Tag Archives: appeasement

What Western powers should do in response to Russia’s aggression

 

ReaganPeaceQuoteThe Russian aggression against Ukraine, initiated by President Vladimir Putin, has surprised many but not me, and should have surprised no one.

It is simply an inevitable consequence of the West, and especially America’s, shameless appeasement policy towards Russia combined with a long-running policy of unilateral disarmament (while Russia, under Vladimir Putin, has been arming to the teeth).

For many years, and especially the last five, Western nations have been dramatically cutting their militaries, defense budgets, weapon programs, and ambitions, while Russia has been dramatically expanding its own.

And for the last five years running, this writer has been sounding the alarm about these suicidal policies, warning that they would only lead to Russian intimidation, coercion, excesses, muscle-flexing, and eventually, aggression.

This writer most notably sounded the alarm in May 2009, writing that:

“Unless European states and America suddenly adopt a hawkish foreign policy and strengthen their militaries, Europe will become a mere province of the Russian empire.”

And as usual, this writer was right all along.

Meanwhile, all those who falsely claimed that “the Cold War was over”, “Russia is our friend/partner, not our enemy”, “you are a Cold War dinosaur”, “you need to shed this Cold War mentality”, and “the 1980s are asking to have their policy back” were dead wrong.

All those who claimed Russia was a partner and not a foe, that it should be appeased and accomodated, that Obama’s “reset” policy was right, that the US could afford to cut its nuclear arsenal further – from Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and the Cato Institute, to the CNAS, Michele Flournoy, Michael McFaul, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Henry Kissinger, and Pat Buchanan – were DEAD WRONG ALL ALONG.

These people should now publicly admit being wrong and shut their ignorant mouths up. But we should be under no illusions that they will.

Now Ukraine, a strategically important country and a weak neighbor of Russia, has been invaded by that country under the utterly false pretext of protecting Russian citizens and ethnic Russians in the Crimea – who were not threatened by Kiev in any way – just like Hitler annexed the Sudetenland in 1938, ostensibly to protect the Sudetenland Germans from the Czechoslovakian government.

In any case, what can and should Western powers do to stop Putin from going any further?

The first and most important thing is to immediately and permanently STOP listening to the advice from the Powell-Kissinger-Flournoy-Clinton school of foreign policy, which has once again (but not for the first time) been proven DEAD WRONG.

This means no more cuts in the West’s nuclear or conventional arsenals, no more “arms control” treaties, no more accommodating of the Russians’ demands. By committing such a blatant act of aggression, they’ve forfeited the right to be heard on any issue and to make any wishes or demands.

But the West must do much more to convince Vladimir Putin that it’s serious. Mere promises of toughness, verbal condemnations, and “dialogue” won’t stop him from committing further aggression.

Therefore, the US, Canada, and European countries should, until such time as the Putin regime collapses:

1) Immediately institute a TOTAL embargo on ALL Russian products except raw minerals.

2) Hasten the deployment of all stages of the European Phased Adaptive Approach to missile defense in Europe, and build an East Coast missile defense site.

3) Immediately withdraw from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Partial Test Ban Treaty, the New START, and the CFE Treaty.

4) Ban the Russian national air carrier, Aeroflot, from flying into US, Canadian, or EU airspace.

5) Warn Russia that any of its military aircraft that venture into US, Canadian, or EU airspace will be shot down without warning.

6) Expel Russian ambassadors from Western countries.

7) Boycott the upcoming G8 summit and Paralympic Games in Sochi.

8) Reverse all defense (budget, programmatic, force structure) cuts undertaken in the last 12 years and start building Western militaries up. In particular, the US should reverse all the cuts in its nuclear arsenal and fully modernize it; revive the MEADS, Airborne Laser, Kinetic Energy Interceptor, and Multiple Kill Vehicle programs; cancel the F-35 program and resume F-22 Raptor fighter production; develop the Reliable Replacement Warhead and the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator; increase its inventory of MOP bombs; reintroduce S-3 Vikings into service; improve its Navy’s ASW equipment and skills; build a Conventional Prompt Global Strike system; develop ASAT weapons; order more THAAD brigades; speed up naval railgun and laser development and deployment; and make more Aegis-class warships BMD-capable.

9) Lastly, and most importantly, Western countries should strike Russia where it is weakest: its economy. Specifically, Western countries, led by the US, should:

a) Impose total economic sanctions, including a total embargo and asset freezes, on Russia; and

b) Start freeing itself from Russia’s oil and gas domination by opening the Outer Continental Shelf, the ANWR, the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, all shale oil and gas deposits throughout the West, and the reserves in the Everglades; liquifying coal; using methane in lieu of natural gas; cancelling the South Stream pipeline; authorizing the Keystone Pipeline; and building the Nabucco Pipeline instead (and as quickly as possible). In addition, the US, which is already a net oil and gas exporter, should immediately start exporting these fuels to Europe to help it wean itself off Russian hydrocarbons.

The Russian economy is terribly dependent on raw minerals exports; 66% of the Kremlin’s revenue comes from these exports, while manufactured goods exports account for only about 10%. Moreover, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has already caused significant unrest at the Moscow stock exchange, whose main index has seen a 10% fall (and a 20% decline in the Russian currency’s value to the dollar) just today (as of 8:24AM ET, 18:24 Moscow time).

Moreover, Putin’s totally incompetent interference in the affairs of Gazprom, the Russian gas producing and exporting company, has driven it into a debt of $50 billion – equalling its turnover of one year.

This invasion, and Vladimir Putin’s entire buildup of the Russian military, would NOT have been possible absent the boon provided by high oil and gas prices (oil now stands at $105/barrel) and Russia’s stranglehold on their supplies to Europe. If that stranglehold is broken, and if these prices decline dramatically and soon, Putin will have no choice but to withdraw his troops, and his wannabe Evil Empire Redux will fall like a deck of cards.

Those who advocated the ridiculous policy of appeasement and unilateral disarmament that brought us into this mess in the first place now falsely claim that the only alternative to dialogue with Russia is war with that country. That is completely false.

No one wants war with Moscow. And since the Russian military is already more than strong enough to defeat the US military easily, it would be ill-advised.

But as stated above, Russia has one great glaring weakness – its economy – and as Sun Tzu wisely counseled, the right way to defeat your opponent is to strike his weaknesses, not his strengths.

Just as Ronald Reagan (who was vilified as a warmonger who would cause nuclear war) won the Cold War without firing a shot, the West, if it applies the right policies, can defeat Russia today, also without firing a shot, by pulling the economic lever. It absolutely can do so. The question is whether Western leaders will now have the intellectual courage to acknowledge the utter failure of their appeasement policy.

John Dummett or Mitt Romney: Freedom or Appeasement

I am Awake

My opposition to Mitt Romney has drawn a great deal of criticism from a variety of people.  It seems my vote is the only one in the nation that actually counts.  While that is flattering in one respect I find it rather disingenuous in another respect.  Why is it that my refusal to vote for the lesser of two evils is the only factor in the destruction of our once great nation?  I find more than enough reasons to refuse to vote for Mitty the Poo, the all-white Obama, based on my Christian faith and Mitty’s propensity to deny his faith in almost everything he stands for politically.

I have a great faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to carry me through whatever evil comes my way.  To me, voting isn’t a question of voting for the one who is less dangerous than the other.  My vote is based on what I believe God would have me do, on the standards set by Him and recorded in the Holy Bible.  I will vote based on who I believe to be in compliance with God’s Word and the Constitution of the United States of America, a document written by men who took much of the content from biblical principles and guidelines.

Mitty the Poo, the all-white Obama claims to be a Christian man, a Mormon.  I don’t care which church he is affiliated with, that is not my concern.  My concerns about Mitty go so much deeper.  How can a man who proclaims to be a Christian support abortion on demand?  God’s Word says that he “knew us before we were even in the womb”.  Does that not accentuate the idea of life at conception to a Christian?  I understand that there are cases that can be made for abortion in instances of rape, but that is not where Mitty stands on the issue.  How can a “conservative Christian” support the joke of the “gay rights” issue?  I don’t agree that homosexuals should be hung from the nearest tree but I don’t believe they should be given special rights not afforded to the rest of us either, and neither does God’s Word.  How can a man who claims to believe in the Constitution not believe in the rights of We the People to keep and bear arms as stated in the Second Amendment?  How can a conservative candidate support Obamacare, a travesty that Mitty actually authored and has supported for several years?

God’s Word tells us to stand strong on biblical principles and to live our lives by His core values.  People who will vote for Mitty out of fear of Obama are neither putting their faith in God, nor their trust in His “divine providence”. 

Voting out of fear brought Adolph Hitler to power in Germany.  People feared another stint with the Weimar Republic and voted in a guy who promised to “fundamentally transform” Germany.  We are facing the same situation today.  People fear what Obama will do in a second term, rightfully so, but are not looking at the other choice realistically.  The mantra is “anyone but Obama, as long as it is Mitty”, and discounting any other option.

I will not vote for Mitty the Poo, the all-white Obama in November.  I WILL NOT COMPLY with the party-line “vote for our guy because he isn’t quite as dangerous as the other guy” mentality.  You see, I find Mitty to be just as dangerous as Obama in many respects.  In addition to the items listed earlier, Mitty also has been bought and paid for by George Soros and the New World Order cabal.  In case you haven’t heard, Soros has publicly endorsed Mitty as the best candidate for the Republican Party.  That is enough on its own merit to stop me from voting for him, but isn’t the only reason I stand on.  I hear people make a big deal out of the Olympics and how Mitty “saved” the event.  What people are surprised to learn when I mention it is that Mitty “saved” the Olympics with $450 million federal tax dollars given to him by George W. Bush.  This same money was denied to Mitty’s predecessor.  I find that rather curious.  If the money was insignificant to the treasury but vital to the Olympics, why wasn’t the money given to the first guy, and who did this money actually go to?  And when you go look at how he balanced the state budget without tax increases you will find a substantial “federal tax donation” to the state treasury.

I will cast my vote for a man who I believe will actually stand up to the New World Order globalists and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and We the People, against all enemies foreign and domestic. I want a President I can believe will do what is right, not just “hope” he will do what is right.

Voting for the lesser of two evils and hoping for a better candidate next time is not the answer.  I heard that, and bought into it, many years ago.  I voted for Bob Dole, one of the worst candidates that has ever run for the office of President of the United States, but he was “better than the alternative and we could get a better candidate the next time around”.  It worked once because we wound up with Ronald Reagan but hasn’t worked out so well since then.  I bought it again four years ago when I voted for the McCain/Palin Republican Party ticket.  I actually voted for Sarah Palin, hoping they would win and McCain would die of a heart attack the next day and leave Palin as the President.  I think that much of John McCain, and I remember how Mitty ran second to McCain in 2008.  Four years ago Mitty was less conservative than John McCain but now he is miraculously the most conservative candidate available?  Naw, I’m not buying the same 3 legged horse again.

My vote will be cast for John Albert Dummett (www.johndummett.us), as a write-in candidate if necessary.  Wasting my vote?  Voting for Obama?  Insuring Obama gets a second term?  NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!  I am exercising the discernment given to me by God and casting my vote for the man who will follow God’s Word and the Constitution rather than voting out of fear of another Obama term.  I will vote for a man who will put what is best for the nation ahead of what is best for his cronies and the New World Order globalist cabal that so many of the Washington “elite” cater to.

I also hear the “he can’t win” line from people I talk to, and undoubtedly will hear the same from many who read this article.  Can’t win?  Why can’t he win?  He “can’t win” because of all of the people in America who would rather vote for evil out of fear of the other evil running.  Mitty the Poo doesn’t really have any support from conservative voters, and certainly not TEA Party people.  If everyone who will vote for Mitty out of the fear of another four years of Obama would vote for John Dummett it would be a slam dunk win for conservative values, for God’s values, and for We the People.  More importantly, it would be a victory for our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. 

We can never regain our freedom by voting for the lesser of two evils.  We the People can only win if we have the courage of our founding fathers.  I wonder how many people said George Washington could never beat the British, armed with the strongest army and the strongest navy in the world at the time.  I wonder how many people cheered Neville Chamberlain when he came back from Europe with a paper signed by Adolph Hitler that guaranteed “peace in our time”, a peace “guaranteed” by selling Czechoslovakia to Hitler?  I wonder how many people were joyous of the pact signed between Hitler and Stalin that prevented Germany from invading Russia in World War II.  Oh, wait a minute; don’t I remember reading that something went wrong there?

Signing contracts, including voting, with evil out of fear of a greater evil is not in the best interests of anyone, particularly the future of our nation.  Our Republic is gone and nearly to the point of no return.  We now live under a dictatorial oligarchy and are in danger of finding ourselves living under a tyranny akin to that of Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, China, and many other repressive governments.

 If you don’t have the courage to stand up for freedom now when will you find that courage?   Will you stand and fight when they come for your bible, your guns, your food, or your home?  Will you fight when they come to round your family up to be sent to the FEMA camps, also authorized under a Republican president and Congress?  Or will you simply pack your one allowed suitcase and trod off to the slaughterhouse like the Jews did in Nazi Germany?  Those willing to bow to tyranny out of fear now will not be willing to stand up for freedom when things get much worse.  The Secret Service has already tried to intimidate Ted Nugent into submission over his remarks at the NRA convention a few weeks ago. 

John Dummett (www.johndummett.us ) has received visits from the FBI, found his e-mail suddenly and mysteriously shut down, his computers hacked, and is receiving death threats.  This is only the beginning.  Those who believe things will be better under Mitty need to look at the last “conservative”/moderate president we elected.  This “conservative”/moderate, along with a Republican Congress, and in addition to the FEMA camps, gave us the “Patriot” Act, Homeland Security, and the TSA.  The last conservative/moderate Republican president did more to destroy our freedom than Bill Clinton.  That “conservative”/moderate was George W. Bush.

Now is not the time to compromise with evil.  Now is the time to stand up for freedom and vote for a man who is offering us a truly conservative platform.  People who say I am wasting my vote or voting for Obama are wrong.  Those voting out of fear of another Obama term are the ones wasting their votes.  I am voting from a positive position, voting for a man I believe will follow through with what he promises and give us a presidency we can once again be proud of.  I am voting for freedom now, not the hope that “someday” we will have an acceptable Republican candidate who will truly stand up for the values of God and our founding fathers.

Today, more than ever, we need a staunch conservative voice in the White House.  We need more staunch conservative voices in Congress.  John McCain, Orin Hatch, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, John Boehner, Eric Cantor, and the others who routinely ignore the Constitution in favor of Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi are not leaders.  They are only interested in currying favor with despots to keep their seat in the back of Obama’s tyranny bus.  All of the dictatorships I listed earlier have their parliaments or congresses but they are only rubber stamps of a dictator, men and women who will do whatever they have to do to keep their seats of power, wealth, and prestige.

We can no longer afford to vote out of fear.  Our nation is teetering on the brink of outright dictatorship and appeasing despots never works out well for the pawns in the appeasement.  We the People must show the courage of our founding fathers and those who have sacrificed their lives to preserve our freedom over the last 236 years.  Voting for Mitty the Poo is appeasement, trying to curry favor with New World Order globalists who have nothing more than their own power.  Voting for John Albert Dummett is a vote for freedom now and in the future.

 

Bob Russell

April 23, 2012

Claremore, Oklahoma

It’s Only Controversial If America’s Involved

Another Koran controversy. That it somehow involves the U.S. and its military should go without saying. How would it possibly be controversial otherwise?

All across the Muslim world at the hands of their own, Mosques are desecrated with fire and bullets. Muslim individuals are butchered in all manner of barbaric ways. And Koran’s? Well, you’ll find pay phone yellow pages in red light districts that are treated with more reverence. But none of that raises the merest whiff of ire from Islamists or the Left.

Now though, with the involvement of the United States, the usual suspects threaten once more to trample one another in their stampede to proclaim themselves sensitive to yet another Western outrage.

That Islamic Fascists engage in such behavior is wholly understandable, if no less repugnant. After all, an ideology that desires nothing less than the complete subjugation of the entire world, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, before a Caliphate lead Theocracy, is hardly going to blush at employing hypocrisy of even the most whorish kind.

But what of the Left? What is it that they get by legitimizing the manufactured outrage of those who would quite happily see them dead or enslaved?

Is it simple opportunism? A belief that by delegitimizing Conservative identification of the Islamist threat, they will direct power back to themselves at the ballot box? That may be a part of it. But if it is, then it stands purely as an ancillary benefit of a driving psychosis that demands reality be distorted in the most self-serving way imaginable.

Of course, this a sin to which those on the Conservative side of the political spectrum are not immune. Indeed we all fall prey at times to painting ourselves in an overly flattering light. Even if deep down we suspect we may have acted a bit of a twerp. But the psychologically mature individual draws the line at fabricating a reality that stands dangerously opposed to the world at large, and those individuals within it who wish them ill.

Down through history, civilization after civilization has fallen before aggressors whose hearts beat with rapacious greed for the treasure of land, lives and gold.

Always, such lusts have been painted less base through the use of injustices, whether exaggerated or wholly concocted.

And always, of those who were faced with this aggression, a certain number could be relied upon to employ the same moral and intellectual self-aggrandizement that is the province of the Left today.

In the minds of such people, the threat, if indeed there was such a threat at all, was an entirely manageable and oft times, wholly understandable one.

For such people, appeasement, was not seen as a fundamental capitulation that would only embolden an enemy. Rather, such an act was the exclusive privilege of the civilized man. For only he could extend his hand in benevolent condescension to the savages unable to control themselves.

In this fatal conceit, the question was never asked: Do those whose aggression I patronize and indulge, view me as I view myself, or do they see me as weak, and easy prey?

It is a question which is still not asked by the Left today when it comes to their dealings with Islamic Fascism.

The fundamental difference now of course is, the stakes are so much higher. Technological advancements have given mankind much that is of benefit, but also, they enable just one man to personally inflict truly nightmarish levels of death and destruction.

A forgiving heart might be tempted to ascribe simple ignorance to the Left’s penchant for minimizing or excusing behavior wholly antithetical of the individual freedom necessary for the existence of Western democracy.

Certainly it is impossible to imagine any of today’s Liberal talking heads facing a situation in which they were forced to deal personally, even physically, with another who wished them unjust harm.

Could not this inexperience then explain their ignorance as to the ramifications of their actions?

No. It could not.

There are examples such as Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, two American hikers imprisoned in Iran for two years on trumped up espionage charges. Who upon their release proceeded to trash America, whilst talking with forgiving moral equivalency of the regime that had just demonstrated to them forcibly that the freedoms they were raised in are by no means a universal human condition.

But really, are such needed? A child confronted by a bully in the playground understands in that moment when violence is immediately before them, that to condescend or legitimize such, is to ensure being beaten bloody. And that the only thing likely to stay the bully’s hand, is a fear of the consequences they will face. Especially if those consequences are sure to be even bloodier in turn.

The idea then that an adult would not recognize these dynamics is purely preposterous. What drives this patently suicidal behavior of the Left then, is not ignorance. But rather, a very conscious decision that self-veneration trumps all. Even when it comes to dealing with those who would take not only our freedom from us, but our very lives.

Remember that the next time you hear such an individual talk with abhorrence of your right to bear arms.

Vaughan Starr is a freelance writer. Professional inquiries may be directed to [email protected]

“Iran to be Held Accountable”: Out Comes the Obama Wet Noodle!

Without a doubt, the story of the day was the unveiling of an Iranian plot to assassinate Ambassadors to the United States, ON U.S. soil, from Saudi Arabia and Israel.  At minimum, this is a clear act of provocation by a regime that has made it clear their contempt for the United States and Israel.  At worst, it’s an act of war.

 

Yet the big, theatrical, megalomaniacal laugh that should have been coming from the general direction of Tehran was drowned out by the snickers of millions when they heard Attorney General Eric Holder state, “The United States is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions.”

 

Really? Why start now?

 

The Obama administration is already talking about more sanctions – which, by the way hasn’t seemed to deter Iran from continuing to build a nuclear weapon, despite their claiming to need it for “energy” reasons.  They’re floating on a sea of oil, folks.

 

There can really only be one reason why a yet still non-nuclear country (we think) like Iran would risk the wrath of the U.S., post-9/11 – the have no fear of real reprisal.

 

Such was, is and will always be the response of despots to the hand of appeasement.  Such people’s disdain and hatred only increases in the face of pacification.  To them, it is a sign of weakness, ineptitude and the embodiment of everything they despise about our culture and society.

 

For most in the civilized world, this type of thinking seems, well, foreign.  We have been brought up to believe that we should look for commonalities and work toward bridging gaps – they want to blow up those bridges or, in this case, ambassadors.

 

They will only respect one thing – a firm powerful punch to the solo plexus followed by the willingness to deliver another blow.  Iran’s leadership knows that this administration simply doesn’t have the stomach for that.  In fact, the President goes out of his way to telegraph to the world that he has no intention of keeping those types of options on the table whatsoever.

 

A wise Jewish carpenter once said, “how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man?”  It’s even easier if the strong man voluntarily ties himself up!

 

I am reminded of one of the most memorable line in movie history that came from the low-budget cult classic Terminator.  It rings in my mind every time I hear some talk of placating our modern enemy and so I adapt it slightly for our modern reality:

 

 

“That [terrorist] is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!”

 

 

The days (and years) after 9/11 found us kicking ourselves for not taking Al-Qaeda seriously.  Will history look upon this date with the same remorse?