Category Archives: foreign policy

by Barry Kelly | June 10, 2013 · 7:30 am

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 55-ADVISOR

WHAT DO THEY WANT?

The Advisor had done some research in the history of Russia’s struggle to compete with British seapower and later the United States. The Czars as well as Mr. Putin, who believes he is a Czar, understand the need for the Russian fleet to have a warm water port. Without an all weather port the Russians cannot extend their power much beyond their own borders. The Advisor thought, it is precisely this kind of knowledge the President does not have. Nothing in his background prepared him to understand the real world which is that nations act in their own interest. If you don’t understand this central reality, your foreign policy is composed of reactions to events you really don’t understand. Like or not his mission required him to educate as well as advise President Obama.

The Advisor knew the President seldom took his advice but he was enough of a scholar to listen thoughtfully and enough of an ideologue to follow his collectivist doctrine. The President would be down here within the next hour. I’ll him if he will allow me to present my research. Right on schedule the ancient steel clad door opened and the President strode it. “Good evening Mr. President. The coffee is ready. Take what ever seat you want. I did some research this week and, if you will permit, I will give you the bottom lines.”

“Well, I thought your advice was just the result of your eight decades of life. I’m intrigued that you include research. So go ahead.”

“Thank you. Why are the Russians so hard to work with in the disaster we call Syria? Russia has no common border with Syria. Syria has no supply of oil or minerals. They have no exports Russia wants or needs. Yet Russia is sending game-changing weapons to Syria and, if their past behavior is any guide, they have or will also send technicians and weapons specialists to Syria. Putin knows there is no one to stop him. Certainly not any Arab or Persian State. Israel can’t without our help. The Euro powers are too focused on themselves to risk capital and blood for anyone else. I have no special insight to U.S. Russian policy but I do remember you whispering to President Medvedev before Putin took the presidency again, asking him to tell Putin you would have more flexibility after the election. Putin is a Czar. He only understands strength. Your secret message to Medvedev told Putin you were in a weak position. In Syria he believes you will not oppose Russia’s historical push to have a warm water port.

“Without a warm water port their fleet is frozen in, bottled up in the Black Sea or cruising far beyond their supply base for many months of each year. Again there is no proof I know of but the Soviet push into Afghanistan in the 1980s was another step in their bumbling efforts dating back to the Czars to gain a corridor to warm water. Syria has dangled a warm water port in the Mediterranean called Tartous. The Russians have already done significant development projects in this port. They really don’t much care who rules Syria as long as Tartous is firmly in Russian control. The Russians will do whatever is necessary to ensure they do not lose control of this port. They have never been so close in recent history to the control of a warm water port. A Syrian regime friendly to the United States that would exercise real control over Tartous is not acceptable. Putin, today, has no respect for America. He only understands strength and has no use for words that are mere rhetoric.

“There is more at stake in Syria than the ousting of President Bashar al-Assad from Syria. I don’t think your Administration understands the historical power that motivates Putin to capture an all weather port. That single feat will mark him as the greatest of all Russia’s Czars. A warm water port at no cost in blood or treasure. A remarkable achievement.”

“You’re telling me Russia’s end game in Syria is for a seaport?”

“Yes. Of course, they don’t mind throwing all Western powers out of the Middle East.”

“No one on my team will believe your analysis.”

“Try some military scholars. They will tell you the same thing.” The Advisor said, as the President was getting up to leave, “Mr. President maybe you need some different people on your team.”

By the author of the Jack Brandon Thriller Series www.factsandfictions.com

Pages: 1 2

1 Comment

Filed under Afghanistan, Conservative views, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics

by Barry Kelly | June 3, 2013 · 7:30 am

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 54

HOW THINGS WORK

President Obama presents a picture of White House operations that is very hard to believe, especially for those of us who have had the privilege of working in the White House. The mission of the President’s inner circle is to protect him by keeping the president fully informed. There must be no surprises that blind side the president and make him look inept. If he has to get information about the working of his administration from the media, something is seriously wrong. The President’s chief of staff, the deputy assistant for National Security Affairs, Cabinet and agency heads, the President’s legal counsel, and a few others all are duty bound to keep the president informed. I didn’t mention the Vice President because he is often kept out of the serious stuff. (If you’re new to my blog and am wondering how I know this, it is because I worked in the White House for two years as a special adviser to President Reagan.)

Take the current IRS scandal. We’ve learned the President’s chief of staff, high level Treasury officials, most likely including the Secretary of the Treasury, the IRS commissioner, the President’s legal counselor, the IRS’s Inspector General and I believe the Attorney General, had to also know. It is inconceivable that not one of these loyal-to-the-President officials did not give the President a heads up. He deserved to know.

Let’s look at the leak scandal next. We know the President was aware of the leaks of national security information from his administration. From a pure national security perspective, the massive leak regarding cyber attacks against Iran’s nuclear weapons program was the most extensive and threatening to our security. No reported immediate investigation here and no culprit named. Certainly the New York Times wasn’t to blame. Leakers of this magnitude are not hard to find unless you do not want them found. Leaks of sensitive elements of the Bin Laden killing had a similar result. No investigation and no leakers named. Don’t ask the question if you do not want the answer. These leaks made the President look good. Therefore, no investigation.

The scandal of the phone records of AP reporters and Rosen of Fox News are different. These do not appear to be calculated White House leaks for political advantage. Again, no real effort to find the leakers. The investigation targeted reporters who were doing their job. Now we are to believe that our top cop, the Attorney General, didn’t know anything about the attack on reporters even though his signature was on the document authorizing the seizure of Rosen’s phone records? Besides the obvious close official connection of the AG to the President, Obama and Holder are reported to be close friends. Now why would a conscientious AG and friend of the President not help the President to get out in front of this scandal? The AG is far too wise to believe the attack on journalists by the FBI could be kept away from media coverage. The right answer is that the President was informed but like the IRS scandal, the investigation of reporters had to be held until after the election.

The last in this trilogy of scandals is the debacle in Ben Ghazi. There is a lot we don’t know but will find out. We do know that the President and his inner circle knew the truth would hurt his chances for re-election. Al Qaeda was a thing of the past. The President’s Middle East policy was a success. Libya was “saved” by the President. All was under control. The administration, meaning Secretary Clinton, President Obama, certain national security officials, a number of officers in the military command structure, counter-terrorist officers, and security officials in the State Department, all knew our Ambassador to Libya had asked for additional security and warned of impending attacks. These requests were turned down. Remember, if you will, that ambassadors serve as the representative of the President in whichever nation they serve. So the refusal of an ambassador’s pleas for security help is a big deal. On these kind of subjects the White House communications system gets it all and it is distributed to named officials in the National Security Staff and the White House.

There is absolutely no way the President, the National Security Advisor, and the Chief of Staff are not going to be informed. They would have to hide to prevent being told. As soon as the attack started emergency high precedent cables would have begun flowing out of Ben Ghazi. This cable traffic would have alerted the State Department, The White House, the CIA, NSA — all relevent military commands. Contingency plans would be pulled up and action plans formulated. At the White House, the staff of the Situation Room would be on full alert and probably augmented, where possible collection systems would focus on Ben Ghazi. A high level meeting of the appropriate players of the National Security Council would be called. The relevant officers of the National Security Staff would be called in, including the Senior Director of the Middle East and the Senior Director of Counter-Terrorism (whatever his current title), would assume the National Security Staff’s point position. Reports and recommendations would soon be on their way to the National Security Adviser. Inter-agency representatives would be on a secure TV conference exchanging information and analysis. In all of this the President would be expected to be front and center and in close touch with key players of the National Security Council who would be offering reaction plans and options. When Usama bin Laden was killed in a special operation President Obama was seen in the Situation Room. When Americans were killed, he was absent. Normally with Americans in harm’s way, doing nothing would not be an option. President Obama made doing nothing the option. As a result the Ambassador and three other Americans were abandoned and left to die. This will forever be a low point for the Obama Administration and the entire Defense Department. One short meeting with his Defense Officials and then off to a fundraiser the next morning in Las Vegas doesn’t seem to fit the role of a competent Commander-in-Chief.

The big truth in all these scandals is that they would have made President Obama’s re-election much harder and maybe even doubtful. So maybe the best defense is the oldest,”I don’t know. I wasn’t informed. I learned about it from the news reporting.” Successful. I guess. Who is sitting in the White House? The man who believes the issue is never the issue. President Obama cannot fix these problems. He is the problem.

BY THE AUTHOR OF THE JACK BRANDON THRILLER SERIES

http://www.amazon.com/Justice-Beyond-Law-ebook/dp/B005BCOFN0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1370183202&sr=8-1&keywords=justice+beyond+law

Transparency isn’t coming easily to Obama White House (latimes.com)
DOJ probed and grilled NYT government sources (rinf.com)
Next Against the Wall: White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler? (nationalreview.com

4 Comments

Filed under Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, Politics

by Barry Kelly | May 1, 2013 · 7:30 am

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 48

ENOUGH?

Whether Republican, Democrat, or Progressive, the facts don’t change. You are entitled to your interpretation of the facts but lets agree on the facts. In the bullet list of what I believe are facts, I’ll try to keep my conservative views on the sidelines. Since the mainstream media does not cover most of the items in this list, many citizens will not be familiar with these facts.

FACTS:

* President Obama has appointed more czars than any other president. Maybe more than all others combined.

English: Barack Obama signing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act at the White House (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

* President Obama’s administration has not followed the Constitutional requirement to forward a budget to Congress every year.

* President Obama’s landmark legislation (Obamacare) was passed without either the people or Congress given a chance to read it.

*President Obama has bypassed Congressional rules and precedents to appoint officials without the advice and consent of the Senate.

* President Obama has spent trillions more than the government takes in.

* President Obama has expanded the role and size of the executive departments and agencies.

* President Obama has used executive power to bypass Congressional authority.

* President Obama refused the Republican offer to give him the authority to select where the sequestration cuts would be made to lessen the impact on the people.

* President Obama has stonewalled Congressional rights to information in the case of the death of the American ambassador in the terrorist attack on Ben Ghazi and in the case of ‘fast and furious’ supplying guns to Mexico’s drug cartels. On the Ben Ghazi issue he refused to call it a terrorist attack for two weeks, insisting more facts were needed. The Justice Department arrested a filmmaker accused of inciting the attack on Ben Ghazi. The president vowed to bring the attackers to justice. So far, we have no evidence of the effort to apprehend them. Evidence is now surfacing that no attempt was made to rescue the embattled personnel at the consulate and annex.

* President Obama has supported the Arab position in issues with Israel.

* President Obama refuses to use the term “War on Terror.” The killing of several soldiers at Fort Hood by an Army major and follower of Islam shouting Islamic slogans is called “workplace violence.”

* The President and his Attorney General consistently opt to give Islamic terrorists the protection and rights usually reserved for U.S. citizens.

* The President’s redline was crossed by Assad in Syria weeks ago when he used chemical weapons against the Syrian people. No comment or action so far.

* The President’s repeated attempts to engage the Iranian regime regarding their efforts to develop nuclear weapons have not worked.

* An open microphone caught the President whispering to President Medvedev of Russia to, “Tell Putin he (Obama) would have more flexibility after the election.”

* Despite the President’s words, unemployment is worse.

* Under President Obama, welfare recipients have risen dramatically.

* The President campaigned on the promise Obamacare would bring down medical costs. They have increased instead.

* The President stated he would support “all of the above” in discussing his energy plans. He and his administration have constantly taken positions to destroy our fossil fuel production. The coal industry is shutting down. The Keystone Pipeline from Canada is still pending another EPA ‘study.’ Billions have been spent in supporting marginal energy producers that haven’t worked.

* Stimulus One did not provide private sector jobs. The President remains committed to the belief government spending is the key to economic development.

* Obama’s administration has issued more regulations impacting economic development than either Presidents Carter or Clinton.

* President Obama has not focused on job development in the private sector.

* President Obama has not tried to find who leaked voluminous intelligence secrets to the press. All the leaks made the President look good.

I’m sure many Progressives can explain these facts in a favorable light. That is their right. At least some of the facts should concern even Progressives. Most of them should concern Democrats. Given a stronger Congress, President Obama would be flirting with impeachment proceedings.

By the author of the Jack Brandon Thriller series. www.factsandfictions.com

Taking part in a Nov. 10, 2009, memorial service on Fort Hood, Texas, President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama look at the photograph of one of the victims of the Nov. 5 shooting rampage that left 13 dead and 38 wounded. See more at http://www.army.mil (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Frank: I Don’t Know Why President Obama Will Not Define Boston Terror Attack As Jihad (freebeacon.com)
AP Scrubs ‘Muslim’ from Obama’s Self-Referential Joke (frontpagemag.com)
Eight Decades of Insights 44 (factsandfictions.com)

2 Comments

Filed under Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics, Israel, Obama, Politics, Progressives, Putin, Terrorism

Tagged as Barack Obama, Benghazi, Congress, Dmitry Medvedev, Fort Hood, Keystone Pipeline, Obama, United States, United States Congress

by Barry Kelly | April 25, 2013 · 7:30 am

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 47

IT IS WHAT IT IS

We are a great nation and we have the best law enforcement, intelligence collection, military, and counter-terrorist capabilities in the world. Unfortunately, we have a tentative president, who, for reasons no one who knows or is willing to talk about, thinks American influence in the world is too strong and America with the rest of Western world has much to be ashamed about. Only by diminishing our power through a socialist transformation can the world find equality and peace, he thinks.

The “black flag of jihad” as used by various Islamic terrorist organizations (since the late 1990s) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The president and his administration don’t want to acknowledge that Islamic Jihad in all its forms is a danger to our way of life. Islam and Christianity have a history. And it is not a peaceful one. The Crusades, the Muslim military sweep through North Africa, followed by the Muslim invasion of Western Europe, the fall of Cordoba, the last Islamic center in Spain are all part of this history. The war continues today and it is an Islamic war against Christian nations. All the Arabs who were dancing in the streets of Islamic countries when the twin towers fell were not all members of an organized terrorist group or active Jihadists but all were Muslims. It is what it is. Muslims do not like us. Moderate Muslims may not be active Jihadists but they condone it and support it. Billions of Saudi dollars have supported radical Islamic Wahabism schools throughout the world. Our president attended one.

He also attended a strident anti-American church for 20 years. He comes by his disapproval of America’s past history naturally. He has a right to hold those beliefs. Unfortunately, the attitude of the president permeates through the entire administration. How else can you explain their

View of Mosque 2 (Photo credit: TushyD)

efforts to cover up Jihadist actions like Ben Ghazi, the constant reluctance to use the word terrorism, or the term war on terror? This president who rushes to judgement at the drop of a hat on other issues, preaches the need to gather all the facts, wait until the investigation is complete, “there is no evidence a terrorist group was involved.” He often ends his preaching with “don’t blame an entire group of people.” Mr. President, Muslims have been involved in nearly all bombing terrorist acts for more than the last two decades. (Yes, I know about Oklahoma City.) Many, if not most, of the mosques in America and elsewhere preach a form of Jihadism. Directly or indirectly, Islamic mosques support radical Islamic fervor. What’s not to profile? Profiling is a common-sense approach to law enforcement and protection of citizens.

Like it or not, we are in a war that has deep Islamic roots. It is what it is.

“John Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia.” (itmakessenseblog.com)
US Imam Calls On Muslims In US To Wage Jihad (joemiller.us)
State Dept. Erases ‘Muslim,’ ‘Islam’ From 2,000 Page Terror Memo… (redflagnews.com)
Islam is the Ultimate Sleeper Cell (itmakessenseblog.com)
Boston bombers – media just doesn’t get it (culturaljihad.wordpress.com)

1 Comment

Filed under Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, Terrorism

Tagged as America, Benghazi, Islam, Jihadism, Muslim, terrorism

by Barry Kelly | February 19, 2013 · 4:09 pm

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 36

PLAYING THE ISSUES

If you have been following my recent blogs, you know I believe President Obama is following the guidance of Saul Alinsky, a brilliant radical tactician. The core of Alinky’s teaching is that “the issue is never the issue.” The only goal is the destruction of the existing order and replacing it with the Progressive (socialist/communist) blueprint for a new and better world where everyone gets a fair shot and everyone pays their fair share. Under this political social philosophy, even a discussion of ends justifying the means is meaningless. If you are striving for power, the means are always morally justified. This strategical approach gives anyone using it incredible flexibility. They can change sides at any time it appears advantageous. The first step in creating a new world is to destroy the current order.

English: Barack Obama delivering his electoral victory speech on Election Night ´08, in Grant Park, Chicago. (Wikipedia)

Now for some complexity. All issues are not the same and cannot be treated the same by the Progressives. For our purposes, I will put issues into three categories: The first category is issues that have been with us for several decades. Under this category live issues such as immigration, states rights, taxation, gun control, energy development, abortion, and solvency of our social programs. The second category are those that have been created recently. Here, I put climate control, sequestration, cabinet appointments, the role and size of the federal government, right to work issues, and government spending. Granted, some of these issues could fit under one of the two other categories. The third category contains those issues that appear to be spontaneous such as Benghazi, Syria, Muslim radicalism, international debt problems, unemployment, and job creation.

The flexibility Alinsky believers have somewhat depends on what category the issue is in. Take immigration as an issue. Obama cannot come out against immigration and he doesn’t have to put forward an effective bi-partisan solution. In fact he will not. Published plans, budgets, position papers are not part of Alinsky tactics as they limit changing sides or conditions abruptly. Instead, the immigration issue will be used to damage the Republican Party, the only party that stands in the way of the establishment of a Progressive dictatorship. This president does not want the Democrats and Republicans to come together to pass bipartisan immigration legislation. Instead, he will present obstacles and deal killers.

Since this is a blog and not a book, I’ll deal in this piece with only a few of the many possible issues. Energy policy is a perfect issue. Does any sane person believe America can be energy self-sufficient without the primary use of fossil fuels for several more decades? Yes. A constant search for alternative power sources is good as long as we are focused on creating an energy program in America that creates thousands of jobs and energy self-sufficiency. Windmills, algae, corn, solar panels just are not economically viable nor credible. How can any president not welcome the Canadian pipeline? It is a no-brainer unless your real objective is to create chaos, high unemployment, angry union workers, and blow off a good neighbor. Only Alinksy followers can applaud Obama’s lethargic non-action. Don’t fall for the Progressives blaming the increasing cost of gasoline on Big Oil. They aren’t boy scouts but the price goes up when the Federal Reserve, which is a private company, prints obscene billions of dollars each month that weaken the dollar. Arabs sell oil for dollars. The weaker the dollar, the more dollars it takes to buy a barrel of oil. Keep in mind few transformations ever occur in a country with an sound economy, near full employment, and a promising future.

One last issue, Benghazi. Could the president have anticipated this crisis? No. But his staff and Cabinet should have. This issue just popped up. The president didn’t know what to do. So he did nothing. Well, he did create confusion. To have this shameful crisis be centered around who created what “talking points” is a mark of Beltway mentally. Fix the blame. Not the problem. Not even Alinsky or Axelrod would have recommended he not call the Pentagon for action or fail to convene his National Security Council, or travel the next day to Las Vegas to attend a fundraiser, or throw Susan Rice under the bus, or the bumbling concealment of information. In keeping with Obama-type transparency he has even kept the names and whereabouts of the Benghazi survivors secret, in spite of requests from Congress. On the Benghazi issue, the president damaged himself as well as the nation. Using every issue as a means to attack your opposition often diminishes all of us. Just ask the surviving family members what they think about the issue is never the issue as a principle for presidential leadership.

By the author of the Jack Brandon thriller series. www.factsandfictions.com