Tag Archives: foreign policy

Threats

Posted on by
Reply

Your moves to strengthen your ability to defend yourselves will be met by us with greater force.  So says Russian President Vladimir Putin.

If the US puts intermediate-range missiles in Europe, Russia will take countermeasures, Putin said at his end-of-year press conference. He warned the “threshold” for the use of nuclear weapons was getting lower.

And this:

In a wide-ranging press conference, Mr Putin also blamed the US for triggering a new arms race and raising the threat of a nuclear war, slamming Washington for abandoning Cold War-era missile treaties even as he boasted of Moscow’s plans to develop new weapons.
…
Russia, whose military budget is only about a 10th of that of the US….

No contradiction there. Bring it. Repeat your predecessor nation’s arms race performance.

Another Schumer Shutdown?

Posted on by
Reply

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY) told NBC News‘ Meet the Press that there would be no money for a border wall “in any form.”  House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) has been saying much the same thing the last couple of weeks, but she doesn’t have the votes to block the money, and she doesn’t have the votes to become Speaker next month if she doesn’t say no this month.

But Schumer: this is the same Senator who a couple of administrations ago voted enthusiastically to fund a border wall.  This is the same Senator who earlier in this administration enthusiastically supported a DACA fix the took care of 1.8 million illegal aliens vice the 800 thousand Schumer wanted to handle and that also had $25 billion for a border wall—and then welched on the deal.  This is the same Senator who agreed earlier this year to $1.6 billion for a border wall but now says no money.

It’s clear that Senator Chuck Schumer is so desperate to oppose President Donald Trump that he’s willing to have open borders and a free flow of illegal aliens rather than see to the security of our borders—or the safety of aliens who want to and try to enter our nation legally.

Trump said he’d proudly take the blame for any government shutdown over the matter, but the responsibility plainly will be that of the automatic obstructionist.  After all, Democrats…aren’t eager to help the Republican president fulfill his signature campaign pledge in 2016….

Go figure.

Google’s Boss Testified

Posted on by
Reply

Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai testified before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this week.  In the course of his testimony, he made some interesting claims.

“Even as we expand into new markets we never forget our American roots,” Mr Pichai said in his opening statement.

Not just roots, though. It’s important that Pichai and his team remember our American culture and values, too.  It’s not at all clear that he/they do.

As an American company, we cherish the values and freedoms that have allowed us to grow and serve so many users.  I am proud to say we do work, and we will continue to work, with the government to keep our country safe and secure.

Just how, exactly, does Pichai and his team propose to do that when they refuse to work with our defense establishment while enthusiastically working with our enemies—in particular, the People’s Republic of China and so with the PRC’s defense establishment?

Speedy Trial

Posted on by
Reply

As I write this on Tuesday, the question of bail for Huawei’s Meng Wanzhou remains unsettled.  The problem centers on a couple of things.  One is her husband’s offer to be responsible for Meng, guaranteeing her appearance at all court proceedings.  The presiding judge, Justice William Ehrcke, is having trouble believing that offer, even were it sincere.  Meng’s husband, Liu Xiaozong, is not a Canadian citizen, Meng’s lawyer had no information on any other immigration status for Liu, and Ehrcke expressed doubt over his ability to control Liu’s whereabouts—and so of Meng’s whereabouts.

Another concern is Meng’s health, of which she claims several problems and the impact being incarcerated in a jail cell would have on them.

A third is the People’s Republic of China’s naked threat of “severe consequences” for Canada if it doesn’t release Meng forthwith.

In reverse order: the People’s Republic of China’s threats a should make it impossible for Canada to do anything other than deny bail and promptly extradite Meng to the US.

While the extradition question is being decided, in satisfaction of Meng’s health concerns, hold her in a prison hospital where she can get the care and medications she says she needs rather than a cell.

Finally, speedily extradite Meng, and get her out of Canada’s hair and into US custody—it’s our laws she’s alleged to have violated.  Then let’s have a speedy trial and a prompt acquittal if her behavior turns out to have been legal, or a speedy conviction and sentence execution if not.

Unfortunately, Ehrcke has decided to grant bail to Meng.  It’ll be instructive to see how long Meng remains in Canada.

Brexit Botch

Posted on by
Reply

British Prime Minister Theresa May yesterday pulled today’s planned Parliament vote on her Brexit deal with Brussels when it became clear that not even her fellow Tories supported the deal in sufficient numbers to pass.  What’s more, she’s not suggested a new date for the vote, even though something is required to be presented to Parliament by 21 Jan 2019.

The deal as it stands is a terrible one, worse IMNSHO than a plain, unadorned breakout from the European Union.  It represented May’s meek submission to Brussels on nearly every one of their demands—including functional retention of EU immigration “rights” and EU court rulings within what used to be sovereign Great Britain for several years after the British nominal departure.

Nevertheless, May’s failure before Parliament represents further damage to Great Britain.

And this:

[May] will tour European capitals and then go back to Brussels to try to secure sweeteners that might buy off huge opposition to the package.
She insisted her blueprint was still the “best deal negotiable”, and said she still planned to put it to a vote once “reassurances” had been secured on the Irish border backstop.

Never mind that the Brussels “negotiators” have already said the present deal is a done deal and there will be no further negotiations on the matter.  There can be no sweeteners, as a result, nor can there be any reassurances: in particular, Brussels has already given all the assurances on the Irish border matter that they intend to putter around with.

Stand by for further May surrender to Brussels.