care about evil and social injustice."

Vic said...

I'm afraid you are really misinformed about causes of Ukraine revolution and the amount of US involvement there. It's as if you're getting your news from RT.com or something. I don't have many English sources to recommend (as obviously most of the information comes in the local languages) - but check out this reddit AMA (just for overall atmosphere): http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1z9pkm/iama_ukrainian_protester_of_euromaidan_our/

It comes across as you have a serious wood for Putin (tough, strong man) as opposed to your own leader (weak, analytical Obama).

The analytical mistake you are making is that acting tough with Russia baits it - quite the opposite. Same as many other nations (ie Arabs) they mainly understand force. So being accommodating would actually make the West appear weak and engender further escalation.

Anonymous said...

Isn't it more just a case of Putin sizing up the disinterest of Barack Obama in doing anything other than dismantling the separation of powers in this country and deciding, "Hey, this guy is so soft I can do anything"?

Anonymous said...

"The analytical mistake you are making is that acting tough with Russia baits it - quite the opposite. Same as many other nations (ie Arabs) they mainly understand force. So being accommodating would actually make the West appear weak and engender further escalation."

This...in a nutshell.

For some reason a huge faction of the US structure in DC (mostly Dems, true), just doesn't understand this.

The same philosophy put to such ill use in our schools (give stars just for trying, never criticize, be "nice") is what guys like Putin and many Russians and Arabs scorn. It's an invitation to stomp on us.

Anonymous said...

The analytical mistake you are making is that acting tough with Russia baits it - quite the opposite. Same as many other nations (ie Arabs) they mainly understand force

This is even more true of non-Western nations.

Anonymous said...

@Vic ...ah, toss out the ol' "its Munich!" Canard. To paraphrase, "its as if you're getting your news from the Weekly Standard or something."

Anonymous said...

"Same as many other nations (ie Arabs) they mainly understand force."

Neocon giveaway. And yes, the neocons really do only understand force.

Anonymous said...

"But America has just taken over half of Ukraine from the Russians, possibly forever, without losing a single soldier!"

I can totally understand why many Ukrainians want to be closer to the West. More opportunities that way. Also, politics and spoils in Ukraine are split along ethnic lines.

In the end, this will be something Ukies will have to clean up themselves. Just like Iraq. In the end, US couldn't fix the problems among Kurds, Shias, and Sunnis. They will have to do it themselves.

US in Syria, Iraq, and Ukraine can break humpty dumpty. But it cannot put it together again.
After WWII, Poland was one of the most homogeneous nations in Europe. It still is. Ukraine is too diverse for its own good, and diversity can make corruption worse as politics becomes tribal.

I just wish both sides act smart and gradually works toward a split. The model split was Czech and Slovakia. The bad bloody model was Yugoslavia. As the populations in UKraine are mixed, split is not easy. But something has to be worked out. Maybe following a split, the populations can gradually switch sides, hopefully without the bloodbath that accompanied the creation of Pakistan apart from India.

scottlocklin said...

I love the "Joos run everything" conspiracy theories here. Isn't it a whole lot more likely this silly cunt is simply an incompetent who got where she is via nepotism? Sitting on Kagan's withered lil' dong and ... however she's pals with that twerp Brooks ... seems explanation enough. It's not her fault we live in a degenerate culture which lionizes dumb broads who sleep with the right people ^H^H^H^H I'm sorry "strong and independent women."

Hunsdon said...

scottlocklin said; I love the "Joos run everything" conspiracy theories here. Isn't it a whole lot more likely this silly cunt is simply an incompetent who got where she is via nepotism?

Hunsdon said: Actually, I will type "Jew" but not "cunt" (except this one time for demonstration purposes). Your second sentence does not in any way invalidate your first sentence. I think Victoria Nuland got where she was through nepotism, I just think it goes beyond who she's married to. (I mean, why is Kagan where he is?)

ScrivenerOfAzkaban said...

"at the behest of our unelected State Department geniuses, selected U.S. cities be welcoming large blocs of resettled Ukrainian refugees"

As a western Canadian, I'll say that you could do worse. The Ukes only got here around 1905-1910 and have been intermarrying and getting along well since WWII.

Anonymous said...

"I love the "Joos run everything" conspiracy theories here."

The media attack disparate impact all the time so so it's entirely reasonable to point out the examples they choose to ignore.

.

"But America has just taken over half of Ukraine from the Russians, possibly forever, without losing a single soldier!"

Ukraine was a buffer state. Neither side had it. The US wanted all of it especially the Russian naval base but look like they might have gifted Putin the eastern half as a more directly controlled buffer zone instead while leaving a bankrupt west Ukraine as the new cold war "Berlin."