Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Foreign Policy, History, Intelligence, Iran, Islam, Military, National Security, The United States | Tags: Everything Is Political, Poisonously Partisan, The Middle East
Still desperately searching for a legacy, Obama has pledged to veto a defense bill unless Congress lifts its spending caps and increases non-defense spending allowing the transfer of terrorists from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Presumably, Mr. Obama intends to return a vacated Guantanamo to Cuba.
I am endlessly fascinated by the extent to which Democrats believe their own propaganda. Democrats were as shocked and frightened as everybody else when the World Trade Center towers were attacked by suicide pilots in captured airliners on 9/11.
Three months into the War on Iraq, President Bush declared the combat phase of the war over, and “the Democratic Party launched a national campaign against America’s commander in chief, claiming that he had lied to the American people to lure them into a war that was “unnecessary,” “immoral,” and “illegal.”¹
Until then, the conflict in Iraq had been supported by both parties and was regarded by both as a strategic necessity in the war begun by Islamic terrorists. Saddam Hussein had launched two aggressive wars in the Middle East, murdered over 300 thousand of his own people, used chemical weapons on Iraqi citizens, and started a nuclear weapons program that was only halted by his defeat in the Gulf War. Over the next ten years, he had defied 16 UN resolutions attempting to enforce the Gulf War truce. In September 2002, the Security Council issued another resolution that gave Saddam until December 7 to comply with the terms or face the consequences. He did not comply. Bush made the only decision possible and launched a preemptive invasion to remove the regime. Two days before the invasion Saddam was given the option of leaving the country and avoiding the war.
Removing Saddam Hussein had been official American policy since October 1998, when Bill Clinton, a Democratic president signed the Iraq Liberation Act. The decision to use force in Iraq was supported by both houses of Congress including a majority of Democrats in the Senate. In June 2003, just 3 months into the war, Democrats made a political decision to turn against the war and launched a five year campaign to delegitimize the war and portray the President and the Republican Party as the villains. The betrayal of the nation and its troops was unprecedented in our nation’s history. The compliant press signed on, with front page coverage of body counts, blowing up minor incidents like the misbehavior of low level guards at Abu Ghraib into a massive war crime. The New York Times and the Washington Post leaked classified documents which destroyed 3 major national security programs designed to protect Americans for terrorist attacks, and launched an anti-war movement.²
Even before the 2008 election, the man who would become the nation’s Attorney General told an audience during the campaign that the Bush administration had permitted abuses in fighting terrorism. He said there would have to be a “reckoning.” ³
In 2006, then Senator Barack Obama led a Democrat effort to defeat a debt ceiling increase. “Raising America’s debt limit,” he said at the time, “is a sign of leadership failure.” If Mr. Obama wants standing now to lecture on the subject, he might acknowledge that he made a grave error then.
Mr. Obama’s goal in his remaining time in office seems to be enlarging the federal government with a massive spending spree. It’s clear that he won’t attempt to rectify the enormous errors he has forced on the American people. And ISIS is shopping for a nuke. Why would we want a defense bill?
Filed under: Foreign Policy, History, Intelligence, Middle East, National Security, Russia, The United States | Tags: Barack Obama, Bashar al Assad, Vladimir Putin
Once again the administration is being taken by surprise. Moscow has established a new airbase in Syria to go with its existing naval base. and they are determined to keep Bashar Assad’s regime in power. The U.S. no longer has any influence in Baghdad, and ever since the U.S. forces pulled out in 2011, Iran has become the dominant player in Iraq.
When Russia sent in flights to create a new Russian military base in Syria, our protests were ignored. President Obama’s failure to act on his red line in Syria has consequences. When he could not even act against Assad’s use of chemical weapons on his own people or Iran’s development of a nuclear program, it ‘s pretty clear that he’s not going to do anything.
Humiliated, Obama is now trying to pretend that Putin will “help”take care of ISIS, but he has been attacking the rebels fighting the Assad regime instead. This is a pure power play by the Russian President. Leon Aron, who is the director of Russian Studies at AEI, looks at why:
- To establish a sustained, open-ended Russian military presence in the Middle East for the first time since President Sadat sent Soviet personnel home in 1972, thus recovering a key Soviet geopolitical asset as postulated by the Putin Doctrine.
- To establish the Russia-Iran-Syria (and possibly Iraq) de facto alliance as the dominant military and thus political actor in the Middle East.
- To boost patriotic mobilization in Russia, which increasingly is the Putin regime’s sole claim to legitimacy. With the economy tanking fast, the ruble down 57% from this time last year, inflation at around 15%, and the seemingly stalemated war on Ukraine no longer generating enough heat to keep the patriotic fervor a-boil, Putin needs another “short, victorious war” (as the Minister of Internal Affairs Vyacheslav Plehve hailed the ultimately disastrous Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05).
The question becomes how far will Putin go? Both Aron and Ralph Peters suggest that we should be prepared for an “accidental” shoot down of a U.S. or British or French plane? That Putin delights in humiliating the United States is not a surprise. That the Obama administration seems regularly to be surprised is more worrying.
Filed under: Pop Culture, Humor, Health Care, Entertainment, Intelligence, Women | Tags: Turlington's Lower-Back Tattoo Remover, Changing Fashions, Permanent Mistakes
(h/t: Bird Dog@Maggie’s Farm)
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Intelligence, Iran, National Security, News, Politics, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Liberal Opinion, Manhattan Upper West Side, Sigh!
I’m not sure just how much we can take away from these “man on the street ” quick interviews, but it’s not very encouraging. Makes one long for the days before the information revolution, when there weren’t quite so many sources of information — comedy shows, reality shows,or am I misremembering a time that never was? I’ve read that large numbers of people get their news from Colbert, Jon Stewart and Conan O’Brien — really?
Colbert is currently wearing bracelets celebrating “Black Lives Matter”, apparently wanting to show his empathy for police lives who don’t matter, or something or other. Is he unaware of the climbing murder rate, recruits dropping out of police academies because it’s not worth it. The worst thing anyone could do for the black community is to make the police department reluctant to protect those black lives because they are afraid of being attacked.
But here you go, an interview on the upper west side of Manhattan, a liberal enclave, and they are unanimously approving ov Obama’s Iran Deal. Except…
Filed under: History, Intelligence, Iran, Israel, Law, National Security, The United States | Tags: President Barack Obama, Presidential Ambitions, The Six Day War
From the Associated Press:
JERUSALEM: Seeking to sell his nuclear deal with Iran to a skeptical Israeli public, President Barack Obama has repeatedly declared his deep affection for the Jewish state. But the feelings do not appear to be mutual.
Wide swaths of the Israeli public, particularly supporters of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have little trust in the American leader, considering him naive and even hostile. One recent poll showed less than a tenth considered him “pro-Israel.”
Such misgivings bode poorly for Obama as he tries to repair ties with Israel in the final year of his presidency, and they would certainly complicate any renewed effort at brokering peace between Israel and its neighbors – once a major Obama ambition.
President Obama believed firmly that one of the great triumphs of his administration would be brokering a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine. He thought that all he had to do was make Israel withdraw to their borders before the 1967 Six Day War. Egypt and Syria launched a coordinated attack against Israel on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. Israel was taken by surprise. Egypt swept deep into the Sinai Peninsula and Syria struggled to throw Israeli troops our of the Golan Heights. It was a huge victory for the Israelis. a cease-fire went into effect on October 25, 1973.
Obama’s missteps date to his earliest days in office, and the Cairo speech, which demonstrated his naivety and unfamiliarity with the Middle East. He doesn’t understand how the Mideast functions and therefore doesn’t understand the dangers Israel faces. But the biggest issue is the Iran Deal. Iran funds Hezbollah, Hamas, and any other jihadist group firing missiles into Israel. Iran buys and supplies the missiles. Mr. Obama’s views might alter if Washington DC was under daily missile attack from Pennsylvania or Maryland.
President Obama might also reflect on Iran’s drive to obtain intercontinental ballistic missiles. They have no need for ICBMs to eliminate Israel. I don’t think Obama’s professions of “deep affections” for the nation of Israel are going to impress much of anybody. A recent Pew survey of 40 countries indicates that confidence in Obama has slipped from 71 percent to 40 percent.
For his part, Obama has acknowledged feeling hurt. In an address to American Jewish leaders last month, Obama underscored his deep commitment to Israel’s security and likened the debate over the Iran deal to a dispute within the family.
“I would suggest that, in terms of the tone of this debate, everybody keep in mind that we’re all pro-Israel,” he said. “And we have to make sure that we don’t impugn people’s motives.”
The astounding thing is that 40 percent of Israelis still have some confidence in Obama.
Filed under: Politics, Foreign Policy, Economy, Military, Terrorism, Democrat Corruption, Law, National Security, China, Intelligence, Crime | Tags: President Obama, Cyber Attacks on US, Ft. Meade Maryland
Chinese government hackers have reportedly stolen commercial data from many U.S. companies, and personal data about many American government employees — including those with security clearances, plus private data from Americans’ health-care companies. Obama has done little or nothing to stop this coast-to-coast raiding of Americans’ property, but has instead worked elsewhere to boost the Democratic party’s political power.
In the Pacific, China’s government is building new island-bases in internationally disputed waters, while Obama focuses his foreign-policy efforts on completing his nukes-and-cash sellout to the deepening alliance of Iran and Russia.
Surely by now, we must have teams working in each government department to harden off their computer files to prevent hacking?The State Department’s lack of control (or concern) over the Secretary of State’s use of a personal computer might argue that there is something more to be desired.
The Daily Mail (UK) just published ( July 15) this “secret” NSA map of cyber attacks from Chinese hackers over the past five years. (Click to enlarge). Did the Daily Mail hack NSA to get their “secret map?”
Silicon Valley is the most attacked. Seattle has Boeing and Microsoft, but I can’t imagine what that one lonely dot on the NW coast is. Iron Springs Resort? The Office of Personnel Management hack got 22.1 million people’s Social Security records, everyone who has ever applied for a government job, and their personal references. The IRS hack in May gave them over 100,000 tax records.
President Obama is not taking this lying down. He refused to stay at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel during the U.N. General Assembly this month. (A Chinese conglomerate now owns the hotel.) And he’s really talking tough in a visit to Ft. Meade, speaking about Chinese cyber attacks.
We’ve made very clear to the Chinese that there are certain practices that they’re engaging in that we know are emanating from China and are not acceptable,” Obama said in an appearance at Ft. Meade. “And we can choose to make this an area of competition – which I guarantee you we’ll win if we have to – or, alternatively, we can come to an agreement in which we say, this isn’t helping anybody. Let’s instead try to have some basic rules of the road in terms of how we operate.”
China is really getting the ultimate threat in the Obama arsenal: “These practices are not acceptable.” That should get their attention.
“We hope that the U.S. stops its groundless attacks against China, start dialogue based on a foundation of mutual respect, and jointly build a cyberspace that is peaceful, secure, open and cooperative,” said a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman. “Maintaining cybersecurity should be a point of cooperation rather than a source of friction between both China and the United States.”
ADDENDUM: During the President’s trip to Alaska, Chinese warships which had been exercising with the Russians in the Arctic traveled 3,000 miles out of their way to broach the 12 mile territorial limits just, by coincidence, when the President was on a 3 day visit to Alaska, and of course they knew his schedule because they had hacked the White House computers.
Violating another nation’s territorial limits just isn’t done, unless it is meant as a provocation. The U.S, brushed it off as unimportant.
Filed under: History, Intelligence, Iraq, Islam, National Security, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Michael Ramirez, Obama's Iran Disgrace, The Iran Deal
I’m afraid this may be what we have gained with Obama’s Iran Deal. I find it hard to understand why so many Democrats are willing to sell out their country for partisan purpose. Do they just take the word of Kerry and Obama without actually looking into the claims? This is not going to end well.