Marco Rubio super hawk

It was George Santayana, one of the major philosophers of the twentieth century, who wrote that “those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Some people do learn from the lessons of history. Others are impervious to them. President Barack Obama is basically in the first camp. Marco Rubio, who burns with the desire to succeed Obama, is fiercely in the latter.

Bush, breathtakingly ignorant of the area’s history and the complexities and difficulties the invaders would eventually encounter plus the adverse consequences for the Afghanistan war of opening a second front, brashly sent troops into Iraq. Could there be a better example of the old adage, “fools rush in where angels dare not tread?”

Obama learned enough from George W. Bush’s disastrous misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan to proceed basically in the opposite way. Aware of the potential repercussions of U.S. military action given a scenario with as many possible variations and outcomes as a chess game between grand masters, Obama is moving cautiously. For his critics on the right and the Republican Party who have learned nothing, Obama’s actions connote only indecision, weakness and, most serious of all, a de-facto renunciation of U.S. leadership in the world (read hegemony).

Guess who is beating the war drums loudest of all among the flock of Republicans attacking Obama’s foreign policy? None other than Senator Marco Rubio.

On September 17, AP reported: “Sen. Marco Rubio is positioning himself as the leading foreign policy hawk among Republicans considering runs for the White House, pushing for more military spending and greater intervention abroad as the United States confronts Islamic State extremists in Iraq and Syria.”

The same day Washington Post blogger Aaron Blake weighed in: “Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) gave a foreign policy speech on Wednesday.And if there was any doubt that he’s aiming to be the most hawkish of all the potential 2016 presidential contenders, this should pretty much put that to rest.”

And how. Rubio’s speech is easily the most aggressive, imperial, and alarmist speech at least since the months-long campaign by Bush, Cheney, Rice and the other usual suspects that managed, through manipulating post-9/11 fear and torrents of false or misleading pronouncements, to brainwash most Americans into supporting the Iraq invasion.

Rubio’s speech is more chilling than a Siberian winter. The main theme is the erosion of the overwhelming dominance of the United States in the world.

“At the end of the Cold War, America’s military was an unmatchable force: well built, well equipped, and uncontestable in its strategic influence.”

But something funny happened on the way to Rubio’s utopia of boundless, endless U.S. hegemony. Reality happened. History did not end. But Rubio sees something darker at work:

“The trend of declining American Strength had been largely incidental among previous administrations, but now it is an active priority. Previous presidents had merely taken their foot off the gas pedal of American Strength, but President Obama has stomped on the brake.”

Based on his non-existent experience in foreign and military affairs, Rubio goes after Obama with no holds barred:

“The president’s foreign policy was once a failure – now it is simply non-existent. From Libya to Syria to Egypt to Ukraine, this administration simply shrugs as threats fester. When the administration does act, it fails to communicate any consistent rationale for military use. The president’s foreign policy was once a failure – now it is simply non-existent. From Libya to Syria to Egypt to Ukraine, this administration simply shrugs as threats fester. When the administration does act, it fails to communicate any consistent rationale for military use.”

While predictably the president was Rubio’s overt whipping boy, Obama is not running for anything in 2016. But Senator Rand Paul may well fight Rubio for the Republican presidential nomination. And Paul is virtually unique among Republicans in continuing to cling to some elements of the party’s old isolationism. The not-so-hidden agenda of Rubio’s speech was to carom his shots off Obama to hit Paul hard:

“What is unfortunate is that too many leaders in both parties, including our president and some who aspire to be president, have shown they would rather wait for poll numbers to change than demonstrate the leadership necessary to shape them.”

These are just a few of the most astounding excerpts from the speech, but by now surely you get the picture. It’s clear that Rubio learned nothing from the vast amount of blood and treasure spent thanks to Bush’s senseless interventions and wants this country to intervene some more.

Fortunately, as the poll numbers Rubio alludes to show, the American people are dead-set against any more of that. They have seen this movie too many times before, and the latest versions are not really over yet. Thank goodness for small favors.

To end on a painful personal observation. Cuban Americans not only have way more representation and power in Congress relative to population than other Latino groups. Cuban Americans have better representation per capita than whites! Normally, this would be a source of pride for any member of such a group. But I have never felt any pride in any of them–of either party. Some are bad and others are worse. Marco Rubio is the most dreadful of all. That’s a feat considering the competition.