Tag Archives: Barack Obama

International news, military news

Now you tell us, general …

The moment of the falling of Saddam's statue, with the help of the US Army.

Michael Flynn didn’t disclose much that many Americans already didn’t believe or even know.

The retired Army lieutenant general — who once headed the Defense Intelligence Agency — told a German newspaper that the Iraq War was a big mistake and that the Bush administration started it on “sketchy evidence” that Iraq had a hand in the 9/11 attacks.

Who knew?

History, Gen. Flynn said, won’t be kind as the Iraq War legacy is written over time.

Gosh. Do you think?

I guess my question for the general might be: Why didn’t you tell us before now?

Flynn told Der Spiegel, “When 9/11 occurred, all the emotions took over, and our response was, ‘Where did those bastards come from? Let’s go kill them. Let’s go get them.'”

I don’t think the emotional part of the response should be criticized. We were angry as hell at what happened. that day.

But to assign complicity for the 9/11 attack almost immediately to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein after going after the Taliban and al-Qaeda strongholds in Afghanistan is where the policy came apart rapidly.

Flynn believes that eliminating Saddam Hussein helped strengthen and embolden the Islamic State, the Sunni terrorist organization that has risen to become a fearsome force in the Middle East. He lays responsibility for that squarely on the Bush administration.

Flynn, though, doesn’t spare Barack Obama from blame in this conflict. According to the Huffington Post: “In a recent interview with Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera’s ‘Head to Head,’ Flynn took aim at Obama’s publicly stated goals to ‘degrade and ultimately destroy’ the Islamic State, saying that while the administration is effectively degrading the organization, the group cannot be ‘destroyed,'”

He added: “We may cause it to change its name, but we are never going to destroy this organization,” Flynn said. “Destroy means to completely eliminate — he should not have used those words, those were incorrect words to use and he should have been more precise.”

So … the debate goes on.

 

national news

Gun death toll keeps mounting

barack

I totally understand that President Barack Obama has his share of critics.

Moreover, I respect and honor Americans’ right to criticize him, even though I remain generally a supporter of his policies, his vision for the country and the manner in which he has led us.

It’s hard for me to watch this brief compilation of the number of times the president has had to go before the nation in the wake of mass shootings.

San Bernardino, Calif., was just the latest. I am frightfully certain there will be more of those kinds of massacres before the president and his family check out of the White House on Jan. 20, 2017.

And, yes, there will be more of them for the next president to confront.

I am not going to make any partisan statement here about how we should end it. I’m not going to enter the fray that’s erupting already about whether to clamp more gun control laws, or whether the latest shooters were jihadists.

This is a terribly complex and hear-wrenching problem that has gripped the nation by the throat. It won’t let go.

I’m just one American who’s grown weary of watching these events unfold. I try, with no success at all, to imagine how a president musters the will to corral his emotions with every violent spasm that grips the country he governs.

 

International news, military news, national news, political news

Have we — or have we not — contained ISIS?

islam-at-war

One of two key figures in the war against the Islamic State has it wrong about whether American military power has “contained” the terrorist organization.

President Barack Obama said ISIS has been “contained” on the battlefield. He said so the other day and then on the very next day, the Islamic State launched those horrifying attacks in Paris.

U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee that ISIS is “not contained.”

Who you gonna believe? The politician or the career military man?

I am going to stick with the Marine on this one.

Do I think we’re losing the war? I tend to believe we will be able ultimately to destroy the Islamic State. It’s going to take a lot more than just U.S. air power to do it. More nations already have joined in the fight, most notably France and Russia, two nations that have paid heavily for ISIS’s terror tactics.

Gen. Dunford told the committee — chaired by Republican Mac Thornberry of Clarendon — that “technically we are not at war” with the Islamic State. The word “technically” is critical here. To be at war requires — in the strictest sense — a declaration issued by Congress at the request of the president.

But in reality, we’re at war.

As for whether the general has contradicted the commander in chief and the secretary of defense and whether that puts Gen. Dunford’s status in some jeopardy, I’ll just add one final point.

We put the military under civilian command. Gen. Dunford answers to Defense Secretary Ash Carter and President Barack Obama, both of whom have said one thing about ISIS containment; meanwhile, Dunford has said something else. Yes, I believe Dunford’s time as Joint Chiefs chairman might be coming to a close.

 

national news, political news

Will these justices stay away from SOTU?

Supreme_Court_US_2010

Do you ever hear something from someone and think, “Damn! I wish I’d have thought of that”?

That happened to me today.

One of my Facebook pals wondered out loud if the only mystery surrounding President Obama’s upcoming State of the Union speech would be whether the three most conservative members of the Supreme Court would stay away, as they have done in recent years.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia all have been absent during Obama’s recent speeches before a joint session of Congress.

I’ve long wondered — as have others –whether it is because they detest the president’s politics so much that they’d rather do something else than sit in front of him while he makes policy statement with which they disagree?

Look, gentlemen, this is the last one of these speeches Barack Obama will give as president of the United States. Surely you can find the time — not to mention the courtesy — to attend this speech along with the rest of your colleagues. Chief Justice John Roberts usually attends, and he’s in the conservative camp right along with the three no-show justices.

It might have been a single event that ticked them off. That would be the time that Obama scolded the court for its Citizens United ruling that took the limits off of corporations and enabled them to give unlimited amounts of money to political candidates. Justice Alito was seen mouthing the words “not true” when the president made his critical comments.

That was then. If the scolding is the reason, well, get over it, will you?

The president is entering his final full year in office. The Joint Chiefs of Staff will be there. Most of the Cabinet will be there; custom calls for one of them to stay away in case something catastrophic happens at the nation’s Capitol Building.

I hope all nine justices see fit to make an appearance. They don’t have to applaud. Just be there.

 

national news, political news

One more, and final time, for State of Union speech

obamaSOTU2015

Barack H. Obama is going to get one more chance as president of the United States to lay out his vision of the state of our Union.

On Jan. 12, he’ll take the podium in front of a joint session of Congress and tell us how he thinks we’re doing, where we’ve been, where we’re headed and likely will propose a laundry list of legislative solutions to the nagging problems that never seem to get cured.

This is it, Mr. President. My advice to you, though, is this: Don’t expect to change any minds or sway anyone’s view of the job you’ve done.

Republicans will continue to say the president has all but destroyed American greatness — single-handedly. Democrats will hail the achievements and the rescuing of the nation from a financial collapse.

I happen to belong to the latter category of Americans. Yeah, it’s a shock, I know.

This final State of the Union speech by President Obama will produce the usual applause dominated by the Democrats in the chamber. Republicans will sit on their hands … for the most part while their Democratic “friends” cheer and holler.

While there’s no denying that the world is in difficult straits right now in this fight against international terrorism, there also can be no denying that the American ship of state has corrected its course in the seven years since Barack Obama took the presidential oath of office.

The economy is in far better shape than before. Our annual budget deficit has shrunk by two-thirds. Energy production is up; energy imports are down. Housing has rebounded. Banks are lending money. More people are working today than they were in 2009. Millions of Americans have health insurance now who didn’t have it before.

And oh yes, we’ve been kept safe from terrorists. There’s that, too.

That’s not the view of those who oppose the president.

But what the heck? It goes with the territory.

House Speaker Paul Ryan was correct in his letter inviting the president to speak. They have a duty to find solutions together, he said. Yes, Mr. Speaker, you do.

It’s time to get busy.

Meanwhile, the president will get one more shot at telling the country he leads what many of us out here already know.

The state of our Union truly is strong. We’ve got work to do, but our footing is a lot firmer than it was when the president took office.

 

environmental news, political news, State news

Nuclear power … time for a return

nuclear%20plant_1

Many Americans long have feared nuclear energy.

To be honest, I was one of them. I no longer fear it.

An essay in the New York Times makes a compelling argument that the time to bring nuclear energy back into the discussion of clean alternatives to coal has arrived. Why not now, while 150 or so world leaders are meeting in Paris to talk about climate change?

Technological improvements have greatly improved nuclear power’s safety record. Peter Thiel’s essay in the New York Times makes a most interesting point.

Remember the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011? Thousands of people died in the earthquake and tsunami that ravaged Japan and destroyed the Fukushima nuclear plant, Thiel writes. Not one person died of radiation poisoning, he adds.

Time for a “new atomic age.”

Yes, there have been disasters, notably the Chernobyl event in Russia in 1986; Three Mile Island before that.

But in the intervening years, nuclear power has become many times safer.

I’m all in on efforts to harvest the wind — which is being done in places like the Texas Panhandle, where my wife, one of our sons and I live. I want there to be more exploration of natural gas, which also is in abundance throughout West Texas. With the abundant sunshine we have in this part of the world, it’s high time we invested far than we do in solar energy.

These all are viable alternative energy sources that must become part of the nation’s wide-ranging effort to wean ourselves of fossil fuel and coal.

We’re neglecting any serious discussion, though, of nuclear energy.

It’s interesting that a climate change conference is being held in a country, France, that relies heavily on nuclear power to keep the lights on.

Roughly 75 percent of France’s energy needs are met by nuclear power plants. It’s ironic, to my way of thinking, that nuclear energy isn’t being discussed as openly as it should, given the location of this climate change conference.

President Obama can seize the moment as he enters the final year of his presidency, according to Thiel.

As Thiel writes: “Both the right’s fear of government and the left’s fear of technology have jointly stunted our nuclear energy policy, but on this issue liberals hold the balance of power. Speaking about climate change in 2013, President Obama said that our grandchildren will ask whether we did ‘all that we could when we had the chance to deal with this problem.’

“So far, the answer would have to be no — unless he seizes this moment. Supporting nuclear power with more than words is the litmus test for seriousness about climate change. Like Nixon’s going to China, this is something only Mr. Obama can do. If this president clears the path for a new atomic age, American scientists are ready to build it.”

 

business news, International news, national news, political news, State news

Cuba opens door to business for Texans

cuba-us-corporation-revolution_si

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott could have responded differently to President Obama’s decision to restore normal relations with Cuba.

The governor could have dug in his heels and condemned the move — as many of his fellow Republicans have done — as a sop to a repressive dictatorship that has a horrible human rights record.

Instead, he chose the more pragmatic approach. He sees the move as a potentially huge boon to Texas business and industry, which is why he’s leading a large trade delegation today to the island nation.

Abbott is no dummy. He believes that Cuba presents Texas with a growing market for state-produced goods and commodities, which is why he has decided to hang his partisan hat on the rack.

A Texas A&M University study says that increased trade between Texas and Cuba could produce as much as a $43 billion total impact on the Texas economy and more than 250 permanent jobs.

The long history of frostiness between the United States and Cuba is well known. The communist government has been deemed an “enemy” of the United States. There once was a missile crisis on the island that brought the world close to a world war.

The Soviet Union has disintegrated. Cuba remains one of the few Marxist nations on Earth.

However, Cuba no longer presents a direct threat to the United States.

Instead, it presents opportunities for the U.S. government and private businesses — not to mention individual state governments and businesses — to exploit.

Go for it, Gov. Abbott.

 

International news, military news

Some good news on the ISIS front … maybe

syria-air-strikes-600x376

There might be a glimmer of good news on which to build regarding the air campaign against the Islamic State.

It is that U.S. intelligence data suggest that the Islamic State’s ranks are thinning, that defections from the battlefield are increasing and that the air campaign launched against the terror network is having a direct impact.

Hmmm. Interesting, yes?

It’s foolish, of course, to get ahead of ourselves here. President Obama said ISIS had been “contained,” and then 24 hours later Paris was attacked by Islamic State terrorists.

But consider this from USA Today: “Top military officials estimate that the campaign has killed 23,000 Islamic State fighters, raising their death toll by 3,000 since mid-October. Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, who oversees U.S. military operations in the Middle East as chief of Central Command, told troops last week in Iraq that the campaign is inflicting maximum pain on the enemy, according to a military official who attended the meeting but who was not authorized to speak publicly about it.”

What does one make of that? Maximum pain ought to mean what we think it means, which is that the air strikes are inflicting the desired misery on this cabal of murderous religious extremists.

France has deployed its air power against the terrorists in the wake of the Paris attacks. Russia has joined the fight with full force after ISIS took responsibility for the downing of the Russian jet and the deaths of 224 passengers and crew.

Is the conflict heading for a quick conclusion? Hardly. However, it’s good to take note of positive trends when they present themselves. Let us hope they spur our combined military forces into delivering more pain and misery to the enemy.

 

national news

These events never will become ‘normal’

suspect

I think I understand what President Obama said about the shooting rampage at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, about how they shouldn’t become “normal.”

Mr. President, we’ll know these things have become normal when the media stop covering them.

A gunman killed three people — including a brave Colorado Springs police officer — and injured several others. It’s not yet known precisely who — or what — was the target. Was it the Planned Parenthood clinic? Or was it something else?

We hope to find out … and soon.

The president also said “enough is enough” regarding gun violence. That, of course, is a given. It was enough long before this latest spasm of violence.

Robert Lewis Dear is now facing murder charges in connection with the shooting. It’s a testament to the hard work of the Colorado Springs Police Department that he was taken into custody.

Is this normal? Is this the kind of thing we should expect to occur?

Never. But we’ll know it’s all normal when no one pays attention.

I doubt very much that’s ever going to occur.

 

International news

Allies tighten ties against Islamic State

air-strike

France and Russia are allies with a common enemy.

It’s the Islamic State.

The two nations’ presidents — Francois Hollande and Vladimir Putin — have agreed to tighten their alliance in the shared fight against the monstrous terrorist cabal.

Wait, though, for critics of President Obama to weigh in. They’ll wonder aloud: Why isn’t Barack Obama in the lead?

What difference does it really make?

France and Russia have skin in this game. The Russians lost more than 200 of their citizens when a bomb exploded on a jetliner; ISIS took responsibility for the deed. Then came the Paris attacks that killed 130 victims; ISIS took responsibility for that deed, too.

Hollande and Putin agreed to share intelligence and to intensify their air strikes against ISIS targets in Syria. As the Associated Press reports: “We agreed on a very important issue: To strike the terrorists only, Daesh and the jihadi groups only, and not to strike the forces and the groups that are fighting against the terrorists,” Hollande said after the meeting, referring to IS by its Arabic acronym. “And we are going to exchange some information about that: what can be struck, and what must not be struck.”

Both countries employ significant military assets. Let us welcome them more fully into this fight.

As for the United States, there’s plenty of pressure being applied for our president to kick our own immense military establishment into an even more active role in the war against ISIS.

My bigger hope, though, is that President Obama is continuing to seek out more allied help — from the rest of the European Union and friendly Middle East countries that more than any other ought to want to destroy ISIS.

For now, I see nothing at all wrong with France and Russia locking arms in this mortal combat.