Obama to release Gitmo detainees inside the U.S.
What could possibly go wrong with this plan? A follow-up from a post from a few days ago.
Labels: foreign policy, obama, policy, terrorists
On Closing Gitmo
So the GOP told us that to close Gitmo would just put terrorists back out in the field. Looks like
they were right. The strange desire to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay stems, it seems, from a very misplaced notion to always embrace one's attackers. It's the basis of a certain left-wing desire to have pure tolerance, and even hidden admiration for, those who hate the West. The left (said as though this amorphous blob of intellectual thought is a coherent, consistent organism) may presume that this will then result in more terrorists being given a nice show trial like they watch on Law and Order. But in reality this will likely mean that a 'no-prisoners' policy will be in effect on the battlefield, a significantly worse outcome.
Labels: foreign policy, leftists, military, obama, policy
Sobran: fear of the smear
By reading
an article at my favorite online magazine:
TakiMag, I ran across Sobran's article, "
Fear of the Smear" -- rarely when I read articles do the words resonate as loudly as they did in this article.
Labels: foreign policy, Israel, policy, politics, racism
Putin giving nuclear help to Chavez: US left without an argument
So, Hugo Chavez, whose main crime other than being a jerk is
nationalizing industries, which is the
same thing Bush did last week to the insurance and mortgage industries which are considerably larger than any Venezuelan nationalization,
is looking to develop a nuclear program. One might think that having a nuclear armed Communist country nearby is a bad thing, and yet Russia, our supposed friend, is helping them out. This might have something to do with our continued
meddling in Russian affairs in places like Serbia,
Ukraine and
Georgia. And our outrage on the world scene to Russia proliferating nuclear weapons might have a bit of hypocrisy considering that we
gave Israel nuclear weapons in violations of our own treaty obligations as well. So, what are we left to do? Leftists blame Bush for ruining the international system, but it is Bush's failure to reject leftist internationalism that has caused the international damage. Our country's actions are relatively consistent despite whomever is in charge, and those actions are no longer in the national interest of the residents of this country, nor are they pursuing the economic interests of the citizens of this country. Perhaps someday we will once again get leaders who remember whom they are supposed to be representing.
Labels: foreign policy, policy, politics
Economic Destruction
The recent news over the past few days about the bankruptcy at Lehman, and the
falling stock prices, and the banking crisis should reach every American and produce a state of near-panic. The housing crisis isn't going away, and it's spreading to other industries and other aspects of the economy.
And I have come to a conclusion that I don't like: that whatever the merits of the Iraqi liberation and stabilization effort, our country simply cannot afford to keep it going and sustain the occupation. We ought to end our occupation as soon as possible and transition to a new government and withdraw the forces. We simply cannot afford as a nation to continue spending at the level at which we have become accustomed.
Solutions:
1- End the war in Iraq and Afghanistan
2- Remove our foreign presence from major military operations in Germany, Japan
3- Remove all restrictions to new energy creation (nukes, offshore, ANWR, anything)
4- Enforce a balanced budget amendment
5- Start drastically cutting social services and paring down the size of government
6- Privatize and sell off as many federal assets/liabilities as possible (the post office and Amtrak come to mind)
7- End the madness of promoting homeownership to those who aren't responsible enough to sustain it
Sadly, I don't think we have the political willpower for any of these, no matter how desperately needed.
Labels: Economics, foreign policy, iraq, policy, politics, war
US to allies: we don't really support you
Continuing in a long line of broken promises, the U.S. has come down on Pakistani President Musharraf, and he's lost enough support after being forced to remove himself as head of the military that
he's resigned. I confess an ignorance of certain international affairs, and the intricacies involved, but the common pattern of being a U.S. ally seems to consistently revolve around broken promises and double standards, as we can see in Georgia right now,
Ngo Dinh Diem learned in 1963, the
Shah of Iran learned the hard way, and even Saddam can be counted in these ranks. Being a friend of the United States usually entails having the U.S. later displace you.
Labels: foreign policy
