Follow us on social

google cta
Mark Milley throws US military under the bus for Israel

Mark Milley throws US military under the bus for Israel

Funny how our four stars never mentioned American atrocities until they figured it would help their friends in the IDF

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Former Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley threw his own military under the bus yesterday, trying to rationalize the killing and maiming of thousands of Palestinian civilians in the last six months of the Israeli war in Gaza.

The following video is a stunning example of how far Israel's supporters in the United States will go to justify what is becoming one of biggest humanitarian catastrophes in the 21st century, sparked by relentless indiscriminate bombing in the densely packed Gaza strip, leaving nearly 35,000 Palestinians dead, most of whom are reported to be innocent civilians. Countless others are still dead under the rubble which covers the entire territory.

He says:

Before we all get self righteous about what Israel is doing, and I feel horrible for the innocent people in Gaza dying, but we shouldn't forget that we United States killed a lot of innocent people in Mosul, in Raqqa, that we the United States killed 12,000 innocent French civilians. And here we are on the 80th anniversary of Normandy, on the prep fires for Normandy. We destroyed 69 Japanese cities, not including Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We slaughtered people in massive numbers, innocent people who had nothing to do with their government, men, women and children. War is a terrible thing. But if it's going to have meaning, if it's going to have any sense of morality, there has to be a political purpose, and it must be achieved rapidly with the least cost and you do by speed.

Nothing he says is not true of course. But Milley skips right past the obvious stick in his self-righteous spokes, which is that the Geneva Conventions were codified in 1949 to prevent the litany of civilian atrocities he ticks off from happening again. War is hell, General Milley, but the international community recognized 75 years ago that innocent slaughter was wrong, and tried to do something about it.

Not to be ignored here, though, is that he is in essence, disparaging American World War II veterans and Iraq veterans too, to make a point of support for what Israel is doing today in Gaza. Funny, Milley and his four-star ilk never mentioned the civilians killed by the U.S. military in Iraq and Syria until they realized that acknowledging it might help get their Israeli friends off the hook. We could have used this kind of candor 10, 20 years ago — when it would have meant something and could have held the U.S. military, including senior military officers like Mark Milley, accountable. Fat chance.

To make matters worse, Milley then nods appreciatively when Palantir CEO Alex Karp chimes in: "The peace activists are actually the war activists, and we're the peace activists." His rationale? Weapons technology companies like his want to make the United States stronger so the country doesn't go to war. Bull.

The whole spectacle is made even more repugnant when you take in the setting: a confab of military officials and weapons contractors, convened to threat-inflate and hawk their wares like garish barkers under the typically euphemistic banner of the "Special Competitive Studies Project," a "non-partisan, non-profit initiative with a clear mission: to make recommendations to strengthen America’s long-term competitiveness as artificial intelligence (AI) and other emerging technologies are reshaping our national security, economy, and society."

Don't forget for a second that Israel's war is not only our war, but in so many ways, our gain, at least for the profiteers — including Milley — who see more personal and professional benefit in supporting Israel, than in defending the integrity of his own fellow Americans.


google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump talks to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts on the day of his speech to a joint session of Congress, in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., March 4, 2025. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade

QiOSK

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court today ruled against the White House on a key economic initiative of the Trump administration, concluding that the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) does not give the president the right to impose tariffs.

The ruling was not really a surprise; the tone of the questioning by several justices in early November was overwhelmingly skeptical of the administration’s argument, as prediction markets rightly concluded. Given the likelihood of this result, it should also come as no surprise that the Trump administration has already been plotting ways to work around the decision.

keep readingShow less
Trump Iran
Top image credit: Lucas Parker and FotoField via shutterstock.com

No, even a 'small attack' on Iran will lead to war

QiOSK

The Wall Street Journal reports that President Donald Trump is considering a small attack to force Iran to agree to his nuclear deal, and if Tehran refuses, escalate the attacks until Iran either agrees or the regime falls.

Here’s why this won’t work.

keep readingShow less
As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base
TOP IMAGE CREDIT: An aerial view of Diego Garcia, the Chagossian Island home to one of the U.S. military's 750 worldwide bases. The UK handed sovereignty of the islands back to Mauritius, with the stipulation that the U.S. must be allowed to continue its base's operation on Diego Garcia for the next 99 years. (Kev1ar82 / Shutterstock.com).

As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base

QiOSK

As the U.S. surges troops to the Middle East, a battle is brewing over a strategically significant American base in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he would oppose any effort to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, arguing that a U.S. base on the island of Diego Garcia may be necessary to “eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous [Iranian] Regime.” The comment came just a day after the State Department reiterated its support for the U.K.’s decision to give up sovereignty over the islands while maintaining a 99-year lease for the base.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.