FreedomHouse (CC)

If the outside world was excited about a U.S. retaliatory plan for the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons against rebels, the families in the capital’s old Mezzah neighborhood struck a tone in utter contrast.

“America is inventing stories about chemical weapons,” one man told CNN’s Fred Pleitgen. “The Syrian government never used chemical weapons. The rebels have used them, not the government. So they are inventing stories because our army is winning.”

Another man, also shopping for household staples, said the U.S. action won’t make a difference. The government will prevail in the civil war, he asserted.

The intervention is in the wake of reports that the Assad regime is using chemical weapons against its own citizens. But, there remain reports that this simply isn’t the case on the ground. As Al Jazeera reports:

“The White House has issued a statement full of lies about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, based on fabricated information,” a statement issued on Friday by the Syrian Foreign Ministry said.

“The United States is using cheap tactics to justify President Barack Obama’s decision to arm the Syrian opposition,” it said.

Russia, a staunch ally of the Syrian government, also disputed the US charge on Friday.

President Vladimir Putin’s foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, told reporters that the information provided by US officials to Russia “didn’t look convincing”.

Russian officials are also not supporting U.S. plans for a no-fly zone over Syria.

“There have been leaks from Western media regarding the serious consideration to create a no-fly zone over Syria through the deployment of Patriot anti-aircraft missiles and F-16 jets in Jordan,” said Mr [Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei] Lavrov, speaking at a joint news conference in Moscow with his Italian counterpart.

“You don’t have to be a great expert to understand that this will violate international law,” he said.

Mr Lavrov also said evidence presented by the US of chemical weapons use in Syria apparently did not meet reliability criteria set out by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

The three-year-long conflict in Syria has been increasingly involving neighboring nations, and Hezbollah leaders have stated that they do not intend to back down in the conflict. This does not bode well for any plans that the U.S. could have for assisting the Syrian rebels – without taking into account arguments from within the U.S. that getting involved at this point would only be giving weapons to existing enemies of the U.S. There is no secret that Al Qaeda has been making in-roads in the Syrian resistance. Add to that it appears that even Israel does not foresee a stable nation in Syria with or without Assad, there seem to be very few, if any, redeeming factors to the U.S. stepping in any more than it has already.

When:Sunday May 5th, 9pm Eastern/6pm Pacific

Where: In Deep with Michelle Ray on Blog Talk Radio

What: Join Social Media Director of ConservativeDailyNews.com, Michelle Ray (@GaltsGirl) as she discusses the issues that impact America.

Tonight: Your calls, a little about American heroes and aiding our enemies.

The Israeli military had no comment. But a source in the Israeli defense establishment told CNN’s Sara Sidner, “We will do whatever is necessary to stop the transfer of weapons from Syria to terrorist organizations. We have done it in the past and we will do it if necessary the future.”

Fox News report:

More details will be posted as they become available.

—-

The first three questions at President Obama’s late starting 100 Days press conference Tuesday did not put the administration in a very good light. The first question about the weapons of mass destruction used in Syria cause the POTUS to respond he understood chemical weapons were used but he was unsure by whom, where and why. His team would investigate and this might be a game changer…

Question two related to the ongoing situation in finding the truth about Benghazi, specifically that some people were being stonewalled from testifying. The president had not heard of intimidation tactics being used against the whistle blowers but his team would investigate and he would get back with information.

The third question was regarding the Boston Bombing and whether there might have been an issue with our intelligence. To no one’s surprise, after a long circular statement, the president said they were investigating this issue and there would be more information in the future.

Continuing with a tough question on the sequester the president went on to remind reporters that he warned everyone of problems with with plan. He did seem to have forgotten that it was his administration who first proposed the sequester as a solution, not Congress. In a not unexpected move, this second term president has transgressed from blaming the past president to putting all the onus onto the mean Republicans in Congress.

Oh, and just in case you didn’t know, the president told us that his grand Obamacare program is all wrapped up with a bow and implemented, causing only minor problems for a few people… Any issues are due to those darned Republicans. (If your insurance has gone up 10, 15 or 25% in the past year to cover all those ‘free’ programs; if your company has reduced hours or the number of employers due to the health insurance requirements; if you’re having a harder time finding a doctor, you might want to write the president and let him know.)

Also, GITMO would be closed if not for those darned Republicans.

One highlight in the otherwise mundane conference was when the sarcastic Obama stated that maybe he should just pack up and go home to which the Twitter universe resoundingly replied, “Yes, please.”

The press conference concluded with a few comments about the gay basketball player’s coming out to which many are wondering how impressed the public should be that this president places such emphasis on keeping up with sports current events. Some might prefer that with all the challenges faced by Americans citizens might be more impressed if the president would state that he spends less time focusing on athletes and that his priority was improving the safety and economy of the country. Of course, given the above answers, who would believe him?

You can watch the entire press conference on C-Span. . . or you can vacuum your carpet.

In an interview early today Engel, who was released with his crew, said he believes that he and his team were going to be exchanged by their captors for four Iranians and two Lebanese citizens. The plan was thwarted when the kidnappers were stopped at a rebel checkpoint. Following a firefight several of the captors were killed enabling the crew an escape. The reporters believed they were kidnapped by government militia loyal to Syrian president al-Assad.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

.
Who is the United States supporting in Syria?

The answer might shock you.
.
FOX19.com-Cincinnati News, Weather

___

Meanwhile, factory activity fell shy of expectations held by economic experts and contracted for a third straight month.  The new orders index is currently minus 6.9.  A reading below zero indicates contraction.  Two consecutive quarters of economic contraction means that after spending $878 billion taxpayer dollars on government “stimulus”, the U.S. economy will experience a double dip recession.  Of course “progressives” will insist the reason the “stimulus” spending failed is because the government did not spend enough.

Over 1.5 million older Americans have lost their homes, while millions more are in danger of losing theirs due to the unsolved, ongoing national housing crisis.  About 3.5 million older homeowners’ mortgages are underwater.  The “progressive” solution to problems caused by “progressive” government interference in the U.S. housing market?  Have the government refinance underwater mortgages.  Why not?  The U.S. debt is only $15,884,155,929,632.05 and climbing rapidly.  America has money to burn.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Home sales dropped by 5.4% in June to an adjusted annual rate of 4.37 million homes, the fewest since October 2011.  Despite 30-year fixed mortgage rates being the lowest since the 1950s, potential buyers are having difficulty qualifying for loans due to the weakening job market.  Without vigorous job growth, consumers may continue delaying the purchase of new homes.  Why is it the White House jobs panel has not met in six months?  Perhaps having such a meeting would cut into the current Oval Office occupant’s golf, fundraising and campaign appearance time.

The outlook for consumers is not good.  Driven by corn prices reaching near record highs due to drought in the Midwest, grocery bills will continue to rise.  Since corn and corn syrup are used in 75% of the products found in supermarkets, shoppers can plan on paying higher grocery bills.

How long will it be before for a “progressive” Senator, Representative or White House czar calls for the use of more corn in ethanol production?

Why be bothered with the population’s food supply when there is a planet to be saved from carbon gas.  Never mind that more “greenhouse gasses” are belched by volcanoes every year than the combined amount produced by humans since civilization began.  Besides, the people most likely to starve to death probably fit into one of the “progressive’s” genetically inferior categories anyway.

Speaking of alternative fuels, the administration’s taxpayer funded capital investments in “green energy” are going so well that the Amonix solar manufacturing plant in North Las Vegas closed after receiving $20 million in federal subsidies.  The announcement came only14 months after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid endorsed the plant’s opening by heralding solar energy in Nevada, comparing it to Saudi Arabian oil.

On the foreign policy front, the Muslim Brotherhood is infiltrating the U.S. government while they seize power in Egypt and Libya.  Israel and Iran are rattling sabers over the Islamist government’s pursuit of nukes and the prospects of an Israeli military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.

Russia and China joined forces to veto sanctions on Syria in a UN Security Council vote.  Afterwards, the White House called Russian President Vladimir Putin, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s main international supporter, about the deteriorating Syrian situation.  Not surprisingly, that call ended with the two of them divided over how to move forward.

This is what is known as: Not peace through strength.

Don’t worry.  The White House saved the day by announcing that the USDA and Mexico have decided to work cooperatively in promoting American food assistance programs, including food stamps, to Mexican Americans, nationals and migrants living in America.

How is this “progressive” hope and change deal working out for you?

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/hows-that-progressive-deal-working-out-for-you/

Russia has dispatched a flotilla of eleven warships, almost half of which have the ability to carry hundreds of marines to the eastern Mediterranean.  Some of those ships are to be docked in Syria. It is the greatest display of Russian power in the region since the start of Syria’s current conflict.

This is clearly a part of Russia’s effort to become a decisive power broker in Syria, and by extension, the Middle East.  Syria is Russia’s one remaining ally in the region and home to Tartus, the last remaining Soviet era military base outside of Russia.

The unusually large size of the deployment announced by Moscow can be considered a message.  The message is not just to the Middle East, but also to the United States.  The message is: We are strong and you are weak.

Not unexpectedly, the response from Washington was, to put it politely, muted.  Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the National Security Council said:  “Russia maintains a naval supply and maintenance base in the Syrian port of Tartus.  We currently have no reason to believe this move is anything out of the ordinary, but we refer you to the Russian government for more details.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/11/world/middleeast/russia-sends-warships-on-maneuvers-near-syria.html?_r=1

The nature of this response will reaffirm to Putin that the current Oval Office occupant is willing to react passively and submissively to the Kremlin.  Leading from behind is seen by experienced global power brokers like Putin as weakness.

Although KGB style secrecy and the Kremlin’s careful manipulation of his image make him difficult to read, watching the recent body language between Putin and Obama makes it is clear for all to see that Putin has little respect for Obama.

Whether Putin or any other Soviet/Russian leader likes you or not is irrelevant to a successful foreign policy.  Ronald Reagan understood that.  George W. Bush understood that.  Mikhail Gorbachev respected Ronald Reagan and grew to like him.  Putin never openly displayed affection for Bush in the way Gorbachev did for Reagan, but Russia’s relative inaction during Bush’s presidency indicated that Putin respected him.  It seems clear that Putin saw, as a result of Bush’s actions, that Bush was ready and willing to promote U.S. interests and power abroad.  In Obama, Putin sees the inverse.  Putin does not see a partner in Obama.  He does not see an adversary in Obama.  In Obama, Putin sees a tool, a weakling who can be punked at will.  Russia’s military deployment to Syria reinforces that conclusion.

Obama’s insistence on making the world like him the cornerstone of his foreign policy is but one of a multitude of reasons why removing him in November is vital to American interests.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/putin-punks-obama/

Egypt’s presidential election results lean towards victory for Mohammed Morsi, the radical Islamist Muslim Brotherhood candidate. Thanks at least in part to vocal White House support for the “Arab Spring”, which ushered the Muslim Brotherhood to Egypt’s presidency, Egypt is now likely to be more inclined towards acting offensively towards Israel.

Russia’s General Staff announced Russian Black Sea fleet warships may head for Syria, saying: “The Mediterranean Sea is a zone of the Black Sea Fleet responsibility. Hence, warships may go there in the case it is necessary to protect the Russian logistics base in Tartous, Syria”. Several warships, including large landing ships are ready for deployment. Russia supports Syria, an active agent for radical Ismanists in Iran, who also just happen to support the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Russia exerts new influence in the Middle East while Russia’s President Vladimir Putin plays the White House like a fiddle.

The Euro survived over the weekend after a close call in Greek elections. Early market euphoria on Monday diminished when persistent uncertainty over the situation in Spain, Italy and other eurozone countries resurfaced. Despite Greece’s election result easing fears that the single currency will disintegrate, indications that Greece will run out of money in mid-July stalled initial market optimism. Multiple countries in Europe are now in economic decline after decades of following Socialist policies.

In France, Socialist President Francois Hollande was given a mandate to follow through with his tax-and-spend agenda when France’s Socialists won control of parliament on Sunday. Hollande now has the majority he needs to combat France’s debt crisis by following the very formula that created a debt crisis in France, Greece, Spain, Italy and the rest of the eurozone.

Meanwhile, in an address to the UN sustainability conference in Rio, Great Britain’s Prince Charles issued warnings about climate change. In a pre-recorded speech the Prince declared: “Catastrophic consequences of carrying on with ‘business-as-usual’ are bearing down on us faster than we think, already dragging many millions more people into poverty and dangerously weakening global food, water and energy security for the future”. The Prince then went on to say: “We do not have nearly enough knowledge on which to base the decisions that will be the best for the long term.” So, which is it? Either “we do not have nearly enough knowledge on which to base the decisions that will be the best for the long term” or we know enough to say “many millions more people” have to worry about poverty, food, water and energy security. You can’t have it both ways, “your majesty”.

In America, Al Gore cashed in on the hysteria he and his fellow climate change propagandists created when New York city Comptroller John Liu OK’d a $16.56 million contract with Generation Investment Management, the former vice president’s environmentally friendly investment firm. Generation Investment Management will help manage New York City pension funds to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Given the track record of green energy capital investments, New York City pension funds are going to be another candidate for a taxpayer funded federal bailout. As with any investment management company, Generation Investment Management will earn their fees no matter what happens to the funds they invest. Apparently it pays to be a global warming alarmist. Perhaps Prince Charles fears the British Monarchy faces pending austerity measures and is just trying to get on the global warming gravy train.

Over the past three and a half years while current world events were taking shape, the White House has been spending money it does not have ala Socialist Europe. All the while enacting another big government socialist “entitlement” program to “nudge” Americans towards European style government dependency.

They championed bureaucratic violations of the free exercise of religion, using the presidential bully pulpit and complicit media lapdogs to convince uninformed voters that it was really a Republican attack on women’s healthcare.

Drones and unmanned airplanes began spying on private property in America’s heartland to ensure American Citizens are complicit with stifling new draconian EPA regulations. An EPA that is now attempting to redefine ditches as bodies of water in order to grant itself additional regulatory power.

Exceeding the Oval Office’s Constitutional and statutory authority to give work visas to a hand picked group of illegal aliens was deemed more important than creating a business friendly, jobs creating economic environment for American Citizens and legal immigrants.

This coming from an administration that pledged in 2008 that it would cut the federal deficit in half by the end of its first term. Instead, the size of the federal government, federal spending and the deficit are all at record high levels. The U.S. national debt has increased by over $5 trillion in less than four years, and after surviving WWI, the Great Depression, WWII, the economic disaster that was Jimmy Carter’s presidency and the global financial crash of 2008, the United States of America’s credit rating has been downgraded.

Insinuating his name into the online biographies of former Presidents and releasing a photo-montage of himself in his “private moments” became priorities, as did attending a record number of fund raising events and playing 100 rounds (and counting) of golf. Never mind that David Axelrod, his 2012 re-election campaign chief, called former President George W. Bush “out of touch” for playing golf while the country struggled with a bad economy.

That’s what his deep-pocketed out of touch with reality millionaire and billionaire Hollywood elite friends expect from their “cool” friend in the White House. To be truly “cool”, one must be seen as being above it all.

America and the world will be better off once the current Chief Executive of the United States begins spending his days playing golf full time as a former government employee.

God Save the Queen.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/fundraise-and-fore-obamas-answer-to-world-events/

Assad described protestors as paid killers, ridiculing freedom demonstrators as people not truly looking for reform. The opposition is seeking reform in a country where expressing dissent often leads directly to arrest and torture. They contend that Assad has offered nothing but cosmetic changes.

A revolt that began as peaceful protests can now only be described as an armed insurgency. This can be attributed to the harsh government crackdown that led protestors to take up arms in self-defense.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, barack obama and many other “progressive” politicians have called the Tea Party “teabaggers”, “racists”, “astroturf”, “Nazis” ” and “extremists” on multiple occasions. The Department of Homeland Security issued a report that described the Tea Party as “right-wing extremists” and “insurgents”, expressing concerns that “Right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities.”

“Violent capacities”?

How much longer will it be before members of Tea Parties are called “paid killers”?

Hasn’t that already happened? Such a description was more than quite heavily inferred by multiple “progressive” politicians and virtually every member of the “progressive” Party Pravda after a nut job who was working solo shot Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Dee “Gabby” Giffords on January 8, 2011.

How soon will members of the “progressive” Democratic Party say that Tea Party members are “not truly looking for reform”?

David Axlerod, obama’s 2012 re-election campaign chief, claimed that the Tea Party “reign of terror” blocked immigration reform. Tea Party efforts to stop “progressive” Democrats from cramming unwanted “healthcare reform” down America’s throat are viewed by “progressives” and their media spokes-tools as “not truly looking for reform”.

How much longer will it take for the United States to become a country where expressing dissent can lead directly to arrest and torture?

According to former FBI agent Larry Grathwohl, Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground Central Committee meant to cause the collapse of the United States government. Ayers and his group would deal with resistant Americans by “establishing re-education centers in the south-west”. Those who refused to convert to Communism, would be “eliminated”. As in: concentration camps would be used to kill 25 million Americans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ

Politico’s Ben Smith reported: “In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn”.

The Tea Party movement began as a peaceful protest against big government, reckless government spending, high taxes and oppressive regulations. The Tea Party’s Contract From America expressed principles held by its members. The most basic being that “Our moral, political, and economic liberties are inherent, not granted by our government.”

The principles of the Tea Party were clearly expressed in the Contract:

Protect the Constitution, reject Cap & Trade, demand a balanced budget, enact fundamental tax reform, restore fiscal responsibility and Constitutionally limited government in Washington DC, end runaway government spending, defund, repeal and replace government-run health care, pass an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policy, stop the pork, and stop the tax hikes.

That sounds like people who are truly looking for reform. Just not the type of reform being insisted upon by members of the institutionalized “progressive” left.

Only those dedicated to the overthrow of the United States government would consider a stand for protecting the Constitution, rejecting the UN backed Cap and Trade agenda, demanding a balanced budget, et al “extreme” in their views.

The similarities between what’s happening now in Syria and plans envisioned for America by the institutionalized “progressive” left are both shocking and real. Why are those similarities being concealed by America’s fabled Fourth Estate? The only logical conclusion is that the views held by the “mainstream media” are sympathetic to those of the institutionalized “progressive” left. They are on the same team.

If violence does break out in the United States, it will be due to a harsh government crackdown leading to peaceful protestors having to take up arms in self-defense. God Bless the genius of America’s Founders and their insightful, forward thinking ratification of the Second Amendment. For they knew first hand that of which Tyrants are made.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/shocking-similarities-concealed/

I was an unabashed neoconservative who supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq until I saw, as William F. Buckley aptly pointed out, how this movement grossly underestimates American power.  This was evident in the negligence in the post-war Iraqi reconstruction operations that followed the fall of Saddam Hussein’s government. The planning of the entire reconstruction effort, outlined in National Security Presidential Directive 24 issued in January 2003, gave the Department of Defense complete authority over the post-war operations.  It’s absurd.  Rebuilding Iraq into a modern, free market democracy in three months or less.  No wonder chaos ensued.  This whole notion of liberal democracy proliferating throughout the Middle East, in a region with no historical precedent of such values, is mind numbingly naive.

Even with our involvement winding down in Iraq, it appears the only winner is Iran since we’ve weakened the only nation in the region to curb its growing influence.  The resilience of the new democracy in Iraq and its disposition towards the United States in the future remains to be seen.  However, Syria is still holding out from the so-called “Arab Spring,” Iran still has nuclear ambitions, which would set off a regional arms race, and Egypt has fallen prey to the radical Muslim Brotherhood after we threw our good friend, Hosni Mubarak, under the bus in the hopes that a vibrant democracy will emerge there. Is this our dividend after spending $700 billion in Iraq?  Was this the best use of American political and military resources?

America’s destructive lack a realism is becoming disastrously expensive and straining our military.  Afghanistan and Iraq has cost us a whopping $1.2 trillion dollars in war expenditures.  We could be facing a $4-6 trillion dollar price tag when this whole ordeal is over.  We need to reexamine our financial stability and national interest for future engagements.

Case in point, Libya had nothing to do with American interests.  We do not receive oil from Libya. We don’t have diplomatic relations with Libya.  It was a civil war that was none of our business in a tribal society whose various clans hated Qaddafi more than each, hence the fragile display of national unity.  Like in Iraq, civil institutions were derived from one man and his family creating a power vacuum that will lead to more bloodshed.  The various militias refuse to disarmand the eastern half of the country has declared autonomy.  Did we really stop a slaughter? I feel more bloodshed will ensue because of our reckless engagement in their affairs.

People die in war, especially in the brutal theater of civil war.  Nevertheless, it doesn’t mean it’s our business. Especially when we have become involved in tribal societies before with little success.  We realists do not deny the existence of moral truths and principles, but when applied in the anarchic field of international relations, it is inherently dangerous.  It thrusts a nation, whose only purpose is to survive, into entanglements that are diplomatically obtuse, detrimental to its interests, and leads to prolonging the conflict.

If Qaddafi had squashed the insurrectionists in Benghazi, it would have been over, but we intervened, allied ourselves with rebel elements affiliated with al-Qaeda, and escalated the civil war leading to more deaths. In Somalia, our intervention culminated in the infamous Black Hawk Down incident, despite the fact it was hopeless from the start. There was no government to open up a diplomatic channel, no infrastructure, and clan ties that prevented national unity.  We lost nineteen American soldiers to help feed people in a failed state. A tragic waste of American resources.

The era of nation-building and humanitarian interventions need to end.   If our criteria for involvement is humanitarian based, we will be in a perpetual state of war.  The essence of nation-building, as George Will rightly said on Charlie Rose, is oxymoronic since it’s an organic entity that take generations to perfect.  Just because American marines are on the ground, doesn’t mean the maturation process will be accelerated.  In all, these attempts at social engineering are textbook cases of the irresponsible and arduous tasks that have drained American power over the past decade.  I’m thankful that a growing consensus in this country is starting to view such ventures as nonsensical.  It’s simply not worth the cost.

Mark Rain (CC)

It is a given that Iran will be a large part of the foreign policy debate between Obama and Romney this fall. But, it will necessarily be in general terms that will likely be useless in practice, and will only be for the benefit of the public and pundits. And it is unlikely that there will be much from Romney’s side that will differ greatly from the current course of action, if for no other reason, because the options are fairly limited. No one that wants to be elected this November will suggest military action in Iran, outside of unmanned air-strikes, or limited surgical actions to reduce Iran’s ability to produce enriched Uranium. And any debate on that would be limited to what is already known publicly about those operations, so there would be logistical issues to address in such a plan – Iran apparently has been building facilities underground, presumably out of the reach of conventional air-strikes.

While the release of video showing domestic unrest is somewhat heartening, it is without real context. Yes, the people are angry with Ahmadinejad, but they could just as easily be more angry with the U.S. – a likely scenario, given that they are undoubtedly given daily doses of anti-Western rhetoric from clerics. The video evidence is also anecdotal, so it would be foolish to think that it is a sign of a potential mass uprising and eventual regime change. For the true cynics out there, change might not be good either – there are no guarantees that once the dust settles, the new leadership would be any friendlier with the U.S. or Israel.

Arab nations in the region add to the instability of the situation as well. Syria’s problems give Iran incentive to move forward faster toward nuclear capabilities, since that nation is its only real ally in the region. Then there is the issue of other Arab nations seeking nuclear arms in the wake of Iran accomplishing that end. That alone is arguably the greatest reason for preventing Iran from entering the nuclear club.

Then there is the possibility that Israel would render all U.S. diplomatic considerations moot by initiating a strike against Iran. If this happens before November, it would radically change the situation for our election, obviously. If it happens at all, it virtually guarantees U.S. involvement in yet another war. Any plan for preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear capabilities that does not take Israel into consideration should be left on the drawing board. If Romney wants to truly exploit deficiencies in the Obama course of action, this is it. The current administration’s diplomatic failures with Israel should be tied into the Iran problem.

The one thing this administration might have done right was to enlist Russia in the diplomatic process. There is a tiny glimmer of hope that their restarting of talks with Tehran may cause the end of the current problem. While it may not leave all parties happy, since it may result in Iran’s ability to export power from nuclear plants, it is at least progress.

As for finding a winning strategy in Iran, perhaps the answer lies in the middle, between extending an open hand as the Obama administration is doing, and offering only a fist, like Iran. But, no matter what is chosen, if the U.S. does not stop characterizing itself as a weakling on the world stage, our nation will pay for it. There is such a thing as tough diplomacy, and as a nation, we need to embrace that stance once again.

Suggested Reading:

Keeping Iran in Check

The Israeli and Arab Dimensions of Iran’s Nuclear Program

The Ghost of Iran’s Future

Syrian Protestors

Amid violence and unrest in Syria has the UN Security Council proposing a resolution that would call on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to step down from office and transfer power to a new government.

Reports from the Syrian State Media Monday say that the ‘terrorists’ have blown up a gas pipeline near the border with Lebanon.

According to a Breaking News Report from The Associated Press at 4:30am ET:

Syrian activists report hearing gunfire and explosions in suburbs of Damascus as the country’s conflict moves ever closer to the capital.

Monday’s reports by the Local Coordination Committees, an opposition group, could not be independently confirmed.

On Sunday, Syrian troops in dozens of tanks and armored vehicles stormed rebellious areas near the capital, shelling neighborhoods that have fallen under the control of army dissidents and clashing with fighters.

Activists and residents said at least 62 people were killed in violence nationwide.

The widescale Sunday offensive suggested the regime is worried that military defectors could close in on Damascus, the seat of President Bashar Assad’s power.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad

The reports of the effects of Syrian violence differ, depending on whose statistics are cited.  According to CNN:

 The United Nations last month estimated that more than 5,000 people have died since March, when the government launched a crackdown against demonstrators. Opposition groups estimate a higher death toll, with counts near or exceeding 7,000 people.

The opposition has blamed the deaths on government actions. The Syrian government says terrorists are responsible for the casualties.

Reporting no doubt from a bar stool in a seedy tavern in Beruit, Lebanon, Telegraph reporter Ruth Sherlock reports:

  After five days of intensive battles, dozens of government tanks, along with armoured vehicles and infantry pulled back from the town of Zabadani following what was said to be a ceasefire agreement with opposition militias.

 But the insurgents heralded the move as an unprecedented victory, claiming Zabadani to be the ‘first free town in Syria and a haven in which to build and strengthen their troops, as Benghazi became in the Libyan uprising.

 I must admit I was largely ignorant myself of the latest occurrences until an U.S. Army Officer of my acquaintance who is readying his team for deployment recently hinted that I should pay attention to the goings on in that country. I was shocked to learn that there was a tank battle in the region, and even more surprised that it has been going on for over five days now; and this without any mention at all from much of the main stream media here in America.

Sherlock continues her report by quoting militia troops on the ground in Zabadani.

“A lot of soldiers have refused to obey orders, and tried to escape,” said a resident, who gave his name as Zean al-Zabadani. “Many of them have been killed. We are going now release the soldiers from Bashar al Assad’s prison grip and help them to escape.

 “But this is a tenuous safety. We are frightened that they will bomb us from the air, or try again to retake the town. We need international help to make this a real safe zone”.

While the residents of the small mountain town await the possibility of renewed ground or air attack, many there are hopeful that there will be some kind of ‘buffer zone’ provided for by the militaries of Syria’s neighboring countries, said Sherlock. Fat chance of that since Syria’s neighbors in the region have had their own problems dealing with the so called, “Arab Spring”.

See the Telegraph’s full story at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9026222/Syrian-town-to-become-hub-of-armed-resistance.html

This report from the Telegraph doesn’t come completely out of the blue, even though the story has largely been ignored here in the US. The Telegraph has gripping video of violence in the streets as Arab League observers watch government soldiers attacking unarmed civilians with sniper fire.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/8981176/Syria-protesters-flee-gunfire-in-Hama.html

Another video apparently shows insurgents destroying a tank.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9013496/Syrian-insurgents-claim-to-attack-tank-in-Homs.html

On the 12^th of this month The Telegraph reported the death of the first Western journalist to have been killed in the violence in Syria. Gilles Jacquier of France was killed by a mortar in the contended city of Homs while another camera crew caught the attack on video tape.

The French journalist Jacquier who had experience covering combat in Iraq and Afghanistan was being escorted by the Syrian military as a part of a larger media group in what was supposed to be a safe, pro-government area.

The latest news from Syria seems to indicate that the government there led by president Bashar Al Assad seems to be losing control of the protests and the insurgency that is following it. Assad has been defiant so far, giving open air speeches in public promising to crush the protests with military force rather than negotiating with the insurgents. Assad’s rule began over 30 years ago as a result of a coup.

Meanwhile, here in America, the media seems more interested in pointing out Romney’s millions in off shore accounts, his penchant for firing people and Newt Gingrich’s lack of a conservative record, his corruption as Speaker of the House and his talkative and bitter ex-wife.

President Obama and his Secretary of State have said little in regards to condemning the violence now going on in the Middle East. When they aren’t being mum about the people being killed, they are all too quick to praise the glorious Spring as a triumph of democracy.

I’d hate to see that kind of “democracy” spreading here in the streets of the United States.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011 will prove to be a very busy and interesting day.  On that day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will address the United Nations general assembly, followed soon after by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Both men will outline the state of affairs between the two peoples who reside in a very contentious region.  Their perspectives, however, are very different, and in the end, only one of them is right.

Netanyahu will start out the day in an effort to defend Israeli policy and practice.  The reception, however, is likely to be very chilly, to say the least.  The U.N. General Assembly has been known for its blatant anti-Israel stance, so Netanyahu’s message is more of a matter of record than of sway.  He simply wants to get everything out there for the world to hear, even if it’ll all fall on deaf ears.

Abbas has different motives.  He is seeking a U.N. Resolution, preferably from the Security Council that declares, unilaterally, the existence of a State called Palestine.  He wants full U.N. membership and representation, and his goal is to force Israel’s hand by having the U.N. outline the borders.  The Palestinian Authority is intent on securing borders from prior to the 1967 war.  At least, that’s the border they want to start with.

Israel, however, has argued that those borders are indefensible and negotiations must be undertaken to choose different borders.  Israel also insists that Jerusalem not be re-divided and remain the capital of the Jewish State.  One other thing that Israel wants, however, is something that the Palestinians are unwilling to give:  a declaration that Israel as a Jewish State has a right to exist.

The P.A. won’t resume negotiations until Israel stops building settlements in the so-called occupied territories.  That, of course, is a straw man being used to further the Palestinians’ goal.  They’d prefer to have the world exert pressure on Israel through the United Nations by painting themselves as the good guys.

The P.A. is undertaking this move by saying they are just copying what the Israelis did in 1948.  An article ran in the Sydney Morning Herald on August 29^th in which Sonja Karkar distorted history and portrayed it as fact.  He said:

“Israel’s own unilateral move in declaring statehood after the UN’s intention to partition historic Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state cannot be avoided. It underscores that Palestine was never a land without a people and that Israel’s existence was imposed on Palestinians, robbing them of their homes and land and destroying their proud and millenniums-old society.”

What Mr. Karkar fails to mention in his first sentence is that when Israel declared independence, they did so within the U.N. partitioned borders in good faith.  The Arab League opposed the plan.  They argued that the U.N. lacked the authority to divide the land and they viewed the division as being unfair.  On the day Israel declared her independence, the surrounding Arab States declared war with one purpose in mind:  the obliteration of Israel.  They wanted to push the Jewish infestation in Arab lands into the sea.

The Palestinians in the region at the start of the war were urged by the surrounding Arab States to leave their homes.  They were promised prime land, once Israel no longer existed.

Mr. Karkar’s reasoning again is faulty by his assumption that the “Palestinians” were actually a distinct society.  There, of course, have always been people there.  Those people come from all different sorts of backgrounds and cultures, but never once has there been a nation of Palestine that was run by the people who call themselves Palestinian.

The Arab confederation lost this war.  Several more military campaigns would be waged over the years and each time the result was the same:  Israel was victorious and the surrounding nations were clueless.

In 1949, the land that the U.N. had partitioned for the Arab State was firmly in the hands of the Jordanians and Egyptians.  It remained in their hands until 1967.

In those 18 years, no effort was made to establish a nation of Palestine according to the U.N. plan.  The only thing the Egyptians and Jordanians did was plan their next war.  In 1967, they lost the now so-called “Occupied Territories”.  Egypt also lost the entire Sinai Peninsula.

On the eastern side, Israel had taken the West Bank of the Jordan River along with East Jerusalem from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria.

Israel reunited Jerusalem, but under treaty with Jordan, left the temple mount under Jordanian control.

In 1979, Egypt and Israel signed a Peace agreement that formally ended 30 years of war.  As part of the deal, Israel gave Egypt back the Sinai Peninsula and wanted to give Egypt the Gaza Strip at the same time.  Egypt did not want Gaza.  They viewed the residents there as being problematic and preferred to leave the problem in Israel’s hands.  Once again, no effort was made by the Egyptians to secure that land, which they could have then turned around and ceded to the Palestinians.

Over the course of time, the Palestinian Liberation Organization evolved from a purely terrorist organization to a “respected” representative of the Palestinian interests.  Various accords have been signed and Israel has withdrawn from large portions of the land.  The exception would be the settlements that are being constructed in the West Bank.

This is where the racist aspect of the Palestinians comes clearly into view for those of us who want to look.  The Palestinians have no interest in having any Jews live in what will be their State and so they oppose, often violently, any Jewish settlements in those areas.  This sort of apartheid is condemned elsewhere, but for some reason, is not only accepted in this region, it’s promoted as the only way to have “peace”.

The truth is there won’t be peace in the region because there are two peoples in one region that both want the same land and refuse to live together and work together.

With the exception of re-dividing Jerusalem, Israel is more than willing to share the land with the Palestinians, side by side.  They just want to make sure their borders are wide enough to be defended.  The Palestinians, however, only view such an existence a stopgap to their goal:  A Palestinian State that extends from the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea.

The United States wants to stop Abbas from making his demands, and Netanyahu wants to make sure the world knows why.  If both efforts fail to change the course the world is on, September 20^th could prove to be a very busy, perhaps even bloody, day, indeed.