The Arms Race Begins In The Middle East

Following the Iran nuke deal, President Obama said "This deal demonstrates that American diplomacy can bring about real and meaningful change, change that makes our country and the world safer and more secure...no deal means the chance of more war in the Middle East".

Well, if that was true, why is Obama now providing $3 billion in military aid to Israel and preparing to provide a missile defense system to Saudi Arabia; and perhaps others in the region?  At the same time Russia has inked a deal with Iran to provide them with a missile defense system.

These two actions by the U.S. and Russia show that war is being assumed as a potential reality.  This isn't peace.  I would suspect its only a matter of time before Saudis move to get their own nukes and their own ballistic missiles in order to have retaliatory capability against Iran. Others in the Middle East are sure to follow.  Also, it has long been known that Israel already has nukes.  Will they now build or buy their own ballistic missiles?  Expect everyone in the neighborhood to beef up their armies and conventional weapons capabilities.

The world is now...safer? More secure?

References:

Iran Nuclear Deal: President Obama Says Deal Makes World 'Safer and More Secure': http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iran-nuclear-talks/iran-nuclear-deal-president-obama-deliver-statement-historic-accord-n391646

U.S. to help Arab states to develop ballistic missile defense capability: http://missilethreat.com/u-s-to-help-arab-states-to-develop-ballistic-missile-defense-capability/

Russia Confirms Sale of S-300 Missile Systems To Iran: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/international/europe/2015/05/26/russia-confirms-sale-missile-systems-iran/27970269/

Saudi Arabia considers its own nuclear options after Iran deal: http://news.yahoo.com/saudi-arabia-considers-own-nuclear-options-iran-deal-131228648.html

Nuclear weapons and Israel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel

Iran Nuclear Pact Could Spark Buildup Of Conventional Weapons: http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/07/15/423101307/iran-nuclear-pact-could-spark-buildup-of-conventional-weapons 

The Complete Failure of the Obama Doctrine

On the Sunday following President Obama's announced nuke deal with Iran, Thomas Friedman -- liberal op-ed columnist  and pseudo intellectual for the New York Times -- sat down with the President to discuss the deal.  As part of the interview, Friedman gave props to  Obama for "knocking down walls" that have existed for years in the countries of Burma, Cuba, and now, Iran.  Friedman called the President's actions towards these countries the "Obama Doctrine" which is to engage rather than isolate adversaries with sanctions.  The only problem with this so-called Doctrine is that it is inconsistently applied.

For, example, the President claimed sanctions haven't worked for 60 years in dealing with Cuba.  They also haven't deterred Iran from becoming a nuclear weapon state.  Yet, we still apply sanctions against North Korea, and most recently, Obama applied sanctions against Russia over Crimea and the Ukraine.  If sanctions don't work, why apply them to Russia, and why keep them against more than two dozen other countries?

Then, there's the inconsistencies against Libya, Syria, the Ukraine, and Crimea.  In Libya, we led from behind by forming a coalition to overthrow Gaddafi.  And, Gaddafi was overthrown.  But, in the case of Syria, we did nothing to help the free-Syria rebels oust the tyrant Bashar al-Assad.  Similarly, in the case of Crimea and the Ukraine, we did nothing to assist those who were fighting the Russian-backed rebels.

Also, where there has been engagement, how has that worked?

Engagement with Russia obviously didn't work.   In 2009, Obama (vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton) "reset" relations with Russia.  We even sweetened the relationship by scraping our European missile defense system that had been seen as a threat to Russia's ability to launch an attack on Europe.  So, what did all this "honey" buy us.  Nothing.  Russia has used our less-aggressive green light to retake Crimea and, eventually, all of the Ukraine. Then, too, Russia has been busy hacking our White House and State Department computers. Things between our two countries haven't been this cold since the war.  And, now, Russia is out to protect Iran from any attack over it's nuke program, by installing a sophisticated ground-to-air missile defense system.

In Libya, we and our coalition overthrew Gaddafi, but, since then we've had to high-tail-it out of the country because the people we freed weren't really our friends.  Then, in Egypt, Obama backed the Muslim Brotherhood.  Unfortunately, the entire country didn't and the Muslim Brotherhood officials that won elections were ousted by a military coup to protect the nation.  It seems like the Obama Doctrine is all about betting on the wrong horse.

Given the past spoiled fruits of the Obama Doctrine, it is hard to believe that our relationship with Cuba and Iran will turn out any better. Already, Cuba is demanding (not asking) for the return of Guantanamo Bay and financial reparations for the last 60 years of sanctions. The "or else" on that demand is anyone's guess.  Then, too, besides just recently calling for "Death to America", the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran is demanding immediate removal of all U.N. sanctions or their is no deal.  So, now, the Obama Doctrine might be faced with "no engagement" on that one. At the same time, while we are feeding the hand of Iran over a nuke deal, they are busily overthrowing any remnants of the government of Yemen which the President claimed was our best ally against radical Islam.

Essentially, in the wake of the Obama Doctrine, there has been nothing but failure after failure.  The fact that the Middle East is on the precipice of an all-out Shia versus Sunni war is an example of how a carrot-only-without-a-stick philosophy is not only wrong but just plain stupid.  However, media types on the left like Friedman just can't see it.  Simply, the world will not be a better place until Obama and the Obama Doctrine leave the world stage in 2016.

References:

Friedman:  Iran and the Obama Doctrine: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/opinion/thomas-friedman-the-obama-doctrine-and-iran-interview.html

Obama Doctrine: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know: http://heavy.com/news/2015/04/obama-foreign-policy-doctrine-iran-nuclear-agreement-deal-change-interview-thomas-friedman-new-york-times-video/

U.S. Sanctions Programs: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Pages/Programs.aspx

How the Russian 'Reset' Explains Obama's Foreign Policy: http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/16/how-the-russian-reset-explains-obamas-foreign-policy/

Obama scraps Bush missile-defense plan - ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-scraps-bush-missile-defense-plan/story?id=8604357

White House hacking reports highlight digital cold war between US, Russia: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Passcode/2015/0410/White-House-hacking-reports-highlight-digital-cold-war-between-US-Russia

Russia to supply Iran with missile defence system: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/04/russia-supply-iran-sophisticated-air-defence-system-150413180038692.html

US shuts down Tripoli embassy and evacuates staff in Libya: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-closes-down-embassy-and-evacuates-staff-in-libyas-capital-tripoli-9630561.html

New York Times:  Working With the Muslim Brotherhood: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/opinion/roger-cohen-working-with-the-muslim-brotherhood.html

Army Ousts Egypt's President; Morsi Is Taken Into Military Custody: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/egypt.html

Obama Tonight: Yemen and Somalia Are Models of Success: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-tonight-yemen-and-somalia-are-models-success_804728.html

pb

Why Didn't Obama Ask The Creator Of the Film To Take The You Tube Video Down Down?

According to the Obama Administration, it is the YouTube video, "The Innocence of Muslims," that is responsible for the widespread, Muslim anger in Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa.

If this is truly what Obama and his people believe, then why hasn't the President shown leadership by personally asking the creator of that video to remove it from YouTube?  Just think about it.  If the President could succeed in having it voluntarily removed, he would appear to be defending Islam while, at the same time, protecting this country's belief in freedom of speech.  Also, by resolving the issue, thousands of Americans, living throughout the Muslim world, would be protected from harm. 

Instead the Administration chose to use "back door" diplomacy by asking Google to review the YouTube video in the hopes that they would remove it from YouTube.  Now, the Administration has been embarrassed because Google has rejected the request. Once again this President has choosen to lead from behind; making him look consistently weak and ineffectual.

Further reading: New York Daily News: Google will not remove anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked violent protests: It does not violate company's terms: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/google-remove-riot-spawning-anti-muslim-youtube-video-sparked-violent-protests-violate-company-terms-article-1.1160370

The Iran Factor

Oil "had been" falling nicely over worldwide recession fears. In fact, it fell more than $9 a barrel in two days. Then, Iran tested 9 long and medium range missiles. In responses, oil jumped again.

Over the last 3 years, my guess is that at least 60% of the rise in the price of oil has been a direct result of Iran's actions and words. The balance of that rise has been due to rebel activity in Nigeria and the threats to cutoff oil to United States by Venezuela and the falling value of the U.S. dollar against other currencies.

Just think about it. Today, oil prices jumped on Iran's missile tests. Last week, oil prices were, again, somewhat stabilizing and, then, Iran threatened shipping in the Straits of Hormuz and that potential was seen as cutting off 40% of the world's oil from delivery. Then, there have been all the verbal threats against Israel and the United States. Almost a week doesn't go by and, like clockwork, where Iran causes oil to pop.

Iran's economy is almost entirely based on oil. The world market for prayer rugs and fanaticism just doesn't have a worldwide economic appeal! So, if they can pump up the price of oil, they can get more cash to flow into their country. Because oil is so important to their economy, any disruption in selling it to the world would actually hurt them in the process. So, I think a lot of this bellicose talk is all a game to increase the oil revenues for themselves. (Note: This is not to say that anyone should ever underestimate their fanaticism and their hatred and desire to destroy Israel; should they get their hands on working nukes!) They, like Pavlov's dogs tests, have learned that all their "big talk" causes oil traders to salivate and run to buy oil; speculate; and, drive prices up. It's a game and the West is too stupid to see. In the mean time, the entire world is suffering in the wake of this game. If oil supplies weren't so tight, Iran wouldn't be able to play this "hand of doom" gambit that they have going. But, we and the rest of the World are knee-deep in foreign imported oil and are too stupid to do what is necessary to put an end to it. We're too busy fighting a possible ghost of a reality called Global Warming.

Once and for all, we need to get this monkey off our backs. We need more production and a strategy to abandon our increasing dependence on this "volatile" commodity. Except for Mexico and Canada, we are totally dependent on the stability of the most unstable countries of the world for our energy needs. How insane is that! And, our government just keeps committing us to more of that insanity as both time and their inaction continues on. Where is crazy Susan Powter when you really need her. Stop the Insanity!

Movin' On Up

The mental midgets at MoveOn.org once ran a full page ad in the New York Times (the official newspaper of the Democratic Party) which was captioned: "General Petraeus, Betray Us!" Cute. Isn't it? However, beyond the little girl skipping-rope mentality of that ad, General Petraeus is a "man" who was sent out to win in Iraq and, by all accounts, has nearly done so. As a result, the peace that he was able to bring to most of the provinces in that country has created a framework for positive political efforts to go forward. By last count, 12 of 16 of the political benchmarks that our Congress mandated in Iraq have been fulfilled and a majority of those remaining open items may be completed by the year's end. The only "betrayal" in that scenario is by MoveOn.org who appears to be a consistent cheerleader for us losing in Iraq.

Now, it is only logical that United States "use" one of its best tacticians, General Petraeus, to manage the broader tensions in the Middle East (See Full Story). A smart move because we can now use his acute judgment and skills to solve some of the pressing problems in Afghanistan and, possibly, in Iran, Syria, and in Lebanon. At the same time, he will still be able to pursue more gains in Iraq.

Already, there is backlash from some Democrats. Instead of viewing this move as putting our "best" in a tough job, people like the Majority Leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, and Democratic Senator Russ Feingold are squawking and making sounds like they are going to block the Petraeus' promotion. Of course, not using Petraeus only makes sense if, and apparently, the Democrats would prefer a "weak leader" in that position; in the hopes that we'll lose everywhere in the Middle East. Helping this mentality along is the Associated Press (the "Pravda" equivalent for the Democratic Party's propaganda machine) who writes articles like "Petraeus promotion keeps nation on its war course" (See Full Story). I might be wrong but, doesn't "winning" (not whining) ultimately result in peace and bring about an end to a war? Of course, there is one other "choice" that is "preferred" by the Democratic Party and left-wing media: Put your tail between your legs and just quit in failure and defeat!

I guess I'm tired of all the revisionist history from the Democrats who were as equally complicit in sending us into Iraq. People seem to forget about all the ignored U.N. Resolutions. the intelligence data on WMD's, the expelled Weapons Inspectors, and our own Senate approval that was used to enter the war. They seem to forget about all the time that was given Saddam Hussein by the Bush Administration to comply with the U.N. resolutions and return the Weapons Inspector as a means of avoiding war. Was the intelligence data wrong? Yes! However, it was just as wrong before George W. Bush got into office.

The "reality" is that we got into Iraq and we are there and no amount of "denial of how we got there" is going to change that fact. Now that we are there, we should leave that country under the best possible conditions and not under the cloud of defeat; if at all possible. Right now, there is one person, General Petraeus, who holds the key to our success; both in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. We should come together and give him all our support!

Note: To get a better picture of the Centcom Map (pictured above) and (General Petraeus' complete area of proposed responsibility) just click on that map to get an expanded view.