Category Archives: foreign policy

Responsibility and Carping

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of letter writers in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal‘s Letters section have some remarks about the way Israel is (trying to) prosecute its defense against Hamas’ war of extermination.

First is the Progressive-Democrat Congressman from Massachusetts, Seth Moulton. He so-piously wrapped himself in his status as a veteran and a US Marine to decry the Gaza civilian casualties occurring as Israel fights to defend itself. In his bellyaching about those casualties, he implies that they are the result of IDF action. He very carefully, though, ignores the fact that those casualties are inflicted on Gaza’s civilians by Hamas directly, as those terrorists shoot the civilians who are trying to leave the combat zone, especially including those proximate targets that the IDF routinely is at pains to identify beforehand so those civilians could otherwise depart.

Moulton further carefully ignores the fact that Hamas inflicts those casualties indirectly by placing their weapons caches, their rocket and missile launchers, and their command centers inside Gazans’ residential buildings, schools, and hospitals.

Moulton, perhaps even more despicably, provides no evidence whatsoever to support his contention that the IDF isn’t doing enough to protect the civilians even as it tries to pick out the terrorist immersing himself in the civilian crowd.

Israel certainly is responsible for its actions. So is Hamas. Carping from safety, by anyone, is not responsible action.

On the other hand, a letter-writer from outside the Progressive-Democrat Beltway Bubble, Paul Mertis of Atlanta, pointed out these items, contradicting Moulton:

[Biden to Netanyahu:] “There was no reason why we had to be in a war in Afghanistan at 9/11. There was no reason why we had to do some of the things we did.” Perhaps Mr Biden should be reminded that while it is approximately 7,000 miles from Washington to Kabul, Gaza borders Israel.

To which I add, regarding Biden’s…irresponsible…advice: yeah, that was just some people that did something. And, it’s also 5,900 miles from Washington to Gaza. It’s easy enough for Biden—and Moulton, come to that—to sit safely on the faraway sidelines and carp, while terrorists, operating from inside Gaza, try to destroy the nation on whose borders Gaza sits.

Chimera

Posted on by
Reply

Hamas has begun planning for the governance of the Gaza strip once its war against Israel is ended.

Hamas’s political leaders have been talking with their Palestinian rivals about how to govern Gaza and the West Bank after the war ends, a fraught negotiation that threatens to put them at odds with the militant wing fighting Israel.
The talks are the clearest sign that Hamas’s political faction is starting to plan for what follows the conflict.

Husam Badran, of Hamas’s Doha-based political bureau:

We want to establish a Palestinian state in Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem[.]

That’s not as outlandish or hubristic as it might seem, given the weakness of the Biden administration’s support for Israel as it defends itself against Hamas’ war of annihilation. That weakness is exemplified by Biden’s, Sullivan’s, Blinken’s, and Lloyd’s constant pressure on Israel for cease fire and to stop killing Gazans indiscriminately—a charge for which none of those worthies have offered a scintilla of evidence. That weakness is further exemplified by the letters from staffers and interns that Biden has received demanding overt support for “Palestinians.”

Nor are our allies in Europe—putative allies of Israel—helping the matter with their constant bleating for cease fires and ends to fighting and please stops.

There’s this…challenge…too, from Mohammed Dahlan, former Gaza security chief with close Emirati and Egyptian connections who’s in daily contact with Hamas:

[D]o you think anybody is going to be able to run to make peace without Hamas?

I ask does anybody think any sort of peace is possible with Hamas?

Israel must conclude Hamas’ war on Israeli terms and not on the terms of the weak kneed or of Palestinian terrorist supporters. The only legitimate end is for Israel to eliminate the entity that is determined to exterminate Israelis.

When the Hamas war is over, there should be no one in Hamas to plan, there should be no Hamas.

Red Sea and Political Timidity

Posted on by
Reply

In the wake of repeated Houthi terrorists’ rocket, missile, and drone attacks against commercial shipping in the Red Sea and in the Gulf of Aden approaches to the Sea, BP has decided to abandon (BP is saying it’s a “pause”) this shorter and cheaper route and instead to go around Africa altogether to get to the Mediterranean Sea and to ports in Europe. Maersk has already made that decision; other shippers will follow, I predict.

BP’s statement, in part:

The safety and security of our people and those working on our behalf is BP’s priority. We will keep this precautionary pause under ongoing review, subject to circumstances as they evolve in the region.

The safety and security of commercial shipping in international shipping lanes also is the claimed purpose of the US Navy’s Freedom of Navigation operations, wherein our Navy often sails the sea lines of communication, often explicitly sailing contested routing through international waters. Simply sailing through, though, without doing anything other than being momentarily present, doesn’t accomplish much, as the terrorists’ actions in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden are so clearly demonstrating.

Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden is pretending to be trying to establish a coalition to protect trade through the Red Sea, but in the meantime, he’s not allowing the Navy to do anything more than shooting at those rockets, missiles, and drones that a couple of its ships can reach after those weapons already have been fired. Biden is not allowing our Navy to take overt and aggressive action to prevent those weapons from being launched in the first place. He’s not, for instance, allowing our Navy to destroy the Houthi’s launch sites throughout Houthi occupied Yemen, much less respond reactively to destroy those facilities involved in a particular attack.

Nor is he allowing our Navy to destroy Iran’s Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz, and Gulf of Oman ports, thereby seriously limiting Iran’s ability to supply the terrorists in Yemen.

Regarding his pretend coalition effort, Biden isn’t even working with Saudi Arabia in their effort to defeat the Houthi terrorists and restore the government of Yemen, which currently is resident in Saudi Arabia.

For those who object to the US acting as, spending treasure and equipment to be, the world’s policeman, what’s going on in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden is a clear and present demonstration of what happens with a President too timid to act, of what happens when we stop being the world’s policeman.

The US needs to act, whether other nations have the courage to do so or not. If we act, they will follow, or if they don’t, we still will have acted. And we don’t have to extend as much support as we do to those nations happy to freeload off our efforts or too timid to act themselves, even in concert with us. The spending on that support can be reallocated to our policeman role.

Costly Support

Posted on by
Reply

A bunch of Republican Congressmen object to the increasing cost of the US’ support for Ukraine’s fight against the Russian barbarian, and barbaric, invasion.

From the WSJ‘s front page teaser to the article:

Some lawmakers and a growing share of the American public are skeptical about how much US taxpayers should continue to fund Ukraine’s defense.

It’s a valid concern, but those Republicans are missing the larger problem. The cost has been, to a very large extent, artificially inflated by the Biden administration’s conscious decision to slow-walk, and on too many occasions to outright bar, delivery of the weapons Ukraine needs at the time the Armed Forces of Ukraine needs them and in the amounts the AFU needs them so they could defeat the Russian invasion and drive the barbarian back out much more promptly.

Dragging the war out, the way Biden has done and continues to do, not only runs up the financial cost, it runs up the casualty count of Ukrainian soldiers and Ukrainian civilians.

And it’s been dragged out—those weapons deliveries hold-ups—for two reasons. One is Biden’s timidity: he’s terrified of provoking Putin.

Here is General Philip Breedlove, former SACEUR Commander, quoted by Edward Hunter Christie:

Modern manoeuvre warfare, just like we taught the Ukrainians, starts with battlefield air superiority. Have we given Ukraine what they need to establish battlefield air superiority? No. No, we have not. And so you can be critical all you want, you just sort of demonstrate your lack of understanding of what manoeuvre warfare is and how it begins, and so let me just add one other big example. Manoeuvre warfare, and I would tell you especially American commanders, counts on long-range precise fire. We fight to hold the the enemy at risk before [stresses], before he brings his force to bear on us. We use long range precision strikes to strike them and then if they still persist in attacking, to strike them in depth. In depth and to strike them all along their lines of communication and supply lines before they can actually meet us, even after they begin an attack. And then we use long range precise strike to hold all the transhipment points, airfields and everything else, at risk when the fight is going on. Have we given Ukraine the ability to do that? The answer is no, we have not, and worse yet we in the West have forbidden Ukraine from using any of the kit that we give them to strike deeply and to hit the enemy before the enemy can bring his forces to bear on Ukraine. We have built sanctuary all the way around Ukraine. On the map, from Belarus in the Northwest all the way around through the East into Russia, all the way into the South, into the Black Sea, we have forbidden Ukraine from using our kit to strike into Russia and so [it] amazes me that people expect them to do manoeuvre warfare under that. So here’s my answer that was all to set the stage for my answer: we should give Ukraine what we would take to the battlefield. We should give Ukraine what it needs to set conditions on the battlefield like we would set conditions on the battlefield. We’re expecting Ukraine to fight a world superpower shorthanded and certainly demonstratively short of the kind of kit that we would use to fight that superpower.

I think, though, that Christie is being generous: this administration failure isn’t so much do to any ivory tower theoriticals so much as it’s due to Biden’s terror of Putin’s harsh rhetoric.

The other is arrogantly stupid: DoD Know Betters insist they know what Ukraine needs better than the AFU does, even though the AFU is the force actually in field facing the barbarian. These Wonders of the Puzzle Palace, comfortable and safe in their summer and winter climate-controled offices, are so full of their precious theories–Christie is correct to this point–that they have no contact with the realities of the battlefield inflicted on the Ukrainians by the barbarian.

Ukraine might not survive another year of Biden’s timidity or of Republicans’ misapprehension of the problem.

That’s the true cost.

Stupid Idea by Stupid People

Posted on by
Reply

This is, to quote a certain Senator who was commenting on a different matter, “a bonehead idea…a terrible, terrible mistake.” The characterization applies here, too.

Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden wants to put the Palestinian Authority in charge of Gaza once Israel has finished Hamas and the Hamas-inflicted war.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu disagrees.

After the great sacrifice of our civilians and our soldiers, I will not allow the entry into Gaza of those who educate for terrorism, support terrorism, and finance terrorism[.]

Aside from that, the Palestinian Authority does not have the respect of the Gazan residents, and it would be unable to govern effectively.

In addition to the foregoing, moving the PA into Gaza would tend to push forward a two-state proposition unifying Gaza and the West Bank. Netanyahu has the right of it here, too.

Netanyahu again:

I will not allow Israel to repeat the mistake of Oslo.

Beyond that, it’s an idea that the Palestinians, themselves, in general have long since rejected completely.

And

Gaza will neither be Hamastan nor Fatahstan[.]

Of course, Netanyahu rejected this idiocy. Biden should be embarrassed at having floated the idea in the first place.

Put a coalition of governors from the Abraham Accords nations, less Israel, plus Egypt and Jordan in charge. Invite the Saudis in, too, if and when they join the Abraham Accords.