What Is Frightening?

That the things I have been worrying about since the President drew his bold red line have been echoed by Laughing Wolf over on Black Five.  It is sobering to know someone else has been comparing the sitting President with the fictional Robert 'Bob' Fowler from Clancy's Sum of All Fears and finding the real President wanting in comparison.

Or the alliances in the region are mobilizing in much the same way they did in 1914 in Sarajevo.  One madman kills a noble that almost no one knew about and the gears of war started to turn as all the years of treaties came into effect as Austria tried to browbeat Serbia into giving up the assassin.  So the Serbs called in their Russian allies while Austria called in Germany.  And it just escalated from there.  What resulted from all of that smart diplomacy was four years of brutal carnage that killed millions and set the stage for a greater conflict.

An even more brutal question to ask will there be a US lead alliance in regards to the murky issue of who gassed whom in Syria?  The British Parliament just said no to Prime Minister Cameron's request for supporting the Americans, the first time they have said no since 1782 and the American Revolution.  The French and Germans are going soft as well; they should when it concerns American consistency, they just have to look at the series of slights and insults this Administration has delivered to England along with betraying European missile defense for a nebulous promise from Russia.  A Russia that supplies Europe with a majority of the natural gas it will need to stay warm this winter.  A Russia that supports the Assad regime in Damascus.  Europe sees more downsides than upsides for joining the American charge.

Then there are the Middle Eastern nations to look at.  Iran likes Assad in power and has threatened Israel if the US attacks.  Saudi Arabia finds itself wanting Assad in power in order to keep the Muslim Brotherhood out of power.  Saudi Arabia is also supporting the current government in Egypt for the same reason - fear of the Muslim Brotherhood.  And the United States, because of the decisions of this Administration, finds itself in opposition to Saudi Arabia, a long time ally, and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood both in Egypt and Syria.  Turkey has refused to assist the United States in regards to Syria so Greece had to be asked to allow the US to use Greek air bases.

If this is not a powder keg with a fuse lit, then I do not know what is.  And for what reason is the US getting involved when there are no geo-political reasons that can protect American interests?  Because of one reported attack on civilians by someone using chemical weapons.  No one knows if it really was Assad's forces that did it or even the rebels themselves that did it by accident.  This is far worse in murkiness than when USS Turner Joy thought it was being attacked by North Vietnamese torpedo boats.  But we have a President who said this was a Red Line even though in the past when Saddam used nerve agents on Kurds or Assad's father obliterated a town with artillery to stop a Muslim Brotherhood insurgency no one protested so loudly that these heinous attacks were used as reasons to depose either tyrant.

As Laughing Wolf said, we are going to be held hostage to the least stable actor in this drama.  Isn't that a cheery thought.  So if you are a devout praying person, please pray harder.



Addendum on the parallels from 1914.
There is the diplomatic war that was fought in concert with the war effort.  England wanted the neutral powerhouse the United States to enter the war on their side.  Wilson became President in no small part because he promised to keep the country neutral to the conflict that was devouring Europe so people with similar feelings voted for him. 

Churchill as First Sea Lord engaged in stratagems that are a bit shabby and dishonest viewed from this end of history; from painting British ships in American colors to putting war materials aboard passenger liners, but what he wanted was England to emerge victorious.  Meanwhile the Royal Navy was hunting German U-boats where they could.  All these actions forced Germany to abandon the cruiser rules and turn to unrestricted warfare on the open seas against any ship they found. 

So the German U-boats became wolves prowling for kills.  Any kills.  It was scant comfort to the families of the dead from these attacks that Germany had followed the rules of war by announcing a zone around England where unrestricted warfare would be prosecuted.  The Huns in the U-boats were now butchers.  The same was not used to describe German commerce raiders but those ships did not skulk below and strike from hiding, instead they still operated under the cruiser rules and treated their captured as well as could be expected.

Another arrow in the cap that helped tilt American opinion in favor of England was a master stroke of counter-espionage by British spooks.  I am referring to the famous Zimmerman telegram where Germany's Foreign Minister tried to entice Mexico into attacking the United States.  That really incensed the American public when it became news and further destroyed any warm feelings that sections of the populace felt towards Germany.

The sinking of the RMS Lusitania was just the final act that brought the US into WWI on the British side.  While the US tried to stay out of the war, events conspired against the President that stripped him of any freedom of action.  And that is how the United States entered World War I on the side of the Serbian assassin since England was an ally of the Russians who were the ally of the Serbs who sheltered the assassin.

Reagan, Berlin, and Now

In case anyone missed it because the media decided to worship their sun god Obama, yesterday was a special day.  Twenty five years ago President Ronald Reagan sounded the clarion call for freedom in what used to be West Berlin.  He demanded of Gorbachev to "tear down this wall!"  Which wall?  Why the Berlin Wall of course, a gray concrete monstrosity that encircled West Berlin in an attempt to prevent people from escaping that paradise called East Germany.  Many paid with their lives in the attempt.

That day in 1987 is fondly remembered in countries of the former Warsaw Pact.  For example Poland and a guy named Lech Walesa struggling to free themselves from Soviet tyranny and dreaded visits by the secret police.  It told them they were not forgotten even when some in the free West, like the rioters in West Berlin protesting Reagan, wanted to forgot so they could 'normalize' relationships with the USSR.  The classic do not provoke the Russian bear least get eaten type.

Just a few years later, many Germans, East and West, were busily smashing those concrete walls with hammers.  And a market for bits of the Wall rapidly sprung up.  Pundits in the West declared it was the end of the Cold War.  One even bravely proclaimed it to the be end of history.

So where are we in 2012.  Obviously we did not reach the end of history that was predicted in those heady days.  As for the end of the Cold War.  Has it really ended?  Looking at things across the globe in objective terms, that answer is also no.

The USSR, the arch nemesis, no longer exists this is true.  Many of the countries it controlled with bayonets and bullets are no longer its satrapies.  But has the country that replaced it, Russia, given up the idea of global ambitions?  With Putin at the helm and supplying such rogue governments as Iran with the means of nuclear warfare along with its efforts to undermine US foreign policy, that answer most definitely is no.

That other communist super power of the Cold War, the Peoples Republic of China, still exists.  And its power and influence has grown whilst that of the USSR has waned.  Even if it's economy appears headed for the wall, the ambition and military might of this country can not be ignored as US re-alignment of its military posture towards the PRC shows.

So now that I have offered evidence that the Cold War has not died but merely changed a few labels, what is the US doing to answer this challenge?  One I have already mentioned, the shift of focus from Europe to the Pacific.  There is also increased interfacing with countries being threatened by the PRC, except in one instance - the current administration has denied Taiwan 66 F-16 fighters.  Meanwhile the US Navy, who would bear the brunt of fighting for the US to assist allies and itself to keep the sea lanes open, is seeing its strength drop from a hoped for 313 ships to 'around 300.'  Aegis cruisers are being retired and $3billion DDGs of the Zumwalt class are simply too expensive.  Meanwhile the Littoral Combat Ship is being produced in two incompatible types.  US Air Force fighters are getting older while the F-22 has finished production and still waiting for the first F-35, which means the F-16 will still roll off the production lines.  Of course a lot of this procurement assumes Washington D.C. will get its act together before mandatory sequestration strikes the Dept. of Defense budget and guts everything.

So while the Cold War seems to be still alive though socialists are loathe to admit it with their constant harping it's over, foolishness and shortsightedness in elected officials in Washington D.C. still seems rampant.  So do not mind me if I am getting a pre-WWII in the Pacific vibe from all this.  Only firm clear leadership can sort out this problem before another Pearl Harbor is experienced

Pesky Oil

The President now thinks releasing some oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is just the ticket to solve the current high gas prices.  The man assumes everyone, except him, is a gullible fool.  Which makes him a con-man of the lowest sort.

Here is a suggestion for our sitting on his hands President.

Open the local oil/gas tap.  Drill.  What will this action do?

1. First it will create thousands of jobs.  Jobs that pay taxes. 
2. It will also boost corporate revenues so they will pay more taxes.
3. It will turn the United States into a global exporter of oil.  More tax revenue.
4. It will increase the amount of slack in the global oil market, so will drive down the price of oil.
5. It would give this country a tool to help allies.  It would buffer countries like Britain and France from being held hostage to the likes of Libya or Iran.
6. It will also reduce the outflow of American capital to oil producing countries that have horrible human rights records.  For example Venezuela.

I hope this polite suggestion helps the President of the United States understand all the positive benefits for increased oil exploration and production.

The Great Betrayal

I have been paying some attention to real world events even as blogging took a break. The withdrawal of all but 150 soldiers from Iraq by the end of this year deeply troubles me.

No one who is praising President Obama wants to mention the state of the Iraqi air force. This air force is still in the fledgling state - the first of 18 F-16 Block 52 Fighting Falcons will not arrive in Iraq to defend Iraqi air space until late 2012 or perhaps not until 2013. One full year after the American pullout. If that is not abandonment of an ally and a responsibility than I do not know what is.

This UPI article is pretty depressing in the scope of how unilateral US pull out is leaving Iraq naked to foreign aggression - no real air defense and no radars until the middle of next year. And Iran to the east and Turkey to the north which are the greatest threats; Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Kuwait have no desires to conquer Iraq.

To borrow a phrase from Star Wars, "I have a bad feeling about this." Especially when Maj Gen. Buchanan is grasping for straws to give positive spin. Eighteen planes is "robust" when before there are no jet fighters in the Iraqi air force. But when compared to the 40 F/A-18 Hornets of tiny Kuwait or Saudi Arabia which now flies American build F-15 Eagles and Panavia Tornados and has on order 72 Eurofighters and 72 Rafaels, 18 airplanes is a joke. Which also sums up President Obama's 'smart' diplomacy.

Aviation Round-Up

The 49th Paris Airshow is rolling along with all the aviation companies trying to sell their wares to anyone with money or good financing. Saab is demonstrating their JAS-39 Gripen NG demonstrator, they are looking for Brazil orders and re-entry into the Indian MMRCA competition. Boeing has displayed the latest 747-8 cargo version.

Airbus/EADS is of course there with their products. The A380 suffered another embarrassing moment, on top of a previous accident where a 380 clipped a smaller jet, when its wing-tip clipped a building. So a Korean Air Lines A380 did the fly-by while the damaged plane sat on the tarmac with a cover over the damaged wing.

Nor was this Airbus/EADS only mishap, the very long delayed A400M had one also. To whit a cracked gearbox in one of the turboprop engines, so another A400M had to be slotted in. To add to the controversy surrounding the four year overdue A400M, the RAF will name their planes Atlas and not Grizzly, shades of the Eurofighter Taifun/Typhoon name controversy. All the delays surrounding the A400M project has allowed American companies to snag orders; Boeing happy with C-17 orders to the RAF, RCAF, RAAF, Oman, and Hungary and Lockheed-Martin selling C-130Js to RAF, RCAF, and a host of other possible A400M customers. And South Africa has cancelled it's A400M orders. And is it me or does the A400M nose and cockpit look like a C-141?

And what post on modern aviation would be complete without mentioning the Peoples Republic of China? It seems the designers at Chinese Military Aviation have developed a new airlifter in the 400,000lb category that bears a strong resemblance to the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III. Very curious confirmation on Chinese intelligence efforts and on Chinese power projection goals, perhaps to places like Africa or Taiwan?

File this under old airshow news. Back in 2009 the Islamic Iranian Air Force had their own airshow. One of the centerpieces was supposed to be an overflight of their IL-76 Candid based AWACs plane named Simurgh. As the video in this link shows, things went terribly wrong and resulted in the loss of crew and plane.

Ineptitude, Courage, and Libya

Only the United States under President Obama would formulate strategic US foreign policy guided by fears of hurting feelings. At least that is the impression Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave Tuesday in testimony before Congress when she said - "We feel we that we did this in a prudent and effective manner, and we did it in a way that did not raise the alarm bells around the region and the world that we were about to invade for oil... But the last thing we wanted was to start off with military assets, when we effectively got our people out. Yeah, the seas were high. The seas were high for the other evacuators as well."

This follows questions many have had in regards to President Obama's very hands off approach to Libya in comparison to US ally Egypt. If we are to believe Clinton's remarks, its more of the 'We are not Bush' foreign policy playbook. In this case the old No Blood For Oil meme. If this is true, then Hosni Mubarak could have stayed in power by claiming to find oil. Words like simplistic, stupid, and suicidal pop to mind.

And it is a slightly different excuse than the previous one trotted out by the Obama administration. That the soft policy with Libya was due to concerns for the safety of American citizens in Libya. Which upon closer examination falls apart since there were far more American citizens, including tourists, in Egypt yet Obama did all he could to actively kick Mubarak out while the Egyptian populace rioted. It could be argued from these statements that Obama would let Libya hold Americans hostage, something not seen since Desert Shield/Desert Storm when Saddam Hussein took many foreign nationals hostage and placed them at critical locations to ward off coalition air strikes. Or perhaps Obama does truly want to replace James Earl Carter in the annals of ineptitude and start another 444 days of shame? I do not think Obama really wants that, but his weak actions are leading to it.

Meanwhile in the deserts of Libya, brave men are doing the hard thing. British Special Air Service, who got their start in WWII in the Libyan desert battling Rommel's Afrika Corps, have managed to evacuate more than 150 civilians to Malta aboard two Hercules transports. And Germany says it has evacuated 132 civilians via military airlift from the Libyan desert. Where are the American Wings of Eagles? Being clipped by a Democratic administration that seeks to curry favor instead of commanding respect it seems.

Egypt Down the Hole

Are we heading to another 444 days of shame? It does seem so. Obama sends a former ambassador of Egypt to privately talk with Hosni and today Hosni gets on the TV and says he has no plans to run in September but is staying on until then. And this is followed by President Obama giving a live non-specific speech that does not support in any way Mubarak.

It does seem we are repeating Iran, the Shah, and 1979 again. Wait until the Suez Canal is closed to traffic until increased 'transit fees' are paid. Check your supplies, see what debts are paid off, and in general be prepared. There are major potholes in our collective future.

I met a traveler from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal these words appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
- Ozymandius
Percy Bysshe Shelley

Foreign Policy Cliff Note Version

For those who are willing to study history and heed its lessons, future disaters can be averted. The peril lies in those so wedded to their notions, no scrap of fact or evidence will dissuade them. They are the ones who bring the Sword of Damocles upon their head and the heads of their countrymen.

The Cuban missile crisis, while it illustrates the efficacy of a threat, demonstrates even more dramatically the terrible dangers which result from unheeded threats. The missile crisis brought us closer to nuclear war than we had been for a decade. And it came about because the Russians did not believe that we would not act if they placed missiles in Cuba. - pg 41. The American Threat. James L. Payne 1970.

Another unseen effect of our threats concerns the decisions of our allies and neutral countries. Our threat to oppose communist aggression encourages them to divert their resources away from the military sphere and into productive activities. ... If we betray this trust, one of the first things that is likely to happen is the spread of nuclear weapons. Nations, realizing that they live in a ruthless and disordered world, will each seek the means to defend themselves. - pg 42. Ibid

Let us send letters, one might advise, to Mao and the rest ... Once those letters are duly posted, the Cold War will have been settled in a peaceable and business-like way. As with almost all simple solutions to difficult problems, it has been tried and found wanting. ... And yet attempts at aggression continue. - pg 43. Ibid.

And that is just a few excerpts from a few pages of a book that runs 223 pages. If the Obama administration just heeded these, just think of where we would be in regards to North Korea and Iran? Would Obama have tried to intervene in the inner workings of Honduras? Who knows, but it is something to think on as the current administration fumbles through one policy gaffe to the next.

A Turkey of a Headache

The Obama Administration is desperately seeking any good policy news. After the mid-term drubbings in Congress and in the state races. Followed by the the scorn of the G20 meet over his fiscal policy. And the collapse of the trade agreement with South Korea that had languished neglected since almost being ratified by the Bush Administration just worsens this administration's standings.

So its not any wonder that Obama looks to the NATO summit to bring in some good news. Alas even here there is trouble brewing. Once secular and pretty reliable, the increasingly more Islamic country of Turkey is poised to throw another spanner into any plans the US has for the Middle East. This time in regards to missile defense for all of NATO. Turkey not only wants all of its territory protected from such missile threats, it wants to control the system.

Welcome to the big leagues Mr. President. Omitting any mention of the nuclear threat Iran poses is going to be the least of your problems at this NATO summit.

Iranian Flying Boats

All I have to say about these new toys of the Islamic Iranian Republic is this: they are going to make some Sea Cobra or Seahawk pilot an ace in one pass. The radar returns from that big square block of metal called a motor and radiator negates any stealth acquired by using ground effeft to fly just above the water. Might as well paint them neon pink.

For War Was Too Terrible

The newest sanctions against Iran remind me of another series of sanctions against Iraq. We know how those Iraqi sanctions worked. This also remind me of another time when people thought if they kept talking with the despots they could avert conflict because the last shooting match was literally bloody terrible.

I speak of the scars and fears induced by World War I. When England lost 600,000 on the Somme. Then Gallipoli. And the French being equally winnowed. The thought of war became akin to grasping a hot skillet without a mitt on. So instead at the League of Nations and in other forums England and France talked and talked while the likes of Mussolini and Hitler portrayed such talk as signs of weakness.

Mussolinni rose to power in a sick Italy. He made many promises, among them restoring the glory that was Rome to Italy. So he invaded Ethiopia in Africa and proceeded to conquer the poor country. When the King of Ethiopia appeared before the League of Nations to plea to this body that was supposed to end conflicts, his pleas were heard and nothing done. The days of considering the League as of any importance became numbered then.

So when Chancellor Adolph Hitler broke the Versailles Treaty that started Germany on the road to military re-armament, what was the reaction of other countries? More talk. Austria was absorbed in the Anschluss and all the West did was talk more to Hitler. Then the Sudetenland demands came, it was given to Herr Hitler and the Czechs lost faith in the West. Then the rest of the Czech populace was taken into the new German Third Reich. While Chamberlain talked of 'peace in our times' Hitler and his minions were building to their next conquest. Even though England and France promised to some to Poland's aid if Germany attacked, by now the word of these two countries was extremely suspect. So Hitler, believing he would only get more words from England and France while having a deal with the USSR, invaded Poland. That was the official start of World War II. The French invaded the Rhur and the German generals got nervous since all German forces were in Poland, but Hitler laughed and predicted the French would pull back. And Hitler was right. So six months later France fell to the German forces that had transferred in from the Polish campaign. When this conflict ended, large swathes of Europe were piles of rubble and tens of millions lay dead, including almost 12 million in Nazi concentration camps.

It seems we are on the precipice of another global conflict, this time with a nuclear Iran bent on controlling all around it. One conflict that could have been ended in earlier stages if the international community could have countenance such abhorrent idea as a muscular diplomacy that involved striking at Iran with military forces. Instead we see IAEA reports Iran may have enough nuclear material for two atomic weapons. And still too many in the West believe they can talk Iran out of snuggling up to a nuclear teddy-bear while ignoring lessons brutish dictators of not 100 years ago taught. Titlting at windmills never seemed more dangerous.

Iranian Tse Tse

I am sorry but I have to ask if the Navy has gelded their commanders after reading this story. The Eisenhower carrier battle group got buzzed by an Iranian Fokker F27 reconnaissance plane in an area that is abnormal for them and the plane was not shot down. There is only like 6,000 American citizens aboard the carrier. Plus the planes a carrier embarks and the possible nuclear weapons stored aboard. And this plane was allowed to buzz the ship for 20 minutes and got within 1000 yards of the carrier. Since the plane was not shredded the CIWS was in stand-by mode I guess.

It seems the fly-by happened at the start of an Iranian naval exercise called Great Prohpet 5. Also involved in this exercise were small fast attack craft operating in large numbers. Lets game out this scenario. During a future Iranian exercise, lets say Great Prophet 7 another F27 passes within 1000 yards of an American carrier. The Americans hold their fire because they have seen this before and their ROE has been revised to reflect this. Then as the F27 comes abreast of the carrier island it banks hard and crashes into the carrier. 1000 yards is not enough time to do anything but take it unless someone has their finger right on the Auto mode of the CIWS. And CIWS can get a bearing on the plane. Now we have an American carrier on fire and possibly out of control. Then prong two of the attack happens as the speed boats come racing in to strike at the distracted escorts in suicide runs. It seems an awefully cheap way to neutralize a large chunk of American power in the Middle East just before Iran does something like punch out Israel.

Reckless Conceit

Thank you New York Times for giving the whole world Obama's new strategy for nuclear weapons. The Obama's Doctrine for Nuclear Weapons is - "We really really won't use them unless my arugula is nuked."

On to the dissection shall we?
To set an example, the new strategy renounces the development of any new nuclear weapons, overruling the initial position of his own defense secretary. As Russia modernizes its nuclear arsenal and such fun countries as North Korea and Iran work on nuclear missiles, Obama wants to pull the plug on the US nuclear weapons manufacturing capability. And Obama wants to reduce the US arsenal of aging weapons while Russia will merely scrap its oldest weapons to meet the treaty requirements of the treaty that is supposed to be signed in Prague.

It eliminates much of the ambiguity that has deliberately existed in American nuclear policy since the opening days of the Cold War. For the first time, the United States is explicitly committing not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons, or launched a crippling cyberattack. What ambiguity? US policy has always been if you use a chemical agent or a bio-agent against the US, then the US treats it as a nuclear device and proceeds to nuke the offender. Now Obama is going, well we wont nuke you if you use Sarin gas or anthrax on us, unless you really are mean to us. And why bring in cyber terrorism? So if a PRC hacker college sucks dry Obama's Blackberry, Obama will nuke Beijing? That right there introduces dangerous uncertainty.

Those threats, he argued, could be deterred with “a series of graded options” -- a combination of old and newly designed conventional weapons. Satayana was right, those who fail to learn are doomed to repeat history. Graduated response worked so well for Sec of Defense Robert McNamara in prosecuting the Vietnam war didn't it? For those who think Vietnam is not important because it happened before they were born, McNamara's strategy allowed North Vietnam defenses to keep pace with increases in American military attacks, resulting in a longer war with far more casualties. But Obama thinks it will work with nuclear weapons now.

Mr. Obama’s plans to fly to Prague to sign a new arms control agreement with Russia on Thursday and then next week will host 47 world leaders in Washington for a summit on nuclear security. The London and Washington Naval Treaties after World War One worked so well after all. Or the treaty between the US and USSR on biological weapons, the US destroyed its stockpiles but the USSR kept at it. Treaties work when enforcement has consequences. I do not see North Korea, Iran, or Venezuela being impressed by the Obama Administration's determination.

“I’m not going to parse that right now,” he said, sitting in his office as children played on the South Lawn of the White House during a day-long Easter Egg roll. However, he cited the example of North Korea, whose nuclear capabilities were unclear until it conducted a test in 2006, which it followed with a second shortly after Mr. Obama took office. Lets face it, containment of North Korea was a failure of the Clinton and Bush administrations. But the way I read this statement and its following paragraph of Obama's, it seems our President is okay with Iran going nuclear. These are dangerous times and the nuclear clock I think has moved one more minute closer to midnight with this misguided revamping. History will judge, may we all live to see that judgement.

L'chaim Israel.

Newtonian Politics

This should come as no surprise after President Obama being such a rude prat to visiting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Arab states meeting in Libya have called off any talks with Israel and praised Obama's strong opposition to new Israeli settlements. The Arabs think they have the stronger hand and can browbeat Israel into sacrificing more of its security because the president of the world's last remaining, but decaying, superpower is on their side.

Yes you can have screaming hissy fits over the phone with a foreign leader like Clinton apparently did with Netanyahu. Its another thing to invite such a leader to your official residence for needed talks and when you disagree with their explanation and viewpoint, to storm out in a huff while screeching at the man he better see the errors of his ways. That is not negotiating, it is issuing a Diktat. It is something I would expect of a Bismark when dealing with France, not when one is talking with an ally about something of mutual interest.

And now I hear President Obama has gone jetting off to Kabul to meet with President Karzai. I guess he needs to mend fences with the leader of Afghanistan after his administration did everything in its power to stage a coup against Karzai in the last elections. I wonder if Karzai left Obama cooling his heels, knowing in a year Obama will start to pull American forces out of the country.

Frankly, when it comes to foreign policy and negotiations one thing is obvious. Obama and his administration have a very static view of world politics. They are not seeing how things interact it seems. Like domestic politics they are just interested in winning at all costs. At this rate, Obama is surging ahead of Carter as the president who has done the most damage to American overseas. And lets not forget Iran is holding three American civilians hostage and so far the Obama administration has done nothing for these lost hikers.

The world is getting more dangerous under Obama than more safe. And I fear Israel will do what the rest of the world has failed to do for the past decade. Destroy or at least blunt Iran's mad dash to being a nuclear power. Dictators like being a nuclear power because it shields them from being attacked in these kinder-gentler emasculated times. Now if we had a decent missile defense system in operation to protect us and our allies, then tin-pot dictators with nukes would not be such a grave menace and having a nuclear blackmail option would not be so attractive.

Thanks Giving

Lets be thankful we are not Iranian pro-democracy dissidents imprisoned hoping the US will save them.

Lets be thankful we are not pro-Karzai forces hoping the US will stay the course.

Lets be thankful we are neither Czech or Pole who depended upon the US to keep its word.

Lets be thankful we have a President who spends as much time choosing a dog as he does deciding on more troops for Afghanistan after saying he already had a plan.

Lets be thankful we are not Israeli for then we would be on our own while the US preaches.

Lets be thankful we are not climate 'scientists' who have sold their honor and integrity for thirty pieces of silver funding.

Lets be thankful we are not Chinese dissidents whom the US glossed over in a recent visit.

Lets be thankful we are not three US Navy SEALS who are about to be court-martialed for giving an evil malignant piece of human excrement a fat-lip.

And finally lets be thankful the Chinese have not foreclosed on the US due to the recent trillions of dollars in debt. Yet.

See, there is a lot to be thankful for.

No Turkish Delight

As people are still trying to digest the unpalatable news that NATO member and EU member candidate Turkey has signed a treaty with Syria while distancing itself further from the West, there is something else to ponder. Something that will probably cause indigestion amongst military leaders at the least.

Turkish Aerospace Industries has produced for local consumption F-16 Fighting Falcon jets in the past. In 2007, a Memorandum of Intent was signed between Northrup-Grumman and TAI to produce center fuselages for the JSF F-35 Lightning II. Which means the following technologies were transferred to TAI:

• High precision advanced technology composite part production, high level digital integration between design and production period,
• Robotic controlled drilling, cutting and integration processes,
• Fiber placement techniques with automatic machining for sophisticated structures,
• Composite and metal bonding techniques by using high technology,
• Robotic controlled precise coating and painting applications,
• High standard quality applications required for 5th generation fighter aircraft.

Flash forward to September, 2009 and TAI has delivered its first center fuselage. It could possibly produce as many 400 such sub-assemblies. The total deal for TAI and Turkey could reach $3billion.

Now ponder all these technologies slipping out of TAI and into Iran via Syria. Since Syria is now an ally of both countries. Or direct from Turkey to Iran. All the leaders in the West who let Turkey slip out of the Western world need to look in the mirror and bluntly say "I screwed up." Now it falls to an EU, who alienated Turkey with its preconditions for EU membership, and a United States, after Turkey nixed a northern front, to try to woo Turkey back. In the meantime, the DoD and the various military contractors who are working with TAI had better start looking at what TAI could give to Iran and its impact on Western military posture. Lives and countries hang in the balance.

Time to Nut Up Mr. President

As President Obama and his advisers wrestle with the decision to either double down and send 40,000 more soldiers to Afghanistan to physically secure more of the country or hope Biden's electronic ninja jujitsu will work. Former Navy SEAL, Medal of Honor winner, and Senator Bob Kerrey argues that President Obama needs to follow General McChrystal's advice. This kind of advice is sorely needed within the confines of Obama's inner circle and is rooted in history.

When grappling with deterrent threats and the task of keeping them credible, there is always a temptation to seek an easy way out. ... The answer to this question, of course, has to be "no." ... If our opponents are really to believe that we shall sacrifice American lives and risk terrible destruction to oppose their aggression, we must, for all practical purposes, be in fact willing to do so. We cannot say we are firm and be cowardly, for our words will be a "specious appearance." In managing a deterrence policy, there is no substitute for courage. - pg 154

As Bob Kerrey mentions in regards to President Obama's foreign policy vision, there is not a coherent policy. And Kerrey chastises the President for apologising too much. As the above quote shows, such apologia creates an impression that the United States is unwilling to shoulder any burden in the name of democracy and freedom.

When the opponent offers a choice between war or retreat, the statesman chooses, without hesitation, war. ... How, in the nuclear era, does one muster the courage to say "Well, then, it is war."? To a large extent, the roots of courage lies in understanding that the opponent can have a war whenever he chooses. ... Hence, when faced by an ultimatum of retreat or war the statesman should calmly say - and mean - "it is war." If the ultimatum was a bluff, then no war results and no retreat is made. If the ultimatum is real, then the resulting war was actively risked by the enemy and the responsibility for it is his. The 1961-62 Berlin crisis illustrates the error of holding oneself responsible for a possible war provoked by an aggressor. ... Illustrative of the fright was George Kennan's comment, reported by Schlesinger: "I am expendable, I have no further official career, and I am going to do everything I can to prevent war....the only thing I have left in life is to do everything I can to stop war." But Kennan was apparently assuming precisely what the United States should not have assumed: that we should have done anything to prevent a war. ... It is dangerous to believe that we can do anything to prevent war when an aggressor wishes to risk it, because there is one thing we can do and a panicky search will lead right to it: retreat. - pg 154-156

Looking at the above passage, one has to think on North Korea and Iran. Starting with the Clinton administration, everyone has tried to reason with North Korea while offering incentives from a basketball to grain to fuel oil. All that has accomplished is more North Koreans starved to death while their dear leader gained an atomic weapon. And the same mistakes have been perpetrated in regards to Iran. The UN, EU, and now the US are caught up in a mental box of their own creation, if they could only negotiate better with the Iranian mullahs, the mullahs are reasonable and see the value of the negotiations. Thus they can prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. This ignores the fact that Iran has multiple nuclear facilities and has spent a vast fortune to get these weapons. England and France both thought negotiations at any cost were better than another war in Europe, in the end they got that war anyway; in the meantime countries like Czechoslovakia and Poland fell victim to naked aggression before those remaining countries had had enough and were willing to risk war.

"Are we going to have another Vietnam in Thailand?" ... Rather it appears that this question is a rhetorical way of advancing an interpretation of the Vietnam war: The United States has got into a costly and unfortunate war. South Vietnam isn't really worth such a war. ... Therefore, we should learn our lesson and never again become involved in such a war. This view is perhaps the most dangerous, most destructive interpretation that could ever be placed upon our involvement in Vietnam. ... That we should make such sacrifices in Vietnam is the best evidence we can offer our opponents that we shall oppose them if they attempt aggression elsewhere. ... To reverse this interpretation, to tell the world that we shall never fight again in Southeast Asia is to weaken our threat and encourage aggression. It is difficult to imagine a more senseless way to squander the American blood that has been shed in Vietnam. - pg 157

In 1975, the Democrats in Congress cut off further military aid to South Vietnam so the country finally fell to Communist aggression. In the following decade, millions of people fled what was South Vietnam while millions more died in Cambodia; all this stemmed from the Untied States buying into the myth put forward by the likes of Jane Fonda and John Kerry that Vietnam was not worth it. We have seen this cannard be put forth in regards to Iraq, which as Kerrey points out President Bush had the courage to double down, listen to Gen. Petreaus, and send in more troops that turned around the situation in Iraq. Now we are hearing from pro-Obama sectors that the fraud in the Afghanistan election is reason enough for the United States to ponder this war is not worth it. Or we hear from Vice President Biden that we, the Afghan government and US, surrender the countryside to the various terror groups while trying to strike at them from secure enclaves. The Soviets controlled the cities and lost all of Afghanistan, but this plan is what Biden is proposing the United States do. Which would mean a democratic Afghanistan would fall and the pogroms to enslave Afghan women will start again. Bob Kerrey's advice should really be listened to by the Obama Administration. Or the view of the bin Ladens of the world will be confirmed again, when things get tough the United States packs up and runs away. Which will beget more violence.

End notes: Passages were quoted from The American Threat - The Fear of War as an Instrument of Foreign Policy. James L. Payne. Markham Publishing Co., Chicago. 1970. 241 pages.

Leaving No Witnesses

Witnesses - An attestation to a fact, statement, or event; testimony. To testify to, bear witness.

Amidst a record expansion of the U.S. federal government to roughly 28% of the GDP, some groups who depend upon largess from this same government are feeling a guillotine applied to their funding.

As the Obama administration races to negotiate with a militant Islamic Iran bent upon fielding nuclear weapons, this same administration seems intent on muzzling or silencing anyone who is willing to document or show the barbarity of this same regime. A case in point can be found nestled next to the Yale campus on the New Haven green. The group is called the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center and it seems. as they were starting to get a grip on how brutal and lethal the Iranian government has been against its own people this summer, their funding has been terminated. The excuse given by the State Department on why the funding was cut was because they had transferred responsibility of such Iranian projects from their Near Eastern Affairs Bureau to the US Agency for International Development.

Talk about a transparent bureaucratic maneuver in an attempt to deflect blame. This is one of those old games. Group A has submitted a request for funds to Bureau C, but someone in a position of authority does not like Group A so they move the function to Bureau G. But all of Group A's paperwork is addressed to Bureau C and can not be transferred over. And since Bureau G has less funding than Bureau C, Group A gets no funds because their paperwork arrived after other groups and thus they go out of business.

Is this an isolated incident? The Boston Globe goes to some extent to paint it as such by regaling the reader with stories of an Iranian dissident who helps lead this group and his efforts to help his fellow Iranians still trapped in Iran. But at the end of the article, the newspaper admits there are three other similar groups who have also been cut off from funding including the Boroumand Foundation which works to eliminate the death penalty in Iran.

Thankfully Senator Joe Lieberman has decried this whole sorry mess. Lets add our voices to his so we can never forget all those Iranians who have died in the name of the tyrannical mullahs. As that German story goes, "When they came for the Jews I did not protest for I was not a Jew.... when they came for me, there was no one left to protest."

Update: Roya Boroumand is part of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. The Boroumand Foundation does not receive any federal grants. Roya and Ladan Boroumand recently won the Lech Walesa Prize. My apologies for any confusion.

History Applied to Missile Defense

Back during Operation Iceberg, the US Navy found itself bedeviled by an aerial buzz-saw called the kamikaze threat. Now a fast carrier task force was something pretty formidable but it was not doing enough to protect the carriers themselves. F6F Hellcats and F4U Corsairs provided a very good aerial umbrella while the destroyers, cruisers, and battleships provided a curtain of lead to ward off the kamikaze; but they were still getting through to damage. So the US Navy started to place destroyers with a few lighter escorts further out along expected axises of threat. The mission of these ships was to give even more advance warning of a kamikaze attack and to allow those Hellcats and Corsairs more time to slash at the attackers' numbers. As a result the amount of damage the carriers suffered decreased, along with damage to escorting ships. These picket ships extended the task force's defensive perimeter which allowed more kamikazes to be destroyed, thus saving more American lives.

By having the radar and interceptor missiles stationed in the countries of Poland and the Czech Republic, America's defensive aegis would be similarly extended. The satellites in 23,000 mile orbits would still provide launch warning, but that radar in Eastern Europe would provide the US with early tracking data while the missiles would give the US a chance to take out some more missiles. Thus reducing the workload of the ABL[if its aloft and in area once developed] and the terminal defense missile interceptors[Patriot for now]. And to boot, to protect allies from a nuclear oblivion from Iran. An Iran that the IAEA now says can build an atomic weapon.

Okay, I will take out a canard that is now being trotted out to defend Obama's decision in regards to missile defense. The talking heads say it will be several years before Iran can develop a missile to carry a nuclear warhead. These pundits forget that Iran has already launched into orbit a satellite. And more telling they omit the ugly truth it will take the US several years, working with Poland and the Czech Republic, to install that radar and those missiles. So to wait for Iran to develop the missile and then respond be deploying, makes all of Europe vulnerable to Iranian blackmail.

Assuming Europe would let the US deploy such a system in the future. The Obama administration has once again betrayed a country that thought the US was an ally. Israel and Honduras spring to mind as aggrieved parties. Now add Poland and the Czech Republic to the list of countries the US has broken its word with.

And what gain has the Obama Administration garnered for abandoning European missile defense? A promise by Russia not to deploy any missiles near Eastern Europe and some chastising of Iran and its nuclear program. A Russia who's history includes an invasion of Poland by the USSR, acting under the secret codicils of its Non-Aggression Pact with Nazi Germany. And Obama informs Poland of this betrayal on the 70th anniversary of that invasion. Naturally the Poles and Czechs are bouncing off the walls in indignation as they remember the last time the Western powers under Britain and France abandoned them to cruel fates.

President Obama and his administration may think they are making the world safer by making the US and the West less dangerous, in fact they have helped the world become more dangerous with their actions of disarmament and appeasement.

Unfit for Command

Many applied that term to Sen. John F. Kerry when he ran in 2004 against President George Bush. The sobriquet was aimed at his narcissistic personality that even as a young man he created a legend more heroic than what was reality. It seems the term was applied to the wrong person. It should be applied to Barack Hussein Obama instead.

How else to explain the happenings since the inauguration that was supposed to bridge the gap between political divides, why even to start healing the planet we all live on. How else indeed.

I have mentioned previous snubbings of close allies and coddling of enemies. This proclivity has continued with bullying of Israel to stop all settlement activity, even trying to stop the growth of existing settlements to accommodate population growth. Honduras continues to be bullied for defending its democracy. Colombia still awaits what should be a piece of landmark legislation that could finally heal the wounds between that country and the US, a free trade agreement that languishes as President Obama speaks softly to Chavez of Venezuela. And in dealings with Iran, the diplomats might as well be reading from menus as they rehash the same points over and over again, meanwhile an Iran that kills its citizens and puts in as Minister of Defense a man wanted for the bombing of a synagogue in Argentina rushes forward to embrace the atomic bomb. Meanwhile it seems Iraq is sliding backwards and Afghanistan is in need of a surge that Obama's allies in Congres seem unwilling to think about.

On the economic front, we see a man who operates in an environment devoid of any connection to reality. Even as the Peoples Republic of China is understandably worried, Obama's Treasury keeps piling on debt while printing more money which devalues its holdings in US dollars. This past Friday, the Obama Administration added another bone of contention between the US and the PRC by imposing a tariff upon tires imported to the US to protect a union that supported his candidacy. What Obama is risking is a trade war and possible sanctions if this is brought before the WTO and the WTO rules against the US.

These two disagreements with the PRC could very well boil over onto the diplomatic front. Obama has touted himself as the man to heal the breaches the previous administration has created. Obama needs the PRC on his side in dealings with a nuclear North Korea that is in the middle of a power transition. Then there is the matter of a nuclear Iran. The PRC sits on the UN Security Council and has a veto vote and on Sept. 24th when Obama heads the Security Council and asks for help with imposing more sanctions upon Iran. The PRC can veto any such sanctions, giving Obama a diplomatic smack down. Some healing right?

All of this stems from Obama being unable to actually lead. To lead risks failure and Obama is very much adverse to public failure. So he stumbles into failures and then tries to blame someone else. Here it is September and Obama was sworn in at the end of January, but he still blames President Bush every time he can. When it comes to criminal conduct in his appointees, it is always someone else who failed to vette the person properly. On the Stimulus bill, the Waxman-Markey Bill, and the various flavours of health care overhaul the Democrats have crafted; Obama has never sent to Congress what he would like in these bills, he has let Congress run wild and craft these legislative initiatives. When thinking about it, Obama is a classic politician. He wants his name attached to something when its a success, but will deny ever being near something that is a failure - ask Rev. Wright or Van Jones.

In the history of the English people, Ethelred the Unready is an obscure footnote in their long illustrious history that they would prefer to forget. Meanwhile William the Conqueror has had many books written about his accomplishments as a leader. I have a feeling we have the former in the White House instead of the later.