News and views

NUCLEAR REALITY IN IRAN

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/95334/Nuclear_reality_in_Iran : 4-13-09

I think Roger Cohen is delusional. We haven’t “squandered” anything when it comes to interacting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, center, waves during the inauguration of the country's first nuclear fuel manufacturing plant on April 9, 2009.(EPA/Corbis/Abedin Taherkenareh)
Reality is that his/their agenda is in no way aligned with ours. As Michael Rubin in the Wall Street Journal asserts, Obama’s idea of “negotiating with an insincere opponent is “arrogant, naïve, and dangerous.”

Big question: Why does Iran need to so urgently pursue nuclear power anyway???? They’re in the epicenter of cheap oil.


The Lure of Foreign Travel by Frida Ghitis
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/tms/politics/2009/Apr/14/the_lure_of_foreign_travel.html

I seem to enjoy Frida’s perspectives and think that she’s right on. Travelling suits Obama, “he could speak in generalities, in concepts, and in vague, pleasing notions.” He makes a good celebrity but where’s the substance? What is the cost that the world is going to expect us to pay in order to like/approve of us? While he calls on a new era of diplomacy and a diminishment of the USA’s power on the world stage, North Korea & Iran are going to happily push forward with their nuclear programs, Europe is going to have us bear as much of the financial burden as possible for this worldwide financial crisis, and who’s going to get in deeper & deeper into Pakistan/Afghanistan while everybody else watches from the sidelines?
But then again, there’s nothing like “Giving speeches to cheering crowds; speaking to world leaders eager for the magic to rub onto their unpopular shoulders is surely much more energizing than watching petty politicians squabble, hapless diplomats talk in circles or dull bureaucrats wrestle bailouts from their calculators. Ah, home, sweet home. It's no wonder the president is planning a busy schedule of international travel.”
Obama: Economy showing `glimmers of hope'
http://www.miamiherald.com/business/story/994918.html : 4-11-09

“President Barack Obama declared Friday that the slumping economy has begun to show ''glimmers of hope,'' but cautioned that it remains severely stressed and will require lots more work to turn it around...

''We're starting to see progress,'' Obama said. ``And if we stick with it, if we don't flinch in the face of some difficulties, then I feel absolutely convinced that we are going to get this economy back on track.''

First of all, what does “glimmers of hope” mean. Does this mean that prior to Friday, there was a time when he had no hope?????? There was always, should always be, and will always be hope Mr. President. I suggest you rethink what you say. Also, how convenient it is to acknowledge how bad things are but that if we stick with it long enough, his policies will get us back on track. He’ll continue to ask us to bear with it, be patient, etc...etc.... etc... yet what policies are being put in place to really stimulate the economy???? How is the American entrepreneurial spirit being fostered??Not at all – at least that’s my perspective. Everything is about subsidy, equalizing, taxes, and big government. But he’ll continue with the town hall meetings and the campaigning – why bother stopping after you’ve been elected. It’s a good strategy , keep campaigning throughout your first four years and when it comes time for reelection you’ve already got an enormous head start on any opponent.

As of a this week, per NPR, 1 in 6 people in the USA are either unemployed or under-employed (part-time employed people looking for full time work) and the rise in unemployment is not expected to crest until 2010. Building roads may help a bit but long term you’d better get American business back on track and somehow get America manufacturing again because a service economy , equalized ala Obama isn’t going to cut it.

Obama seeks $83 billion for Iraq, Afghan wars

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30140288 AP , 4/9/09

http://www.drudge.com/news/119800/obama-seeks-83-billion-wars


”President Barack Obama is seeking $83.4 billion for U.S. military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, pressing for special troop funding that he opposed two years ago when he was a senator and George W. Bush was president” - my how things change when one actually has the burden of dealing with issues and not just talking/criticizing.

As is so succinctly commented in the Drudge posting:
“It's easy to be against something when you're not accountable for its success or failure. The left dearly wanted to pin an Iraq defeat squarely on Dubya & the Reps. But Bush and enough Reps held firm regarding withdraw. Now that Dems have enlarged their margins in both houses of congress and added the POTUS, it seems as though they (Obama at least) have changed their tune. No longer do we hear how we need to get out of the region, etc. To the contrary, we're shuffling deck chairs, moving troops to Afghanistan. “

My take – I think our involvement is the region is totally no win. Noble but a no win. No matter what, we’ll be blamed for something, will be expected to foot the bill for everything, and will have the gratitude of small minority. Perhaps it’s time to leave and let them sort things out themselves. Should things get bad enough in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, surely the UN will do something? or will it do nothing? It would be cheaper to send in special forces periodically to exterminate any problem organizations/people than try to reshape cultures that don’t think like we do, don’t like us and never will (unless we make all the concessions).

death tAX
GOP comes to the rescue -- of the rich
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/993218.html : 4/10/09
It makes me sick to see the blatant hostility some people have to success or should I say to the success that is probably always going to be out of their reach. What else would explain this absurd point of view. Somehow, it seems “fair” to tax somebody their entire life yet, if they’re industrious enough and lucky enough to accumulate any sort of wealth, let’s tax that money again when they die. Perfect....typical liberal b.s.

The meaning of soothing, missing words
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/993230.html : 4/10/09
Bravo Mr. Thomas. I agree.

''Words must mean something,'' President Barack Obama said in Prague last week in response to North Korea's missile launch. He was speaking about the numerous resolutions and condemnations of North Korea's actions over the years by the United Nations and others. It is a standard the president should apply not only to North Korea, but also to the Middle East and the Muslim world.
In a speech to Turkey's Parliament, the president said, ''The United States is not, and never will be at war with Islam.'' It was a noble sentiment. Such a unilateral declaration may soothe many in the West, but there is a central question that comes from Obama's declaration of conscientious objection: What if Islamic extremism is at war with America, Europe and Israel and everyone who stands in the way of its attempt at supremacy in religion and politics?.....
In some Muslim media, in some textbooks produced for Middle Eastern schoolchildren, at some Islamic schools in America and in recruitment films that urge ''jihad'' and declare martyrdom to be the highest goal of a Muslim person, one might conclude (if words mean something) that a significant portion of Islam is at war with Judaism, Christianity, and strains of its own religion that do not embrace the extremist view of hell on earth for all who disagree.
In his soothing words to the Islamic world, it would have been useful to hear Obama challenge Muslims to put their own house in order and evict extremists from it. He might have asked for a reciprocal statement from Islamic scholars, heads of Islamic states, and people in charge of spreading hate directed at the West that Islam is not at war with America, Israel and Europe. It would also be helpful to hear a pledge that Muslim extremists intend to assimilate in countries to which they have immigrated, embracing the history, language and culture of those nations and eschewing attempts to impose Sharia law, not only on people of their faith, but on others who do not share it.”

They don’t play by the same set of rules , Mr. President............

At Summit of Americas, U.S. May Face World of Blame for Economy 4-14-09
By Scott Wilson
President Obama plans to take his message of partnership to Latin America and the Caribbean this week, but he will face a group of leaders far less forgiving than their European counterparts were about the United States' central role in the global financial crisis.

His celebrity status is definitely not going to get him far – only his concessions will (and do we really need to make concessions!!!!!!!). "He is not going to Trinidad with a plan for the hemisphere," said Jeffrey Davidow, a former ambassador to Mexico and Obama's special adviser for the summit. "He is going to Trinidad with the intention of listening, discussing and dealing with his colleagues as partners." Who needs a plan when you can listen & discuss?????????????Discuss what?????? I suggest it be what is best for the USA since you’re our President! Colleagues/partners – what is that??? We’re talking leaders of sovereign nations not colleagues /partners – each who is responsible for taking care of the interests of his/her nation – this isn’t a partnership. To the contrary , it’s a chess game, a power struggle, an attempt to gain more control or diminish that of another. We best not give in to our “colleagues” – they’ve shown all to well how quickly they’ll jump on another bandwagon when it so benefits them. We’re in a position of power because we’ve earned it – let’s not give it up just to make somebody like us more. No matter what , they’ll have to deal with us if we’re relevant. Better to be respected than liked.