Filed under: Afghanistan, Africa, Foreign Policy, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Middle East, Military, National Security, Politics, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Al-Qaeda Affiliates, Bloodlust and Brutalitly, Boko Haram in Nigeria
While all our attention is focused on Iraq and Syria, an al Qaeda affiliate in Nigeria is sweeping across northeast Nigeria with equally brutal means to attempt to break up the most populous nation on the continent.
Boko Haram overran Gwoza, a city of about 275,000 in Borno state, declaring on August 24, that the town now had “nothing to do with Nigeria”— and declared it part of “the Islamic caliphate.
This is the area where the kidnapping of schoolgirls in April gave birth to the hashtag campaign #Bring Back Our Girls. Wars are not won and problems are not settled with hashtag signs. Other events in the news cycle soon took over the attention of the world. Boko Haram’s leader Abubakar Shekau called the Islamic State’s self-proclaimed caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, as among his brethren, as well as al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri and Taliban chief Mullah Omar. Security experts have said that Borno state may be the start of Boko Haram’s new country. They are aggressively attacking the Nigerian military which is poorly equipped and under armed.
It is a particularly vicious terrorist organization, linked to other terrorist organizations. Bombings, assassinations and kidnappings, genocide on Christians, attacks on schools where the students are taken if they are girls, or slaughtered if they are boys, and they have begun to operate like a conventional army with tanks and artillery.
When these groups are victorious their recruiting is more successful. They seem like conquering heroes and the bloodlust and brutality are an attraction until their armies are decimated, and reality sets in.
Filed under: Afghanistan, Africa, Capitalism, Economy, Foreign Policy, Humor, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Middle East, National Security, Politics, Russia, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Inability to Face Facts, Michael Raimirez, The National Threat
I find it truly interesting that Liberals are so much less concerned than Republicans are about the threat of terrorism, of militant Islam, of the actual threat to the United States, and why this should be so.
Liberals care about power — theirs. They don’t like mass democracy (in spite of their party name), middle class capitalism, the individual businessman’s pursuit of profit as well as the individual citizen’s self-interested pursuit of success. They care about being in charge, about the administrative state. Liberal social programs don’t work, they are not as good at administration as they like to think, and their experts aren’t all that expert — but the next program will surely work. Liberals have no foundational principles, but react to events on a case by case basis as they occur.
They essentially bypassed the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by lumping them under their hatred for George W. Bush, and didn’t learn much of anything about the countries, the wars, the people or the threats, and their only interest was in getting past it. It has left them dreadfully ill-prepared to understand foreign policy and national power and its needful uses. Nor, lost in a mush of political correctness and tolerance, are they even able to call mass murder and genocide — terrorism. They are simply unprepared to grasp the potential threat that faces us, nor able to plan how to treat with it. We are easy prey.
Filed under: Africa, Democrat Corruption, Foreign Policy, Intelligence, Islam, Middle East, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, Russia, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: A Weak Foreign Policy, Libya and The Arab Spring, Threats to America
In the 1980s, there was a wave of terrorist incidents involving Libyans, and Pan Am Flight 103 was brought down by a bomb over Lockerbie, Scotland in December of 1988. The Reagan administration reacted by prohibiting Libyans from coming to the U.S. to attend flight school, work in aviation maintenance or flight operations, or to study or seek training in nuclear science.
Without going into the long conflict with Libya, with Muammar Gaddafi, in the so-called Arab Spring in 2011, demonstrators across northern Africa ousted former rulers in Tunis and Egypt and it resulted in a protracted civil war in Libya and the eventual execution of Gaddafi. The Arab Spring did not turn out to be the stunning move to democracy that our administration expected. A year later, militants attacked the American compound in Benghazi, killed our ambassador, his technological support officer, and two brave former SEAL contractors. Libya remains in turmoil, and the terror threat there continues.
The Obama administration has surprisingly decided to lift the longstanding prohibition on Libya, by turning a blind eye to real terrorist threats and forged ahead with its plan to allow Libyan pilots and nuclear scientists to study in the U.S. — although only weeks ago Americans working at the American embassy in Tripoli were evacuated due to battles between rival rebel groups.
The House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security and the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security held hearings, and demanded documents on the issue from DHS, which were never provided.
There are unconfirmed reports that there are eleven passenger jetliners missing from the main airport in Tripoli. The State Department has said they have no confirmation, so this may be only rumor, but a scary one.
The Committee Chairmen are troubled. Chairman Goodlatte: “The House Judiciary Committee has repeatedly sought information about the Administration’s policy reversal but political appointees at the Department of Homeland Security have stonewalled the Committee’s requests and have not articulated why it is in Americans’ best interests to change policy. Given the ongoing volatility in Libya, it is unconscionable and completely irresponsible that the Administration plans to lift a longstanding policy that protects Americans and our national security from threats in the region.”
Chairman Gowdy: “The burden of proof for advocating a change in the status quo lies with the Administration. Is post-revolutionary Libya secure enough to change the rules? Why now? What evidence does the Administration have to assert the relationship between Libya and the US has indeed normalized? It is extremely concerning that DHS is moving forward with these plans, but has not provided information on the policy change despite repeated requests from Members.”
Congressman Chaffetz : “It is unbelievable that this Administration is willing to put Americans in harm’s way by lifting a decades-old security ban on a country challenged by instability. This makes no sense. None. Recent events – such as the 2012 attack on our U.S. Consulate in Benghazi – do not indicate a nation where things have been ‘normalized.’ Rather they seem to be ingredients of a failed state in the making.”
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved a final regulation to lift the Reagan era prohibition on Libyans which was put in place in 1960. The administration justifies it’s action by claiming the relationship with Libya has “improved”, evidenced by evacuating the embassy?
Perhaps this falls under “organizing the Middle East.” Why any administration would want to train more Middle Eastern nuclear scientists is beyond me, nor what illusions they have about the world. According to studies, Republicans are 13% more inclined to consider al Qaeda or ISIS as a threat than Democrats. And Republicans are 18% more concerned about Iran’s nuclear program than Democrats are. Go figure.
Vladimir Putin reminded us on Friday, as Russian tanks and troops poured into eastern Ukraine: “I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations,” he said. “This is a reality, not just words.” Russia, is “strengthening our nuclear deterrence forces.”
Well at least somebody is capable of straight, tough speech. Unfortunately he’s on the wrong side.
Filed under: Africa, Foreign Policy, Iraq, Middle East, National Security, Terrorism | Tags: carbon pollution, Not the Islamic State, The Biggest Challenge
American concern over President Obama’s national security advisers grows. He seems increasingly unable to understand the risks from the Islamic State, and his advisers seem increasingly inept.
Yesterday, as threats to the United States multiply, Secretary of State John Kerry remains fixated on — global warming. On Wednesday at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Secretary Kerry repeated his claim that climate change is “the biggest challenge…we face right now.”
ISIS has established a terrorist state across northern Iraq and Syria, Israel is under siege by terrorists, Ebola is spreading in Africa and threatens to arrive on our shores, our southern order is wide open to terrorists, criminals and diseases by presidential order, China is engaging in a massive military buildup and working on shooting down our satellites. Russia is attacking Ukraine and threatening its other smaller neighbors, and our biggest worry is climate change? Unbelievable.
It’s hard to know what Mr. Obama’s relations with his advisers is, are they so in awe of him that they do not question any of his ideas? Some sources say that Obama only meets with his very closest associates. It’s been reported that he doesn’t attend foreign policy briefings, and that he doesn’t like meetings. The big problem is that there seems to be genocide going on in Iraq, and Obama is fully engaged on the golf course.
ISIS, or the Islamic State, is increasingly intent on attacking the United States. They have proclaimed they want their flag flying over the White House. We should probably take them seriously. A lot of military people are alarmed, as are those who are deeply familiar with the Middle East.
Mr. Kerry recently warned African leaders to stop creating new farms and focus on what they already have. “Certain agricultural processes can actually release carbon pollution,” he explained to the Africans who were hoping for help in feeding their starving people.
Filed under: Africa, Developing Nations, Environment, Foreign Policy, Global Warming, Junk Science, Science/Technology | Tags: A Cooling World?, Misguided Advice for Africa, Secretary of State John Kerry
John Kerry went off on an extended rant at a panel on “Resilience and Food Security in a Changing Climate” at the U.S. Africa Leaders Summit on Monday.
Eight thousand children die every single day. Around the world, one in eight people suffers from chronic hunger, and in sub-Sahara Africa that number regrettably is one in four. So looking to the future, it’s only going to be more difficult to bring these numbers down.
He said the seven billion people the world struggles to feed today will be nine billion by 2050, more than half of which is set to occur in Africa. And climate change will make confronting world hunger even harder. The effects of climate change, he said, are already being felt around the world.
We’re not talking about some distant future. We’re not talking about some pie in the sky, unproven set of theories, as they were in the earliest days of population growth or other challenges that we face. The impacts of climate change are already being felt everywhere in the world. From the Arctic to the Antarctic, and everywhere in between and around, and they are only going to get worse,” he said, noting that will continue to be the case unless world leaders are able to reach an agreement in Paris next year at the UN conference on climate change.
“All you have to do is look at the extreme conditions that farmers are dealing with around the word. Hotter temperatures, longer droughts —like in California for instance and other parts of the world — unpredictable rainfall patterns,”
All you have to do is look at our ocean, the same carbon pollution that drives climate change is literally changing the ocean’s chemistry,” he said, arguing that it is among the difficulties fish populations are facing.
Kerry went on to say that the increase in carbon is not only detrimental to the amount of food available, but it is also making what is available less nutritious.
Drought, storms, monsoons, hurricanes, tornadoes and unpredictable rainfall patterns, are weather, not climate. Climate is a statistic involving worldwide temperature.
CO², carbon dioxide, is one of the building blocks of life, and a natural fertilizer for plants. It makes plants grow. One of the reasons we have been able to feed growing numbers of the world’s population is that slightly increased CO² has helped plants to grow and flourish. It helps to make plants more resistant to drought. If Mr. Kerry wants to grow more food on the same amount of land, the worst thing he could do is to try to cut back on what he mistakenly calls “carbon pollution.”
Norman Borlaug, the Father of the Green Revolution, was one of the great figures of the 20th century. He saved hundreds of millions of lives by producing new varieties of plants and went on to receive the Nobel Peace Prize for averting malnutrition and famine. From 1950 to 1992, the world’s grain output rose from 692 million tons produced on 1.70 billion acres of cropland to 1.9 billion tons on 1.73 acres, an increase of more than 150 percent. His innovations have helped to feed the world. Not enough for the left, which marches and demonstrates against GMO (genetically modified organisms) foods, just as they are out there demonstrating against nonexistent “carbon pollution.”
There was a video, but I couldn’t listen to it myself, let alone push it on you.
Filed under: Afghanistan, Africa, Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Foreign Policy, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Middle East, National Security, Politics, The United States | Tags: Don't Blame Obama, Global Chaos, Main Job - Foreign Policy
—Israel and Hamas were having a 3-day cease-fire at the behest of Ban-Ki-Moon and John Kerry. I’m not sure what they think they are accomplishing. This time, it lasted just 90 minutes, at which point Hamas sent a batch of suicide bombers into Israel, and killed two Israeli soldiers. Then they kidnapped an Israeli soldier. Hamas is a terrorist organization that wants the destruction of the State of Israel and the death of all its inhabitants. Israel wants Hamas to stop firing missiles into Israel, and they want to destroy all the terror tunnels Hamas has dug. Hamas is fighting to win.
ISIS is threatening Kurdistan, and the Kurds have asked the U.S. for military help. They have a good army, but spread a little thin because the border is so long. Obama turned them down, said they’d have to get help from Iraq’s central government—who are more than a little busy at present. Whatever emergency crops up, Mr. Obama is right on top of it.
—The Russia problem continues. The U.S. and the E.U. will impose new sanctions as soon as Monday, in the hopes that with the right balance of carrots and sticks, Mr. Putin will knock off the power grabs. Slap on the wrists and then we can all get back to ordinary business. Mr. Putin is just acting understandably. Ukraine is part of Russia’s historic sphere of influence, so let him have them.
This is Western self-deception. Mr Putin’s Russia is an authoritarian regime bent on redoing the Cold War. He has no democratic legitimacy, so to maintain power he must employ an increasing nationalism and foreign conquest to maintain power. Foreign meddling is not limited to just historic claims. Mr. Putin is not going to be swayed by either mild sanctions nor by reset buttons. Victor Davis Hanson sums it up:
The Obama administration often either denies any responsibility for the current global chaos or claims that it erupted spontaneously. Yet most of the mess was caused by, or made worse by, growing U.S. indifference and paralysis.
Over the last five and a half years, America has had lots of clear choices, but the administration usually took the path of least short-term trouble, which has ensured long-term hardship.
There was no need to “reset” the relatively mild punishments that the George W. Bush administration had accorded Vladimir Putin’s Russia for invading Georgia in 2008. By unilaterally normalizing relations with Russia and trashing Bush, Barack Obama and then–Secretary of State Hillary Clinton only green-lighted further Russian aggression, which has since spread to Crimea and Ukraine.
There was no need for Obama, almost immediately upon assuming office, to distance the U.S. from Israel by criticizing Israel’s policies and warming to its enemies, such as Hamas and the authoritarian Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan.
China, Iran, Syria, Libya, and oh, yes, North Korea, who just threatened to drop a nuclear weapon on the White House.
When the uprising in Syria against Bashar Assad arose, it was dominated by patriotic Syrian freedom fighters who asked for our help. Saudi Arabia and other American allies in the Arab world urged us to provide arms and help to the rebels. We didn’t. Iran and Russia did. They saw the larger importance of the conflict and poured in weapons and personnel to support Assad. Somewhere in that period Obama did draw a red line, but it didn’t mean anything. The Saudis have clearly stated their opinion. We and the Europeans are naive and ineffective and as a clear result, they have been planning to obtain their own nuclear weapons.
In December of 2010, a Tunisian street vendor set himself on fire to protest the confiscation of his goods and the harassment from municipal officials. That began the Tunisian Revolution and the so-called Arab Spring. That was followed by the Egyptian Revolution in January of 2011, a popular uprising against Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and then in February, the revolution in Libya began with anti-government demonstrations in Benghazi, which escalated into a civil war. Egypt elected the Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood in a questionable election and finally the army took over again. The West condemned, demanded an end to violence, was concerned — all the usual. We had an ambassador, his aide and two brave former Seals murdered. And how preposterous does it look now to have attempted to blame that on an amateur video?
Libya is more than unstable, and we have pulled our embassy staff out of Tripoli. Walter Russell Mead is not so sanguine:
Throw in the resulting civil war in Mali and the scattering of insurgents and weapons to the four winds, and you have a classic exhibition of reckless incompetence—of American arrogance, ignorance, carelessness and moralism combining in a toxic stew to sink a fragile country we never understood.
Luckily for America’s self-esteem, it was liberal Democrats that produced this particular shambles. If Republicans had done this, the media would be on the administration non-stop, perhaps comparing Samantha Power to Paul Wolfowitz—a well-meaning humanitarian way over her head who wrecked a country out of misguided ideology. There might also be some pointed questions for future presidential candidates who supported this fiasco. But since both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have their fingerprints all over Libya, there isn’t a lot of press hunger for a detailed, unsparing autopsy into this stinking corpse of policy flub.
If Obama were a Republican, the press and the weekly news shows would be ringing with hyperbolic, apocalyptic denunciations of the clueless incumbent who had failed to learn the most basic lessons of Iraq.
ISIS is still rampaging over Iraq. Egypt, Jordan and even the Palestinian West Bank are hoping that Israel can eliminate Hamas as a power. There is still civil war in Mali. We have set free the Taliban’s top generals in a misguided attempt to empty Guantanamo. Victor Davis Hanson adds:
Christians are being exterminated and cleansed from Iraq and Syria. But we seem to think they are equivalent to bible-thumping Texas evangelicals and their killers exotic versions of Che, and so the ethnic cleansing is rarely condemned. If Barack Obama would just close his eyes and envision ISIS, Hamas, or Putin as the Tea Party or Fox News, and then react accordingly, the world would be a safer place. …
The U.S. looks at the current global violence and then looks away, after a call for a “pivot” or a flash card calling for Boko Haram to give back the girls it has enslaved. Our generation’s version of the bad memories of the 1918 Meuse-Argonne Offensive is Iraq and Afghanistan. Like our grandparents of the 1930s, we feel that the dead lost abroad in the most recent wars were not worth it — and so ignore the gathering war clouds on the present horizon, as if ignoring them means they must disappear.
Glance about — Central America, Venezuela, China, Russia, Ukraine, Crimea, Gaza, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Turkey, etc. — and the world outside the West is mostly a nasty place. The three common denominators in all these catastrophes are the usual demagogic leaders blaming someone else for their people’s own self-inflicted miseries, a comfortable West that shrugs that somehow all these depressing things and mean people will just go away — and a tired global enforcer whose community organizer leader went into retirement and offers “make no mistake about it” warnings between swings on the golf course.
Filed under: Afghanistan, Africa, China, Foreign Policy, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Israel, Latin America, Middle East, National Security, Politics, Russia, The United States | Tags: A World in Turmoil, An Arc Of Instability, The Obama Foreign Policy
A Wall Street Journal’s front page article on Monday said politely “Obama Contends With Arc of Instability Unseen Since 70s.” “A convergence of security crises is playing out around the globe from the Palestinian territories and Iraq to Ukraine and the South Chin Sea, posing a serious challenge to President Barack Obama’s foreign policy and reflecting a world in which U .S. global power seems increasingly tenuous.”
The breadth of global instability now unfolding hasn’t been seen since the late 1970s, U.S. security strategists say, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, revolutionary Islamists took power in Iran, and Southeast Asia was reeling in the wake of the U.S. exit from Vietnam.
In the past month alone, the U.S. has faced twin civil wars in Iraq and Syria, renewed fighting between Israel and the Palestinians, an electoral crisis in Afghanistan and ethnic strife on the edge of Russia, in Ukraine.
Bewildered leftists say that he promised to end the War in Iraq, and wind down the war in Afghanistan and he did. He fulfilled his campaign promises. But there is ending and ending. I don’t know if anyone voted for Obama because he said he would end the War in Iraq. They voted for Hope and Change, and fancy theatrics and a litany of carefully crafted meaningless phrases.
Foreign policy is hard, and the big things may be controlled by the little things like personalities, and ego as well as deep knowledge and understanding of the history and culture of a country. Obama wasn’t much interested in foreign policy. He seems to have had in mind simply being the anti-Bush. Bush made wars, he would make peace. Bush had a muscular presence in the world and emphasized American strength. Obama wanted us to be just a nation among other nations, and let other nations deal with stuff. Obama found his national security briefings boring and quit going.
He yanked our people out of Iraq too abruptly and failed to establish a status of forces agreement to help prepare the Iraqi army for just what is happening now. The countries in Eastern Europe didn’t get their missile defense. Obama said in a May speech at West Point that the Obama foreign policy doctrine, would rely on U.S. leadership, but not troop deployments. Well, we’re not any good at the U.S. leadership business either, it seems.
A few meetings with Obama and Hillary’s “reset button” convinced Putin that nobody was likely to do anything, so he went right ahead to annex Crimea. The allies who had relied on America to prevent Russia’s ambitions lost confidence in American action as well. The Taliban got their leaders back. Obama drew a Red Line in Syria, and then erased it. The Arab Spring was misunderstood from the beginning, and the administration fell for the Muslim Brotherhood’s claim to Egypt. The feckless John Kerry has been trying to solve the problems of the Middle East by forcing Israel to give more land to the Palestinian terrorists. The Chinese, watching our military downsize, have decided to upsize theirs and are vigorously growing their navy and submarine fleet and flexing their muscles in the South China Sea.
And there is the self-declared new Caliphate, now encircling Baghdad, another surprise to the administration, and our negotiations with Iran go on. We want assurances, they are happy to give assurances. We seem unable to learn that deception is a way of life in the Middle East, and expect an agreement to be worked out that will enable them to have all the sanctions lifted.To call it all an “Arc of Instability” is perhaps the understatement of the year. But the stakes have never been higher.
Jonathan Karl lists some of the “instabilities.” Obama, we are told, no longer talks to anyone but Valerie Jarrett and Michelle. We are in the best of hands.