Tag Archives: foreign policy

Obama’s Syrian Timidity

Posted on by
Reply

From The Wall Street Journal:

President Barack Obama said the White House needed further proof that Syria’s security forces gassed civilians and rebels to change his “calculus….”

And

[T]he president walked a fine line by defending his insistence that he would not tolerate the use of chemical weapons, but also by saying he would not be pressured into quick military action in Syria.

Of course, it’s not possible to help the 70,000 Syrians already butchered by al Assad.  I’m sure, though, the surviving Syrians, including those who will be killed by al Assad’s repudiated government in the coming days and weeks will by heartened by Obama’s…studiousness.

Bill Murray, ex of the CIA and experienced in the area had this (I’m at a loss to know whether he offered this as an excuse or a description):

Lebanon was like a tar baby.  It sticks to your fingers, and you can’t get away from it.  Syria is the same way.  There’s not going to be a happy outcome no matter what you do.

Granted.  Stop worrying, then, about consequences, and do the right thing.  No more stalling, no more looking for excuses not to act.

Benghazi and Clinton

Posted on by
Reply

From the House GOP Interim Progress Report…on the Terrorist Attacks in Benghazi Libya:

During 2012, in numerous communications with the State Department, officials from the U.S. Mission in Libya stress both the inadequacy of security as well as the need for additional personnel. Two critical cables warrant specific mention:

March 28, 2012, Ambassador Cretz sends a cable to Secretary Clinton requesting additional security assets.

April 19, 2012, the response cable from the Department of State to Embassy Tripoli, bearing Secretary Clinton’s signature, acknowledges Ambassador Cretz’s request for additional security but instead articulates a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including the Benghazi Mission.

In her testimony before Congress in January, Clinton said,

With specific security requests they didn’t come to me.  I had no knowledge of them.

It’s true enough that the boss’ signature is routinely added to correspondence that has been prepared by subordinates and then sent out.  This, of course, does not absolve the boss of responsibility for the content or outcome of that correspondence.  The addition of the boss’ signature is solely at the discretion of that boss.  Secretary of State Clinton had, to coin a phrase, constructive knowledge of her cable acknowledging the deteriorating security conditions at her Benghazi Consulate, and she ordered the continued withdrawal of security from that Consulate, anyway.  Furthermore, by her position and her decision to delegate the application of her signature to her correspondence, she had imputed knowledge of the situation and of her decision to proceed with her security drawdown.  She simply lied in her testimony before Congress.

The Interim Report can be seen here and here.

Remember this in 2016.

Some Remarks on Terrorism

Posted on by
Reply

Congressman Tom Cotton (R, AR) had some on the House floor earlier this week.

I rise today to express grave doubts about the Obama Administration’s counterterrorism policies and programs.  Counterterrorism is often shrouded in secrecy, as it should be, so let us judge by the results.  In barely four years in office, five jihadists have reached their targets in the United States under Barack Obama: the Boston Marathon bomber, the underwear bomber, the Times Square Bomber, the Fort Hood shooter, and in my own state—the Little Rock recruiting office shooter.  In the over seven years after 9/11 under George W Bush, how many terrorists reached their target in the United States?  Zero!  We need to ask, “Why is the Obama Administration failing in its mission to stop terrorism before it reaches its targets in the United States?”

Indeed.

Now couple this with Obama’s decision on Thursday, through his Attorney General, Eric Holder, to intervene in an FBI terrorist investigation by marching a Federal Magistrate into the surviving Boston Marathon terrorist’s hospital room, mid-questioning by the FBI, to Mirandize that terrorist.  Which terminated the FBI’s questioning of the terrorist.

Are We Projecting?

Posted on by
Reply

The People’s Republic of China, in its latest national defense report, is accusing the US of “destabilizing” the Asia-Pacific region, because we’re shifting the focus of our attention there instead of keeping it on Europe.

PRC Defense Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun, referring to enhancements of our ties with our friends and allies around the Pacific and the South China Sea, and to our strengthening (a little bit) our military presence in the area:

Certain efforts made to highlight the military agenda, enhance military deployment and also strengthen alliances are not in line with the calling of the times and are not conducive to the upholding of peace and stability in the region[.]

We hope that the relevant parties would do more to enhance the mutual trust between countries in the region and contribute to peace and stability

Never mind that the PRC defense budget is second in the world only to our own, it’s grown by 500% over the last dozen, or so, years, and they’re currently engaged in a massive sea grab.  Things would be much more stable if we’d just abandon our allies, friends, and trading partners, and let the PRC get on with it.

Projecting, are we, Mr Yang?

And Here Come the Concessions

Posted on by
Reply

South Korea and the U.S. both offered to return to negotiations with North Korea, aiming talks at Pyongyang’s nuclear program and broader security threats in a bid to reduce tensions on the Korean peninsula that American officials said run the risk of a direct military conflict.

Senior South Korean officials who met with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry in Seoul Friday, said their government also was willing to resume sending humanitarian assistance to the North following weeks of escalating threats by North Korean leader Kim Jong Eun[.]

And

Secretary of State John Kerry said Washington would consider resuming its own diplomatic channel should Pyongyang display a willingness to begin dismantling its nuclear-weapons program.

Notice that: not actually dismantle.  Just put on the show of willingness.

Just as predicted earlier.