Posts Tagged Pakistan
Sarah Palin Nuked Her Own Brain
Posted by Lance Haley in 9/11, Congress, Conservatives, Government, National Security, Sarah Palin, War in Afghanistan, War on Terror, White House, al Qaida, foreign policy on April 12th, 2010
It’s obvious Sarah Palin must have put her head in the microwave oven somewhere along the way.
In her most recent comments regarding President Obama’s nuclear weapons policy, Palin tried to belittle Obama by claiming that his only knowledge of the topic was gained through “his vast nuclear experience that he acquired as a community organizer and as a full-time candidate.”
Excuse me? Palin sees a full-time candidate every morning when she looks in the mirror.
But more to the point. What Palin obviously does not even know is that as a first-term junior U.S. Senator with a coveted seat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Obama introduced his first major piece of legislation in 2005 with Republican co-sponsor Senator Richard Lugar, Chairman of the committee. Known as the Lugar-Obama proliferation and threat reduction initiative, it was designed to limit proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), as well as expand the State Department’s ability to find and interdict weapons and materials designed for this purpose – particularly nuclear weapons.
Betcha didn’t know that one, Sarah?!?
Moreover, when she stated that the Obama Adminstration “treated the Afghan President poorly”- referring to President Obama’s direct and unambiguous criticism of Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s unwillingness to root out corruption and fraud within his own government – she explicitly ignores the fact that his government is financed by and exists only with the support of the United States taxpayer; that Afghanistan has virtually no Gross Domestic Product – as in an economy, Sarah; that Afghanistan’s largest export – opium - directly provides the world with an unending supply of heroin, while simultaneously financing the Taliban and Al Qaeda; and last, but not least, there is strong evidence that President Karzai’s brother is heavily involved in this game of drug trafficking and revenue-sharing with the terrorists organizations.
Yet she maintains that we should continue to finesse Afghanistan, but not Iran. She thinks we should finesse Pakistan, but not North Korea. She believes we should “quit coddling our enemies”, and that we should “respect” our allies – in spite of their unwillingness to respect our own national security interests. Sarah, here is what happens when you coddle an ally too much:
1) As you keep throwing more and more money at them – $21 Billion to be exact, in U.S. foreign aid given to Pakistan from 2001 through 2008 - you perpetuate their willful impotence and institutional corruption. The Bush Administration kept former Pakistani leader General Musharaff propped-up with U.S. taxpayer’s money for seven years with a promise from Pakistan that it would root out and pursue terrorists operating in its own territories. They did little or nothing. It was only after the Democrats had taken back control of Congress in 2006 and then threatened to pull the plug on Pakistan’s foreign aid, that Bush reluctantly decided it was time to “get tough” with Musharaff.
2) You cannot allow your ally’s sovereignty to be paramount to your own national security. Republican Presidential candidate John McCain – do you even recall who his V.P. running-mate was, Sarah (?) – stated that he (McCain) would not violate Pakistan’s sovereignty by going after terrorists in it’s territory if elected President. In deep contrast to that “coddle your friends” policy, President Obama made it clear on numerous occasions while on the campaign trail that if Pakistan would not do the job, he would! Shortly after President Obama took the oath of office, he made good on his word. And guess what, Sarah? Our terrorist enemies in Pakistan do not sleep well at night anymore – as this blog noted some 90 days ago.
3) When the U.S. taxpayer funds $21 Billion in foreign aid under the pretense that it is going to make our country safer, they want a President who is going to make sure that the recipients give us our money’s worth. President Obama immediately recognized that Pakistan’s government was full of graft and corruption, and that it was doing nothing about ousting the terrorists, so he pressed them very hard on the issue - unlike Bush and Cheney – and Pakistan has demonstrated a whole new attitude about going after the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Moreover, they have kept their damn mouths shut about the U.S. “violating their sovereignty” with our incessant and terrifying drone attacks – thus giving the terrorists a taste of their own medicine after seven years of U.S. impotence.
President Obama is now sending the same message to Afghan President Karzai – PUT UP, OR SHUT UP!
HMMMMMMMMMMM . . .
Amazing how that all works, eh Sarah???
If Palin thinks – and I use the term “think” very loosely in her case - that she has any standing to criticize President Obama’s foreign policy experience, let’s look at the facts. In the previous Presidential election campaign, Palin couldn’t even identify the Bush Doctrine when asked by Charlie Gibson of ABC news - damn those “gotcha journalists”, Sarah. Moreover, that she is not even aware of President Obama’s own prior nuclear proliferation legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate back in 2005 speaks for itself.
Here is the reality for Sarah Palin’s political supporters: well-timed platitudes and folksy quotes are not going to make this country more secure. To the contrary. And our enemies would be more than happy to exploit such blatant foreign policy inexperience and unprecedented ignorance of publically available information. The information contained in this post is not rocket science, and easily accessible to even a 5th grader, Sarah.
Most glaring though, is The Anchorage Daily News’ – as in Alaska’s largest newspaper – recent acknowledgement that “she has little or no foreign policy experience.”. If she cannot even get an endorsement from her own home state newspaper on this very important issue . . . well, that speaks volumes.
Which all leaves no doubt that the terrorists are just drooling at the prospect of her being elected President in 2012.
Fighting both the Islamic Terrorists, as well as the Financial Terrorists with Terror
Posted by Lance Haley in 9/11, Bailouts, Banking, Business and Money, Capitalism, Credit Card Industry, Economics, Financial Crisis, Government, How and Why We Get Screwed, National Security, Politics, United States, Wall Street, War in Afghanistan, War on Terror, Wealth Disparity & the Ultra Rich, al Qaida, financial industry, foreign policy on January 15th, 2010
Al Qaida and Wall Street understand how to use terror!
First, you place American citizens in deep fear of some unimaginable catastrophe by destroying two very tall skyscrapers full of people, or by sending the global economy into an almost irreversible tailspin. Second, you continually remind them through repetitive conditioning (suicide bombers on planes or wide-spread bankruptcies and unemployment) that it could happen again tomorrow. Finally, you then reap the results of their irrational behavior from the resulting Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): 1) two debt-laden wars, with the associated horrific physical deaths and wounding of tens of thousands of innocent young soldiers; 2) financial system-breaking bailouts, with huge profits for a select group of well-connected banks, as well as obscene bonuses for the well-heeled financial terrorist executives who reside at the top of those businesses.
The answer to the problem?
Well on the first front, President Obama and his advisers seem to understand that General McChrystal’s “urge to surge” in Afghanistan was only an appeasement to military strategists, and simply moves more targets (soldiers) into closer proximity for the Islamic terrorists to attack. More importantly, Obama and company also understand that terrorizing the Islamic Terrorists is a far more effective and efficient use of resources.
This strategy was first articulated in Obama’s campaign for President, wherein he declared that he would not hesitate to send large numbers of drones into the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area to bring the fight to our enemies in their own backyard. Guess what? It is working.
As one resident of the region was recently quoted, “[w]e have become used to the drone attacks, but now people are scared as they are coming every night.” Israr Khan Dawar, a 17-year-old student in Mir Ali, a town in the North Waziristan region of Pakistan which is controlled by Islamic militants, said “more noise means they are flying lower, and that means an attack is more likely.” Sadly, these civilians are collateral damage in an unfortunate war that they have been drawn into as a result of the reckless behavior of those around them.
As for the second front (the Financial Terrorists), we need a scorched-earth strategy like Colonel Kurtz employed in the movie Apocalypse Now, and not some lame federal “banking fee“. Obama should temporarily nationalize the ten largest U.S. banks, starting with Goldman Sachs, throw their management out, replacing them with people who will act without reckless abandon in search of profits and then make money the old-fashioned way – loaning it out at reasonable rates of interest.
Now THAT would sufficiently terrorize Wall Street.
Unfortunately, it is likely far too late. The time to have moved on this would have been one year ago, when they were at the mercy of the Feds. They won that war, and now we ARE screwed.
P.S. For all you “Capitalists” out there who would label such a drastic measure as “Socialism” – that’s what we have been doing for the past year - you better find a more cogent response. Besides, as Nouriel Roubini (“Dr. Doom”)suggested in the Wall Street Journal inteview, we would only ”nationalize” this sector of our financial system temporarily. It would seem prudent at that point to break up these banks into smaller entities, impose moderate regulations on them (especially with usury rates of 18% on credit cards), and spin off the trading and investment side of the firms - regulating them in move inventive ways. We would have then re-privatized them all within twelve months.
President Obama, that would have sufficiently vanquished the Financial Terrorists, and further given pause to Wall Street’s minions, forcing them to rethink how they are going to conduct business going forward.
The Battle of Tora Bora, Afghanistan in 2001 – the Ghost that Keeps on Haunting the U.S.
Posted by Lance Haley in Media & Communication, Uncategorized, War in Afghanistan, foreign policy on December 11th, 2009
Where is the outrage?!?
If this blogs’ coverage of what happened in Tora Bora seems to be getting redundant, there will be no apologies. New information about the single worst foreign policy decision in American history is not something to sweep under the carpet when so many U.S. military soldiers have sacrificed their lives because of this blunder. The American press can ignore this . . . I refuse to let this go until someone is finally taken to the proverbial woodshed over this disaster.
And the hits on Dick Cheney’s credibility just keep on getting handed out on a silver platter . . .
Finally, after eight long years, somebody finally affirms what I have been saying all that time. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, U.S. commander of forces in Afghanistan, and the man who “urged the surge” that President Obama just accommodated, testified before Congress this week, stating that capturing Osama bin Laden is the lynchpin to defeating the al – Qaida terror network.
OK, one more time. Remember, Bush stood on the smouldering ruins of the World Trade Center on 9/12, proclaiming through his bullhorn that ”the men who brought down these towers would be brought to justice”, and days later said he “wanted bin Laden, dead or alive.” Yet, it was Bush’s own Secretary of Defense – Donald Rumsfeld – who created the strategy that enabled bin Laden to escape from Tora Bora in December 2001.
Dick Cheney later downplayed the importance of capturing bin Laden in 2006, and his own outgoing Army Chief of Staff at the Pentagon, Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, echoed that same sentiment in 2007, stating that “I don’t know that it’s all that important, frankly.” It should be noted that Shoomaker was previously the head of U.S. Special Operations Command – the unit that was searching for the previous six years for bin Laden after he escaped into the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan in the Battle of Tora Bora. They never found him.
Finally, the biggest indictment of the failure of these men, and a rebuke of these impotent attempts to veil their incompetence by dismissing the primary objective of the U.S. military in Afghanistan , is the report by the U.S. Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee. Before you blame this current Adminstration for ANYTHING that occurs in Afghanistan – have a nice fat plate of crow.
The War in Afghanistan could have been over – you know, “Mission Accomplished” – in December 2001. If it were not for so many lost U.S. lives, one could laugh at the irony. Now there will be more lives lost in pursuit of an objective that was within the grasp of our political and military leaders (I use the term loosely) eight years ago.
How pathetic and unconscionable.