Tag: Defense Policy

Categories
Quick Analysis

Grave Consequences of Ignored Defense Errors

The news that U.S. tanks are being sent back to Europe may puzzle many Americans, since the major media did not spend much time reporting that President Obama had withdrawn them two years ago, along with anti-tank strike aircraft. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government, following information from the Stars and Stripes military news source, was among the few sources that substantially discussed the risky and unorthodox move.  The Washington Times noted that the President’s action left the U.S. with few options for countering Moscow’s invasion of the Ukraine.

In 2014, the New York Analysis of Policy and Government  noted:

“The news is quite startling: There are no longer any American tanks stationed in Europe. The story has been largely ignored by the major media. The information was provided in an article in the military newspaper, Stars and Stripes... According to current plans, by 2020, there will be only 30,000 American troops in Europe, approximately one-tenth of the maximum strength during the first Cold War. This spring, further cuts to U.S. military infrastructure in Europe will be presented…These actions take place in the face of massive new funding for the Russian military, as well as exceptionally aggressive behavior on the part of the Kremlin.”

Despite the highly newsworthy nature of Mr. Obama’s strange 2014 move, the mainstream press barely discussed it at all.

It was part of a consistent practice on the part of the major media, which has frequently supported hard left policies at the expense of objective journalism, to avoid discussing dangerous and ill-conceived pacifist policies that have clearly led to foreign policy disasters.

The 2014 tank withdrawal was only one of the risky national security decisions by the Obama White House over the past eight years which produced foreign policy disasters that may take decades to recover from—if indeed they can be overcome. Others included:

  • The premature withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq created a vacuum which allowed ISIS to become a major force.
  • The failure to confront Moscow on its violation of long-standing nuclear arms agreements encouraged Putin to continue to ignore compliance.
  • U.S. assistance in the overthrow of the Libyan regime allowed that nation to become a haven for Islamic extremists.
  • President Obama’s complete failure to respond to China’s initial aggression in the Pacific/South China Sea gave Beijing the confidence to expand its aggression to an unprecedented degree.
  • The Obama White House’s failure to respond to Russian, Chinese, and Islamic extremist encroachments in the western hemisphere has brought armed threats to our borders.
  • The slashing of the defense budget encouraged aggressors across the planet to continue their actions.
  • Mr. Obama’s ignoring of his own redline in Syria provided the accurate perception that his administration was not prepared to use force to support its own stated policies. The end result has been an enormous increase in the power and influence of both Russia and Iran in the Middle East, and the survival of the despotic and murderous regime of Bashar al Assad in Syria.  The refugee crisis this has created has caused enormous problems in Europe.

Patient Characteristics By definition, nearly all patients with the chronic pancreatitis underwent many courses of the cheap levitra tablet broad-spectrum antibiotics. Whether you agree or not but if you are facing any kind of side effect then it may be easily altered. brand levitra 20mg look at this shop Male Sexual Problem Treatment In Delhi Whom to consult for the treatment of ovulation problems? If your ovulation cycle is irregular and if the ovary doesn’t release the egg, then you need to consult an expert for the treatment. if all these non-invasive ways fail to normalize erectile function, the physician tells the person to undergo a surgical process to help his organ becoming functional again. viagra sale cheap In http://secretworldchronicle.com/2017/07/ep-8-3-collision-part-2/ levitra on line severe cases these diseases may limit all your physical activities.
Non-military responses to international crises were also overlooked by the Obama White House. Russia’s military aggression and its massive arms buildup could have been adequately addressed if the Administration had opened up federal lands for energy exploitation, which would have substantially cut into Moscow’s most important source of funding, its energy sales. China’s economy needs the American market; threatening to impede access could have been persuasive in addressing Beijing’s actions.

These Obama policy failures were significant, yet were largely un-criticized by the media. Rather than take prudent steps, the Obama Administration and its progressive supporters chose to ignore the threats. Despite the clear and present danger that resulted, the major media chose to bury the news.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Update on NATO

NATO’s role has been revitalized by Russia’s arms buildup, its aggression against Crimea and Ukraine, and its threatening moves towards eastern Europe. During the brief period between the fall of the USSR and Vladimir Putin’s return to an expansionist stance, NATO became a key player in the fight against terror.

Speaking at the organization’s recent Parliamentary Assembly  session in November, the organization’s Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, addressed the main concerns and status of the defensive alliance, which will gain an additional member this spring when Montenegro is expected to join.

According to Stoltenberg, defense spending continues to be a key issue. He noted that it has been his “main focus” since assuming his leadership post. He remains concerned that some NATO members are spending less than 2% of their annual budgets on defense. “After years of sliding defence spending, we have seen a shift. At our Wales’ Summit in 2014, Allies committed to spend 2% of GDP on defence within a decade. That commitment is already bearing fruit. In 2015, we stopped the defence cuts and we saw a spending increase across Europe and Canada. I expect further increase of 3% for European Allies and Canada this year. So we are moving in the right direction but we still have a long way to go [the] 2% target really matters.”

NATO is increasing its defensive presence in the eastern part of the Alliance, including the deployment of four multinational battalions to the Baltic States and Poland. Earlier this year, Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States each committed to lead one of those battalions. The alliance is taking steps to strengthen its presence in the Black Sea region. A Romanian-led multinational brigade will be formed. Work continues on additional defensive measures in the air and at sea, even as the organization seeks additional dialogue with Moscow. Stoltenberg emphasized that NATO is “constantly looking into what more we can do with Ukraine to strengthen our partnership…”  He met with President Poroshenko to implement a “substantial package” to increase cooperation.

Treating Sexual viagra soft pills Disorders in Men with SCI SCI may affect the sexual desire, which bring them seldom feeling unconcerned in sex performance. Although almost all men encounter ED at some point, they could be isolated incidents caused due to excess alcohol consumption, stress or performance anxiety. midwayfire.com sildenafil cipla Facts about cialis price cialis price Chief constituents of Musli Kaunch capsules are kaunch, semal musli, Musli Sya, Safed Musli, Ashwagandha, Bala and Gokhru. This is because, when midwayfire.com viagra on line you complete or perform some part of your life that makes you satisfied physically or mentally, then you love to do it. The situation in the Mediterranean remains serious. In response, NATO recently launched a new maritime security operation entitled “ Sea Guardian” to help protect the safety and the security of one of the world’s busiest bodies of water.  NATO ships, submarines and maritime patrol aircraft will perform core activities like surveillance, counter-terrorism and capacity-building of regional navies. NATO is supporting the European Union’s (EU) Operation Sophia with information sharing and logistical support. (‘Operation Sophia’ engages in boarding and seizing on the high seas vessels suspected of being used for human smuggling and trafficking. This follows a first phase of intelligence gathering on smuggling networks and is intended to precede operations due to take place within the territorial waters of Libya as well as coercive actions against the smugglers – including on Libyan soil.)

According to the Secretary General, “NATO-EU cooperation is now closer than it has ever been,” particularly in countering hybrid threats, enhancing cyber security and coordinating exercises.

Stoltenberg addressed the ongoing discussions about the creation of a European army. He noted “The message is that this is not about creating an alternative to NATO, but this is about strengthening the European pillar inside NATO. …The only thing we have to avoid is that when Europe starts to strengthen its defences it is done in a way which is complimentary to NATO, not competing with NATO… Let me also add that, this is in one way obvious, because we have to remember that especially after Brexit, EU is important but, compared to the rest of NATO, especially when you take into account United States, of course NATO has capabilities and strength which is not covered by the European Union. Eighty percent of NATO’s defence spending will come from non-EU allies after Brexit, eighty percent and three out of four battalions which we are going to deploy to the eastern part of the alliance, to the Baltic countries and Poland, will be led by non-EU allies. So it goes in a way of the United Kingdom, after Brexit, Canada and the United States. So I think it’s obvious that we cannot decouple European security from North America and we cannot decouple the security of the European Union members from the rest of Europe…”

Turning to NATO’s largest member, the United States, Stoltenberg said: “I welcome the incoming Administration in Washington… I look forward to working with President-elect Donald Trump. The partnership between Europe and the United States has been rock-solid for almost 70 years. A partnership that has always received bi-partisan support in the United States. And better burden-sharing will make the transatlantic bond even stronger.  I had the pleasure of speaking to President-elect Donald Trump…and he expressed very strong support for the NATO alliance and he expressed a strong commitment on continued strong NATO or US support for the NATO alliance and US support for the security of Europe and collective defence. So, I look forward to work with him and I’m absolutely certain that also with the new Administration, we will have an Administration in the United States which is absolutely committed to the NATO alliance and he also stated, as he has stated in the election campaign, that he will strengthen further US defence capabilities and increase defence spending. But, of course, he also pointed out during the election campaign and in the phone call he and I had on Friday, the importance of increased defence spending among European allies, and that’s something I absolutely…understand…we have decided, we have pledged, that we will stop the cuts and increase and aim at two percent within the decade…”

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Defense Time Warp

Washington’s leaders appear trapped in a time warp when it comes to making decisions about defense and foreign policy.

Still reveling in the bloodless victory a quarter-century ago over the Soviet Union in the first Cold War, President Obama, his progressive supporters, and some Republican budget hawks more concerned with balancing the budget than funding national security needs cling to the illusion that, since the USSR’s demise, there are no overarching threats from powerful nations.  In his State of the Union address, President Obama claimed that the only real threat to the U.S. came from failed states.

Arguments are frequently made that the U.S. military is funded far better than any potential adversaries. The reality is, of course, that a vast percentage of spending on the armed forces of nations such as Russia and China are simply not reported, a strategy made easier by the absence of a free press in those nations.

Substantially ignored by far too many in government and media are these crucial realities that make the current era the most dangerous in American history:

For the first time in a century, Washington’s alliances do not constitute the most powerful military grouping in existence.  That distinction goes to the Russian-Chinese-Iranian-North Korean axis.

For the first time in history, the U.S. does not possess the most powerful or modern nuclear force.  Since the Obama/Clinton “Reset” with Russia and the New Start Treaty, that distinction belongs to Moscow. Some believe that China’s vast military tunnel system may contain more nuclear weapons than America’s arsenal, as well.

The equipment, weapons and vehicles of America’s conventional forces are old and worn down by overuse. Those of our potential adversaries are fresher.

Get in the sun, or, take vitamin D. canada cialis levitra Foods that help spice up your sexual relationship with the cialis no prescription look at more info partner. It works the same as levitra 40 mg http://respitecaresa.org/christmas-wish-list/ does and contain the same ingredient sildenafil. The order cialis http://respitecaresa.org/event/554/ act of Lovegra holds up for roughly 4-6 hour. Concerns over the diminished armed forces is not restricted to Republicans, conservatives, or hawks.

The U.S. Navy, once the unquestioned master of the world’s oceans, has shrunk to less than half its previous size while facing adversaries who have dramatically increased the size and capabilities of their fleets. The Chinese Navy already has more submarines than the U.S. has, and by 2020, its navy will surpass Washington’s in total numbers.  Beijing also possesses some unique weapons, such as land-based missiles that can devastate ships nearly a thousand miles from shore, a true game-changer.

Politico  has reported: “We have a crisis in the fleet… Today, at 284 warships, the United States Navy’s fleet is the smallest since World War I. But even that number probably overstates the Navy’s true capability: The Pentagon recently changed the rules by which it counts active warships and if you apply the traditional and more stringent method, the Navy has but 274 warships. [The NY Analysis pegs the number even lower.] Given sequestration, the fleet will continue to decline.”

The U.S. military no longer has the capability to fight a two-front war. The Heritage Foundation  notes that “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 (cuts in funding) on readiness and capacity. While the military has been heavily engaged in operations, primarily in the Middle East but elsewhere as well, since September 11, 2001, experience is both ephemeral and context-sensitive. 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. Thus, though the current Joint Force is experienced in some types of operations, it is still aged and shrinking in its capacity for operations.”

The American Enterprise Institute opines: “Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, American power has slowly but surely atrophied relative to the burgeoning threats that confront the United States. Seemingly attractive short-term defense cuts carried long-term costs, not only in monetary terms, but also in proliferating risk to American national interests. Military spending has fallen since 1991 by every metric—as a percentage of GDP, as a percentage of the federal budget, and in real terms—even as a declining share of the Pentagon budget funds combat-related activities…

“American political leadership has consistently asked the military to do more with less. Without sufficient military credibility to deter or contain conflict, an ever-smaller American military has been sent abroad far more frequently than in the Cold War. If the rosy assumptions about threats to American interests had proved true, none of this would matter. Yet the past decade has seen drastic and widespread negative developments for American interests, from the direct threat of radical Islamist terrorism to China’s unwillingness to cooperate instead of compete and Russia’s delusions of grandeur. These threats to stability might each be soluble in isolation, but together they require sustained application of American economic, diplomatic, and cultural power, each buttressed by credible US military power. If American political leadership continues to underfund and overuse the military, it will not result in a less ambitious foreign policy. It will result only in greater risk to American national interests. A weaker military has resulted in less credible American security guarantees and increased likelihood of conflict. A strong American military will rebuild the trust of our allies and ensure stability for a new American century.”

Decisions over the fate and funding of America’s military have been tied to balance sheets, politics, and conflicting ideologies. It’s time that the only appropriate criteria—the ability to deter enemy aggression—replaced those comparatively trivial considerations.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The conversation America avoids

There is a conversation that America must have, but appears intent on avoiding. It is now abundantly clear that the Obama/Clinton/Kerry foreign policy has failed, and failed to an unprecedented and exceptionally dangerous degree. Despite clear evidence of failure, the Administration not only shows no intention of changing course, it refuses to even admit the extent of its missteps.

Islamic terrorists control more territory than ever, have more men under arms than ever, and have greater resources at their disposal than ever. The premature withdrawal of American troops from Iraq created a vacuum allowing ISIS to thrive.  U.S. support for deposing Gadhafi has turned Libya into an extremist playground, and the same result almost occurred following Obama’s encouragement for the overthrow of Egypt’s Mubarak—only a counter-revolution (opposed by the White House) saved that nation from the same result. Yemen, once touted as an Administration foreign policy success, is now in chaos. The Taliban is poised to make a comeback in Afghanistan, emboldened by the announced drawdown of U.S. forces.

China has not only become a military superpower, it has become a regional bully.

Russia, thanks to the Obama/Clinton “Reset” policy, now clearly outguns the West. The Ukraine has been dismembered, and the world waits for the next move, which may be against NATO members Latvia, Estonia, or Lithuania. Moscow’s bombers have begun patrolling the coasts of the United States and its allies.

Iran, thanks to the softening of sanctions, may soon have a nuclear weapon.

North Korea is now perfecting the missile technology to place its nuclear weapons on both land and submarine based ICBMs.
When people picks up a particular scent, it can pfizer viagra 50mg help have them into the mood as just what studies reveals. The popping or cracking noise sound of an adjustment is those gasses being viagra sale released. Post order viagra online recovery period is usually four to ten weeks and vacationing in India is never on the expensive side even during normal times. Due to its anti microbial cialis prices property the growth of micro organisms is inhibited in body.
The Russian, Chinese, and Iranian militaries are making significant inroads in Latin America, particularly Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.

America’s steadfast allies now doubt our resolve, as Chinese naval vessels threaten them in the Pacific, and Russian bombers and fighters fly threateningly near their homelands.

Rather than face these challenges, the White House issues delusional statements. The President states that the “Shadow of the crisis of terrorism has passed.” The Administration issues a national security study proclaiming that American is stronger and safer than ever.

For the most part, neither the President’s own party nor his Republican rivals have given this crucial issue the attention it requires. Democrats fear that doing so would require committing resources to defense and away from the social spending programs it depends on for voter loyalty. Republicans hesitate in the belief that the American public, exhausted by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is unprepared to listen and inclined to turn against the bearer of the bad news.

The peril grows rapidly.

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

Military Voters Organize Against Failed Obama Policies

During his tenure in office, President Obama has, in the words made popular in the John Lennon song, “give peace a chance.”

  • He slashed military spending even as potential adversaries raised theirs.
  • He advocates for a unilateral American reduction in nuclear weapons.
  • He signed an arms control treaty that left Washington at a distinct disadvantage.
  • He withdrew American troops from Iraq and announced a withdrawal date from Afghanistan.
  • He pulled back on purely defensive measures such as the anti-missile system.
  • He refused to allow energy drilling on federal lands that would have limited Moscow’s oil and gas-financed ability to finance its vast military buildup.
  • He withdrew all U.S. tanks from Europe.
  • He has pursued the closing of militarily vital industrial plants.
  • He refused to fulfill treaty obligations with the Philippines and Ukraine when they were assaulted by China and Russia.
  • He did not retaliate against Islamic fundamentalists for the assault on Benghazi.
  • He has not responded to the growth in Russian, Chinese, and Iranian military influence in Latin America.
  • He has weakened sanctions against Iran’s nuclear development program.
  • Where U.S. troops are deployed, he has made the rules of engagement so stringent that American troops are killed before they even get permission to fire back.
  • He advocates putting U.S. troops under the jurisdiction of the U.N. criminal court, a move guaranteed to handcuff and endanger them further.
  • During his re-election campaign, the votes of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines stationed overseas were mysteriously delivered late.

Some men using PDE5-inhibitors may experience side effects such as flushing, itching and gastrointestinal upset). cheap levitra It helps to gain harder and bigger erection for pleasurable buying viagra on line coition. Chief constituents of Vital M-40 capsules are Balsamodendron Mukul, Terminalis Chebula, Saffron, Ferrum, Pongamia Glabra, Aril Myristica Fragrans, brand viagra from canada Onosma Bracteatum, Orchis Mascula, Strychnos Nux-Vomia, Asparagus Adscendens etc. Men who utilize this jelly have a tendency to do so as it has a speedier impact than purchase cialis online http://secretworldchronicle.com/tag/enrico-marconi/ and as it is in a jelly structure numerous men want to utilize it on the off chance that they battle to have the capacity to swallow tablets.
The end result has been a dramatically more dangerous world, with military activity in Europe and Asia on a scale not seen since the end of World War II, as well as the resurgence of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

In response, a unique movement has been started by former and current members of the U.S. armed forces to get out the vote in 2014 in attempt to strengthen the legislative branch’s ability to halt Mr. Obama’s dangerous foreign policy missteps.

The movement is spearheaded by the founders of the organization, Special Operations Speaks,  which was formed in the aftermath of the Benghazi debacle. According to the organization,

“Interestingly enough, when GWB was president you heard about the military deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan almost daily.  With Obama in the White House, however, the mainstream media has been strangely quiet.  More than 1,000 American soldiers have lost their lives in Afghanistan in the last 27 months.  This is more than the combined total of the nine years before…The Commander in Chief is AWOL.   There is a deep disgust, a fury, growing in the ranks of the military against the indifferent incompetence of this president…But there is now a movement afoot in the Armed Services to launch a massive get-out-the-vote drive against this President.”

As global events spin out of control, it is increasingly likely that not only those with military experience but also voters deeply concerned about the likelihood of a major war caused by  the White House’s demonstrably unsuccessful foreign policies will make their concern felt at the ballot box.