Category: Quick Analysis

The political angst of America’s blacks

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 8, 2015

The long struggle through slavery and segregation is over, and, quite bluntly, more economic and political progress was rightly to be expected for America’s blacks following the civil rights legislation and court decisions of the 1960’s. Indeed, since 1972, blacks have experienced unemployment at roughly twice the rate of whites.

Many of those who blame continued racism for the poor results are themselves responsible. Rather than taking the politically appropriate and clever approach of continuously playing off the Democrat and Republican parties to gain goals, the black establishment sold itself in virtual lock step to the Democrats. It was an odd fit that never produced the necessary results. Those with a sense of history can rightly express confusion at the alliance of black leaders with the party that supported slavery and segregation.

Republican connection with the black community extended beyond those twin evils. As noted in a Guardian review, “With Republicans having trouble with minorities, some like to point out that the party has a long history of standing up for civil rights compared to Democrats. Democrats, for example, were less likely to vote for the civil rights bills of the 1950s and 1960s. Democrats were more likely to filibuster.”

There is more to Republicans and civil rights as well. Rather forgotten is the fact that 57 years ago this month, Republican president Dwight Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Democrat social welfare policies do not envision blacks as equals, with the same capability to advance economically and politically as all other ethnic groups. Rather than embrace policies that provided more opportunities, the Democrat leadership opted instead for social welfare programs that provided no path to economic equality but did buy votes from those at the bottom of the economic ladder who saw no other way to increase their standard of living. That strategy remains a hallmark of the Obama Administration.

Those policies, and the federal budgetary and economic spinoffs they produced, hold significant responsibility for the roadblocks blacks have faced in moving into the economic mainstream (after segregation was ended) in the same manner that other ethnics groups have.

Some prominent Democrats understood the folly of this approach. New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote about the devastating effect on the black family that these policies produced.

The mainstream media, which has generally tilted towards the left, has opted to give the mantle of “black leaders” only to those public figures who give their support to the Democrat Party. Accomplished figures in government and politics such as Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Clarence Thomas, Alan West, and others, who are Republicans, are largely overlooked as “black leaders,” while ignoble figured such as Al Sharpton get abundant airtime.

The counterproductive nature and, some would say, hypocrisy of adopting social welfare policies in combination with die hard loyalty to the Democrat leadership can be seen, oddly enough, in the antagonistic relations between the radical group Black Lives Matter and the campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders.
How many men are struggling with this problem? According to estimative numbers in USA, Europe and Japan are 50 million men suffering in impotence.Apparently this is another modern-age disease. sildenafil in canada The prostate is a very important organ in the male body, which plays a very important role in fertility. viagra prices Most of the time, when a man gets an erection but cannot maintain for longer due to venous leakage. generic viagra online This is the only drug in terms of sexual disorder where man will not generico viagra on line http://www.learningworksca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/nv.schoolboards.2011.pdf be able to get erection once or twice does not mean you require the drug.
Sanders’s positions represent the ultimate of what the black leadership—at least, the portion of it that gets publicity and wields political power—wants. He says the correct things, according to their left-wing viewpoint, and rarely misses an opportunity to blame racism or capitalism for their complaints. He is the most stringent advocate for the “progressive” policies that guide them.

The assault on what would appear to be their ideological ally highlights unfortunate personal opportunism on the part of some black leaders. Sanders is outside of the mainstream of Democrat leadership, and is therefore open to attack.

Barack Obama, as the first president from the black community, shares the hard-left ideology that characterizes his party. His policies have harmed, according to financial planner and radio personality Charles Butler (A black American) the black community more than any other group. Butler particularly points to the President’s immigration policies, which has added to the unemployment woes of the black community, particularly those of young people in inner cities.

The harm from progressive policies is also seen in education. Policy.Mic notes:

“In the 2012 election, minorities turned out in droves to vote for progressive Democrats. But have progressive policies really served to benefit minorities? In the field of education, the answer is a resounding no. Progressives have long opposed school choice. In 2009, Obama and other Democrats killed a program which gave low-income Washington, D.C. students money for private-school tuition, leaving only existing scholarship recipients to continue. Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan actually rescinded 216 scholarships. Imagine how those parents and students felt when they received word from the Department of Education.

“In 2011, Republicans in Congress introduced a bill re-authorizing the program. The White House opposed the bill because it expanded private-school voucher programs. They argued that the ‘private school vouchers were not an effective way to improve student achievement.’

“It seems the Obama administration didn’t bother to read its own Education Department’s study which found ‘a positive and statistically significant impact on the average reading test scores of the students in the study,’ while performing on par with public-school students in math. The voucher students graduated at a rate of 91%, more than 20 points higher than those who sought a voucher but either didn’t get one or didn’t enroll in the program after being accepted.” The White House was eventually pressured to relent.

According to Deneen Borelli (who is black) writing in the Washington Times “Objective analysis would conclude that President Obama’s progressive policies have failed blacks, leaving them frustrated and vulnerable to the social agitation by Mr. Sharpton. The sad truth is Mr. Obama’s agenda includes policies that preferentially harm blacks.”

Tags Al Sharpton, Blacks and Democrats, Blacks and Republicans, Blacks in America, Civil rights, Civil Rights Movement, DanielPatrick Moynihan, Dwight Eisenhower, social welfare policies

Quick Analysis

Is the U.S. surrendering the Arctic?

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 7, 2015

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry , Moscow is claiming approximately 1.2 million square kilometers of the Arctic, 350 nautical miles from the coast. The areas include the Lomonosov Ridge, Mendeleev-Alpha Rise and Chukchi Plateau. Moscow wants the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which opposed a similar attempt by the Kremlin in 2002, to consider the matter this year, but a spokesperson for the Commission indicated the issue will not arise for about seven months.

The Arctic is a vital area both for strategic and economic purposes. It is believed to possess a quarter of the planet’s energy supplies.

Moscow has significantly increased its military presence at the top of the world, reopening former Soviet Union cold war bases and developing at least ten new sites the Kremlin calls rescue stations in the region. In 2007, one of its submarines dropped a canister with a Russian flag in the area to symbolize its claim.

Moscow’s military aircraft have flown provocatively close to Arctic-area territories belonging to NATO members.

According to Russia Direct, “Russia’s claims on …vast swaths of territory in the Arctic are reinforced by its ability to project force in the region. Its fleet of several dozens of icebreakers, including nuclear, as compared to America’s six icebreakers, [only one of which is truly Arctic-capable] gives Russia an economic and military advantage in the Arctic. The Deputy Prime Minister of Russia in charge of the defense industry, Dmitry Rogozin, stated that Russia has already launched the construction of a new nuclear icebreaker fleet and that three units will start their operations by 2017, 2019 and 2020, respectively.”

Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) told Fox News earlier this month “Right now, the Russians are playing chess in the Arctic and our Administration still seems to think it’s tic-tac-toe.” China is now also entering into the fray, constructing its own icebreaker as part of its massive naval buildup.

As the threat unfolds, the U.S. is reducing its Army forces in the region. Sen. Sullivan along with other members of the Alaska delegation recently submitted a letter to U.S. Army Secretary John McHugh on the force reduction:
STORAGE OF navigate to this storefront generic cialis 5mg Store the pills of viagra and you can have erections like ever before. This had already proved that if men had high levels of cholesterol and rising blood pressure, the risk of pfizer viagra samples heart disease and stroke. Confronting the person does by no means mean that you should pay more for Recommended pharmacy shop mastercard viagra when Kamagra is not proposed to be taken in the event that it is continuously rehashed, a specialist ought to clarify the advantages and conceivable symptoms of pharmaceutical before it is recommended. In most likelihood, a buy levitra where sufferer will run away from the situations which has his back to the wall.
“In accordance with our Congressional responsibility to provide oversight, we request the documentation used by senior U.S. Army leadership to make this strategically short-sighted decision. In our view, the current threat environment and the location of those threats does not align with the U.S. Army’s decision to remove forces from Alaska.

“As a delegation, we share the concerns expressed by Generals Joe Dunford, Paul Selva, Mark Milley, and Robert Neller about Russia’s threat to U.S. national security. Unfortunately, we believe the U.S. Army failed to fully consider the importance of Alaska’s Army forces in countering Russian emergence as a leading threat, a fact stated by numerous senior Department of Defense leaders…

“As you are aware, the 4-25 Airborne Bridge Combat Team (ABCT) can respond to most crisis areas in the Northern Hemisphere faster than anywhere else in the continental U.S. Additionally, we believe that Alaska is home to some of the world’s greatest, most abundant, topographically-challenging, and climate-diverse joint training areas. However, it has come to our attention that Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) scored in the bottom third of the U.S. Army’s Military Value Analysis (MVA). Needless to say, this modeling perplexes us.”

Further, as the New York Analysis of Policy & Government recently noted, the U.S. has only two icebreakers, while Russia has forty. The President has stated he will try to deliver only a single new icebreaker by 2022.

The New York Times reports that Coast Guard Commandant Paul F. Zukunft has noted that “We have been for some time clamoring about our nation’s lack of capacity to sustain any meaningful presence in the Arctic.”

Despite widespread concern the U.S. State Department appears relatively unconcerned. In response to press inquiries about Russia’s growing presence and military maneuvers, a senior state department official stated: “I get intelligence briefings regularly and I’m watching what the Russians are doing. Most of what I have seen in terms of their buildup, in terms of improving infrastructure along the Northern Sea Route, are things that I think the United States should be doing as well – building infrastructure, putting in search-and-rescue capabilities, improving communications capabilities in the North. So I’m not troubled by most of what I see – let me emphasize most of what I see. Arctic maneuvers, military operations, I’m not – I have not seen anything that goes much above and beyond what we’ve seen in the past decade or so from the Russians. What has happened is, for instance, the Norwegians and the Russians have been conducting joint military exercises up until when the sanctions were invoked. Because of the sanctions, we’re not allowed to have military-to-military contact and operations, so they’ve done it separately. When the Norwegians did their exercises, it got no notice. When the Russians did their exercises, it was portrayed as Russian aggression. I’m not sure that they’ve done anything more than they’ve done in the past, and they have a right to take necessary steps to preserve their sovereignty of the waters that they’re responsible for.”

Tags Arctic, militarizing the Arctic, Russia in Arctic, Russian land grab

Quick Analysis

U.S. economy faces employment, trade, & national security crises

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 5, 2015

The just released report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) features a very slight improvement in the “U-3,” the generally used unemployment statistic. However, an objective analysis points to an American economy that is deeply troubled, and not improving.

According to the BLS. “Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 173,000 in August, and the unemployment rate edged down to 5.1 percent. The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed in August at 6.5 million. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”

Job gains occurred in health care, social assistance and financial activities. Manufacturing and mining lost jobs. While the gains in health care, social assistance and financial activities were, although very minimal, welcome, the reality is that a deeper examination of the statistics and the implications for the economy present a picture of a troubled economy. The more inclusive “U-6” number, which includes a more comprehensive look at unemployment, remains in double digits at 10.3%. This reflects the fact that persons employed only part time because they couldn’t find full time jobs increased by 158,000.

The divide between those engaged in productive labor and those out of the workforce is worse than last year at this time. The job participation rate is at extremely low 62.6%, down from 63% a year ago. The number of those not in the labor force edged up from 94,031, a worrisome increase from August 2014’s 91,794.

One of the most important portions of the economy continued to decline. The crucial manufacturing sector saw a jobs drop of 17,000. Mining employment also was reduced by 9,000. According to the National Association of Manufacturers, about one in six private sector jobs is in the manufacturing sector.

The challenges of the American manufacturing sector are reflected in a poor trade balance. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis the U.S. goods and services deficit in July increased $10.6 billion, or 3.6 percent, from the same period in 2014. Exports decreased $47.0 billion or 3.5 percent. Imports decreased by a smaller amount, $36.4 billion or 2.2 percent. In 2006, according to Trading Economics, the U.S. had set a record low trade gap, and with increased domestic production of energy it was not unreasonable to assume that trade deficits would continue to be lowered. However, the impact of American manufacturing decline, in part due to concessions made to China by the Clinton Administration and the fact that the U.S. maintains the developed world’s highest corporate tax levels has dashed that optimism.
cialis generic pharmacy Reiki can also fortify and heal personal relationships. When men who experiences the mentioned symptoms and visits their doctor, the doctor will usually check for andropause by examining the following: – Loss of hair in the armpits and axilla, shirking of the testicles, lessening of muscle mass, and also decreased muscle strength. vardenafil online Use of the sleep apnea mouthpiece is called Oral Product Therapy and it buy cheap levitra has been prosperous in sufferers who suffer from mild in order to get compensation and relief. Not many people like to discuss it, but many men will gradually experience from lovemaking issues and construction problems. online cialis prescriptions
The loss of vitality in the manufacturing sector is more than just an economic problem. The Alliance for American Manufacturing notes national security concerns as well:

“America’s military communications systems increasingly rely on network equipment from China, putting our entire defense at risk. A 2012 House intelligence committee investigation, for example, found that the Chinese telecommunications company Huawei, which had been working to expand in the United States, posed a major threat to the U.S. because its equipment could be used to spy on Americans — as well as U.S. defense systems and companies.

“New America Foundation senior fellow Peter Singer warned military leaders in 2015 that ‘America’s most advanced fighter jets might be blown from the sky by their Chinese-made microchips and Chinese hackers easily could worm their way into the military’s secretive intelligence service.’ …

“But it isn’t just on the cyberfront where America is giving its defense away. The United States increasingly relies on foreign nations to provide the materials needed for our defense supply chain.

“Not a single high-tech magnet — crucial to military hardware — is Made in America. Roughly 91 percent of the rare earth element needed for night-vision googles is from China. The United States produces just 2 percent of Lithium ion batteries, used in everything from unmanned aerial drones to bomb disposal robots and other gear.”

Tags August Employment, BLS, goods and services deficit, manufacturing in the U.S., trade deficit, unemployment rate

Quick Analysis

China’s warships near Alaska elicits White House yawn

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 4, 2015

The news of an unusual deployment of five Chinese vessels, including an amphibious attack ship near the coast of Alaska is the latest in a disturbing pattern of militarily aggressive moves by Beijing’s navy. As it has in the past, the White House continues to claim that these increasingly belligerent acts are of no concern.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest, in response to press questions, stated: “They [the Department of Defense] have positively identified a number of Chinese naval vessels in that region, but they have also — based on their analysis, they have not detected any sort of threat or threatening activities.”

The question is, when will the White House actually recognize that a threat exists?

A recent Defense Tech article reported that the Chinese Navy will outnumber its U.S. counterpart by 2020. Combined with extraordinary new military technological developments, such as the Dong Feng 21 anti-ship ballistic missile, and the continuing weakened state of the U.S. Navy (which has shrunk from 600 ships to 254, and has also suffered personnel losses due to White House-encouraged retirements) America’s maritime power is in deep trouble.

The numbers tell their own story. China’s fleet will grow to 351 ships within five years. The imbalance in submarines is particularly acute. House Armed Services Committee member Randy Forbes says Beijing will have an 82 to 32 advantage in subs.

Any growth in the reduced U.S. Navy remains in doubt. President Obama’s proposal to redeploy ships from other parts of the world to the Pacific to counter the Chinese threat no longer appears viable for a number of reasons. These include the fact that the Navy simply doesn’t have sufficient numbers to make this effective, as well as the growing presence of other threats that will require those ships to be on station elsewhere. Russia is also enhancing its naval power, part of the massive growth in armed strength ordered by Vladimir Putin, and is also re-opening cold war era naval facilities in Latin America and the Arctic. Iran continues to threaten American vessels in the strategically vital Straits of Hormuz. (Al Jazeera Quotes an Iran commander saying that his fleet can destroy U.S. warship in 50 seconds) North Korea also continues to be a threat.
Most natural treatments have been around for centuries and cheap generic tadalafil are some of the safest means to cure illness. Having diabetes order levitra online is usually a probability component for having heart failure. best price sildenafil browse these guys This way you will maintain the bird wholesome and joyful. It also buy tadalafil online reduces self-esteem and self-confidence.
China’s Dong Feng 21 missile,a land based weapon that destroy an aircraft carrier or other large ship from 900 miles away, is a major threat. The Naval Institute Blog, described the U.S. Navy’s reaction to this device as a near-panic reaction:

“The Navy’s reaction is telling, because it essentially equals a radical change in direction based on information that has created a panic inside the bubble. For a major military service to panic due to a new weapon system, clearly a mission kill weapon system, either suggests the threat is legitimate or the leadership of the Navy is legitimately unqualified. There really aren’t many gray spaces in evaluating the reaction by the Navy…the data tends to support the legitimacy of the threat.” The land based missile can effectively destroy an aircraft carrier or other large warship from 900 miles away.

Concern over the existence of China’s increasingly large and highly capable fleet is matched by the use it has made of its growing power. Two salient examples exemplify the challenge.

Adm. Harry B. Harris Jr., the commander of U.S. Pacific Command recently stated China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea is an issue the American public must know about and the United States must address. He noted that in an 18 month span, China has reclaimed almost 3,000 acres of rocky outcroppings in the vital South China Sea. Beijing intends to use the locations to assert control over vital shipping lanes. According to the Department of Defense, “more than $5.3 trillion in global sea-based trade relies on unimpeded sea lanes through the South China Sea, adding that the Strait of Malacca alone sees more than 25 percent of oil shipments and 50 percent of all natural gas transits each day. This is made possible through the regional countries’ adherence to longstanding customary international law, which protects freedom of navigation, he added.”

China’s occupation of portions of the Philippines exclusive economic zone, (see the New York Analysis of Policy & Government’s full review of this issue) provides another example of Beijing’s vigorous use of its regional naval superiority. Its intimidation against Japan and Vietnam are other salient examples. In each of these areas, the Unites States has failed to support the nations, some staunch allies, victimized by China.

Tags China and shoals, China and the Philippines, China and Vietnam, Chinese aggression, Chinese Navy, Chinese navy near Alaska, naval threats, shrinking U.S. navy

Quick Analysis

New York Analysis on Obama’s Foreign Policy

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 3, 2015

President Obama’s foreign policy appears inexplicable. Today, the New York Ingredients: Newly grown dehusked Black gram (powdered) – 25 gm Seeds of kapikacchu (mucuna pruriens) (powdered) – 25 gm Seeds of kapikacchu (mucuna pruriens) (powdered) – 25 gm Shatavari, ashwagandha, Madhuyashti [ Glycerrhiza Glabra. ] (Powdered)- 3 gm each Ghee (prepared from cow’s milk) – 10 gm buying cialis on line Juice of Vidari kanda (Pueraria tuberosais) – 10 gm Sugar cane juice – 10 gm Cow’s milk -. This jelly must be consumed 15 minutes before copulation &the impact of such drug products longs for about 4-6 hours after its administration. * One must remember that before generic cialis without prescription making any consideration of such medicinal devices, the patients must obtain proper information regarding the usage, route of mechanism, adverse responses associated with the drug treatments from their health professional.* He must not have an excess consumption of such medicinal. Once patients are found to be infected with uterine fibroid, and the fibroid is in non-surgical stage, then fuyan pill will be a good choice, it can help you relieve levitra prescription the symptom, control the growing-up of the fibroid. There are also dangers associated levitra in india price with these Stents. Analysis of Policy & Government provides the most logical explanation.

Tags Obama foreign policy

Quick Analysis

The Cyber Threat

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 2, 2015

Speaking at the 2015 USSTRATCOM Deterrence Symposium recently, Dr. Brad Roberts, who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy in the first Obama Administration, stated that cyber warfare capability is a key operational concept.

The New York Analysis of Policy & Budget reported in 2013 that “America faces a number of cyberspace threats. The most serious are from those wishing to engage in espionage to steal both military and technological secrets, and from those who wish to turn the nation’s own computer systems against it by dismantling defense systems and committing sabotage against key civilian infrastructure. Cyber attacks have escalated by 1,700% since 2009, costing intellectual property theft losses over $400 billion.

An armed attack following a cyber assault would be exceptionally effective. Key defense systems could be disabled, leading to a military that is deaf, dumb, and blind, defending a nation that may have its electrical, energy, water, transportation and other crucial systems heavily disrupted.

General Keith Alexander, the former commander of the U.S. Cyber Command, openly worried that the United States was not adequately prepared for a cyber attack. He noted that on a scale of one to ten in preparedness, the U.S. was at about a three. He emphasized that the time to stop a cyber attack is less than a minute–far less time than preparing for an incoming missile attack.”

The Fireeye organization ‘s report, “Gazing into the Cyber Security Future” notes that “As the technology landscape evolves and attackers continue to adapt, we’re going to see new vulnerabilities to mobile, new operating systems and the cloud—and new ways for attackers to exploit these weaknesses. Preventing every breach is impossible.”

James R. Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, reviewed the 2015 cyber threat environment:

“Cyber threats to US national and economic security are increasing in frequency, scale, sophistication, and severity of impact. The ranges of cyber threat actors, methods of attack, targeted systems, and victims are also expanding. Overall, the unclassified information and communication technology (ICT) networks that support US Government, military, commercial, and social activities remain vulnerable to espionage and/or disruption. However, the likelihood of a catastrophic attack from any particular actor is remote at this time. Rather than a “Cyber Armageddon” scenario that debilitates the entire US infrastructure, we envision something different. We foresee an ongoing series of low-to-moderate level cyber attacks from a variety of sources over time, which will impose cumulative costs on US economic competitiveness and national security.

A growing number of computer forensic studies by industry experts strongly suggest that several nations—including Iran and North Korea—have undertaken offensive cyber operations against private sector targets to support their economic and foreign policy objectives, at times concurrent with political crises.

Developed as a viable alternative to order cialis professional , this medicine also contains Sildenafil citrate. Take viagra for sale india no more than one tablet daily and let 24 hour period pass by before taking another one. Continue reading healthier facts to use Here, we are going to explore the most commonly found medical illness called erectile dysfunction. discount pfizer viagra The medicine is actively prescribed as the same aids in causing improvement in the blood circulation that helps in flushing of blood across all muscles and primarily the penile muscles so as to provide harder erection during the intercourse. cheapest price on tadalafil
Risk. Despite ever-improving network defenses, the diverse possibilities for remote hacking intrusions, supply chain operations to insert compromised hardware or software, and malevolent activities by human insiders will hold nearly all ICT systems at risk for years to come. In short, the cyber threat cannot be eliminated; rather, cyber risk must be managed. Moreover, the risk calculus employed by some private sector entities does not adequately account for foreign cyber threats or the systemic interdependencies between different critical infrastructure sectors.

Costs. During 2014, we saw an increase in the scale and scope of reporting on malevolent cyber activity that can be measured by the amount of corporate data stolen or deleted, personally identifiable information (PII) compromised, or remediation costs incurred by US victims.

For example:

After the 2012-13 distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks on the US financial sector, JPMorgan Chase (JPMorgan) announced plans for annual cyber security expenditures of $250 million by the end of 2014. After the company suffered a hacking intrusion in 2014, JPMorgan’s CEO said he would probably double JPMorgan’s annual computer security budget within the next five years.
The 2014 data breach at Home Depot exposed information from 56 million credit/debit cards and 53 million customer email addresses. Home Depot estimated the cost of the breach to be $62 million.
In 2014, unauthorized computer intrusions were detected on the networks of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) as well as its contractors, US Investigations Services (USIS) and KeyPoint 2 Government Solutions. The two contractors were involved in processing sensitive PII related to national security clearances for Federal Government employees.
In August 2014, the US company, Community Health Systems, informed the Securities and Exchange Commission that it believed hackers “originating from China” had stolen PII on 4.5 million individuals.

Attribution. Although cyber operators can infiltrate or disrupt targeted ICT networks, most can no longer assume that their activities will remain undetected. Nor can they assume that if detected, they will be able to conceal their identities. Governmental and private sector security professionals have made significant advances in detecting and attributing cyber intrusions.

In May 2014, the US Department of Justice indicted five officers from China’s Peoples’ Liberation Army on charges of hacking US companies.
In December 2014, computer security experts reported that members of an Iranian organization were responsible for computer operations targeting US military, transportation, public utility, and other critical infrastructure networks.

Deterrence. Numerous actors remain undeterred from conducting economic cyber espionage or perpetrating cyber attacks. The absence of universally accepted and enforceable norms of behavior in cyberspace has contributed to this situation. The motivation to conduct cyber attacks and cyber espionage will probably remain strong because of the relative ease of these operations and the gains they bring to the perpetrators. The result is a cyber environment in which multiple actors continue to test their adversaries’ technical capabilities, political resolve, and thresholds. The muted response by most victims to cyber attacks has created a permissive environment in which low-level attacks can be used as a coercive tool short of war, with relatively low risk of retaliation. Additionally, even when a cyber attack can be attributed to a specific actor, the forensic attribution often requires a significant amount of time to complete. Long delays between the cyber attack and determination of attribution likewise reinforce a permissive environment.

Threat Actors: Politically motivated cyber attacks are now a growing reality, and foreign actors are reconnoitering and developing access to US critical infrastructure systems, which might be quickly exploited for disruption if an adversary’s intent became hostile. In addition, those conducting cyber espionage are targeting US government, military, and commercial networks on a daily basis. These threats come from a range of actors, including: (1) nation states with highly sophisticated cyber programs (such as Russia or China), (2) nations with lesser technical capabilities but possibly more disruptive intent (such as Iran or North Korea), (3) profit-motivated criminals, and (4) ideologically motivated hackers or extremists. Distinguishing between state and non-state actors within the same country is often difficult—especially when those varied actors actively collaborate, tacitly cooperate, condone criminal activity that only harms foreign victims, or utilize similar cyber tools.

Russia. Russia’s Ministry of Defense is establishing its own cyber command, which—according to senior Russian military officials—will be responsible for conducting offensive cyber activities, including propaganda operations and inserting malware into enemy command and control systems. Russia’s armed forces are also establishing a specialized branch for computer network operations.

Computer security studies assert that unspecified Russian cyber actors are developing means to access industrial control systems (ICS) remotely. These systems manage critical infrastructures such as electric power grids, urban mass-transit systems, air-traffic control, and oil and gas distribution networks. These unspecified Russian actors have successfully compromised the product supply chains of three ICS vendors so that customers download exploitative malware directly from the vendors’ websites along with routine software updates, according to private sector cyber security experts.

China. Chinese economic espionage against US companies remains a significant issue. The “advanced persistent threat” activities continue despite detailed private sector reports, public indictments, and US demarches, according to a computer security study. China is an advanced cyber actor; however, Chinese hackers often use less sophisticated cyber tools to access targets. Improved cyber defenses would require hackers to use more sophisticated skills and make China’s economic espionage more costly and difficult to conduct.

Iran. Iran very likely values its cyber program as one of many tools for carrying out asymmetric but proportional retaliation against political foes, as well as a sophisticated means of collecting intelligence. Iranian actors have been implicated in the 2012-13 DDOS attacks against US financial institutions and in the February 2014 cyber attack on the Las Vegas Sands casino company.

North Korea. North Korea is another state actor that uses its cyber capabilities for political objectives. The North Korean Government was responsible for the November 2014 cyber attack on Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE), which stole corporate information and introduced hard drive erasing malware into the company’s network infrastructure, according to the FBI. The attack coincided with the planned release of a SPE feature film satire that depicted the planned assassination of the North Korean president.

Terrorists. Terrorist groups will continue to experiment with hacking, which could serve as the foundation for developing more advanced capabilities. Terrorist sympathizers will probably conduct low level cyber attacks on behalf of terrorist groups and attract attention of the media, which might exaggerate the capabilities and threat posed by these actors.

Integrity of Information

Most of the public discussion regarding cyber threats has focused on the confidentiality and availability of information; cyber espionage undermines confidentiality, whereas denial-of-service operations and data deletion attacks undermine availability. In the future, however, we might also see more cyber operations that will change or manipulate electronic information in order to compromise its integrity (i.e. accuracy and reliability) instead of deleting it or disrupting access to it. Decision making by senior government officials (civilian and military), corporate executives, investors, or others will be impaired if they cannot trust the information they are receiving.

Successful cyber operations targeting the integrity of information would need to overcome any institutionalized checks and balances designed to prevent the manipulation of data, for example, market monitoring and clearing functions in the financial sector.

Tags cyber attack, cyber command, cyber threat

Quick Analysis

Illegal immigration presents budget, crime, and health concerns

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date September 1, 2015

Illegal immigration is having a significant effect on the already weakened budgets of U.S. states and cities, as well as directly impacting the health and safety of the American population.

The sheer numbers are staggering. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, the immigrant population, legal and illegal, hit a record 42.1 million in second quarter of 2015, driven largely by a surge in illegals coming across the southern border, “an increase of 1.7 million since the same quarter of 2014. Growth in the immigrant population in the last year was led by a 740,000 increase in the number of Mexican immigrants. After falling or growing little in recent years, the number of Mexican immigrants again seems to be growing significantly. Among the CIS findings:

The nation’s immigrant (foreign-born) population, which includes legal and illegal immigrants, grew by 4.1 million from the second quarter of 2011 to the second quarter of 2015 …Immigrants are 13.3 percent of the nation’s total population — the largest share in 105 years.

The side effects are known to doctors and the FDA, but robertrobb.com soft generic viagra still they are being prescribed and used by males of different age group. It can lessen some significant side-effects of aging, such as cognitive dysfunction, by protecting and repairing the brain drugshop here viagra samples cells. A problem some men have, price of viagra which may also be a sensitive issue for them is erectile dysfunction. Check supplies cipla cialis on hand, and the site’s delivery information.

Growth in the last year was led by a rebound in the number of Mexican immigrants, which increased by 740,000 from 2014 to 2015 — accounting for 44 percent of the increase in the total immigrant population in the last year.
The total Mexican immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached 12.1 million in the second quarter of 2015 — the highest quarterly total ever.
Prior research has indicated that net migration (the number coming vs. leaving) from Mexico had fallen to zero; the recent growth indicates that the period of zero net migration has ended.
In addition to Mexico, growth in the immigrant population was led by a 449,000 increase in the last year from countries in Latin America other than Mexico.
The Department of Homeland Security and other researchers have estimated that eight in 10 illegal immigrants are from Mexico and Latin America, so the increase in immigrants from these countries is an indication that illegal immigration has begun growing again.
The number of immigrants in the United States is now enormous, but it must be recognized that most immigrants, including those from Latin America, are in the country legally. Absent a change in legal immigration policy, the immigrant population will continue to increase.”

According to the Congressional Budget Office,

“State and local governments incur costs for providing services to unauthorized immigrants and have limited options for avoiding or minimizing those costs… Rules governing many federal programs, as well as decisions handed down by various courts, limit the authority of state and local governments to avoid or constrain the costs of providing services to unauthorized immigrants. For example, both state and federal courts have ruled that states may not refuse to provide free public education to a student on the basis of his or her immigration status. Furthermore, many states have their own statutory or constitutional requirements concerning the provision of certain services to needy residents…

“Costs were concentrated in programs that make up a large percentage of total state spending—specifically, those associated with education, health care, and law enforcement… The tax revenues that unauthorized immigrants generate for state and local governments do not offset the total cost of services provided to those immigrants.”

The Federation for American Immigration Reform “estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion; nearly $29 billion at the federal level and $84 billion at the state and local level…tax collections from illegal alien workers, both those in the above-ground economy and those in the underground economy… do not come close to the level of expenditures and, in any case, are misleading as an offset because over time unemployed and underemployed U.S. workers would replace illegal alien workers…

“Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.

“At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.

“Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury. With many state budgets in deficit, policymakers have an obligation to look for ways to reduce the fiscal burden of illegal migration. California, facing a budget deficit of $14.4 billion in 2010-2011, is hit with an estimated $21.8 billion in annual expenditures on illegal aliens. New York’s $6.8 billion deficit is smaller than its $9.5 billion in yearly illegal alien costs.”

Crime and public health, as well as budgets, have been directly affected by illegal immigration.

In FY 2013, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE)

“conducted 133,551 removals of individuals apprehended in the interior of the U.S.; 82 percent of all interior removals had been previously convicted of a crime. 59 percent of all ICE removals, a total of 216,810, had been previously convicted of a crime. ICE apprehended and removed 110,115 criminals removed from the interior of the U.S. ICE removed 106,695 criminals apprehended at the border while attempting to unlawfully enter the U.S.”

Health concerns are also significant. Judicial Watch Reports that “illegal immigrant minors entering the U.S. are bringing serious diseases—including swine flu, dengue fever, possibly Ebola virus and tuberculosis—that present a danger to the American public as well as the Border Patrol agents forced to care for the kids, according to a U.S. Congressman who is also medical doctor.

“This has created a ‘severe and dangerous’ crisis, says the Georgia lawmaker, Phil Gingrey. Most of the Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) are coming from Central America and they’re importing infectious diseases considered to be largely eradicated in this country. Additionally, many of the migrants lack basic vaccinations such as those to prevent chicken pox or measles, leaving America’s young children and the elderly particularly susceptible…Specifically, tuberculosis has become a dangerous issue at both the border and the camps, according to several sources cited in the story. One source confirms that ‘the amount of tuberculosis is astonishing.”

Tags illegal immigration, illegal immigration and crime, illegal immigration and health

Quick Analysis

Top Democrat candidates have ideological similarities to Obama

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date August 31, 2015

The similar views of the three top candidates for the Democrat nomination for the White House, Hillary Clinton, Senator Bernie Sanders, and, very soon, Vice President Joe Biden with President Obama insure that the 2016 campaign will be a referendum on the overarching goal the incumbent has pursued during his tenure in office: to reshape the American economy and culture into one designed to produce equality of outcomes. The President’s vision applies to non-Americans as well as to U.S. citizens.

Most of the ancillary issues, including examples such as the massive transfer of spending from defense to social programs, the virtually open borders, the reduced footprint of American forces across the globe, Obamacare, etc. are means to this end.

The White House has largely managed to avoid a substantive national conversation on this goal, although the inclusion of those outside the U.S. has lately come more into focus. In this aspect, Mr. Obama has been fortunate, thanks to a largely compliant media. A certain percentage of the voters receiving federal aid may be attracted to his philosophy, but his consistent inclusion of those outside America rankles many natural Democrat supporters, including inner city blacks and union rank and file members who have lost jobs due to the large influx of illegals tacitly allowed into the nation thanks to the Administration’s intentionally lax enforcement of the southern border.

While Clinton, Sanders and Biden are ideologically similar to the President, they differ considerably in style. Senator Sanders has been bluntly honest about his rejection of the traditional U.S. economic structure (he does disagree with the President on some job-related issues.) The other two have been more subtle but equally as committed to his vision. The more congenial Joe Biden would be more apt to work with Congress.

The lack of transparency on the part of the Obama Administration has been an instrumental part of its efforts, as is the significant attempts to chill opposition, whether through IRS intimidation, attempts to place monitors in newsrooms, the bugging of reporters, and the plans to regulate the internet. But those tactics will not work for candidates, whose goals and proposed strategies will be the subject of intense discussion and analysis.
In this condition, levitra viagra online is suggested as the first line therapy of men’s erectile dysfunction. The recent study indicates that bladder neck due to enlarged prostate obstructs the erection process.Diseases like kidney disorder, neurological disorder, and others that cause harm to blood vessels or connective tissue in the surrounding region of penis are the major viagra sans prescription physical causes of erectile dysfunction although there are a lot of men that face erectile dysfunction due to physiological issues; however, younger adults are. You can find uk viagra prices solution for all the common and uncommon health problems in our medical field, if you reach a certain amount on your order. It gives them a chance to rise above their physical anomalies and lead a normal life like any other medication. generic viagra can also cause certain side effects in its users, which usually subside as your body gets used to the actual dosage of this medicine.
As summer draws to a close, the political conversation appears to dwell increasingly on immigration. The continued, essentially unregulated influx across the U.S. southern border sheds light on the President’s unspoken but apparent rejection of placing American concerns above those of the global population.

The fact that the equality of outcomes idea, under whatever approach it has been tried, has failed apparently doesn’t faze the White House or the Democrat front-runners. Whether attempted in a strict setting such as the old USSR, or the more genial social-democrat nations of Europe, it has failed to produce economies that provide financial rewards for the diligent or an incentive to the private sector to expand hiring.

That shouldn’t be surprising, since the key goal is not the prosperity of the people, but their equality. Taking down the middle class to the level of the poor is as acceptable an outcome as is bringing the poor up to the middle class. Both results provide an equality of outcomes. Examples from across the globe and throughout history virtually guarantee, however, that more middle class will wind up poor than poor wind up as middle class.

The President’s rather autocratic style in attaining his vision– avoiding Congress has been virtually a mantra for Mr. Obama (I can’t wait for Congress to act,” “I have a pen and a phone,” and the labelling of key international deals as just about anything other than treaties which require the consent of Congress) may work against Biden, Clinton and Sanders unless they expressly reject the tactic. For those concerned about safeguarding Constitutional guarantees and procedures, the President’s—and many of his key supporters—rejection of those bedrock rights will also serve as a detriment to the Democrat nominee.

Tags 2016 campaign, Democrat candidates, equality of outcomes

Quick Analysis

U.S. releases 2015 Asia-Pacific Maritime Strategy

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date August 29, 2015

The Department of Defense has spelled out its Maritime Security Strategy for the Asian-Pacific region.

According to the DoD, “The U.S. will continue to use diplomacy, multilateral institutions and continued engagement to protect free and open access to maritime Asia, while focusing on safeguarding the freedom of the seas, deterring conflict and coercion, and promoting adherence to international law and standards…”

In a statement that should worry U.S. allies, the DoD has stated that “the United States takes no position over competing claims for land claims in the South China Sea and the East China Sea.” This is a rather stunning statement, considering that the lion’s share of disputes are between China, an opponent, vs. Japan and the Philippines, two steadfast U.S. allies.

Further cause for worry is the fact that all the paper shuffling and statements of determination are reduced to insignificance by the severely understrength position of the U.S. Navy, which has shrunk from 600 ships in 1990 to about 284 vessels today.

Key Excerpts from “The Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy: Achieving U.S. National Security Objectives in a Changing Environment:”

“The United States has enduring economic and security interests in the Asia-Pacific region. And because the region – stretching from the Indian Ocean, through the South and East China Seas, and out to the Pacific Ocean – is primarily water, we place a premium on maintaining maritime peace and security. To that end, the Department of Defense has three maritime objectives in the Asia-Pacific region: to safeguard the freedom of the seas; deter conflict and coercion; and promote adherence to international law and standards…

Competing Territorial and Maritime Claims:

There are numerous, complex maritime and territorial disputes in the Asia-Pacific region. The presence of valuable fish stocks and potential existence of large hydrocarbon resources under the East and South China Seas exacerbate these complicated claims. A United Nations report estimates that the South China Sea alone accounts for more than 10 percent of global fisheries production. Though figures vary substantially, the Energy Information Administration estimates that there are approximately 11 billion barrels and 190 trillion cubic feet of proved and probable oil and natural gas reserves in the South China Sea and anywhere from one to two trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves, and 200 million barrels of oil in the East China Sea. Claimants regularly clash over fishing rights, and earlier attempts at joint development agreements have faltered in recent years.

Although the United States takes no position on competing sovereignty claims to land features in the region, all such claims must be based upon land (which in the case of islands means naturally formed areas of land that are above water at high tide), and all maritime claims must derive from such land in accordance with international law, as reflected in the Law of the Sea Convention. The United States has a strong interest in ensuring all claimants seek to address and resolve their issues peacefully, without conflict or coercion. We also encourage and support the efforts of claimant States to pursue diplomatic and other peaceful efforts to resolve the issues of sovereignty.

In the East China Sea, we continue to acknowledge Japan’s administration of the Senkaku Islands and oppose any unilateral action that seeks to undermine it.

In the South China Sea, we urge all parties to pursue peaceful means of resolving their disputes, which includes diplomacy as well as third party dispute settlement, such as the Philippines’ submission of its claims for arbitration in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures in the Law of the Sea Convention. We also urge all parties to take action to implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DoC) and take steps towards early conclusion of a meaningful Code of Conduct (CoC), which would provide agreed upon rules of the road to reduce tension among claimant States. South China Sea South China Sea territorial and maritime disputes revolve around three primary issues: (1) competing territorial claims among claimants, (2) competing maritime claims among claimants, and (3) excessive maritime claims asserted by some of the claimants.

Regarding competing territorial claims, there are six claimants to the land features in the South China Sea: Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. There are three primary disputes over territorial sovereignty. The first is a dispute among China, Taiwan, and Vietnam over the sovereignty of the Paracel Islands, which China has occupied since 1974. The second is a ChinaTaiwan-Philippines contest over Scarborough Reef. The third is a multi-claimant dispute over the Spratly Islands, which includes more than 200 geographic features. China, Taiwan, and Vietnam claim sovereignty over all of the Spratly land features, while Brunei, Malaysia, and the Philippines claim sovereignty of only certain land features in the island group. Vietnam and Malaysia have yet to delimit fully their maritime claims in the South China Sea…

In sharp contrast to the South and East China Seas, the Indian Ocean region has remained relatively free of tensions caused by territorial and maritime disputes in recent years. Although there are a few maritime disputes in the region, they are relatively stable or have been resolved through international tribunals and arbitration.

Military and Maritime Law Enforcement (MLE)

Modernization Rapid military modernization across the Asia-Pacific region has significantly increased the potential for dangerous miscalculations or conflict in the maritime domain. Many countries are also significantly enhancing their maritime law enforcement (MLE) capabilities. These assets have become increasingly relevant as countries, particularly China, are using them to assert sovereignty over disputed areas.

China is modernizing every aspect of its maritime-related military and law enforcement capabilities, including its naval surface fleet, submarines, aircraft, missiles, radar capabilities, and coast guard. It is developing high-end technologies intended to dissuade external intervention in a conflict and designed to counter U.S. military technology. Although preparation for a potential Taiwan conflict remains the primary driver of Chinese investment, China is also placing emphasis on preparing for contingencies in the East and South China Sea. China sees a need for the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) to be able to support China’s “new historic missions” and operational tasks outside the first island chain with multi-mission, long-range, sustainable naval platforms equipped with robust self-defense capabilities. Although quantity is only one component of overall capability, from 2013 to 2014, China launched more naval vessels than any other country. The PLAN now possesses the largest number of vessels in Asia, with more than 300 surface ships, submarines, amphibious ships, and patrol craft.

China also is executing the largest MLE modernization effort in Asia, quantitatively and qualitatively improving its fleet, which is designed to enforce its maritime claims in the East and South China Seas. China’s MLE fleet, composed primarily of vessels from the newly formed China Coast Guard, is likely to increase in size by 25 percent and is larger than that of all of the other claimants combined.

Other Asia-Pacific nations are also enhancing their maritime capabilities. Japan is improving Japan Self-Defense Force (JSDF) deterrent capabilities and realigning military and MLE assets to areas near the Senkaku Islands, which are also claimed by China. Japan plans to acquire and realign Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) assets to the area; upgrade maritime patrol craft and ground force radar, and missile units; and develop an amphibious assault capability within a joint JSDF task force. The Japanese cabinet has approved a modest increase to the Japan Coast Guard’s budget, in part to fund a permanent Senkakus patrol unit.

In Southeast Asia, Vietnam is pursuing an ambitious maritime modernization program, highlighted by its ongoing acquisition of six Russian-built Kilo-class submarines, frigates and corvettes, and its potential procurement of longrange coastal defense cruise missiles. In 2014, Japan announced it would provide Vietnam six used coast guard surveillance vessels, and Hanoi is expanding the Vietnam Coast Guard’s power to enforce maritime law. The Philippines is also modernizing its maritime forces—some of its ships date to World War II—including through its acquisition in 2011 and 2013 of two excess defense article U.S. Coast Guard cutters.

Maritime Challenges:

Although many claimants are using their military and maritime law enforcement capabilities in a responsible manner, recent provocative actions have heightened tensions in the region and raised concerns. Actions such as the use of MLE vessels to coerce rival claimants, unsafe air and maritime behavior, and land reclamation to expand disputed features and create artificial islands hamper efforts to manage and resolve territorial and maritime disputes peacefully. Expanded Use of Non-Military Assets to Coerce Rivals Several nations have expanded their use of non-military assets to advance their territorial and maritime claims in the East China Sea and South China Sea. Most notably, China is using a steady progression of small, incremental steps to increase its effective control over disputed areas and avoid escalation to military conflict. In particular, China is increasingly deploying the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) to enforce its claims over features in the East and South China Seas. China prefers to use its government-controlled, maritime law enforcement ships in these disputes, and operates PLAN vessels over the horizon so they are ready to respond to escalation.

China has demonstrated this model during disputes with rival claimants over Scarborough Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, the South Luconia Shoal, and CNOOC-981 drilling operations south of the Parcel Islands.

Since 2012, the CCG has maintained a persistent presence in areas including around the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea and Scarborough Reef in the South China Sea. Similarly, China has used MLE ships to restrict and put pressure on Philippine access to Second Thomas Shoal where the Philippines maintains presence via a grounded naval vessel, the Sierra Madre. Although China is not the only claimant to use non-military assets to conduct worrying or dangerous actions against rival claimants – for example, in 2013, members of the Philippines Coast Guard killed a Taiwan fisherman in waters claimed by both the Philippines and Taiwan – it has been, by far, the most active.

Exercise not only helps put off obesity, order levitra without prescription http://djpaulkom.tv/music-dj-paul-datsik-collaborate-on-get-smashed-single/ diabetes, and hypertension but also lowers the level of excitement while making love with the partner. Under this promotional offers they offer various price cuts and discounts to the client and this way event he buy levitra wholesale consumer can save large amount of money on the medications. These statistics should more or less prove that cialis 10 mg has indeed solved the age old problem of male impotence can be taken care off. Wives are soft corner of life – if you fight will them you can set your head on her circuit and ask her to kiss you in addition saw little ‘sorry’; and you know what did you say? They are merely pleased approaching it! They are merely like with the purpose of simply!! Great, anyways lovely in support of you, exact!!.You can http://djpaulkom.tv/behind-the-scenes-photos-from-dj-paul-and-dj-crunchys-new-video/ viagra on line ordering to solve the. Unsafe Air and Maritime Maneuvers:

The growing efforts of claimant States to assert their claims has led to an increase in air and maritime incidents in recent years, including an unprecedented rise in unsafe activity by China’s maritime agencies in the East and South China Seas. U.S. military aircraft and vessels often have been targets of this unsafe and unprofessional behavior, which threatens the U.S. objectives of safeguarding the freedom of the seas and promoting adherence to international law and standards.

China’s expansive interpretation of jurisdictional authority beyond territorial seas and airspace causes friction with U.S. forces and treaty allies operating in international waters and airspace in the region and raises the risk of inadvertent crisis. There have been a number of troubling incidents in recent years. For example, in August 2014, a Chinese J-11 fighter crossed directly under a U.S. P-8A Poseidon operating in the South China Sea approximately 117 nautical miles east of Hainan Island. The fighter also performed a barrel roll over the aircraft and passed the nose of the P-8A to show its weapons load-out, further increasing the potential for a collision.

However, since August 2014, U.S.-China military diplomacy has yielded positive results, including a reduction in unsafe intercepts. We also have seen the PLAN implement agreed-upon international standards for encounters at sea, such as the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES), which was signed in April 2014.

Land Reclamation on Disputed Features:

One of the most notable recent developments in the South China Sea is China’s expansion of disputed features and artificial island construction in the Spratly Islands, using large-scale land reclamation. Although land reclamation – the dredging of seafloor material for use as landfill – is not a new development in the South China Sea, China’s recent land reclamation campaign significantly outweighs other efforts in size, pace, and nature. In the 1970s and 1980s, the Philippines and Malaysia conducted limited land reclamation projects on disputed features, with Vietnam and later Taiwan initiating efforts. At the time, the Philippines constructed an airfield on Thitu Island, with approximately 14 acres of land reclamation to extend the runway. Malaysia built an airfield at Swallow Reef in the 1980s, also using relatively small amounts of reclaimed land. Between 2009 and 2014, Vietnam was the most active claimant in terms of both outpost upgrades and land reclamation. It reclaimed approximately 60 acres of land at 7 of its outposts and built at least 4 new structures as part of its expansion efforts. Since August 2013, Taiwan has reclaimed approximately 8 acres of land near the airstrip on Itu Aba Island, its sole outpost.

The Department of Defense, in concert with our interagency partners, therefore is employing a comprehensive maritime security strategy focused on four lines of effort: strengthening U.S. military capabilities in the maritime domain; building the maritime capacity of our allies and partners; leveraging military diplomacy to reduce risk and build transparency; and, strengthening the development of an open and effective regional security architecture.

DoD LINES OF EFFORT: First, we are strengthening our military capacity to ensure the United States can successfully deter conflict and coercion and respond decisively when needed. The Department is investing in new cutting-edge capabilities, deploying our finest maritime capabilities forward, and distributing these capabilities more widely across the region. The effort also involves enhancing our force posture and persistent presence in the region, which will allow us to maintain a higher pace of training, transits, and operations. The United States will continue to fly, sail, and operate in accordance with international law, as U.S. forces do all around the world.

Second, we are working together with our allies and partners from Northeast Asia to the Indian Ocean to build their maritime capacity. We are building greater interoperability, updating our combined exercises, developing more integrated operations, and cooperatively developing partner maritime domain awareness and maritime security capabilities, which will ensure a strong collective capacity to employ our maritime capabilities most effectively.

Third, we are leveraging military diplomacy to build greater transparency, reduce the risk of miscalculation or conflict, and promote shared maritime rules of the road. This includes our bilateral efforts with China as well as multilateral initiatives to develop stronger regional crisis management mechanisms. Beyond our engagements with regional counterparts, we also continue to encourage countries to develop confidence-building measures with each other and to pursue diplomatic efforts to resolve disputed claims.

Finally, we are working to strengthen regional security institutions and encourage the development of an open and effective regional security architecture. Many of the most prevalent maritime challenges we face require a coordinated multilateral response. As such, the Department is enhancing our engagement in ASEAN-based institutions such as the ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM-Plus), ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), and the Expanded ASEAN Maritime Forum (EAMF), as well as through wider forums like the Western Pacific Naval Symposium (WPNS) and Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS), which provide platforms for candid and transparent discussion of maritime concerns. [1] Enhancing U.S. Military Capacity in Maritime Asia Investments and Capabilities For decades, the United States has stood with its allies and partners to help maintain peace and stability in the AsiaPacific region. During this period, the U.S. military has enjoyed and depended upon the ability to project power and maintain freedom of action in the maritime domain. Increasingly, we see countries developing new technologies that appear designed to counter these advantages. The Department is therefore working to maintain the necessary capabilities to deter conflict and reassure allies and partners, while protecting our ability to respond decisively if required. This includes investing in new capabilities and concepts that will allow U.S. forces to operate freely even in contested environments.

The Department is enhancing U.S. capabilities to project power from the sea, in the air, and under the water. As part of this effort, we are deploying some of our most advanced surface ships to the region, including replacing the aircraft carrier USS George Washington in 2015 with the newer USS Ronald Reagan; sending our newest air operations-oriented amphibious assault ship, the USS America, to the region by 2020; deploying two additional Aegis-capable destroyers to Japan; and home-porting all three of our newest class of stealth destroyers, the DDG-1000, with the Pacific fleet. We are complementing these surface capabilities with some of our most capable air assets, including F-22s, continuous deployments of B-2 and B-52 strategic bombers, additional tilt rotor aircraft for the Marine Corps and Special Forces, and, in 2017, the first forward-stationing of F-35s to Iwakuni, Japan. The Department will also procure 395 F-35 aircraft over the next several years, many of which will be deployed to the Asia-Pacific region. For the subsurface environment, the Department is basing an additional attack submarine in Guam and funding two additional Virginia class submarines and the Virginia Payload Module, a compartment added to our new attack submarines that will increase dramatically their capacity to carry weapons and other payloads. These capabilities will help protect and add versatility to our advantages at sea, in the air, and under the water.

In support of these assets, the Department is investing in a comprehensive weapons modernization program, including plans for new or updated land-, sea-, and air-launched missiles relevant to the maritime domain. DoD is procuring advanced precision munitions that will allow our forces to strike adversaries from greater stand-off distances, like the new extended-range Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM-ER), and a new long-range antiship cruise missile that will improve the ability of U.S. aircraft to engage surface combatants in defended airspace. And we are finding new ways to use existing weapons systems, including by enhancing the capabilities resident in our current inventory of Tomahawk cruise missiles.

In addition to enhancing our power projection capabilities, the Department is investing in flexible capabilities that will allow us to respond more rapidly and effectively to a wider range of potential maritime challenges. The rotational deployment of Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) in Singapore provides the U.S. Navy with a flexible, nimble asset that can operate effectively in the region’s challenging littoral waters. The Department is currently conducting the second proof-of-concept deployment of the LCS to the region, a deployment that will not only include port calls and engagements with seven different Southeast Asian States, but also participation in one of our largest and most complex war-fighting exercises in the Republic of Korea (ROK), Foal Eagle.

Additionally, we will deploy the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) to the region, which will more effectively enable a range of missions, from counter-piracy efforts to special forces operations and disaster relief missions. Finally, the Department of Defense is investing in critical enabling capabilities, including persistent, deep-look ISR platforms that will provide us with greater situational awareness and early warning of potential crises in the maritime domain. The U.S. Navy is procuring 24 E-2D Hawkeye carrier-based airborne early warning and control aircraft, and as stated in the President’s most recent budget submission, investing $9.9 billion over the next four years to procure the final 47 P-8A Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft, many of which will be deployed to the Asia-Pacific region. The Department is also making substantial investments to develop the MQ-4C Triton unmanned aerial system, which will provide broad area situational awareness to our operational commanders. The first deployment of MQ-4Cs will arrive in the U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM) Area of Responsibility (AOR) in FY 2017.

… Over the longer-term, the Department of Defense is also developing a suite of innovative ideas and capabilities – known as the third offset – to advance U.S. military dominance in the 21st century and ensure the United States can deter adversaries and prevail in conflict, including in maritime Asia. To offset advances in anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) weapons that we see proliferating in maritime Asia and beyond, the Department will identify, develop, and field breakthroughs in cutting-edge technologies and systems – especially in the fields of robotics, autonomous systems, miniaturization, big data, and additive manufacturing, and will draw these together in innovative operational and organizational constructs to ensure freedom of access for United States’ forces in a contested A2/AD environment.

Force Posture: One of the most important efforts the Department of Defense has underway is to enhance our forward presence by bringing our finest capabilities, assets, and people to the Asia-Pacific region. The U.S. military presence has underwritten security and stability in the Asia-Pacific region for more than 60 years. Our forward presence not only serves to deter regional conflict and coercion, it also allows us to respond rapidly to maritime crises. Working in concert with regional allies and partners enables us to respond more effectively to these crises. The United States maintains 368,000 military personnel in the Asia-Pacific region, of which approximately 97,000 are west of the International Date Line.

Over the next five years, the U.S. Navy will increase the number of ships assigned to Pacific Fleet outside of U.S. territory by approximately 30 percent, greatly improving our ability to maintain a more regular and persistent maritime presence in the Pacific. And by 2020, 60 percent of naval and overseas air assets will be home-ported in the Pacific region.

The Department will also enhance Marine Corps presence by developing a more distributed and sustainable laydown model. Enhancing our forward presence also involves using existing assets in new ways, across the entire region, with an emphasis on operational flexibility and maximizing the value of U.S. assets despite the tyranny of distance. This is why the Department is working to develop a more distributed, resilient, and sustainable posture. As part of this effort, the United States will maintain its presence in Northeast Asia, while enhancing defense posture across the Western Pacific, Southeast Asia, and the Indian Ocean.

The cornerstone of our forward presence will continue to be our presence in Japan, where the United States maintains approximately 50,000 military personnel, including the U.S. Navy Seventh Fleet and the only forward-stationed Carrier Strike Group in the world, as well as U.S. Marine Corps III Marine Expeditionary Force and significant Air Force assets. DoD is working more closely than ever with our Japanese allies, forward progress that will accelerate in future years under the new revised defense guidelines. In an effort to ensure that this presence is sustainable, we have worked with Japan to develop a new laydown for the U.S. Marine Corps in the Pacific. As a result, the Department of Defense will be able to shift its concentrated presence on Okinawa toward a more distributed model that includes Australia, Hawaii, Guam, and mainland Japan.

As part of this program, the Department will develop new training ranges in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to enhance the readiness of our forward forces to respond to regional crises. The footprint associated with this laydown will support the arrival of next-generation capabilities and joint training and readiness in the USPACOM AOR. Through the bilateral Force Posture Agreement (FPA) with Australia and the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) with the Philippines, the Department will be able to increase our routine and persistent rotational presence in Southeast Asia for expanded training with regional partners. In Australia, the FPA will enable full implementation of the rotational presence for training and access for the U.S. Air Force and a Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) of up to 2,500 Marines. Additionally, the Department is on track to achieve its stated goal of simultaneous rotation of 4 Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) through Singapore by 2017, which will provide the first persistent U.S. naval presence in Southeast Asia in more than 20 years.

DoD is also modernizing our maritime presence in Guam, as part of our efforts to develop Guam into a strategic hub for our joint military presence in the region. This includes forward-stationing a fourth attack submarine to Guam this year and deploying the Joint High Speed Vessel by 2018, while making investments in the resilience of the infrastructure supporting these capabilities. Guam is the regional hub for Air Force’s Global Hawk fleet and the Navy will operate the MQ-4C Triton unmanned aerial reconnaissance vehicle from Andersen Air Base by 2017. The Air Force continues a program to modernize hangars and other support structures to augment those and other U.S. military capabilities…

Tags Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy, China land reclamation, U.S. Navy

Quick Analysis

Feudalism again, or the wave of the future?

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date August 28, 2015

It’s long been considered part of the American dream—a home and backyard of one’s own, away from the noise and congestion of the inner city. However, some consider it an anti-environmental form of housing that also happens to be politically troublesome as it fosters an anti-high tax, independent way of life that progressives deem outdated.

The Environmental Protection Agency advocates that “A smart growth approach to housing, with compact development, green design and construction, and transportation options, can help communities and their residents protect the environment and create more affordable neighborhoods.”

Others disagree sharply.

Those who favor “smart growth” and small housing units claim that dense housing centered on mass transit links are the high-efficiency wave of the future. Opponents of the concept believe that housing choices should be based on the wishes and needs of the people, not on the whims and goals of urban planners. They also note that the concept of small dwellings developed for the wishes of elitists resembles feudal living arrangements, with peasants residing in tiny residences while the aristocracy has far more comfortable quarters. The fact that billionaires such as former NYC mayor Mike Bloomberg are among the chief advocates of the concept lends credence to that perspective.

Randy O’Toole, writing for CATO, states that “smart growth” governments nationwide are implementing a degree of land-use regulation that is unprecedented in the United States prior to 1990. Unfortunately…such regulation can produce an even worse quality of life for residents. The policies’ real effects appear to be increases in traffic congestion, air pollution, consumer costs, taxes, and just about every other impediment to urban livability. Citing Portland, Oregon as an example of how this concept backfires, he found that “Portland’s ‘smart growth’ restrictions have changed one the nation’s most affordable markets for single-family housing in 1989 to one of the least affordable since 1996…smart growth advocates seem to believe that they know best how people should live. That belief seems destined to one day join the beliefs in urban renewal and public housing projects as government-directed efforts that caused enormous damage to urban livability.”
InjuriesDamage to nerves in the pelvis also can rotate as a block around the vertical lumbar spine. order viagra without prescription Detection of type 2 diabetes can be made very viagra soft pills sure that the drug is stored properly. The fountain of youth has a buy cialis on line name: Acai. According to the medical experts, eriacta has been a successful medication for viagra australia mastercard all age ED patients.
Joel Klotin, writing in a Real Clear Politics article, believes that “The next culture war will not be about issues like gay marriage or abortion, but about something more fundamental: how Americans choose to live. In the crosshairs now will not be just recalcitrant Christians or crazed billionaire racists, but the vast majority of Americans who either live in suburban-style housing or aspire to do so in the future. Roughly four in five home buyers prefer a single-family home, but much of the political class increasingly wants them to live differently…To justify their actions against how Americans prefer to live, progressives will increasingly cite the environment…Yet the connection between suburbs and climate is not as clear as the smart growth crowd suggests. McKinsey and other studies found no need to change housing patterns to reduce greenhouse gases, particularly given improvements in both home and auto efficiency. Yet so great is their animus that many anti-suburban activists seem to prefer stomping on suburban aspirations rather seeking ways to make them more environmental friendly.”

Writing in the Daily Beast Joel Kotkin also writes about “The progressive’s’ war on suburbia.”

“You are a political party, and you want to secure the electoral majority. But what happens, as is occurring to the Democrats, when the damned electorate that just won’t live the way—in dense cities and apartments—that you have deemed is best for them?… University of Washington demographer Richard Morrill notes that the vast majority of the 153 million Americans who live in metropolitan areas with populations of more than 500,000 live in the lower-density suburban places Democrats think they should not. Only 60 million live in core cities. Despite these realities, the Democratic Party under Barack Obama has increasingly allied itself with its relatively small core urban base.”

Stanley Kurtz, writing in Forbes, maintains that Obama is robbing suburbs to pay for the cities. “As many Americans do not know, in the eyes of the leftist community organizers who trained Obama, suburbs are instruments of bigotry and greed — a way of selfishly refusing to share tax money with the urban poor. Obama adopted this view early on, and he has never wavered from this ideological commitment, as a review of his actions in office goes to show.”

Tags Obama vs. suburbs, smart growth, sprawl, suburbs, suburbs vs. cities, urban density, urban sprawl