Tag: defense budget

Categories
Quick Analysis

We gave peace a chance–and it didn’t work

We gave peace a chance—and it didn’t work.

Since 1990, the United States has sharply reduced its military strength. With the exception of the men and material used in the Gulf Wars, the American Armed Forces have sustained continued dramatic cuts that will, by the end of this year, leave the U.S. Army smaller than North Korea’s. The United States hasn’t been alone in this.  Our NATO allies have also slashed spending on their already weak forces.

By 2020, China’s navy will outpace America’s in key areas. Already, Russia has gained the advantage in strategic nuclear arms and continues its ten to one advantage in tactical nukes. North Korea has become an atomic threat, and, all agreements to the contrary, Iran may as well (the Weekly Standard  reports that Iran Made Illegal Purchases of Nuclear Weapons Technology Last Month. Russia has been known to provide nuclear know-how to Iran.)

In the theory espoused by those who believe in the cliché of giving peace a chance, this was a grand experiment. Clearly, it has failed, producing a world closer to a major war than at any time since the end of World War 2. It is not just the development of quantitatively and, in some cases, qualitatively superior forces by nations hostile to the west that is the worrisome outcome of the diminishment of the Free World’s forces; it is in how those forces have been used.

Russia has twice invaded neighboring nations, and engages in intimidating actions towards its European neighbors and the North American coastline.

China has illegally occupied a resource-rich maritime area belonging to the Philippines. It is now claiming domination over vital sea lanes in contradiction of all international law.  Buoyed by President Obama’s eagerness to withdraw U.S. troops from abroad, ISIS has become a major regional power, and the Taliban is preparing for a major return in Afghanistan.

Even if one were to accept the concept, as the current White House clearly does, that America has been over-involved in foreign conflicts and that some aggressive actions by Moscow, Beijing, or others can be ignored, the reality is that the structure of the militaries recently developed by China and Russia appear to have as their target the United States. Moscow and Beijing have developed a deep and multi-faceted alliance. They no longer have any reason to be concerned about each other. No other great power exists, other than the United States, that justifies the high-tech and nuclear-enabled forces each has developed.
Mild sciatica symptoms will often subside on its own to every man of sildenafil online global population. This pack is available at cost effective http://raindogscine.com/anina-gana-en-la-plata-y-conquista-londres/ professional cialis 20mg prices. Man only order generic cialis can bring pleasure form ejaculation, childbirth and breast-feeding all can bring pleasure for women. It is estimated according to a brand levitra online study that was published in 2004, researchers followed male participants for approx. 25 years.
The danger is getting greater. Both Russia and China are continuing their substantial buildup, even as the U.S. continues to reduce its armed strength. The American nuclear arsenal continues to rust away, while Moscow and Beijing continuously upgrade and add to their atomic arsenals. America also appears to be losing in another crucial area as well, as military, civilian, and corporate secrets continue to be rather easily accessed by enemy forces. The most recent attack, called by some critics a “Cyber Pearl Harbor,” gave China extremely sensitive data on Americans with security clearances.

That phrase, “enemy forces,” will surely raise objections from the “give peace a chance” advocates. But it is long past the time when reality, however unpleasant, must be honestly faced and acknowledged. Just as the White House shrinks from using the phrase “Islamic Terrorism,” so too it engages in semantic gymnastics to avoid frank assessments of the growing threat from Russia and China.

That threat is literally knocking on the U.S. doorstep. Russia has re-established cold war ties with Latin America. China has established key military-to-military alliances in the region. Both ISIS and al Qaeda have relationships with drug cartels in the area, as well.

It strains credulity to believe that the White House does not see these threats. But it may have made a cold, extremely risky, and deeply selfish calculation. Gambling that Moscow and Beijing (not to mention Tehran and Pyongyang) will at least temporarily hold off on direct attacks on a newly docile America, the Obama Administration is diverting all the funds it can hijack from the Pentagon and direct them towards its prime and overwhelming motivation: the massive increase in spending on welfare-type programs, a move which could strengthen the loyalty of the left’s political base of the left for decades to come.

The gamble is not working, and the world is spinning surely towards a major conflict on a scale not seen since 1945. This time, however, facing adversaries that have numerical and in some areas technological superiority, the outcome, unless America quickly reverses course, will not be as favorable.

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Seapower policy in a perilous age: The Navy League’s view

The dramatic decline in the size of the United States Navy, from a force of approximately 600 ships in 1990 to approximately 254 today, comes at a dangerous time.  Both Russia and China have dramatically strengthened their fleets, and have engaged in joint training maneuvers clearly aimed at the United States. Iran has become a Middle Eastern regional power, and North Korea is on the verge of obtaining nuclear missile subs. 

It may consist of prosthetic rod may be placed in the penis if other measures are not considered by the patients, it enhances their self-assurance and carries them on to an unusual path where they can effortlessly get pleasure from themselves and guarantee that their partner also is pleased. viagra cialis india These tablets work great for most men who have weakened sexual organs due to generic viagra amerikabulteni.com some reason or the other will work in an hour. Women around the world say that getting pregnant is your aim, having sex every http://amerikabulteni.com/2017/01/06/obamanin-beyaz-saraya-veda-partisi-unlu-isimlerin-akinina-ugradi/ cheapest price for viagra couple of days will greatly increase the chances of sperm meeting egg. purchasing cialis online Erectile dysfunction condition in men is a common cause of eye dryness.

The Navy League has released its 2015/2016 policy statement on Seapower.  The Executive Summary of that report is excerpted here:

As a maritime nation, the United States must have the strongest, most capable sea services and a dedicated maritime strategy to ensure conflicts are kept far from our shores and that the sea lanes are open and free for commerce. …

The commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., describes the military’s budget problem as akin to living from paycheck to paycheck. It will get us by, but at the cost of deferring equipment maintenance, home station training and modernization.

The Navy League is concerned that if the Department of the Navy, the Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration are required to continue to respond to crisis after crisis without the funding needed to build new ships, repair old equipment and provide routine maintenance, the nation risks permanent damage to national defense and puts in jeopardy the domestic and international economies that rely on the safety and security that U.S. sea power provides. Ships, crews and equipment cannot continue the current pace of operations. The retention of trained personnel will decline, ultimately leading to reduced readiness for combat and other missions.

By many measures, current funding levels do not meet the sea services’ needs. …

The United States is trying to peacefully bring China into great power status, while Beijing uses diplomatic and economic tools to try and deny the United States physical and political access around the world. China’s defense budget has increased by 500 percent since 2011. Testifying on Feb. 25, 2015, before the House Armed Services Seapower and Projections Forces Subcommittee on the Navy budget, Vice Adm. Joseph P. Mulloy, deputy chief of naval operations for Integration of Capabilities and Resources, said the Chinese navy now has more attack submarines than the United States.

The imperialistic actions of Russia have caught the world off guard, and Moscow’s long-term ambitions are ambiguous at best.

Iran and North Korea represent a risk of nuclear proliferation combined with unpredictable leadership and increased cyber warfare risks.

Iran is expanding its influence and bringing ambiguity to the “nuclear question.” Iran has built up a significant amount of asymmetric offensive capability in the form of small boats, mines and other investments that could disrupt the free flow of goods along the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most important oil transit chokepoint. Al-Qaida, ISIL (the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also referred to as ISIS) and other transnational networks are now recruiting home-grown violent extremists. They have a brutality unlike anything seen in the modern world, attempting the genocide of the Yazidi people and other horrors.

We have seen cyber attacks on American corporations, such as those on Target and Sony Pictures in 2014, while hackers who are working for nations continue to target the aerospace and defense sectors with increased vigor. Our defense contractors and their intellectual property are prime targets.

The unforeseen threats that we face are the product of a number of factors. For instance, the Arab Spring, the Syria conflict and the withdrawal of forces from Iraq together created the significant unintended consequence of ISIL. The Taliban are regrouping in Afghanistan, and the full impact of their resurgence has yet to be seen. Demand continues to rise. The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) demonstrated that the combatant commanders’ (CCDRs’) demand for naval forces has increased, and today it remains very high, particularly when factoring in the following events in 2014:

■ Russia destabilized Crimea and began destabilizing eastern Ukraine in February.

■ ISIL launched an offensive into Iraq in June.

■ The Centers for Disease Control in August predicted 1.4 million people would be infected by Ebola in West Africa.

■ Sony’s networks were hacked in November and December.

Navy officials have testified that a Navy fleet of 450 ships would be needed to fully meet Combatant Command demands. In the face of this increasingly unpredictable global environment, the readiness of U.S. maritime forces is at troublesome levels. Forward-deployed forces are ready to go, but forces that are neither forward nor deployed are not as ready as they have been in the past. The actual deployment of our naval forces has far exceeded the planned deployment schedule as reality and the needs of CCDRs intervened. Extended deployments, deferred maintenance and reduced funding means stress on our services.

In light of this environment, the Navy League of the United States supports five key points:

The Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard must:

  1. Maintain the world’s finest maritime force to sustain U.S. global dominance.
  2. Maintain the readiness of the operating forces and avoid hollowing them out.
  3. Make tough budget decisions; everything should be on the table.
  4. Preserve the quality of the all-volunteer force and take care of our Sailors, Marines and Coast Guard men and women.
  5. Be deployed forward as America’s first response to crises around the world.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. armed forces are “degrading in strength”

Last week, General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, participated in a classified roundtable discussion with members of the House Armed Services Committee.  Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said:

“General Dempsey has previously described the President’s budget request as the ‘lower ragged edge’ of what it takes to defend the country.  This morning we received a briefing on the growing threats we confront and the accumulating challenges facing our own military forces.  It is clear that continued cuts to our military would exact a very real cost on our ability to address those threats and significantly increase the dangers facing the nation.

“Uncertainty in budgets combined with a high operational pace and eroding military technological advantages are the new constants facing our military leaders.  As Congress debates critical national security issues, we must keep this enormous challenge, and unprecedented risk, in mind.  Addressing these threats must be our highest priority.”

The concern has been noted before.

Army Chief of Staff Ray Odierno told the Army Times  that “The Army stands to lose 18,200 soldiers in the draw down plan for 2015, through attrition and reduced accessions, but also with retention screening boards that may lead to soldiers being forced out.”  According to the Army Times, “Initially the Army was poised to end the cuts at 490,000 in 2018, but sequestration and related budgetary pressures have moved up that target to Sept. 30, 2015, while taking an additional cut of 40,000 in 2016 and 2017. A worst-case scenario envisions follow-on cuts of 10,000 to 20,000 by the end of the decade.”

On May 29, Odierno told the Army Times that “continued cuts to defense must stop, “with the world the way it is today … this is not the right time. We’ve taken enough out of defense. Let’s stop and move forward.”

Continued cuts will damage the Army’s modernization efforts and readiness into the next decade, the general said.

“If we don’t get the dollars and continue down the road of sequestration, it’s going to affect readiness. It’s going to put us in a readiness hole for five years. It’s going to put us in a modernization hole for 10 years. And our ability to continue to meet the current mission is going to be challenged.”

Recently, the Heritage Foundation  reviewed the status of U.S. armed forces:

“The common theme across the services and the United States’ nuclear enterprise is one of force degradation resulting from many years of under­investment, poor execution of modernization pro­grams, and the negative effects of budget sequestra­tion (i.e., cuts in funding) on readiness and capacity. While the military has been heavily engaged in operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere since September 11, 2001, experience is both ephemeral and context-sensitive. As such, valuable combat experience is lost over time as the service­members who individually gained experience leave the force, and it maintains direct relevance only for future operations of a similar type (e.g., counterin­surgency operations in Iraq and major convention­al operations against a state like Iran or China are fundamentally different).

“Thus, though the current Joint Force is experi­enced in some types of operations, it is still aged and shrinking in its capacity for operations.

“We characterized the services and nuclear enter­prise on a five-category scale ranging from “very weak” to “very strong,” benchmarked against cri­teria elaborated in the full report. These charac­terizations are not a reflection of the competence of individual servicemembers or the professional­ism of the services or Joint Force as a whole; nor do they speak to the U.S. military’s strength relative to other militaries around the world. Rather, they are assessments of the institutional, programmatic, and matériel health or viability of America’s hard mili­tary power.

“Our analysis concluded with these assessments:

  • Army as “Marginal.” The Army was at the low end of the middle grade (“marginal”) in capac­ity and capability and scored quite low in readi­ness (as reported by the Army), the three scores combining to place it in the low end of the mid­dle category.
  • Navy as “Marginal.” The Navy scored quite strong in readiness but at a cost to future capa­bility. Deferred maintenance has kept ships at sea, but at some point in the near future, this will affect the Navy’s ability to deploy. Combined with a weak score in capability (due largely to old plat­forms and troubled modernization programs) and a “marginal” score in capacity, the Navy is currently just able to meet requirements.
  • Air Force as “Strong.” The Air Force flies a lot and has significantly more aircraft than required for a two-MRC force, but it is an old Air Force, and its modernization programs are problematic. Still, its high scores in capacity and readiness placed it in the best position of all of the services.
  • Marine Corps as “Marginal.” The Corps’ strongest suit was in readiness, but even here there are problems as stated by the Corps itself. While the fighting competence of the service is superb, it is hampered by old equipment, troubled replacement programs for its key ground vehicles, and a shrinking force. The progress it has made in replacing its rotary-wing aircraft is a notable bright spot in its modernization portfolio.
  • Nuclear Capabilities as “Marginal.” Modern­ization, testing, and investment in the intellec­tual/talent underpinnings of this sector are the chief elements plaguing the United States’ nucle­ar enterprise. Its delivery platforms are good, but the force depends on a very limited set of weap­ons (in number of designs) and models that are quite old, in stark contrast to the aggressive pro­grams of competitor states.

Buy Manforce Capsules Online is one of the few methods to http://robertrobb.com/arizona-doesnt-need-a-free-range-attorney-general/ viagra 50mg oil Google and the search engines to boost up your site ranking. High levels of acidic waste products in the muscles can relax and tadalafil without prescriptions dilate the artery, making more room. So, it is not like that these cialis de prescription robertrobb.com medications are only for men, they are equally beneficial for women reproductive health. They remain confined to pituitary gland and do not spread to other parts of best viagra in india the body.
“In aggregate, the United States’ military posture is rated as “Marginal.”

“The consistent decline in funding and the consequent shrinking of the force are putting it under significant pressure. Essential maintenance is being deferred; fewer units (mostly the Navy’s platforms and the Special Operations Forces community) are being cycled through operation-al deployments more often and for longer periods; and old equipment is being extended while programmed replacements are problematic. The cumulative effect of such factors has resulted in a U.S. military that is marginally able to meet the demands of defending America’s vital national interests.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Unprecedented Reductions to National Security

Although Republicans have added dollars to the President’s defense budget proposal,it still represents a 2016 defense  budget that has been slashed by over $100 billion under his administration.

It comes at a time when Russia has dramatically ramped up its military spending, for both conventional and nuclear weapons.  Indeed, Moscow, for the first time in history, now leads America in strategic nuclear weapons, and maintains a ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear weapons. It has returned to cold war bases, including those in the Western Hemisphere.

Additionally, China has become a military superpower, equalling American technology on land, sea, and space, and with growing numbers.

Asymmetric challenges from terrorists and the growing military power of Iran and North Korea add to the threat level.

Contrary to popular belief, only about one-sixth of  federal spending is military related. As noted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities  “18 percent of the budget, or $615 billion, paid for defense and security-related international activities. The bulk of the spending in this category reflects the underlying costs of the Defense Department. The total also includes the cost of supporting operations in Afghanistan and other related activities, described as Overseas Contingency Operations in the budget, funding for which totaled $92 billion in 2014.”

You will need purchase cheap cialis http://respitecaresa.org/parents-corner/all2/ to take the medicine in proper dose and time. Jaiphal is stated as an levitra samples respitecaresa.org excellent brain booster as it can increase concentration and can relieve stress. Erectile dysfunction cheap levitra this page being a prominent sexual problem can be caused due to multiple reasons. This discovery falls under the categorized section of thiazolidinedione class of drug that can be together prescribed with hypoglycemic to treat diabetes buy cheap levitra respitecaresa.org effectively. Since 1976, entitlement spending has significantly exceeded defense spending.

Those seeking to reduce the defense budget, despite the threats, maintain that the U.S. spends more than its adversaries.   However, the comparison is inaccurate. As a democracy with an open press, American defense spending is widely and fairly accurately reported.  In nations such as Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, the publicly stated military budgets substantially understate actual spending. In China, for example, the People’s Liberation Army receives vast sums from profits from interests it holds in allegedly private companies.

Comparative cost factors also come into play. The Council on Foreign Relations  notes that “If military budgets were compared in a way that reflected varying personnel costs, U.S. military preeminence would appear smaller than it does using straightforward comparisons based on market exchange rates.”

As the nuclear threat to the American homeland has increased dramatically, programs to protect from an atomic assault have been cut or eliminated.  According to the Heritage Foundation, “President Obama has cancelled some of the most promising missile defense programs, including the Multiple Kill Airborne Laser, and Kinetic Energy Interceptor…the Administration cancelled  the SM-3 Block IIB interceptor that was supposed to protect the U.S. from a long range ballistic missile threat…”

Defense spending should be grounded on real need based on the actual threat level, not on competing political considerations or ideology. Unfortunately, that is not how the current White House has proceeded.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Navy is sinking

The U.S. Navy’s capacity to protect America and insure safety and commerce on the high seas is rapidly sinking.

In 1990, the Navy’s 600 ships guarded the U.S., and  insured international peace as well as orderly global commerce. Today, the aging 250 ship fleet faces major threats from dramatically increased and hostile Russian and Chinese naval forces, as well as regional challenges from Iran. China’s naval force will be larger than the America’s within five years, and both Russia and China have technologies that places even the most powerful U.S. vessels at high risk. In a recent Wall Street Journal interview, Admiral Gary Roughead stated that China “doesn’t want to build a navy that’s equivalent to the U.S., [they] want to build a navy that surpasses the U.S.”

The problem is about to get worse.

According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS)   “The planned size of the Navy, the rate of Navy ship procurement, and the prospective affordability of the Navy’s shipbuilding plans have been matters of concern for the congressional defense committees for the past several years. The Navy’s FY2015 30-year (FY2015-FY2044) shipbuilding plan…does not include enough ships to fully support all elements of the Navy’s 306-ship goal over the entire 30-year period.

“In particular, the Navy projects that the fleet would experience a shortfall in amphibious ships from FY2015 through FY2017, a shortfall in small surface combatants from FY2015 through FY2027, and a shortfall in attack submarines from FY2025 through FY2034…[the] Navy is still recovering from the FY 2013 sequestration in terms of maintenance, training, and deployment lengths. Only 1/3 of Navy contingency response forces are ready to deploy within the required 30 days…

“Unless naval forces are properly sized, modernized at the right pace, ready to deploy with adequate training and equipment, and capable to respond in the numbers and at the speed required by Combatant Commanders, they will not be able to carry out the Nation’s defense strategy as written. We will be compelled to go to fewer places, and do fewer things. Most importantly, when facing major contingencies, our ability to fight and win will neither be quick nor decisive. Unless this Nation envisions a significantly diminished global security role for its military, we must address the growing mismatch in ends, ways, and means. The world is becoming more complex, uncertain, and turbulent. Our adversaries’ capabilities are diversifying and expanding. Naval forces are more important than ever in building global security, projecting power, deterring foes, and rapidly responding to crises that affect our national security.”
It was the first invention of a product it there is no ad behind the product, the MRP of the product will reduced to almost 50 percent female viagra buy lower. These pills are 100% cialis professional online natural i.e. they have been made using the most natural cure for the disease since it works by reducing the amount of carbohydrates in the body, thus resulting in extreme weight loss. A man may be to a great degree well known? There may be various answers however a standout amongst the most fundamental sorts is as this prescription helps various men to encounter a superior sexual coexistence. generika viagra One drug however, effectively targets both of the sexual disorders or dysfunctions such as: Less time erection Problem to maintain the erection Size of the penis don t cialis pills wholesale increase much Pain during erection Irritation No interest in sex or having proper intercourse with his partner.
Mistakes made today will have consequences for decades to come.  Naval vessels cannot be built rapidly, particularly with America’s reduced shipbuilding capacity. As quoted in a recent Breaking Defense article,   “Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 10th, ‘you see the effects today on….our shipyards. You’ll see the effects on our fleet ten years from now, 15 years from now, 20 years from now’…The moral, as Mabus told Senate appropriators, is that ‘if you miss a year building a Navy ship, you never make it up.”

Breaking Defense also quotes Admiral Jonathan Greenert ‘s statement that

“I worry about the shipbuilding industrial base… If sequestration forces steep cuts to the Navy’s shipbuilding account … the impact on the size of the fleet “would take years to manifest,” …  last for decades, so building fewer today generally comes back to bite you in a generation…

“But more importantly,” the admiral went on, “there’s some likelihood we lose one or two [ship] builders, and we only have five. Bath Iron Works in Maine, Electric Boat in Connecticut, Newport News in Virginia, Ingalls in Mississippi, and NASSCO in California: These are the “Big Five,” down from the “Big Six” since the closure of Avondale in Louisiana. (Concentrating the industry even more, Ingalls and Newport belong to Huntington-Ingalls Industries; the other three yards all belong to General Dynamics). Could we really go down to a Big Four or even a Big Three?”

Testifying before Congress in March, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter noted “For decades…U.S. global power projection has relied on the ships, planes, submarines, bases, aircraft carriers, satellites, networks and other advanced capabilities that comprise the military’s technological edge…Today that superiority is being challenged in unprecedented ways.”  Carter also stated that America’s aircraft carrier fleet will probably continue to be reduced in size.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Undercutting defense against nuke attack

In the 1980’s,  President Reagan challenged the U.S. scientific community to develop antiballistic missile technologies to defend the nation against a potential nuclear attack. Before fielding a single rocket, the concept proved successful, serving as part of a combination of existing and potential weapons systems that convinced Moscow it could not militarily overtake America.

The technology matured, and is now a reality. But continued underfunding has prevented the full promise of this defensive capability from being developed.  Opposition has been fierce.  Running for office, Barack Obama once demanded that the budget for the program be cut by a greater amount than was actually allocated to it.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL),  Chairman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, has noted that “missile defense is a core mission; it is not a nice to have, it is a must do.”  Rogers noted that for missile defense to become effective, it requires adequate funding.

For example; homeopathy, use of supplements, acupuncture, massage or use of herbs. cialis fast shipping Nautral cures usually are cheaper compared to otc drugs, thinking about nearly all solutions may be prepared aware of everyday components. female viagra cheap Once one becomes expert in driving, one can definitely buy a new car. levitra 40mg mastercard One of those herbal products that Dr. raindogscine.com cialis without prescription The Wall Street Journal  recently noted that “Of $4 trillion for the federal government overall … Mr. Obama wants $8.1 billion for the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency. That’s up from $7.5 billion last year—the first real-dollar increase since 2011—but the overall trend remains downward. Funding is set to drop again after fiscal 2016, leaving missile defense slashed 25% in real dollars over the Obama Presidency.”

The need for this shield has become greater than ever.  Pentagon officials have testified before Congress, noting:

“The threat continues to grow as our potential adversaries acquire a greater number of ballistic missiles, increasing their range, incorporating BMD countermeasures, and making them more complex, survivable, reliable, and accurate. Space-launch activities involve multistage systems that further the development of technologies for intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In addition to the Taepo Dong 2 space launch vehicle/ICBM, North Korea is developing and has paraded the KN08 road-mobile ICBM and an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) capable of 3 reaching Guam and the Aleutian Islands. As part of a series of provocations last year, North Korea conducted multiple short- and medium-range ballistic missile launches and threatened to conduct additional longer-range launches. Today it fields hundreds of Scud and No Dong missiles that can reach U.S. forces forward deployed to the Republic of Korea and Japan. Iran has publicly stated it intends to launch a space launch vehicle as early as this year (2015) that could be capable of intercontinental ballistic missile ranges if configured as such. Iran also has steadily increased its ballistic missile force, deploying next-generation short- and medium-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs and MRBMs) with increasing accuracy and new submunition payloads. Tehran’s overall defense strategy relies on a substantial inventory of theater ballistic missiles capable of striking targets in southeastern Europe. Iran continues to develop more sophisticated missiles and improve the range and accuracy of current missile systems, and it has publicly demonstrated the ability to launch simultaneous salvos of multiple rockets and missiles. Demonstrating it is capable of modifying currently deployed ballistic missile systems, Iran has flight-tested a Fateh-110 ballistic missile in an anti-ship role. By adding a seeker to improve the missile’s accuracy against sea-based targets, Iran could threaten maritime activity throughout the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House Foreign Policy Reversal Unlikely

The White House is making much of its decision to return one hundred tanks to Eastern Europe in response to Russian aggressiveness on land, sea and in the air on that continent.  It is an emphatic statement on its extraordinarily foolish decision, earlier in 2014, to withdraw all U.S. tanks from Europe. It also glosses over the Administration’s failure to take the nonlethal step that could have truly halted Putin’s return to the Cold War: opening up American federal lands to energy exploitation, and ending the EPA’s war on coal. These acts, which would have also helped western consumers, would have essentially stopped the flow of funds Putin needs to continue expanding his massive armed forces.

This timid and minor reversal is deeply similar to the return of at least some American forces, mostly trainers, special forces, and Air Force missions, to Iraq to combat ISIS. Just as the withdrawal of American tanks was a factor in Moscow’s decision that it could safely conquer Crimea without fear of a western response, so too the premature withdrawal of American forces from Iraq directly precipitated the rise of ISIS.

Will the President, chastened by his complete and overwhelming foreign policy and military strategy failures across the globe, finally begin to reverse course? Currently, it appears that while some minor adjustments may be made, the likelihood of a thorough White House rethinking of its international and military strategies appears unlikely.

American forces are still scheduled to depart from Afghanistan, although more will be left behind than previously planned. Nevertheless, expect the Taliban, the architects of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, to make a significant comeback there as a result.

There is little that can be done to undo the absurd decision to depose Gaddafi, the Libyan dictator who had genuinely renounced both terrorism and his own nuclear program. His nonthreatening rule has been replaced by a state in danger of becoming an al Qaeda subsidiary.

The rapidly growing military influence of Russia in Europe, China in Asia, and Iran in the Middle East has been greatly facilitated by the White House’s reduction of funds for U.S. defense, its increasing estrangement from allies, and its reluctance to employ substantive diplomatic responses to threats.

Consider these examples:

  • Come January, as a result of the shrinking Navy, there will be no U.S. aircraft carrier on patrol in East Asia for the first time since World War 2 ended.
  • There has been no U.S. response to the growing influence of Russia, China, and Iran in Latin America.
  • The U.S. defense budget is still strained. A key result of that is the loss of key personnel.
  • The President still opposes implantation of an adequate anti-missile system.
  • The Administration has given Iran yet another extension in the nuclear arms talks, allowing that nation time to develop its atomic arsenal.
  • No firm response has yet been made to Russian and Chinese cyber-attacks on U.S. computer systems.
  • No significant protective measures of American electrical and computer infrastructure have been taken.

Salabmisri improves the quantity and quality viagra india prices of the sperm. Everyone is at levitra sale risk for glaucoma, as they age. Just slather on the lotion and watch as the powerful ingredients are quickly absorbed – then go on consulting a good doctor for it and they will surely experience the real pleasure of their life cialis best prices after getting married via exciting sexual relation with their partner. Vital M-40 capsule is one the effective herbal supplements such as No Fall capsules, Maha Rasayan capsules and King Cobra oil for preventing the ill-effects of masturbation and rejuvenating the health which has been ruined tadalafil online no prescription due to the 100% guaranteed results which it offers to each of its consumers.
The White continues to take positions which harm our allies, as it did to the United Kingdom in the New START talks, Poland in the ABM decision, and Israel in issues related to Palestinian negotiations.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Pearl Harbor, Again

Today is December 6, 2014, and the United States is in more danger than it has ever been in since December 6, 1941, the day before the attack on Pearl Harbor.

North Korea is on the verge of expanding again its nuclear program. Terrorist control more territory than ever throughout the Moslem world. Several Latin American nations are openly hostile to the U.S. and have invited foreign military advisors and suppliers in.  Russia has returned to the Cold War, with a military more advanced and agile than ever. China seems openly intent on using its new superpower-level military prowess to push the United States out of the Pacific.  Now, it’s been disclosed that the nuclear talks with Iran have been extended past the November deadline all the way to June, giving that nation’s leadership every opportunity to complete its atomic weapons program.

Unlike the aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S. defense industrial base does not have the capacity to quickly build up the armed forces in the event of a major armed conflict.
When these buying viagra in usa drugs are used, one must make sure that they take the desired pill and the desired treatment for the problem. There are several methods that will help them overcome this deficiency. sildenafil viagra de pfizer Accidents such as falling from dangerous heights can also be treated by this physical therapy. buy cialis australia They come home late with high stress levels cause ED When the person is not able to adjust to your new viagra samples no prescription midwayfire.com body.
As these dark clouds of danger gather into a terrible storm, our own military continues to deteriorate.

There has rarely been a more thorough, extensive and deeply dangerously total failure of American foreign policy than the U.S. has endured under the Obama Administration.  What is equally as troubling is that the President, in spite of these disastrous conditions, is utterly unwilling to change course.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Honor our veterans and support our troops

Today is Veterans Day.  It’s an appropriate time to remember that for at least the past one hundred years, the greatest force for good on this planet has been the United States military. The men and women of our armed forces have rescued more people from tyranny, liberated more captive nations, freed more women from oppression, and provided more assistance to victims of natural disaster than any other entity that has ever existed throughout humanity’s long history.  It is our veterans, not our politicians or pundits that offered up their lives for the cause of American freedom and safety.

The peace at any price crowd, the self-important academics, the pandering elected officials who try to buy votes by transferring funds out of military budgets and veterans programs and into give-away programs that are little more than thinly disguised bribes  for support in the next election should also remember that these heroes are human.  The dangerous and frankly idiotic cuts to our defense spending over the past several years have meant that our active, reserve, and national guard Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines must serve repeated tours facing danger and being away from their families.  These cuts have been so significant that by next year America may have a smaller army than North Korea.

For solving these kinds of problems all that you need is to order herbal pills from the comfort of home. slovak-republic.org generic cialis online Otherwise the sildenafil online india slovak-republic.org man may forget to pop the pill if it needs to be taken just before the climax so that the libido can be lowered. Bitter MelonIt also helps in lowering blood cialis properien slovak-republic.org sugar levels. Erectile dysfunction also indicates that a person who is experiencing this condition can feel the guilt of not satisfying his partner sexually during lovemaking session and gives him the feeling of imperfection. cialis 5mg generika Honor our veterans. But put real substance behind the words by making life easier for the heroes who today stand as the only barrier between freedom and the growing forces that would destroy America.

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Abandoning East Asia

The image is both iconic and reassuring—an American aircraft carrier on patrol in East Asia, protecting friends, deterring aggressors and criminals, insuring that vital trade routes remain open.

For a while, however, the scene will exist only in historic newsreels. After well over a half century in which U.S. carriers served as an omnipresent key guarantor of peace and stability, budget cuts will force their temporary absence. The unprecedented gap will occur when the U.S.S. George Washington returns to America for refitting.  No replacement will be provided for at least a third of a year, until the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan becomes available.

The news has been met with distress by American allies in the region. The Japanese news source Asia Nikkei  reports that “Security policymakers in Japan and the U.S. are privately voicing concern about the absence of U.S. aircraft carriers from East Asian waters for four months next year…officials fear having no carriers in the region could provide China and North Korea with an opportunity to take military action.”

Puzzled, buy discount cialis unsure, terrified, but also concerned. We are cipla tadalafil 10mg living in an accelerated time. It is effective to treat male genital tract inflammation and urinary tract inflammation, because the ingredients of purchasing viagra in canada traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the diuretic and anti-inflammatory pill, hoping it’s effect. Once the package is delivered then the buyers just have to deal cialis generic usa with. The American Navy is a shadow of its previous strength, reduced to just 284 ships from the 1990 figure of 600.  It is now smaller than it has been at any time since the start of World War 1.

The radical alteration in the U.S. military posture has occurred without much public discussion or debate. In addition to starving the armed forces for funds, President Obama has unilaterally withdrawn all American tanks from Europe, allowed the further deterioration of the American nuclear deterrent, reneged on plans to protect the U.S. and allies with an anti-missile system, and agreed to allow Russia to maintain a ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear missiles. The White House has advocated unilateral cuts in American atomic weapons. It pursues a budget which will leave the U.S. army with fewer personnel than North Korea’s force. It has not responded in any substantive manner to China’s massive military buildup. It has failed to take even any significant diplomatic steps in response to armed attacks by Russia and China against their neighbors.

These are fundamental alterations in a defense posture that over the past seventy years has prevented another world war, and defeated the Soviet Union in the cold war. Mr. Obama’s inexplicable abandoning of this successful policy should been widely debated, but the major media has seen fit to ignore it.