Obama’s Asia Pivot

On top of President-On-The-Way-Out Barack Obama’s (D) acquiescence to the People’s Republic of China’s seizure of the South China Sea and his timid response to the PRC’s aggression against Japan in the East China Sea—hallmarks of his “pivot to Asia,” we get the following pivot outcomes.

A Chinese attack submarine made an unprecedented stopover in Malaysia this week in a rare public display of China’s expanding undersea force and a further sign of power realignment in Southeast Asia.

And

The visit came as two Russian warships docked in the Philippines—a US treaty ally—and Moscow offered to sell Manila advanced weaponry in another challenge to longstanding U.S. military relations in the region.

Wonderful job on the pivot by our On-The-Way-Out Commander in Chief.

Sort of makes one wonder which way he was pivoting in Asia.

A Thought on Edward Snowden

This one is prompted by a Letter to the Editor published in last Thursday’s Wall Street Journal.  The relevant part of the letter is this:

If we start at the beginning, it was the US government, including the National Security Agency, that stole information that belonged to me—my phone and internet metadata. Edward Snowden revealed the existence of the government’s thieving. Now Mr Snowden is considered the thief.

Now Mr Snowden is considered the thief.  He is, and worse. That the NSA screwed up/stole private data/abused its role/what-have-you doesn’t alter that simple fact.

Were Snowden a whistleblower, he wouldn’t have run to the PRC’s Hong Kong and then proceeded to Russia where he’s continuing to give up American secrets.

Were Snowden engaged in civil disobedience, he would have returned long before now—indeed, would never have left—stood trial, making his case before the American people and a jury of his peers, and with his arrest and trial, emphasized the absurdity of the law that facilitated the NSA’s behavior.

But he did the one and didn’t do the other.

The US Nuclear Force

Steven Pifer, a Brookings Institute denizen, wrote some thoughts for Politico in response to a President-Elect Donald Trump tweet about our need to “expand [our] nuclear capability.”  Typical of his piece is this bit:

[O]ne should keep perspective. The North Koreans are building their small nuclear arsenal, and no one knows for certain whether they have miniaturized a weapon that could fit atop a ballistic missile. But nothing North Korea does could stop the US military—with its current nuclear capability—from obliterating the small country.

One should, indeed, keep perspective.  The perspective that Pifer has omitted to notice is that when northern Korea gets an ICBM with a warhead on it that’s capable of reaching American (or Republic of Korean, or Japanese, or Australian) cities, it will be too late to develop upgraded nuclear weapons with which to deal with the barbarians of the north.  Once northern Korea’s nuclear weapons are destroying American (or RoK, Japanese, or Australian) cities, certainly we can obliterate the small country, but our cities or those of our friends and allies, and all the millions of people in them, will already be dead.

Russia and the People’s Republic of China are modernizing and expanding their nuclear weapons suite, also.  Against these two, the US has fewer than 1,500 nuclear warheads.  Despite their power, that’s not enough to fight a war with (especially not a two-front war), even one that starts out as, and stays focused on, conventional arms.  Russia and the PRC know that; that’s one of the motivations for their upgrades.  What we have doesn’t deter those who are deterrable very much anymore.

Our nuclear weapons, including the warheads sitting on them, also are old, and untested for some time other than via computer simulations. (Scary thought: given the Russians’ and PRC’s penchant for attacking and penetrating our government computer systems, what if they are altering or have altered those simulation databases so they don’t give accurate results?  Frankly, that’s not likely at all, but “not likely” is not “impossible.”)

Pifer made this claim, too:

There is no need…for a new US nuclear weapon in Europe.

Except for those Russian nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad, and those Russian tactical nuclear missiles moved to forward deployment locations in western Russia, from where they can reach not just cities and military forces in the Baltics, Poland, and Ukraine, but well into Germany.  Would US nuclear weapons in Europe counter those Russian nukes?  No, and yes.  They wouldn’t be used to attack the Russian nukes; they’d be used to deter Russia’s use of those nukes by holding at risk Russian targets.

And one last thought in favor of expanding our nuclear capability, including numerically.  We, strapped as we are, can afford an arms race and the technological race associated with one; Russia and the PRC cannot.  We should welcome an arms and technology race enthusiastically—one might say with open arms.  An arms and technology race is how we buried the USSR.

The VA Fails Again

The wife of an Iraq veteran, blinded by a suicide bomber has a story to tell (RTWT) from the veteran’s spouse’s perspective, and she has asked the central question.  Her question is this:

[T]here has to be a better way for our federal government to make it easier for the spouses, parents, and siblings who have to quit their jobs and forfeit their livelihoods to care for an injured veteran.

Her husband’s—and her—problems with this failed agency include things like this [emphasis added]:

My first encounter with the military bureaucracy came days after I arrived at Walter Reed to see Scotty, a West Point graduate, after he’d been flown in from Iraq.  …  I was supposed to be on “orders” and receiving a stipend for food, but somewhere along the way someone filled out the form incorrectly. The man I spoke to said that it would be a huge hassle to try to fix it….

But being blinded is no big deal.

And

In a world where technology is making almost all aspects of life easier, why isn’t there a website, a liaison, or an advocate to fill out government paperwork and get deserving veterans the benefits they were promised and deserved? When I asked for help, someone suggested we hire a lawyer.

Sure.  It’s entirely appropriate to sue a government agency to force it to perform, but it’s wholly unreasonable to expect that agency to perform on its own initiative.

And this performance regarding a potentially lethal situation:

Most recently, Scotty had an infection that needed emergency care. Upon arriving at the VA emergency room, which was packed, I noticed that there were at least four people behind the counter for paperwork. They informed us it would be a four to five hour wait to see a doctor.

On the other hand, it is really a hassle for a government hospital to treat emergencies.  Especially with all that bothersome paperwork that has to be done first.

This wife proposes making the VA run more like a business, and giving the customer what the customer needs.

Indeed.  Run the thing like a business: it’s failed and has been a failure for years; close it down.  Disband the VA altogether, and use its current budget (adjusted in subsequent years for inflation and for the number of veterans, whose care also will ebb and flow with age and with the number of wars from which they’re returning) as vouchers paid directly to the veterans so they can get their own doctors, see their own clinics and hospitals, and get proper care from providers of their choice.  Let the customers—our veterans and their families—get what they need.

 

Veteranos Administratio delende est.

Embarrassments Coming Thick and Fast

Now the People’s Republic of China is overtly rubbing President Barack Obama’s timidity in his face, and in the face of the United States.  The USNS Bowditch had been conducting ocean floor surveys in the South China Sea and was recovering the drones it used in conjunction with those surveys when a PRC vessel that had been stalking shadowing the Bowditch snatched one of the drones and made off with it.

This is, at best, an act of rank piracy and a theft of technology the PRC does not have.

The question then becomes: what is President Barack Obama (D) going to do about it—besides wagging his finger and trying to talk tough, I mean.  Here’s Peter Cook, Obama’s Pentagon spokesman:

We call upon China to return our [unmanned underwater vehicle] immediately, and to comply with all of its obligations under international law[.]

Please.  We beg you to leave us alone.

State has lodged a formal protest with the PRC.  That’ll show them.

Apparently Obama is, once again, satisfying himself with trying to sound tough without actually doing anything.  He lacks the self-awareness even to be embarrassed by this face slap.

And now that the PRC has collected the drone’s intel value while rubbing Obama’s impotence in his face, they say they’ll return the drone.  Sometime.