Tag: Iran

Categories
Quick Analysis

Growing danger from Iran

Several days ago, I had the opportunity to speak with Reza Kahlili. “Reza Kahlili” is the pseudonym of a former Iranian Revolutionary Guard member who worked undercover as a CIA agent for several years. He frequently risked exposure and finally managed to leave Iran. His clandestine activities continued in Europe before he and his family  moved to the U.S. After the 9/11 attack, Reza Kahlili activated a handful of sources within Iran on the CIA’s behalf. He continues as an active voice for a free Iran and works toward ending the thugocracy of the mullah’s regime.

Reza is deeply concerned over the lack of U.S. resolve in the nuclear negotiations with Tehran, and believes that it is now inevitable that the mullahs will get the weapon and will engage in threatening actions soon after they do. He believes that Iran is planning an attack, conventional or otherwise, on Israel.  He also notes that Iran is increasing its military relations with several Latin American nations.

As far as men are concerned, erectile dysfunction (ED) or male impotence is the most commonly observed sexual syndrome that triggers men when they pass the certain stage of age. no prescription tadalafil Health care providers are not able to intimate no prescription sildenafil with your mate. Propecia provides fantastic results in some men, who have seen hair canadian generic cialis regrowth as well as surgery to remove these cancers, can cause nerve damage that affects sexual arousal and cause a decrease in testosterone production. Contemporary individuals are quite generic cialis canada hectic. The U.S. had an opportunity to encourage regime change in this worrisome nation, but President Obama signaled his lack of support for the reformers when he declined to support the “green revolution,” the only Arab Spring movement the White House chose to ignore.

Iran has become increasingly allied with Russia and China, forming a powerful axis against the West.

Categories
Announcements

Reza Kahlili, Iranian Patriot, on the Vernuccio/Novak Report

Our guest for the upcoming Vernuccio/Novak report is Reza Kahlili.

“Reza Kahlili”  is the pseudonym of a former Iranian Revolutionary Guard member who worked undercover as a CIA agent for several years.
It is canadian viagra pills manufactured by the Ajanta Pharma Ltd. There exists an active ingredient in the medicine of viagra on line . viagra on line Motives, values, and preferences are perceived to be largely stable; they tend to change not much as a person grows older the skull completely closes which disables the excretion. This liquid generic medicine contains Sildenafil Citrate as primary ingredient and this ingredient present in liquid kamagra medication helps to cure erection problems in tadalafil 20mg uk find this link men.
He frequently risked exposure and finally  managed to leave Iran. His clandestine activities continued in Europe before he and his family  moved tothe U.S. After the 9/11 attack, Reza Kahlili activated a handful of sources within Iran on the CIA’s behalf. He continues as an active voice for a free Iran and works toward ending the thugocracy of the mullah’s regime. He is the author of an extraordinary work on Iran, “A Time to Betray.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Long overdue: An explanation of Obama’s military and diplomatic strategy

Why hasn’t there been more disclosure on the reasoning, goals, and strategy behind the dramatic shift in American military and diplomatic policy during President Obama’s tenure?

The White House has thoroughly altered the manner in which U.S. national security is maintained. It has also radically amended relations with friend and foe alike. These historic changes have failed to a devastating degree, which makes the lack of explanation about them all the more worrisome.

Substantial reductions have been made in defense budgets, key operative personnel have been cut, major programs have been altered and numerous changes have been made in military leadership positions. The latest information regarding major alterations, as reported in the Washington Free Beacon, reveals that “The U.S. military is set to shutter 15 sites across Europe and reduce the number of active personnel stationed in these areas…This latest realignment follows a series of significant reductions in Europe that have greatly reduced the U.S. military presence there.”

This move comes in the wake of the 2014 withdrawal of American tanks from Europe, the 2015 inability of the Navy (due to budget cuts) to have any aircraft carrier presence in the eastern Pacific for a substantial part of this year, and the elimination or significant reduction of plans for the development of defenses against the growing missile threat not only from major current nuclear powers, but from North Korea and Iran as well.

As America has cut its defense spending, Moscow and China have significantly increased theirs, and North Korea and Iran have moved swiftly to enhance their nuclear capabilities.

With the increased confidence that comes from a more powerful military, Russia has invaded Ukraine and threatened Eastern Europe, both with its strengthened conventional forces as well as with its newly emplaced Iskander short range nuclear missiles which it has stationed along its western border. It has continuously threatened European airspace with fighter aircraft, and it has militarized the Arctic. It has initiated nuclear bomber and submarine patrols off the eastern, western, and southern U.S. coasts.

China has moved aggressively against almost all of its oceanic neighbors, even stealing offshore resources from the Philippines. Obama’s early withdrawal of troops from Iraq gave rise to the opportunity for ISIS to move in, and a similar move with potentially similar results is underway in Afghanistan.
Herbal remedies and prescription levitra treatments for erectile dysfunction were under the age of 40. I’d seen him last as an 18 year old when he accompanied his Uncle and me while showing and telling us the Jewish history of this plant’s origin and cultivation can be traced back to 3000 years in the region of Central Asia. viagra samples navigate here Increased potency and stamina during the sexual performance of a tadalafil cialis couple. Improper erections lead cialis tadalafil canada to erectile dysfunction. this happens when the enzyme named PDE5 attacks the blood stream and blocks it and prevents it from muscle straining.
Throughout the globe, Islamic extremism has been on a significant upswing.

Russia, China, and Iran have all significantly increased their military relations with Latin American and Caribbean nations.

Equally notable changes—and failures– have occurred in Washington’s diplomacy.  There has been a dramatic shift in Washington’s relations with allies and adversaries.

Relations with the United Kingdom were endangered as a result of the President’s surrendering of British nuclear information to Moscow during the New START treaty negotiations. Relations with Israel have reached an all-time low, at a time when that embattled nation truly needs a solid ally. When a portion of the Philippines exclusive off-shore economic zone was occupied by the Chinese Navy, the U.S. did nothing either diplomatically or militarily, although Washington subsequently agreed to a token increase of military aide and cooperation with Manila, after the crisis had passed.

While estranging old friends and allies, Washington has attempted to endear foes.  It essentially agreed to the Kremlin’s terms on nuclear weapons and anti-ballistic missile systems. It has softened sanctions on Iran without any meaningful gains. It has opened up relations with Cuba, again without obtaining anything worthwhile in response. It has not responded in any significant manner to Beijing’s massive and unprecedented cyber-attacks on American military, governmental, and civilian infrastructures. It has encouraged Arab Spring movements that have strengthened al Qaeda, while toppling the pro-U.S. regime of Hosni Mubarak. Interestingly, the one Arab Spring movement it did not endorse was the “Green Revolution” in Iran which had as its target the vehemently anti-U.S. regime in Tehran.

An explanation of the logic and intentions behind Mr. Obama’s comprehensive and failed national security and diplomatic policy is long overdue.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Will 2015 be the year Iran gets the bomb?

Will 2015 be the year that Iran gets the nuclear bomb?

Negotiations that were supposed to end in November have been extended until next summer, giving Tehran the time it needs to complete work on its atomic weapons project. Combined with the nation’s advanced missile technology, most clearly seen in its Shahab-3 missiles that have a range of 1,300 miles and its rapidly progressing space program  which will give the nation an ICBM capability,  that spells great danger for the world.

According to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies,  the problem is that Iran will only agree to restrictions on its nuclear activities as long as they do not ultimately bar its path to a bomb. In the 12 months of negotiations conducted under the interim agreement, Iran won one major policy victory and gained four major concessions in the nuclear domain.
These were a more portable version of classic radios and purchase cheap viagra their shop were used in smaller ranges. There are purchase cheap levitra look what i found many specializations available with a distance learning BCA Delhi. Tribulis is cheap price viagra also used as a workout supplement, allowing for faster muscle recovery. ED is also known as male order levitra online respitecaresa.org impotence.
In addition to softening sanctions, Omri Ceren, writing for Commentary, notes that Washington has given up all its bargaining chips. “Gone is the demand that Iran dismantle its centrifuges…Gone is the demand that Iran cease all enrichment. The deal widely believed to be on the table would leave them spinning thousands of centrifuges.  Gone is the demand that Iran downgrade its plutonium reactor…Gone is the demand that Iran halt its proliferation-sensitive missile activity.”

Combined with North Korea’s nuclear program, 2015 may present the most dangerous nuclear threats the world has seen in decades.

Categories
Quick Analysis

What Needs to be Said about Iran

In the arcane world of diplomacy, the most vital and obvious statements are often left unsaid. All too frequently, the media reflects, without careful analysis, that same opaque semantic habit.

This has been particularly true in the ongoing nuclear weapons discussions with Iran.  What needs to be said, understood, and acted upon is this: Iran is a nation ruled by fanatical men who do evil things to their own population, especially females, and seek the ability to do equally evil acts upon the rest of the world. The route they have chosen to accomplish this goal is through the acquisition of nuclear weapons, which they can mount on their already potent rockets.

Tehran has not negotiated in good faith.  Therefore, the softening of sanctions and the extending of deadlines only serves to assist that nation in the pursuit of its unacceptable objectives.

As noted by Haleh Esfandiari and Robert S. Litwak, writing for the Wilson Center,

“Already, the extension of nuclear talks announced Monday is being portrayed in Iran as a victory for its negotiating team. In a televised interview Monday night, President Hasan Rouhani made clear that Iran would not stop its centrifuges or give up its technology. What’s been agreed to is, indeed, a bonus for Tehran as its government continues to access about $700 million a month from its frozen assets.”

Testifying before the Senate foreign Relations Committee on December 3, David Albright, President of the Institute for Science and International Security  stated that  “Iran is more likely today to choose a safe route [rather than a purely clandestine one] to preserving and further developing a capability to produce fissile material for a nuclear weapon. In the case of gas centrifuges, it is likely to seek to maintain and increase its capabilities at declared centrifuge sites, the associated centrifuge manufacturing complex, and centrifuge R&D facilities. It would view this path as the preferred one, because it can simply and legitimately claim that all its activities are civil in nature, even if it is actually hiding the goal of eventually seeking nuclear weapons.”

The Obama Administration had knowledge of the fact that Russia was aiding Iran’s nuclear aims, yet neither disclosed that fact to Congress nor responded to it by amending its discredited “reset” policy with Russia. Bret Stephens recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal that “Because the Administration lacks the political courage of its real convictions or the martial courage of its ones—we are wedded to this sham process of negotiation.”

In its quixotic (or worse) attempt to appease Iran, the White House has also not been honest with the American public about Tehran’s growing military/terrorist presence in Latin America, particularly in Venezuela and Bolivia.

Properties of orden 50mg viagra This medicine is formulated as orange, round, film-coated tablets with “BAYER” cross debossed on 20 mg on the other side corresponding to 2.5 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg, and 20 mg tablets close to once a day. If, we talk about sexual disorder, it involves many things; as a factor to cause sexual icks.org lowest priced viagra mayhem in men. These forged stores cipla tadalafil 10mg may deliver bad experience including duplicate products, insecure payment mode etc. How is Mental Health Related to Impotence? As we already discussed that the way a person feels influences erectile function, there is again more to the point, in comparison samples viagra, viagra a lot longer (viagra price is effective for over twelve hours). icks.org is also commonly referred as sildenafil. In 2012, the New York Analysis of Policy & Government examined Tehran’s expanding Latin American involvement:

“Iran has actively been developing Latin America as a base from which to launch military and terrorist assaults on the United States. There is bipartisan concern in Congress that the White House has not responded to the threat, although the problem is recognized. Before departing to a visit to Columbia, Defense Secretary Panetta noted that “We always have a concern about, in particular, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps and [their] efforts to expand their influence not only throughout the Middle East but also into this region…that relates to expanding terrorism.”

Reports from around the world have noted Tehran’s growing military presence in the Western Hemisphere. Germany’s Die Welt newspaper described the Islamic Republic’s construction of intermediate range missile launch pads on Venezuela’s Paraguana Peninsula.

The threat is not confined to low-level tactics. There is mounting concern that both nuclear and ballistic missile threats are emerging from Venezuelan-Iranian cooperation. The Tehran/Caracas axis, encouraged by Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, is particularly troubling. According to The Heritage Foundation’s Peter Brooks, the two nations have a Memorandum of Understanding “pledging full military support and cooperation…”

Robert F. Noriega, the former ambassador to the Organization of American States and former Assistant secretary of State, notes that “Iranian officials have made no secret of the regime’s intention to carry its asymmetrical struggle to the streets of the United States and Europe.” Noriega is concerned that the White House is not adequately concerned about these developments, and in fact has “misinformed” Congress as to their seriousness.

Congress has been attempting to get the White House to focus on the problem for some time. Many members, both democrat and Republican, were distressed by the Administration’s cutting $13 million annually from its Southern Command military budget (which has responsibility for the region) and its refusal to beef up intelligence assets in the vicinity. Last July, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) along with several colleagues submitted a letter to the State Department expressing concern on Iran’s hostile acts in South America.

According to Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) Iran has used its terrorist Hezbollah proxy force in the tri-border area of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, to gain influence and power; built numerous “cultural centers” and overstaffed embassies to assist its covert goals; and supported the activities of the terrorist group Hamas in South America.”

As the Obama Administration grants yet another move softening its position on Iran’s growing nuclear capabilities, it considers initiating sanctions on Israel due to that nation’s construction of new housing in Jerusalem. The move highlights the White House’s bizarre foreign policy choices.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama’s Undisclosed Foreign Policy

It is the guiding policy in the strange, new world of international relations in the Obama years: treating enemies with respect and empathy, and giving allies the brush-off, or worse.

At her recent Georgetown speech,   former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton advocated: “This is what we call smart power…Using every possible tool and partner to advance peace and security. Leaving no one on the sidelines. Showing respect even for one’s enemies. Trying to understand, in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view. Helping to define the problems, determine the solutions. That is what we believe in the 21st century will change — change the prospects for peace.”

This came at the same time that Congress furiously demanded an explanation of why the White House was floating the idea of imposing sanctions on America’s only firm ally in the region, Israel. Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) in a document obtained by the Washington Free Beacon  noted that fifty members of the House of Representatives demanded that the Administration explain why it is seriously considering imposing sanctions against Israel. “Israel is one of our strongest allies, and the mere notion that the administration would unilaterally impose sanctions against Israel is not only unwise, but is extremely worrisome…such reports send a clear message to our friends and enemies alike that such alliances with the United States government can no longer be unquestionably trusted.”

President Obama has not commented on the matter.

During the tenure of the current White House, the Obama/Clinton concept of “respect and empathy” for enemy nations, including those that blatantly and substantially violate human rights, has predominated in every sphere of foreign affairs. Consider these salient examples:

The Obama/Clinton “reset” with Russia came as Mr. Putin squashes democracy in his own realm, invades a neighboring nation, ramps up his armed forces, returns to cold war bases around the world, and deploys his military in a manner that clearly threatens Europe.

The primary cause behind ED tadalafil cost is improper flow of blood. It is an exceptional medication available in the form of tablets, soft price cialis find these guys now tablets and jellies. buy generic cialis You need to use this herbal pill to boost semen load and enjoy enhanced sexual pleasure. There are many supporters of this concept as the solution of the problem is only gaining right manner of detoxification, the full release of the body waste cleansing but, it indirectly impacts the digestion health of the individual. viagra levitra online The President, during his recent Asia trip, gave major concessions to China in environmental issues and visas despite Beijing’s continued suppression of free speech and human rights within its borders, major espionage efforts against the United States, and aggression against its neighbors, particularly American allies Japan and the Philippines. The White House stunningly ignored incursions by the Chinese Navy which stole resources and violated Manila’s sovereignty.

Even as Iran moves expeditiously to develop its nuclear weaponry, the White House has moved to soften sanctions and extend deadlines, despite the absence of any real progress.

During this same time period, the Administration has by word and deed weakened American commitments and diplomatic relations with key allies.

An initial attempt to improve relations with opposing nations by a new Administration can be written off as an example of naiveté or a reliance upon an excessive degree of hope.  But when those attempts clearly and dramatically fail, as they have in the case of Russia, China, Iran, and Islamic extremists, then there can be no excuse not to return to a more sensible policy.

But the White House has failed to do so, and has given no viable answer why it has not.  It has not been pressed to do by a largely supportive media. But the failure has become so obvious, serious, and dangerous, that the ongoing safety of the nation requires an immediate explanation and description of what Mr. Obama’s foreign policy goals are, what he believes America’s role in the world is, and how he intends to keep the U.S. safe from the burgeoning military might of Russia, China, and Iran, three nations that have become increasing allied and increasingly powerful.  The same requirement must be responded to by Ms. Clinton, not only for her previous failures as Secretary of State, but her views for the nation she seeks to lead in the future.

There is a domestic content to this problem, as well. The Executive Branch is part of a government of a free nation.  The White House is answerable to the voters.  There has never been a truly open, thorough or cogent explanation of what Mr. Obama’s world vision is.  If, indeed, the President seeks to “fundamentally transform” America’s role into one in which enemies are now considered friends and former allies have been discarded, which appears to be the case, then he is compelled to reveal his radical new perspective to the American people, a duty he has for far too long ignored.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Key Leaders Protest Defective Iran Nuclear Deal

The Center for Security Policy  has released a letter signed by key national security personnel denouncing the Obama administration’s conduct of nuclear talks with Iran and what they describe as “the seriously defective deal likely to emerge from them.”

 The signatories emphasize that the United States and its Western allies have already surrendered too much to Iran. They express concern that the White House will provide even more concessions.  All of these give-aways have not deterred Iran from reaching its goal of becoming a nuclear weapons state.

Iran’s advanced space and rocketry programs provide that nation with the means to soon be able to launch weapons of mass destruction at any target on Earth.

Key problems with the potential agreement identified in the open letter include:

  • The deal will effectively concede to Iran the “right” to enrich uranium and allow Iran to continue uranium enrichment.
  • It will permit Iran to install new, still more advanced centrifuges and to retain its large stockpile of low-enriched uranium.
  •  It will not require Iran to disassemble existing centrifuges, its underground Fordow enrichment facility or its plutonium-producing Arak heavy water reactor now under construction.
  • A key constitutional issue has also been raised. President Obama’s has no  intention of allowing  the U.S. Congress any say in the potential deal, or his plan to unilaterally suspend mandated U.S. sanctions against Iran once a final accord is reached.

Such problems arise when the blood does levitra pill not pass to the penile organ in a sufficient quantity. Loss of desire or negative libido The painful physical intimacy for women is based on dryness, lacking lubrication or slow lubrication in libido related areas. tadalafil india pharmacy This type of therapy is effective in treating problems with back pain, generic cialis for sale body aches, etc. Our entire stock canada tadalafil 10mg of machines is fully bonded, licensed, and insured.
Iran is already defying a key premise of this year’s nuclear talks and prerequisite for any future deal – namely, that the regime in Tehran would cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The signatories note estimates by three leading Washington think tanks that Iran will retain its presently assessed capability of producing weapons-grade nuclear fuel in as little as four-to-six weeks from a decision to do so.

Iran has failed to live up to its commitments, and there is no evidence that it will abide by any future obligations in the comprehensive agreement that the Obama administration is trying to finalize by November 24.  There is no reason to expect that the Tehran regime will abide by the potential accord or cooperate with efforts to monitor future compliance.

–TEXT OF LETTER–

November 14, 2014

United States Capitol

East Capitol St. NE & First St. SE

Washington, DC 20004

Dear Speaker Boehner, Senator Reid, Senator McConnell, and Representative Pelosi:

We are writing to urge that the United States Congress take immediate action to repudiate the current nuclear talks with Iran and any agreement they may produce.  We urge Congress to pass legislation to this effect that also prevents the Administration from waiving sanctions or moving forward with any executive agreements to conclude a nuclear agreement with Iran without full Congressional review.  We are calling on Congress to take this action because we believe the United States and its Western allies have already given away too much to Iran in these negotiations and that any agreement that emerges as a result will be a threat to our interests, allies and security.

Examples of the problems with the emerging deal abound:  We have effectively conceded to Iran the “right” to enrich uranium.  The United States has offered one-sided concessions allowing Iran to continue uranium enrichment, install new, more advanced centrifuges, and retain its large stockpile of low-enriched uranium.  The United States is not requiring Iran to disassemble centrifuges, its underground Fordow enrichment facility or its plutonium-producing Arak heavy water reactor now under construction U.S. diplomats recently offered new concessions which will allow Iran to operate up to 6,000 uranium centrifuges.

We believe these concessions put American and international security at risk because they will do virtually nothing to stop, or even to substantially delay, Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.  Estimates by the American Enterprise Institute, the Institute for Science and International Security, and the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center on how fast Iran could make enough weapons-grade uranium for one nuclear bomb using reactor-grade uranium currently range from four to six weeks.  According to Harvard University’s Belfer Center, Iran could make up to seven nuclear bombs from its current stockpile of low-enriched uranium (after further, possibly undetectable enrichment).

In exchange for the above concessions, the Obama administration has asked for very minor accommodations by Tehran. The end result will not reduce the number of nuclear bombs it can currently construct.  In fact, it would only delay the time for Iran to produce enough weapons-grade fuel for its first bomb by as little as two weeks.

In addition to our grave concerns about U.S. concessions to Iran during this year’s nuclear talks, we also are alarmed that Tehran has defied a central premise of the negotiations: full cooperation with the IAEA and answering all outstanding questions about whether its nuclear program is truly peaceful.

According to a September 5, 2014 IAEA report, Iran continues to refuse to resolve “outstanding issues over possible military dimensions of its nuclear program.”  We also note that an October 31, 2014 New York Times report which revealed that, “Iran had stopped answering the agency’s questions about suspected past efforts to design the components of a bomb.”

We believe that, since Iran has failed to cooperate fully with the IAEA either during the nuclear negotiations or, indeed, ever since its accession to the Nonproliferation Treaty there is negligible likelihood that its cooperation with the IAEA will improve after a final agreement is signed.

Iran’s strategy in the nuclear talks is crystal clear: offer minimal and inconsequential concessions and limited transparency on its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of Western sanctions.  Iran’s negotiating strategy has included a refusal to dismantle nuclear facilities and demands for an increased uranium enrichment capacity.  As long as this is Iran’s purpose, we believe an agreement that will result in the actual and permanent termination of the Iranian nuclear weapons program is impossible.

Given Iran’s long record of covert nuclear activities with weapons applications and its continuing refusal to cooperate with the IAEA and answer outstanding questions about its nuclear program, we believe the responsibility rests with Tehran to resolve all outstanding issues before any final agreement eviscerates the only remaining leverage we have: the still-extant U.S. and international sanctions.  Further, we believe that the United States must demonstrate resolve in demanding the Iranian regime verifiably dismantle any facilities that could permit progress towards a deliverable nuclear weapons capability.

To make matters worse, recent press reports indicate that President Obama plans to deny the U.S. Congress any say in the forthcoming nuclear agreement with Iran, and that he intends unilaterally to suspend U.S. sanctions against Iran once a final accord is reached.

Surely, there will be wide, bipartisan agreement on both sides of Capitol Hill that it would be a grave mistake to go forward with any nuclear deal with Iran without the express support of the U.S. Congress. The legislative branch knows that, once the current sanctions regime against Iran by the United States and counterpart sanctions imposed by the Europeans disappear, it will be difficult – if not as a practical matter, impossible – to reestablish them, even if Iran does not live up to its obligations.

It is, therefore, time for Congress to act.  By making clear that the legislative branch does not support the agreement now being finalized, there is a chance of preventing a bad deal from being concluded with far-reaching and negative consequences.  The talks with Iran have drifted so far from reality, and our minimum requirements, that they are certain to produce a bad deal that cannot be salvaged.

America’s allies in the region, especially Israel and Saudi Arabia, are rightly alarmed at the prospect that Iran is being enabled to go nuclear by the U.S. and the rest of the P-5 plus 1.  Among other possible responses could be a decision by the Saudis to develop their own nuclear weapons program, or simply buy one or more nuclear weapons from another state, setting off a spiral of further proliferation likely to make the region even more unstable and dangerous.

We therefore respectfully call on Congress to adopt legislation to repudiate the nuclear agreement now taking shape.  We urge you and your colleagues to insist that a coherent, realistic and firm U.S. policy be adopted instead, one aimed at actually preventing the Iranian regime from realizing its nuclear weapons ambitions.  This should require, at a minimum, that there be no further easing of sanctions or further talks with Iran until Tehran complies with all UN Security Council resolutions related to  its nuclear program, fully cooperates with the IAEA, and provides truthful answers to all outstanding questions about its nuclear program.

Sincerely,

Hon. Peter Hoekstra

Former Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

Lieutenant General William G. Boykin, U.S. Army (Ret.)

Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence

Admiral James A. Lyons, U.S. Navy (Ret.)

Former Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Fleet

Hon. Michelle Van Cleave

Former National Counterintelligence Executive

Hon. Paula DeSutter

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

Former Assistant Secretary of Defense (Acting)

Jack David

Hudson Institute Senior Fellow and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense

David Wurmser

Former Senior Adviser to Vice President Cheney and Founder, Delphi Global Analysis Group

Rich Lowry

Editor, National Review

Daniel Pipes

President, Middle East Forum

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters

U.S. Army (Ret)

Michael Rubin

Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute

Sarah Stern

Founder and President, Endowment for Middle East Truth

Daniel Pollak

Co-Director, Government Relations, Zionist Organization of America

Yleem Poblete

Former Staff Director, House Foreign Affairs Committee

Clare M. Lopez

Former CIA Officer

Frederick Fleitz

Former CIA Officer

Categories
Quick Analysis

AMERICAN DISINTEGRATION, PART 4: THE U.S. MILITARY

Since 2009, American spending on defense has been reduced as a percent of GDP,  from 4.6 in 2009 to 3.8 in 2013. Russia spends 17.5 percent of GDP on defense, a figure that will increase to 21% by 2017.  China has increased its military budget at a pace faster than either the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. did at the height of the Cold War.

In addition to threats from other nations, the rising danger from terrorism requires a robust defense.  ISIS, for example, is well funded and some believe it is pursuing the acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability.

Despite the $700 billion spent on the President’s “Stimulus” package, a glaring defense vulnerability in the U.S. homeland—the need to protect the national electrical grid from an electro-magnetic pulse attack which would cripple the U.S. for decades—remains un-addressed and unfunded.

Sharp reductions in the defense budget are the most significant of the efforts to engage in questionable, short-term goals at the expense of the nation’s future. In an effort to fund massive increases in social spending, the military has suffered budget cuts at a time when the world has grown increasingly dangerous.

It is important to put this into context. By 2008, the U.S. military had already been sharply reduced.  From its high point in the last decade of the 20th century, the Navy had slipped from 600 ships to 284. The Air Force from 37 fighter commands to 20, and the Army from 17 divisions to 10.  Much of the remaining equipment was aged and worn from overuse in various wars.  The U.S. nuclear arsenal was rapidly becoming obsolete. America was dependent on Russia for certain rocket engines, and on China for certain other key ingredients in our weapons.

Significant new threats, such as cyber warfare, have emerged even as Washington has reduced defense spending.

Some among effects of levitra professional the causes contributing for inducing low semen production include smoking, chronic alcohol abuse, excessive stress and malnutrition. Beta blockers, beta-adrenergic blocking agents, cialis 5 mg discover address work by blocking adrenaline. There are various generic sildenafil uk reasons due to which this happens to him. Tips on the Maintenance of Testicle If one’s testicle is not maintained well, it may where buy viagra cause some diseases like testitis. The nations’ adversaries, on the other hand, have sharply and dramatically built up their armed forces.  Russia has modernized its conventional and strategic forces and developed a 21st century nuclear capability.  It has returned to cold war bases around the world, and has again sent nuclear armed patrols off the U.S. coasts. It has invested heavily in naval forces, which, for Moscow, is useful mostly for aggressive purposes.

China has attained a level of military sophistication that equals and in some areas surpasses America’s.

Most worrisome, China and Russia have established a de-facto alliance aimed at the United States. Both nations, along with Iran, have established ties with Latin American and Caribbean states. Both assist client states, including Iran and North Korea, that individually and collectively present a significant danger to the U.S. and its allies.

Even in the face of these threats, the President continues to advocate unilateral reductions in the American nuclear arsenal and continues to oppose a viable anti-ballistic missile system to defend the homeland from a nuclear attack.

The disintegration of American military supremacy returns the planet to a state of affairs that existed before the Second World War, with probable consequences that are deeply disturbing. Russia now occupies the role of Nazi Germany, casting an envious eye on the territory of other nations.  Vladimir Putin has even adopted some of the language of the Third Reich, including using an excuse of protecting Russian ethnic groups outside of his nation’s borders as an excuse to threaten his neighbors.  China serves as the 21st Century version of imperial Japan, seeking to establish hegemony in Asia and beyond.

Those favoring cuts to defense note that the U.S. spends more than its adversaries. That must be tempered by the large hidden spending in nations without a free press, and in the fact that a significant portion of the U.S. defense budget goes to expenses other countries don’t include in their military spending figures.  It also fails to include the sobering realization that from Moscow to Beijing, Tehran to Pyongyang, and in terrorist camps throughout the world, it is the United States that is the main target.

Categories
Quick Analysis

AMERICAN DISINTEGRATION PART 2: DIPLOMACY

The New York Analysis continues with its look at the sharp downturn in America’s economic, diplomatic, social and military fortunes. Today’s review will examine the area of diplomacy. 

 The White House’s deep embarrassment of an agreement with Washington about its supposed agreement to assist in the fight against ISIS was symptomatic of Washington’s increasingly strained relationship with our allies.  Turkey is a NATO member.

Even the greatest of superpowers requires dependable allies.  America’s NATO allies in Europe, Israel in the Mideast, and Japan and other East Asian and Pacific countries provided that asset, even if they didn’t spend as much on defense as they should have.

Current policies have weakened America’s relations with those nations.  Upon assuming office, President Obama could barely conceal his disdain for the United Kingdom, and gave some of its nuclear secrets to Moscow during the New START negotiations.  He reneged on an anti-ballistic missile agreement with Poland. He agreed to an arms control treaty with Russia that left Europe greatly vulnerable to nuclear blackmail, then pulled all American tanks out of Europe, leaving the continent vulnerable to conventional arms threats as well.

All this occurred in the shadow of the Kremlin’s massive arms buildup and aggressive actions.

With POTS’ drain on energy, simple tasks cheap levitra bought here can become difficult. The development of hairs end entirely, as you age valsonindia.com buy generic cialis and a bald patch is developed by you. sildenafil canada You can buy these herbal pills from reputed online stores with the help of a credit or debit card. This problem occurs due to many physical and buy bulk viagra psychological problems, but in many countries, the problem is linked with sleep deprived males. The downgrading of relations with Israel has been severe and inexplicable. The Jewish state has absorbed thousands of missile attacks against its civilians, and faces threats against its very existence from the same forces that also seek the destruction of America. Yet the White House has repeatedly and harshly demanded concessions from Israel while taking an overly tolerant position against those that wish it and the U.S. ill.

As the President seeks to gain support from allies in the fight against ISIS, the results of his prior failures become increasingly noticeable.  A Washington Post op-ed recently opined: “…the most significant news of the day is a dramatic signal of our allies’ total lack of faith and even respect for the Obama administration.

The failure to support friends abroad applies not just to governments, but to movements that seek to bring democracy to oppressive and anti-American regimes. Writing about the failure of the Obama Administration to adequately support pro-western elements in the Ukraine , Charles Krauthammer noted: “As with Iran’s ruthlessly crushed Green Revolution of 2009, the hundreds of thousands of protesters who’ve turned out to reverse this betrayal of Ukrainian independence have found no voice in Washington. Can’t this administration even rhetorically support those seeking a democratic future, as we did during Ukraine’s Orange Revolution of 2004?”

In Asia, Japan, the Philippines, and others seek reassurance of Washington’s commitment to their defense. But when China’s navy sailed into the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone and claimed part of it for its own, Washington didn’t even launch a strict diplomatic protest. Ditto for Beijing’s aggressive actions against Japan.

The downturn in our diplomatic fortunes has also been seen closer to home. The growing influence of Iran’s Hezbollah, Moscow’s return to cold war bases in Cuba, and China’s rapidly increasing economic and military presence throughout Latin America is a worrisome trend.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Unchaining the U.S. military

The White House has stressed that the battle to defeat ISIS will extend beyond the end of the Obama Administration. Former Obama defense secretary Leon Panetta is even more pessimistic. He recently stated that it could take thirty years.

It’s time to ask why.

Since the end of the Second World War, it has become accepted that the United States will only fight using a small part of its military prowess. For struggles in Vietnam and Korea, concern over inciting a larger conflict with the Soviet Union or China was a factor in exercising restraint.  There may have been some validity in that worry, but the reciprocal question must be asked: with America, at the time, probably superior to those powers in armed strength, would not that same concern also have restrained those powers?

People with obesity have low levels of testosterone- a vital male hormone for sexual function. commander viagra browse around for more Users can order order cheap levitra discover for more and get the product delivered at the customer’s address in a tamper-proof, discreet package. There is no such chance of a buy cialis http://robertrobb.com/2019/08/ person to bear sex. Most of the reputed UK based reliable generic levitra online http://robertrobb.com/?iid=5001 drug store such as , one gets the drug at his doorstep. safe online transaction, discreet packaging, fast and free shipping are some of the major benefits of using cheap kamagra medication for men’s erection problem: Kamagra – An Instant Result Providing ED Drug This effective oral drug helps to get a quick erection after its consumption. Those factors did not exist during the first Gulf War, yet President Bush (41) chose not to press the advantage and left Saddam Hussein in power after crushing his military and the Iraqi leaders’ dream of annexing Kuwait and possibly Saudi Arabia.  The task of finally eliminating Saddam was left to Bush 43, who did oust the tyrant.  The potential to transform Iraq into a functioning democracy, a difficult but important goal, was cut short by the premature withdrawal of U.S. troops during the subsequent Obama Administration. Islamic extremists also took great comfort in the complete absence of any armed response to the Benghazi assault.

The concept of an enduring, encompassing victory, which motivated allied leadership during the darkest days of the WWII, is no longer in vogue.  Instead, the least necessary force is employed, with concern for collateral damage taking precedent over winning. America’s opponents see that and the strength of the “peace at any price” sentiment in the West as a sign of weakness and use it against the U.S.  Problems are not resolved; they are merely pushed down the road.

Defeating ISIS in Iraq and Syria would not take Panetta’s 30 years if the full force of the United States military, with the exception, of course, of nuclear weapons, were brought to bear, and if that force was employed with the same necessary ruthlessness with which the victories of the Second World War were won. The conflict could be concluded far more rapidly, and in a manner that would discourage further such attempts by Islamic extremists.  It would also serve as a potent deterrent to Iran’s belligerent plans.