Filed under: Europe, Freedom, History, Politics, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Peter Robinson, Ronald Reagan, The Berlin Wall
Germany today celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall, the reunification of East and West Germany that resulted, and the collapse of Communism. It was a big day for the Germans, and they have been celebrating for some time. The leaders of all the Western Democracies were there.
The United States sent a delegation headed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. President Obama did not attend. He sent a video of himself, noting that Jack Kennedy once spoke at the Brandenburg Gate, and that he, Obama, was the first African-American President of the United States. Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Pope John-Paul, Helmut Kohl and all the people who had a real part in bringing the wall down, were not mentioned.
Power Line has printed an excerpt from Peter Robinson’s memoir How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life. Robinson was the speechwriter assigned to write the Brandenburg Gate address and the excerpt is an account of how the speech came about.
The usual liberal pieces have appeared on schedule today, noting all the world’s walls. The Israeli wall, the wall between the U.S. and Mexico — supposedly comparable. What they never seem to grasp are the differences. The Berlin Wall was constructed to keep the German people in East Germany in. It was a prison wall, tall— with barbed wire, watch towers, floodlights armed guards and machine guns — to keep desperate citizens from escaping to freedom.
And the idea that communism killed over 100 million of their own people has been conveniently assigned to the memory hole.
Filed under: Law, Military, National Security, Progressivism., Terrorism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Fort Hood, Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano
ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates — The American Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, says that her agency is working with groups across the United States to try to deflect any wave of anti-Muslim sentiment after Thursday’s dreadful massacre by U.S. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a Muslim who reportedly expressed growing dismay over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is enlightening to see just what the Obama administration means by “homeland security.” Can’t offend anyone. Don’t want any hurt feelings.
Filed under: Law, National Security, Terrorism | Tags: And Other Newsroom Nonsense, Political Correctness, Root Causes
THIS WEEKEND IN SEATTLE, WASHINGTON:
On Halloween, Police Officer Timothy Brenton and rookie Officer Britt Sweeney were sitting in a car following a traffic stop when shots were fired in a clear assassination attempt. Officer Brenton was killed and Sweeney was grazed in the neck.
On Friday, police detectives were pursuing a tip from a resident who said that a car at an apartment complex in suburban Tukwilla matched the description of a car seen nearby when Brenton was killed.
Officers examined the car, which was covered with a tarp, and when they walked to speak to other law enforcement conducting surveillance, Christopher Monfort (seen above) approached the three detectives. Detectives started asking Monfort questions when he pulled a gun and tried to shoot. Monfort was shot by the detectives.
In Monfort’s apartment investigators found rifles and improvised explosive devices which they disarmed before removing them.
Monfort graduated from the U.W. in March of 2008 with a degree in Law, Societies and Justice. He was seeking a job in law enforcement, and listed as one of his accomplishments an internship with the American Civil Liberties Union.
Seattle police have had no problem in clearly identifying Monfort as a “lone domestic terrorist,” which the media repeat, attributing the phrase to the police department.
MEANWHILE, BACK AT FORT HOOD, TEXAS:
Mark Steyn comments this morning in the Corner at NRO:
Nidal Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers and the shooting of 38 more at Fort Hood in Texas, attended the controversial Dar al-Hijah mosque in Great Falls ,Virginia in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists. …
[Hasan's] fellow students complained to the faculty about Hasan’s “anti-American propaganda,” but said a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal written complaint.
…The George Washington University Homeland Security Policy Institute (HSPI) established the Presidential Transition Task Force, comprised of national and homeland security experts, policymakers and practitioners…The goal was to determine the top strategic priorities to advance the nation’s security in the coming decade…
Among the event participants was Nidal Hasan, representing the Uniformed Services University School of Medicine, who just last week shouted “Allahu Akbar” just before gunning down 51 of his fellow members of the military on their own base.
The nothing-to-see-here media continues to carefully avoid any mention of the word “terrorist” or “Islamist” and instead blathers on about pre-post-traumatic stress disorder apparently acquired by contact with someone who has served in combat. The New York Times went for this theme while explaining how mortified he was at having to deploy. CNN explained that “Treating trauma victims may cause it own trauma.” J.R. Salzman who is a little more familiar with PTSD than veterans of newsroom desks, is not amused.
There are many Muslims serving proudly in the United States Military, accepted completely by their fellow troops. Silly gyrations by the media to search for some fantasized root cause that will explain why Major Hasan became a Islamist domestic terrorist accomplish nothing except to fan the contempt the public holds for practitioners of political correctness.
Filed under: Military, News, Terrorism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Impressions, Massacre at Fort Hood
It is being described at President Obama’s “My Pet Goat Incident.” The reference, of course, is to the morning of 9/11 when President George W. Bush was reading a storybook to a group of primary schoolchildren.
An aide came in to inform the president of the first strike on the twin towers, and then of the second strike. The President blanched noticeably, but continued to finish the story rather that terrify a room full of little children.
Democrats tried to portray his reaction, which was courageous leadership, as somehow incorrect — as if a few minutes could make all the difference. Heck with the little kids, leap up and run out of the room? Please. It takes character to do the right thing in spite of your immediate instincts.
President Obama was informed about the terrorist massacre at Fort Hood two hours earlier. He chose to do all the lighthearted introductory thanks and “shout-outs,” before he even mentioned the Fort Hood attack in a startling and very odd quick and seemingly insincere flip in demeanor.
President Obama ordered flags flown at half-mast, gave a couple more speeches, put the pressure on wavering Democrats for the health care bill, announced that he would attend the memorial service next week for the victims at Fort Hood, and departed for the weekend at Camp David.
President George W. Bush and Laura quietly went to the hospital where the wounded were being treated to offer their condolences, concern and encouragement. No press, no photo-op. Governor Perry also dropped by.
Filed under: Europe, Foreign Policy, Freedom, History, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Angela Merkel, Collapse of Communism, The Berlin Wall
German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke before a joint session of Congress on Tuesday. She said:
[F]or me America seemed completely out of reach . . . then on the 9th of November 1989, the Berlin Wall fell.
And this border which had divided a nation, for decades, keeping people in two different worlds, was now open. And this is why for me, today is first and foremost a time to say thank you.
I thank all those American and Allied pilots who heard and heeded the desperate appeal of then-Mayor of Berlin Ernst Reuter, in 1948, who said, you, the nations of this world, cast your eyes towards the city.
For months, these pilots flew food to Berlin for the airlift, saving the citizens from starvation. Many of these soldiers risked their lives. Dozens lost their lives. We shall remember and honor them forever…
I think of John F. Kennedy, who won the hearts of the Berliners, when, during his visit in 1961, after the wall had been built, he reached out to the desperate citizens of Berlin by saying, “Ich bin ein Berliner.” I think of Ronald Reagan, who, far earlier than most, clearly saw the sign of the times and, standing in front of the Brandenburg Gate, already in 1987, called out, “Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” This appeal shall remain forever in my heart.
The 20th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall is a very important occasion. Americans, in 1989, didn’t seem to really grasp that shift in the condition of the world, or perhaps the leftists among us didn’t consider it an event to be celebrated. There have been books written about the lack of appreciation for the enormity of the collapse of Communism and the end of the Cold War.
But then Liberals prefer to attribute the whole thing to Gorbachev and Perestroika. Ronald Reagan, who? Pope John Paul? Margaret Thatcher? George Meany? Why do they always try to rewrite history? And once rewritten, it becomes gospel. Obama has made a major mistake in not attending, but so far he is not doing well with the foreign policy thing. No character, no class.
Filed under: Freedom, History, Military, Terrorism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Afghanistan, Pakistan, The United States of America, U.S Military
Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Foreign Policy, National Security, Politics, The Constitution, The Elephant's Child
The office of the President of the United States has a long and complex history. Over the past 220 years, it has been occupied by just 44 different men. George Washington was the first and undoubtedly will remain the last to be elected unanimously. He came to the office reluctantly.
He had been Commander-in-Chief long before he was elected President. He was elected to that position by the Continental Congress in 1775 when he was forty-three years old. There was not yet an army for him to command, only the militias surrounding Boston. And when he said he farewell to his troops in 1783, he was fifty-one. He had only a few years as a civilian before his country called upon him again. His prudence and restraint set the country on a firm basis, and in his farewell address he said:
In the discharge of this trust, I will only say, that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious, in the outset, of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more, that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that, if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe, that while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.
The office of the presidency, with its obligations of duty and commitment, takes a toll on the men who temporarily occupy the position. They owe a debt to those who have held the office before them, and to the history left to them by previous occupants. Treaties and alliances have been laboriously created, relations with other countries, whether in trade or good will, carefully nurtured. A knowledge and awareness of that history is essential.
Thomas Jefferson said:
Most bad government has grown out of too much government. [and]
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have…The course of history shows that as government grows, liberty decreases.
President James Polk remarked:
No President who performs his duties faithfully and conscientiously can have any leisure.
President Harry Truman:
I have tried my best to give the nation everything I had in me. There are probably a million people who could have done the job better than I did, but I had the job, and I always quote an epitaph on a tombstone in a cemetery in Tombstone, Arizona. “here lies Jack Williams, He done his damnest.”
Dwight Eisenhower said:
Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict on us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Conservatives, independents, pundits and even many Democrats are trying to understand President Barack Obama. There are so many questions.
He is clearly not the centrist that he portrayed during the campaign. Is he a radical leftist? He has described himself as a communitarian, for whatever that is worth.
Barack Obama has never, we have been told, had much interest in history. A knowledge of and respect for history are essential to the presidency. Without that you repeat the mistakes and failures of those who have gone before. Depression, inflation, stagflation, debt, unpreparedness or trust in the wrong adversaries. The demands of the office require humility, not hubris.
Nations have interests. Relations with other nations are not popularity contests. Years of carefully nurtured relationships based on fair dealing and fair trade are being discarded in the hope of deals with long-term antagonists who wish our destruction. Speeches, however charmingly delivered and meetings are unlikely to sway them from their purposes.
When a new president temporarily takes on the most important office in the world, he becomes the president of all Americans, not just the unions who supported his campaign. He must suffer criticism and mockery in the understanding that it is the right of the American people and his role to bear it.
He takes on an obligation to preserve, protect and defend the nation. The savings that represent the life’s work of its citizens cannot be spent wildly in some misguided attempt to achieve progressive goals that have been proven over and over not to work. The American people, 38 percent, want the budget deficit cut in half in the next four years. Only 23 percent think health care reform should be a top priority.
I just don’t think that Barack Obama understands the office of the presidency. Oh, he gets the prestige, and he clearly likes the perks and trappings, some of which he adopted before he was elected. He keeps reminding us that “I won!” Yet he seems not to have understood the obligation, the duty, the sacrifice of the office and the weight of the burden that a president must bear. He and Michelle keep complaining about how hard he has to work.
There’s a lot more to it than being surrounded by admirers and sycophants attending to every need, than having AirForce One at one’s beck and call. I just don’t think he gets it. What do you think?
Filed under: Islam, Military, Terrorism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Afghanistan, Dithering, Pakistan, U.S. Army
On August 30, 55 days ago,General Stanley McChrystal submitted his request for 40,000 more troops in Afghanistan, and outlined his counterinsurgency strategy. President Obama is still reviewing the strategy and what everybody thinks of the strategy and who is for it and who is opposed, and playing golf and making speeches and having fundraisers. A decision has not been forthcoming, but he said maybe in another two weeks.
(h/t: the marvelous Michael Ramirez)
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Freedom, History, Islam, National Security, Politics, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Afghanistan, Eastern Europe, Iran, U.S. Foreign Policy
Vice President Cheney gave a speech last night at the Center for Security Policy. Once again, he proved why he is probably the most consequential vice president in the Nation’s history.
An excerpt from the speech:
Most anyone who is given responsibility in matters of national security quickly comes to appreciate the commitments and structures put in place by others who came before. You deploy a military force that was planned and funded by your predecessors. You inherit relationships with partners and obligations to allies that were first undertaken years and even generations earlier. With the authority you hold for a little while, you have great freedom of action. And whatever course you follow, the essential thing is always to keep commitments, and to leave no doubts about the credibility of your country’s word.
So among my other concerns about the drift of events under the present administration, I consider the abandonment of missile defense in Eastern Europe to be a strategic blunder and a breach of good faith.
It is certainly not a model of diplomacy when the leaders of Poland and the Czech Republic are informed of such a decision at the last minute in midnight phone calls. It took a long time and lot of political courage in those countries to arrange for our interceptor system in Poland and the radar system in the Czech Republic. Our Polish and Czech friends are entitled to wonder how strategic plans and promises years in the making could be dissolved, just like that – with apparently little, if any, consultation. Seventy years to the day after the Soviets invaded Poland, it was an odd way to mark the occasion.
You hardly have to go back to 1939 to understand why these countries desire – and thought they had – a close and trusting relationship with the United States. Only last year, the Russian Army moved into Georgia, under the orders of a man who regards the collapse of the Soviet Union as the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century. Anybody who has spent much time in that part of the world knows what Vladimir Putin is up to. And those who try placating him, by conceding ground and accommodating his wishes, will get nothing in return but more trouble.
What did the Obama Administration get from Russia for its abandonment of Poland and the Czech Republic, and for its famous “Reset” button? Another deeply flawed election and continued Russian opposition to sanctioning Iran for its pursuit of nuclear weapons.
In the short of it, President Obama’s cancellation of America’s agreements with the Polish and Czech governments was a serious blow to the hopes and aspirations of millions of Europeans. For twenty years, these peoples have done nothing but strive to move closer to us, and to gain the opportunities and security that America offered. These are faithful friends and NATO allies, and they deserve better. The impact of making two NATO allies walk the plank won’t be felt only in Europe. Our friends throughout the world are watching and wondering whether America will abandon them as well.
Big events turn on the credibility of the United States – doing what we said we would do, and always defending our fundamental security interests. In that category belong the ongoing missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the need to counter the nuclear ambitions of the current regime in Iran.
A full transcript of the speech is available here.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Islam, National Security, Politics, Terrorism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Afghanistan, American Military, Indecision, Pakistan
This painting by San Francisco artist Ed Ruscha is one selected by President Obama to be loaned to the White House. It would seem to indicate some level of self-awareness on the part of Mr. Obama of characteristic indecision. The world is taking notice of Obama’s dithering regarding Afghanistan and Pakistan, and worrying.
The word “dithering” has gained a spot in current vocabulary that it has never previously occupied. In a campaign speech on September 9,2008, Obama said:
His plan comes up short. There’s not enough troops, not enough resources and not enough urgency. What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the War on Terror is not in Iraq and never was. The central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan where the terrorists who hit us on 9-11 are still plotting attacks seven years later.
On March 27, according to Charles Krauthammer, with his secretaries of state and defense at his side, the President said “Today I’m announcing a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.” He made it clear that he had not arrived at the decision casually. The new strategy, he said, “marks the conclusion of a careful policy review.” The conclusion of an extensive review, the president assured the nation , that included consultation with military commanders and diplomats, with the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan, with our NATO allies and members of Congress.
Dr. Krauthammer continued: “The general in charge was then relieved and replaced with Obama’s own choice, Stanley McChrystal.”
On August 30, Obama’s handpicked general submitted a request for 40,000 more troops which he said were necessary for the counterinsurgency strategy the president wanted, and to avoid losing to the Taliban.
General Petraeus, Admiral Mullen, General Zinni, and Ike Skelton (chair, House Armed Services), Diane Feinstein (chair Senate Intel) agreed. Six weeks later, Obama is still dithering. Rahm Emanuel was on the Sunday shows using the uncertainty in Afghan elections as the latest excuse. Robert Kaplan wrote in the Atlantic:
The Afghan people have survived three decades of war by hedging their bets. Now, watching a young and inexperienced American president appear to waiver on his commitment to their country, they are deciding, at the level of both the individual and the mass, whether to make their peace with the Taliban — even as the Taliban itself can only take solace and encouragement from Obama’s public agonizing. Meanwhile, fundamentalist elements of the Pakistani military, opposed to the recent crackdown against local Taliban, are also taking heart from developments in Washington. …This is how coups and revolutions get started, by the middle ranks sensing weakness in foreign support for their superiors.
Obama’s wobbliness also has a corrosive effect on the Indians and the Iranians. India desperately needs a relatively secular Afghan regime in place to bolster Hindu India’s geopolitical position against radical Islamdom, and while the country enjoyed an excellent relationship with Bush, Obama’s dithering is making it nervous. And Iran in observing Washington’s indecision, can only feel more secure in its creeping economic annexation of western Afghanistan.
At the White House, the dithering goes on. The meetings are now referred to as “seminars”, but strategic decisions seem to be left, not to the world’s best generals, but, of course, to the president and Rahm Emanuel, Joe Biden and David Axlerod.
As the painting says: I THINK MAYBE I’LL…MAYBE…YES…
xxxxxxxwait a minute…
xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Second Thought…
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx MAYBE NO..
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxyet
Filed under: Capitalism, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Liberalism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Democrat Corruption
The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research 2009 Wriston Lecture, “Decline is a Choice: The New Liberalism and the End of American Ascendancy” by Dr. Charles Krauthammer is a must read for conservatives. Our country is in a recession. “The weathervanes of conventional wisdom are registering another round of angst about America in decline. New theories, old slogans: Imperial overstretch. The Asian awakening. The post-American world. Inexorable forces beyond our control bringing the inevitable humbling of the world hegemon.”
If you need an antidote to the preposterous awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama — not for accomplishments, for there are none — but for the cult of personality and improbable promises of undefined hope and change, it is here. Dr. Krauthammer is very, very good.
The transcript is to be found here, and a video of the speech is here. I always prefer to read so I can underline and make notes, but others choose a video. In any case, do not miss it.
Filed under: American Elephant, Europe, Politics | Tags: Debunking Liberal Lies, Eugene Robinson, Nobel Peace Prize, Obama
At least according to the half-wit, Eugene Robinson, who claims Republicans who criticize Obama’s undeserved Nobel prize do so because they hate America.
The problem for Robinson is that nobody else thinks Obama deserves the prize either. Polls in the UK show most Brits agree that Obama did not deserve the award. Another poll shows Norwegians (the peace prize is awarded in Norway) agree. Indeed, reaction all across Europe has been fairly unanimous, and the world agrees with Republicans — they don’t think Obama deserved the award either!
So I guess the only conclusion we can reach, if we are to use the torturous contortions Eugene Robinson calls logic, is that Obama has increased world hatred of America!
Filed under: Foreign Policy, History, Islam, Israel, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Iran, Meaningful Engagement, Serious Discussion
Dore Gold, former Israeli Ambassador to the United States:
The U.S. and Iran speak very different diplomatic languages that cannot be bridged by a dictionary alone. In the West, candor is central to confidence-building; for the diplomats of the Islamic Republic, deception is a way of life.
The whole brief article is worth your time, but these two sentences caught my eye.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Islam, Terrorism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Afghanistan, health care, Pakistan, U.S. Military
William Kristol doesn’t understand the agonizing over Afghanistan:
I think that’s pathetic. The president said this is a war of necessity. He said it’s a war we have to win He said we have to think about it regionally and that we have to think of Afghanistan together with Pakistan and that we can’t have a stable Pakistan unless we hold the line in Afghanistan, and an unstable Pakistan in unbelievably dangerous since they have nuclear weapons. Why is this a tough call?
Max Boot summarizes E.J. Dionne Jr.’s column in the Washington Post:
In essence, he writes, we should accept a high risk of failure in Afghanistan because trying to win the war will take away momentum from Obama’s domestic agenda, notably health-care reform. “The last thing he should do is rush into a new set of obligations in Afghanistan that would come to define his presidency more than any victory he wins on health care.”
Well, that kinda sums it up, doesn’t it?
Filed under: American Elephant, Foreign Policy, Military, National Security, News | Tags: Afghanistan, Obama, Support the Troops!
Update: Welcome Red State Readers!
Thanks to Moe Lane for the link! While you’re here, we hope you’ll have a look around our humble little blog and tell us what you think. We also make some pretty cool t-shirts, buttons, stickers and other fun stuff, so, you may want to check out some of our hottest items, or have a look at our CafePress Store.
Obama has taken ownership of the war in Afghanistan. Since the presidential campaign, he has characterized it as the good war while he calls the Iraq war (despite liberating 24 million people, and turning an avowed enemy and a rogue dictator into a democratic ally) a mistake.
Meanwhile, things have not been going well in Afghanistan of late. Restrictive rules of engagement are getting our troops killed while the president hems and haws about what to do.
On the one hand, the loss will be Obama’s — he cannot blame it on President Bush — and no president wants that kind of legacy. On the other hand, our allies continue to leave the theater, and Obama’s base, the left, have finally gotten the courage up to admit that their prior support of the Afghan war was always a lie (Imagine that!) and they want to bail on that war as well.
With that in mind, come two headlines today:
White House: Obama to take ‘Next several weeks’ to review strategy and,
Tony Blair to head the EU within weeks.
Now we all know Tony Blair has his head on straight about both the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and resolutely so. Is Obama then waiting for Blair’s leadership to give him the political cover to send more troops to Afghanistan? Or are the stories unrelated, and Obama simply finds himself too busy trying to secure Olympic contracts for his Chicago cronies and seizing the American health-care system for his union thugs to bother himself with little things like terrorism, al Qaeda, the Taliban, and our troops lives?
Let’s hope it’s the former.
Time will tell.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, National Security, Terrorism, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Democrat Demagogues, Iran, Mushy Multilateralism, The United Nations
Wednesday, September 23— President Obama speaks to the United Nations General Assembly. He says “if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards…then they must be held accountable. The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced.”
Thursday, September 24— President Obama chaired a session of the U.N. Security Council. When the Security Council passed a new resolution which never mentions Iran or North Korea, Obama pounded his gavel and proclaimed: “The resolution we passed today will also strengthen the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. We have made it clear that the Security Council has both the authority and the responsibility to respond to violations to this treaty. We’ve made it clear that the Security Council has both the authority and responsibility to determine and respond as necessary when violations of this treaty threaten international peace and security. That includes full compliance with Security Council resolutions on Iran and North Korea. Let me be clear. This is not about singling out individual nations….[W]e must demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced.”
Friday, September 25— Speaking to the G-20 in Pittsburgh, President Obama admitted that “yesterday in Vienna, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France presented detailed evidence to the IAEA demonstrating that the Islamic Republic of Iran has been building a covert uranium enrichment facility near Qom for several years….The existence of this facility underscores Iran’s continuing unwillingness to meet its obligations under U.N. Security Council resolutions…Iran’s decision to build yet another nuclear facility without notifying the IAEA represents a direct challenge to the basic compact at the center of the non-proliferation regime…[T]he size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program. Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow… [and is; threatening the stability and security of the region and the world."
So when President Obama spoke to the General Assembly and the Security Council, he already knew that Iran's latest violations of "international standards" endangered peace, but he refused to put Iran on the agenda of the Security Council summit. So he made a perfectly useless speech, and got a perfectly useless resolution.
As a matter of fact, the president has known since last fall, before he was inaugurated that Iran had another facility at Qom. He knew when Iranians took to the streets to protest an illegitimate election, and he refused to offer any encouraging words. The demonstrations continue, but words in favor of liberty have not been forthcoming.
President Nicolas Sarkozy of France [France!] in the U.N.’s translation from the French said…“President Obama himself has said that he dreams of a world without nuclear weapons. Before our very eyes, two countries are doing exactly the opposite at this very moment. Since 2005, Iran has violated five Security Council Resolutions… I support America’s extended hand. But what have these proposals for dialogue produced for the international community Nothing but more enriched uranium and more centrifuges. And last but not least, it has resulted in a statement by Iranian leaders calling for wiping of the map a Member of the United Nations.
As Jules Crittenden said: “It’s a sad state of affairs when a Frenchman mocks an American president and you have to go with the frog.”
From his statement on Friday, Obama said: “The size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program.” Gosh! You think?
The regime in Iran is corrupt, willing to use terror as a weapon at home and abroad. It has demonstrated over and over that it will stop at nothing to acquire nuclear weapons, and that it is dedicated to the destruction of Israel and of the United States.
Lest you think that President Obama has no particular foreign policy beyond a mushy hope for “meaningful dialogue” maybe around December or so, that he is unconcerned about a nuclear holocaust, never fear. He says that if the international community does not act swiftly to deal with climate change that “we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe.”
“The security and stability of each nation and all peoples — our prosperity, our health, and our safety — are in jeopardy. And the time we have to reverse this tide is running out.” But then the World Wildlife Fund and other environmental activist groups say the President’s speech didn’t go far enough, that it was an opportunity missed.
Well, it’s always especially nice when everybody has their priorities straight.That one degree of warming we had last century, back before 1998, was really worrying. Now that the climate’s been cooling for the last ten years we are facing “irreversible catastrophe”— but nuclear attacks — that’s so, so 20th century!
Filed under: Economy, Foreign Policy, News, The Elephant's Child | Tags: Mongolia, The Great Hural, Ulan Bator
The world financial crisis hit Mongolia as well as the rest of the world. Everyone had to tighten their belts a bit, from camel drivers to horse herders. Mongolia has a wealth of natural resources in copper, gold, silver and high-quality coal. They thought they had the answer in 2006, when the legislature in Ulan Bator, the Great Hural, slapped a 68 percent windfall profits tax on copper exports, at $2,600 or above a ton. Gold exports they taxed at $500 an ounce or above, and settled back to watch the money flow in.
Not only did it not flow in, mining companies shut down their operations, gold was smuggled out of the country, and foreign investors vanished. Then the boom times ended and the global financial crisis hit too.
The Great Hural borrowed a page from the supply-side notebook, and scrapped the tax. Money is now flowing into the country. Mining companies like Canada’s Ivanhoe Mines and Australian Rio Tinto are expected to sign a major deal to exploit the massive Oyu Tolgoi copper and gold mine. The government would receive a $250 million advance against future royalties and taxes.
Tavan Tolgoi, the world’s largest undeveloped coal deposit with 6.5 billion tons of coal, may be the next project. A consortium of Russian energy companies and other mining companies have submitted bids.
There is much more to do. Corruption is endemic, amd officials at every level of society are on the take. Education needs to be modernized so that Mongolians can supply their own financial expertise and business skills to support the economy. Dumping the windfall profits tax is a good start.
Do you think our Congress might take a lesson from the Mongolians?
