Filed under: Middle East, Military, National Security, Politics, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: "Peace Dividends", Never Prepared, War and Peace
These videos from the Heritage Foundation explain some of the problems with America’s current defense posture. Whenever a war in ended and troops returned home, politicians are sure that was the last war, and they can quit spending money on a lot of military stuff, and spend it instead on things that will buy more votes at home. “The Peace Dividend” they always call it. Liberals are sure that we wouldn’t have any wars if it weren’t for the warmongering Republicans always in favor of throwing our weight around — around the globe.
It is partly a matter of basic philosophy. Liberals are usually opposed to guns, sure that if there were fewer guns, there would be less crime. That attitude spills over into national defense. What we need, they are sure, is simply more dialogue, more peacekeeping, more U.N. Obviously, I’m generalizing here.Liberals believe that the natural state of the world is Peace. Conservatives are more apt to recognize that War is pretty much the natural state of the world, and that the periods of Peace are to be celebrated, but to have Peace, you must prepare for War. Nicely encompassed in the statement “Speak softly, but carry a big stick.”
In 1933, the Army of the United States was 137,000 men. The U.S. Army was 16th in size in the world. The French Army, on the other hand numbered 5 million men. The military had built up somewhat by Pearl Harbor, after all, the war had been going on in Europe and China for a couple of years. Germany had invaded France in May of 1940. ,We were desperately unprepared, with obsolete planes, battleships for a carrier war. We couldn’t even strike back until Midway in June of 1942, and that was mostly luck. It was a long desperate slog until the American arsenal began to catch up with military needs. When the troops came home, we had a “Peace Dividend.”
By 1948 the army had declined to 554,000, and we were totally unprepared for the North Korean invasion of South Korea in 1950. And so it goes. The Taliban is stronger than ever, and the government is discussing how to ‘dialogue’ with them. We can talk about how it is impolite to throw acid in little girl’s faces, because they want to go to school.
Filed under: Election 2012, Global Warming, Islam, Middle East, Military, Politics, The United States | Tags: Afghanistan, Electoral Politics, The American Military
Uncle Jimbo, from Blackfive, takes exception to President Obama’s ‘strategy’ in Afghanistan. He wouldn’t have gone for the idea that the troops were fighting on Obama’s behalf either. The administration’s plans to ‘dialogue’ with the Taliban seem to be some vague part of the ‘strategy,’ whatever that is. It seems to be about— getting out before the election. There’s certainly a lot of rather large problems that must succumb to electoral politics.
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Energy, Middle East | Tags: High Gasolne Prices, Supply and Demand, Who to Blame?
The price of gas at the pump affects the price of your groceries — which you have probably noticed are going up significantly. But the reasons for the hike in gas prices gets pretty interesting. According to the Daily Kos, it’s because of the oil oligarchs. The president claims that it is due to, depending on to whom he is speaking, oil company executives, undeserved oil company subsidies, and/or nasty oil speculators.
Bill O’Reilly said that “Right now we are all being taken advantage of by an administration that has an anti-fossil fuel agenda and an oil industry that manipulates the U.S. market. Who is looking out for us? Nobody.”
Investors says that “there are efforts to manipulate oil prices; That’s one reason why OPEC — made up mostly of Middle Eastern countries —was formed. But those are countries, not U.S. oil companies.
Carlos Ghosn, CEO of Renault-Nissan alliance points out that by 2050 there may be as many as 2.5 billion vehicles on earth compared with fewer than 1 billion now. China and India are expected to count for at least half of the growth by 2030. But the transportation sector is dependent on fuels derived from crude oil and will be for the foreseeable future.
The Heritage Foundation notes sensibly that: “We’re not anti- energy technology. We’re against wasting taxpayer money to “invest” in those technologies, including oil and gas. If it’s a market-viable idea, using federal money is offsetting private-sector investments. If it’s not a market-viable idea, we’re artificially propping up an industry until it goes bankrupt. Either way, it’s a raw deal for taxpayers.” But they also take notice of the Strait of Hormuz:
- The Strait of Hormuz is a critical oil-supply bottleneck,
- Iran probably has the capacity to significantly reduce the flow of petroleum,
- Petroleum prices would approximately double while a blockade is in effect, and
- The impacts on income, employment, and petroleum prices would linger beyond the period of a blockade.
The Gatestone Institute says short supply, not Middle East tensions push up oil prices. “Oil is trading in lockstep with expectations for economic growth, as reflected in stock prices. There’s not a shred of evidence that geopolitical uncertainty has added a penny to the oil price. Obama’s $20-$30 per barrel risk premium is a number pulled out of a hat, without a shred of empirical support. In effect the president is blaming Israel for high oil prices.”
Mining.com notes that demand is down, but the laws of supply and demand aren’t working. The price should be declining, but it’s going up instead. Two main forces are driving fuel prices upward in the United States: high global oil prices and the state of the U.S. oil transportation and refining industry. Stability of supplies from the Middle East is keeping oil traders up at night. Lots of good information here on the complexities of refiners, pipelines and transportation. But they still blame most of it on the Middle East.Saudi Arabia should be able to step up production enough to replace the lost volume from Iran if sanctions remain in place.
Steven Hayward suggests that the declining demand is a signal that the economy is headed down again.
Mr. Obama’s FY 2013 proposed budget gives politically favored green energy preferential treatment over the fossil fuels industries, wit tax subsidies, tax credits, procurement preferences and grants, and in contrast burdens the oil and natural gas sectors with almost $86 billion in higher taxes over the next ten years. Fortunately both the senate and the House voted the president’s proposed budget down.
Here is my roundup of what state mandates and taxes add to the cost, but I’m not sure that I clarified anything. What is clear is that there’s a lot of finger pointing going on, and “experts” have lots of different answers. The article by Mining.com does a good job of explaining the refinery and pipeline problems.
Meanwhile, for those who want to blame oil company ‘greed’ and ‘excess profits’, this graph explains profits by industry.
Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Election 2012, Energy, Middle East, Taxes | Tags: Oil Company Profits, Oil Company Taxes, The Price of Gas
According to polls, most Americans believe that the high price of gasoline is due to “oil company greed.” That is unfortunate, and wrong. This is called the BIG LIE. If you repeat erroneous information often enough , people will believe it. President Obama chooses to demonize “Big Oil”and to talk incessantly about the huge “subsidies” that Big Oil gets. He wants them removed. Congress turned him down, primarily because they are not subsidies, but the same kind of tax write-off that most companies get to compensate for the cost of doing business.
Did you know that ExxonMobil, for example, pays far more to the federal government than it get in profits? In addition to the massive income tax bills, energy companies are required to pay “royalties” and “bonus bids” for the right to explore for and produce oil and gas on federal lands. Rising oil and gas revenues have provided a “windfall”of new revenue for the federal government. For the fiscal year 2000, the taxpayer’s total return from royalty payments was $4.95 billion, $10.7 billion in 2006, and exceeded $20 billion for fiscal year 2008.
Oil is a world commodity. The price of oil is a futures price, based on what they expect the price of oil to be for the next tanker truck, or next oil tanker. The guy at your neighborhood gas station has to pay for gas the next tanker truck will bring, not what he paid for the last one, because in a volatile market it will be different. Nobody knows what the future price of anything will be, but they have to plan ahead anyway. Some like to call the futures contracts that people buy and sell — speculation, and sneer at speculators as evil people. Some people are gambling, but most are simply buying contracts to protect themselves from future price hikes. When you have a lot of turmoil in the Middle East where much of the world’s oil comes from, the future price goes up because they are worried about Iran threatening to block the Straits of Hormuz through which much of the oil must pass. Syria is a worry, and Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon.
(click to enlarge)
This chart shows you how much the Private Oil Companies (remember that most oil companies are huge state-owned outfits) pay in income tax (in blue) compared to their profit margin (in yellow).
Econbrowser has done a remarkable job of assembling a bunch of maps to explain why the price of gas is different in one place than it is in another. Here in Washington State we pay over 55¢ per gallon in gasoline taxes— higher than most, and the price at the pump is well over $4 a gallon and rising. But even after you subtract the gas taxes, the average cost is still different. Do click on this link to see the five maps that explain so much about the cost of gas. It is well worth your time, and you will understand more and worry less, or at least worry less about the wrong things, and you’ll be less susceptible to political demagoguery.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Israel, Middle East, National Security, Politics, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Fair Weather Friends, Israel and America, Strange Politics
The Israelis produced this film exposing their understanding of the relationship between the Obama administration and the state of Israel, over the past three years. They call it “Daylight.”
I would describe the video as straightforward and fair. I believe our relationship with Israel is important and the administration’s treatment of this great friend has been deplorable. Constant demands that Israel give up more land, more lives so that the Palestinians will want to make peace is a pipedream. The Palestinians have no interest in peace. They want to eliminate Israel. That’s what they teach their little kids in school— grow up to be a shahid. They don’t even show the state of Israel on their maps.
Once again, Obama’s public words have no relationship to his actions. If you care to read his speech at the AIPAC Conference yesterday, it is here.
ADDENDUM: An article from the Times of Israel expresses Netanyahu’s dilemma: Does he dare rely on Obama? It’s an interesting piece and shows just how far the administration’s intemperate words and acts have decayed the relationship.
Filed under: China, Europe, History, Iran, Iraq, Middle East, Russia | Tags: 1162—1227, Genghis Khan, He Created an Empire
I have mentioned that I never seem to read anything when it first comes out— partly because I usually have a stack of books that I have not yet read, but partly also because you have to be in the right frame of mind for some books. A good friend recommended Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World to me years ago. It was published in 2004, but I never got around to it until now. When I get excited about something I have read, I’m inclined to insist that everyone else read it right now. So consider yourselves warned.
I knew nothing about Genghis Khan except the”Mongol hordes,” Ulaanbaatar, the steppes, and the first stanza of Percy Bysshe Shelley’s “Xanadu” which I recalled word for word from Survey of English Literature quite a few years ago. Not promising. So I read the Introduction.
In 1937, the soul of Genghis Khan disappeared from the Buddhist monastery in central Mongolia along the River of the Moon below the black Shankh Mountains where the faithful lamas had protected and venerated it for centuries.
Well, who could resist that? Born in 1162, and his soul disappeared in 1937.
Year by year, he gradually defeated everyone more powerful that he was, until he had conquered every tribe on the Mongolian steppe. At the age of fifty, when most great conquerors had already put their fighting days behind them, Genghis Khan’s Spirit Banner beckoned him out of his remote homeland to confront the armies of the civilized people who had harassed and enslaved the nomadic tribes for centuries. …
In conquest after conquest, the Mongol army transformed warfare into an intercontinental affair fought on multiple fronts stretching across thousands of miles. Genghis Khan’s innovative fighting techniques made the heavily armored knights of medieval Europe obsolete, replacing them with disciplined cavalry moving in coordinated units. Rather than relying on defensive fortifications, he made brilliant use of speed and surprise on the battlefield, as well as perfecting siege warfare to such a degree that he ended the era of walled cities. Genghis Khan taught his people not only to fight across incredible distances but to sustain their campaign over years, decades, and, eventually, more than three generations of constant fighting.
Jack Weatherford is the Dewitt Wallace Professor of anthropology at Macalester College in Minnesota. He earned his PhD at the University of California, San Diego, and an honorary Doctorate of Humanities from Chinggis Khaan College in Mongolia. He certainly knows how to draw in a reader.
In American terms, the accomplishment of Genghis Khan might be understood if the United States, instead of being created by a group of educated merchants or wealthy planters, had been founded by one of its illiterate slaves, who, by the sheer force of personality, charisma and determination, liberated America from foreign rule, united the people, created an alphabet, wrote the constitution, established universal religious freedom, invented a new system of warfare, marched an army from Canada to Brazil, and opened roads of commerce in a free-trade zone that stretched across the continents. On every level and from any perspective, the scale and scope of Genghis Khan’s accomplishments challenge the limits of imagination and tax the resources of scholarly explanation.
That’s all the sampling I shall give you. Here’s the book at Amazon, though every bookstore should have copies. And here is a young Mongolian musician, Battulga, who plays “Jonon Kharin Yavdal” on a horse headed fiddle which has a skin covered box and horsehair strings (even the bow-string) as in an ancient traditional fiddle. Enjoy.
Like this:
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Israel, Middle East, National Security, The United States | Tags: Strategy and Intent, The Middle East, U.S.-Israel Military Exercise
Every time I think I’m getting a grip on what is going on in the Middle East, I find that is not the case. Reader Spartan noted that Debka File had said there were U.S troops in Israel in readiness for a military engagement with Iran, categorized as the biggest joint US-Israel war game ever held. I demurred as I have read that Debka File is not a reliable source. So, Spartan, mea culpa.
Iran had some more excitement in which a drive-by motorcyclist slapped a ‘sticky bomb’ on the car carrying one of Iran’s nuclear scientists. Motorcyclist escaped, car blew up, one less Iranian nuclear scientist, and Hillary Chamberlain Clinton rushed for the closest microphone to insist we had nothing whatsoever to do with THAT. Americans just don’t do that sort of thing.
Iran’s foreign ministry boldly proclaimed that it has:
reliable documents and evidence that this terrorist act was planned, guided and supported by the CIA. The documents clearly show that this terrorist act was carried out with the direct involvement of CIA-linked agents.
Other complications: Obama had finally grasped that Nigeria’s labor strike against oil producers, the war against the Canadian pipeline and topping that off with an embargo on Iranian oil, would probably boost the price of gas over $5 a gallon and boost reelection chances to zero. So last Thursday the U.S. postponed any oil embargo for 6 months or so, though European governments were not quite so craven. They are expected to agree to a ban on imports of Iranian oil on Jan. 23.
A joint U.S.– Israel military exercise that is to be the biggest ever between the two countries has been postponed, Israel Radio reported. Israeli Defense Ministry spokesman Josh Hantman said in a phone interview that the exercise was still under discussion and declined to give further details.
The exercise was moved to the second half of 2012 for “a variety of factors” to promote “optimum participation by all units,” said Captain John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman. “We remain dedicated to his exercise and naturally want it to be as robust and as productive as it can be,” he said in an email.
U.S. sanctions imposed last year were to cut off oil dealings with Iran’s banking system, making it difficult for consumers to buy the country’s oil. Iran responded by threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz, the route for about a fifth of globally traded oil, if sanctions are imposed.
Israeli Vice Premier Moshe Yaalon told Israel Radio that while Congress had shown itself determined to place tougher sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program, the Obama administration “appears more hesitant out of fear that oil prices might rise.”
Russia is parking its warships in Syrian harbors, while they pursue bilateral trade, supply ammunition to the locals, and replacing the dollar with the rial and ruble in trade.
I guess if we can just be persuaded to wait until after the election, then Obama will be firm and deal promptly with these nasty little foreign policy glitches. It’s not exactly “appeasement,” it’s just, um, that “we take no options off the table,” according to press secretary Jay Carney. “But we are engaged in the kinds of diplomatic efforts that you would expect in a situation like this.” Carney is getting good at empty words that convey nothing, nothing at all.
The U.S.will not enforce a no-fly zone over Syria. Israel says US-Israel exercise postponed for “Budget Reasons.”Army General Martin Dempsey is making his first visit to Israel as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but “he is not delivering any specific message to the Israelis.” A White House spokesman, Tommy Vietor, declined to elaborate on Obama’s January 12 call with Netanyahu.
So there you go. All perfectly clear. ––
Filed under: Economy, Foreign Policy, Middle East, Military, National Security, Politics, Terrorism | Tags: national security, New Defense Strategy, Obama Slashes Militaqry
Oh Gawd, it’s “peace dividend” time again! Obama made a rare trip to the Pentagon, flanked by his four service chiefs and his Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and saying that:
The United States of America is the greatest force for freedom and security that the world has ever known. And in no small measure, that’s because we’ve built the best-trained, best-led, best-equipped military in history — and as Commander-in-Chief, I’m going to keep it that way.
Uh huh, and then he proceeded with a lot of how wonderful our military is, and all the historic investments we’ve made in the military, the usual lovely baritone meaningless words, at which point he bragged on his administration:
And thanks to their extraordinary service, we’ve ended our war in Iraq. We’ve decimated al Qaeda’s leadership. We’ve delivered justice to Osama bin Laden, and we’ve put that terrorist network on the path to defeat. We’ve made important progress in Afghanistan, and we’ve begun to transition so Afghans can assume more responsibility for their own security. We joined allies and partners to protect the Libyan people as they ended the regime of Muammar Qaddafi.
And having congratulated himself, he said “Now we’re turning the page on a decade of war:” His words paint a pretty picture of how our splendid military has done a wonderful job and now we need to slash defense, gut the military, eliminate weapons. The White House settled on $450 billion in cuts in the military budget last year with Congress through 2021, on top of $350 billion in weapons programs killed earlier. Defense spending will fall by 1% next year, and another $500 billion in possible cuts starting next January unless Congress steps in first.
It was left to Defense Secretary Leon Pannetta to deal with “the savings we have been mandated to achieve.” Panetta said in an earlier statement that the ordered cuts would lead to a “hollow” military. The Navy will shrink from today’s 300 vessels to 238 and would lose two carrier battle groups. Strategic bombers will fall from 153 to 101. Air Force fighters would drop by more than half from 3,602 aircraft to 1,512 planes. And apparently our nuclear arsenal will be cut as well.
The military is a huge bureaucracy and of course there are savings that can be made. This is not about that, but about politics. The budget is out of control, and the president refuses to rein in entitlements, the really big problem. He won’t rein in either the energy department or the EPA, not cut back on his subsidies for his clean energy fantasy. He still wants to do infrastructure. Every effort to cut back on spending is met with fierce resistance from the White House, but the Left does not like the military, and does not really grasp the need for one.
Obama has apologized to the world for American power and success, and succeeded only in convincing the world that America is a hollow giant with a weak indecisive leader. The entire Mediterranean is a tinder keg, taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood. Iran is close to developing a nuclear weapon, yet with an increasingly restive population. Syria is aflame and Assad continues slaughtering his people. China is developing a carrier force, and growing its military apace. Obama is surrendering to the Taliban in Afghanistan, and his pullout of troops from Afghanistan and Iraq may well destroy all our accomplishments there. Iran is threatening to close the Straits of Hormuz, and working hard in South America and Mexico to create trouble.
We have a long history of “Peace Dividends,” always disastrous and leaving more young lives destroyed. A weak country invites aggression.
Filed under: Africa, Australia, China, Developing Nations, Europe, Middle East, United Kingdom
11. New York, New York
Here is a collection of pictures taken out of airline windows. Sounds like looking at a bunch of clouds, but they are quite amazing, as you tour the world. Enjoy.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Iraq, Islam, Middle East | Tags: Accidents/ Incompetence/ Rebellion?, Explosions in Iran, The Mediterranean Aflame
Nearly two weeks ago, a mysterious explosion destroyed an Iranian missile development base. The Israeli Military reported on the effect of that explosion, and on the same day, Iran’s official news agency FARS reported that a loud blast was heard in the Iranian city of Isfahan at 2:40 pm local time. A security official confirmed that the explosion had occurred, but refused to give further details. The head of the security department said “we have no exact information; the incident is being investigated.”
FARS news agency said that the blast was heard distinctly in several parts of the Iranian city. they posted a picture from an April bomb attack in Kashmir, and subsequently took it down. The Iranian regime announced that there was no explosion in Isfahan. Members of the Green democracy movement confirm, that there was indeed an explosion in Isfahan. So there you have the news from Iran.
Israeli military intelligence reported earlier today on the last explosion in Iran, which destroyed a missile technology production site at a military base in Tehran which killed one of Iran’s heads of the missile projects:
“The blast in the site where surface-to-surface missiles were developed can delay or bring to a complete halt the production of the missiles at that site,” said head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence Research Section Department Brigadier General Itai Baron at a briefing in the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.
“However,” Baron cautioned, “It must be emphasized that Iran has other development sites other than the one that was destroyed.”
So, accident, bad luck, incompetence, Iranian opposition, some outside source? Who knows? According to one blog, at least 17 gas pipeline explosions have been reported since last year. Nearly a dozen major explosions have damaged refineries since 2010. Michael Ledeen suggests that the opposition is abandoning its commitment to non-violence. J.E. Dyer says the attacks seem to be poorly designed, if that’s what they are, but the idea of a war against the mullahs seems a possible explanation.
It’s all speculation at this point. The Middle East is aflame from one end to the other. Not exactly the “Arab Spring” of fantasy. Assad is living on borrowed time, Egypt is near revolution and running out of money, the Muslim Brotherhood is winning across the Arab countries. Saudi Arabia is worried about the development of shale oil. Lots of inspiration for thriller authors, lots of confusion for the rest of us.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Iraq, Islam, Middle East, National Security, Politics | Tags: American Foreign Policy, Arab Spring?, Considering the Middle East.
Arab Spring they called it, as if a million flowers of Democracy were about to bloom. Which was more the triumph of hope over reality. Ghaddafi is gone, but Libya has just announced that their new government would be Islamist in nature and follow Sharia law. And the first thing to be abolished would be the laws against polygamy.
The Arab states of North Africa were revolting against controlling dictatorships, and there were plenty of warnings that they may have not liked their ruling tyrants, but they also had no experience of Democracy. Tunisia had their first election yesterday and it was reportedly a clean, enthusiastic election. Turnout was at 90%. The country adopted a proportional system during the transition that limits the ability of any party to hold too much power. If this remains as a check before new constitutions are adopted it will be a good thing.
The Islamist Nahda party claimed victory by a significant margin. The other main parties conceded. Nahda won about half the votes. Two secular parties did well, and one will probably join Nahda in a coalition. The new constitution is supposed to contain a bill of rights, divide government power, and protect minority rights. After the constitution is adopted, a new round of elections will be held in a year.
The country is one of the most modern and homogenous nations in the Arab world. The dictator Ben Ali family ran a mafia empire, yet today Ben Ali lives in exile in Saudi Arabia. It will take time — lots of time— to see how it will turn out, and it will take a better foreign policy on our part.
Obama’s foreign policy czars are gone. One by one, they have disappeared. Obama’s appointment of the original czars was seen as a way of empowering hand-picked senior officials to instigate a transformational foreign policy without having to submit them to congress for confirmation. Obama’s focus on humility and apology in diplomatic engagement was supposed to be a sharp contrast to the “hard power” emphasis of the Bush administration:
Now that none of them has achieved the diplomatic breakthroughs so naively expected by the newly elected Obama, ambitions have been reduced to not making things any worse—and even that may be difficult.
Barry Rubin has been reporting ever since Barack Obama was inaugurated in January of 2009 on Obama’s disastrous Middle East Policy. His column today is a review and summing up, in the wake of the Arab Spring debacle, of the Obama foreign policy. It’s not pretty. The now dominant view, he says is:
This interpretation considers the virtually sole danger to be al-Qaeda and its terrorist attacks against America. In order to ensure Islamists aren’t radicalized to behave that way, they want to co-opt radical Islamists they consider far less threatening. They insist that such Islamists are far less extreme than people like me say and that holding power will moderate them.
This travesty is born of Western ignorance about Islam and Islamism; discounting the power of ideology and the nature of these societies; assuming that everyone thinks alike in wanting more material goods; putting all their effort into stopping another September 11 (even at the expense of massive strategic losses); presuming moderation is inevitable, etc.
These people believe that the “Turkish model” is just fine and dandy rather than seeing it as an extremely dangerous way for radical Islamists to seize and hold power to carry out anti-American and aggressive goals. This misunderstanding is key to their failure to understand Arab politics or Islamism, as is the idea that Facebook, community-organizer yuppies are any match for jihadists.
I would urge you to read Barry Rubin’s post. I think he is particularly well-informed and correct in his wide-ranging analysis. This isn’t what you will be hearing from the mainstream media who no longer do much searching analysis. If Obama says that bringing the troops home from Iraq by the end of the year is a diplomatic triumph and a praiseworthy event, that is what the MSM will report. We deserve better.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Iraq, Middle East, Military | Tags: American Military, Obama's Failed Negotiations, Self Congratulatory Address
The storyline that plays in Obama’s head is clearly different than the one that plays in mine. Peter Wehner, who served in the Bush administration and writes now frequently at Commentary magazine’s Contentions blog, wrote recently that he thought that Obama has a heroic vision of himself in his head which just doesn’t allow reality to intrude.
This is so odd. Does he really think he’s doing a good job? Is he telling a story that he hopes the rubes will believe? Does he believe what he says? Does he think this story is the one that his base will like and thus believe? Is he just trying to put a good face on an administration blunder, for public consumption?
This article from the New York Times gives some of the back story, and suggests that negotiations are ongoing, but Iraq needed a clear break to signify Iraq’s own sovereignty.
Here is the transcript of the Weekly Address, should you want to consider what the president had to say more closely. Here’s how Scott Johnson of Powerline describes the address.
Obama fits both Libya and Iraq into a “larger story.” In this address he is bringing it all back home, you might say. To the themes of R2P, collective action, and strategic retreat, Obama adds the clear McGovernite note that America is coming home to turn its attention to the important things involving projects in which we have “invested” too little. He really couldn’t be much clearer.
Pretty depressing.
