J House's Most Recent Comments
in: No First Use
in: To Hiroshima
-
“The President left himself wide open to criticism by expressing in his Prague speech the goal “to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.”
Well, in his two terms, the President has certainly failed in that regard. Today, N. Korea has not only detonated multiple nuclear bombs, but is in the act of reprocessing nuclear weapons-grade fuel (possible to be sold to the highest bigger, including Iran).
The Iran ‘deal’ merely delays the inevitable…a nuclear armed Iran and Saudi Arabia possessing nuclear weapons..
in: Decent Intervals
-
The President, when he ran for office the first time, knew very well what he was ‘inheriting’ (I object to that politically charged word…every President knows what they are getting into when they run for office). Yes, it was far easier to get in Iraq and Afghanistan that to get out. But the President took his eye off the ball in Iraq when there was some measure of stability in 2009 (look at the trend lines in U.S. combat deaths then, and they were still in the fight).
In Afghanistan, he tried to replicate the success of the ‘surge’ strategy in Iraq and failed, mainly because he set an end date for withdrawal, and complicated it by taking it to the Taliban, not just AQ.
The Libyan debacle was completely of this President’s doing, and it runs counter to his pre-election comments about invading Arab countries that do not threaten America. His actions have destabilized the entire arc of North Africa.Libya’s ASPs have been looted of all weaponry and explosives. We will pay for this, dearly.
As far as my policy prescriptions go, who cares? Biden had it right in Afghanistan…a lighter footprint was the right action, and he wasn’t persuasive enough.
Recognize that, like Vietnam, if Afghans opposing the Taliban do not want it bad enough, then the cause is lost.
in: Decent Intervals
-
“He has tried his best to resist the undertow of Afghanistan and Iraq, and keep on the periphery of the hellhole that is Syria.”
President Obama doubled down in Afghanistan with the ‘surge’ of nearly 100,000 troops, and it has been a complete failure in the end. Casualties spiked and what is to show for it? Helmand and Kunduz provinces are nearly lost, with the Taliban gaining more ground weekly.
In Iraq, in 2011 the President declared Iraq was ‘secure’ and ‘could stand on its own’ (his words), and that ‘the United States will not be Iraq’s Air Force’. Another policy failure.
Libya? He ordered NATO air power to take down an Arab dictator that was no threat to U.S. national security, with no post-conflict plan, resulting in total chaos there. On top of it, that phony ‘no fly zone’ turned into a regime change operation, ensuring the Russians would never trust the U.S. on a vote for a NFZ in the UN again. The President did all of this while breaking U.S. law…the War Powers Act.
Yemen? We are knees deep in that secret dirty war, re-supplying the ‘coalition’ with deadly arms in which we have no control over increasing civilian casualties.
Periphery of Syria? We have been conducting airstrikes on a group for over a year now that will have a long memory and will do what it can to strike back at the U.S. and Europe, long after the President leaves office. Stay tuned for 9/11, part II.
The President’s foreign policy prescriptions have emboldened Russia, who now have more influence and a stronger foothold in the Middle East than they have in 30 years. Come back to my post when Putin makes a move in the Baltics before the end of the President’s term, and tests NATO’s ‘red line’. Preparations are already underway for another maskirovka party in Lithuania
Krepon, with all due respect, I suggest you replace your morning kool-aid with coffee.
in: The New Isolationism
-
I’m not a Republican, but I will give it a shot. Sanctions against Iran were just starting to sting, along with the drop in the price of oil. Holding out would have given the United States more leverage in the negotiations. The President said the sanctions wouldn’t hold, but he wouldn’t use the same argument for sanctions against Russia. We’ve given away enrichment, sanctions, prohibitions on the trade of conventional arms and ballistic missiles, unfrozen tens of billions (which will flow to Russia for arms)…for a promise that Iran won’t develop nuclear weapons and tighter inspections.
You have to play hard ball, not softball with Iran. Unfortunately, this is about a political legacy, not preventing Iranian nukes.
Read my words in 2015 when Iran secretly deploys nuclear weapons, as the NKs have done.
in: The New Isolationism
-
Actually, MK, I never wrote the Iranians are likely to cheat. However, if their past record is any indication, they will cheat again. Fordo was prohibited. So was research on nuclear weapons designs.
Go back ten years on this blog. I predicted nothing would stop NK from producing and testing nuclear weapons, as well as opening Yongbon again to produce more plutonium. Now they are enriching uranium as well.
The Iranians have been on a +20 year strategic path to the bomb. A piece of paper with as much teeth as the Munich agreement isn’t going to do much to stop them in the end. It buys time, at most.
in: The New Isolationism
-
There is no logic to the agreement if the Iranians are determined to cheat.
If they go for a nuclear bomb if there is no agreement, we threaten to attack (Obama’s policy is not allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon…period, in his words)
If there is an agreement and they go for a nuclear bomb, we also threaten to attack.
With the deal, the only outcomes favorable to the P 5+1 is less centrifuges, which means less enrichment (unless another Fordo pops up) and better monitoring of the cycle.
For this, Iran gets tens of billions unfrozen, sanctions dropped, conventional and ballistic missiles in several years, the right to enrich and develop advanced nuclear technology, etc.
It isn’t isolationism…its just this deal is weighted heavily in favor of the Iranian regime.
What is the rush if they really have no intent on developing nuclear weapons? The fact is, it is driven by political expediency for this President’s ‘legacy’. a political
in: Will Gravity Lift the Space Code of Conduct?
-
Actually,in 2001, the bone morphs into a orbiting nuclear weapon, not a space station.
in: Inappropriate Target
-
You are right, Jefferey…it is pure elitism.
I would argue that it is harder to manage and run a Target retail store than any govt. position, including the NNSA.
First, there is accountability, and there are numerous examples in govt. that prove that accountability isn’t an issue at all.Senator Menendez and his free flights until he is caught is a recent example. Someone running a Target that takes free $58,000 private jet flights from a vendor would be immediately fired. No review board…no union representation. No ‘ethics’ hearing.Fired.
Second, there are profitability goals and quotas, which doesn’t even exist in a govt. job. In other words, actual results count and are measured, along with your performance. Waste all of the taxpayer’s dollars you want and blow your budget…you may even be richly rewarded with a promotion, if you are greasing the right skids.
Third, typically it is merit that gets you promoted in the private sector. Numerous examples in govt. where that isn’t the case. Why, Penny Pritzker is about to become Commerce Secretary…we all know how she gets that position, just like most ambassadorships.
in: Death and Disability
-
“In due course, the Congress will be faced with votes on automatic weapons and ammunition clips that no true hunter would use”.
Is limiting an individual’s right enshrined in the US Constitution the issue or is this about the rights of ‘true hunters’?
I own six guns, all inherited to me for the past 40 years. One could be considered a ‘sniper rifle’, since it is a bolt action .30 caliber. I also have rapid fire repeater rifles. Like millions of other Americans that own tens of millions of guns, not one of these weapons has ever walked out of my home and killed someone….and never will.
Drunk drivers kill thousands of school children and thousands of adults every year, yet we hear no cries of these crazed acts of ‘car violence’ or denying the rights of law abiding citizens to own and drive cars.
Why?
Show Full Context of Comment
‘No first use’ is no more than a ‘feel good’ strategy.It doesn’t work in boxing, and it won’t work in the next nuclear war…it is literally a prescription for ‘lights out’.