Archive for the ‘Asia’ Category

OUR NARCISSIST PRESIDENT IS WINNING !

Wednesday, June 7th, 2017

 

Forget What You Hear: Our Narcissist President Is Winning

I first became aware of Donald Trump in the late seventies.  I was not impressed.  In fact, I didn’t like him.  I thought he was a braggart and a man who went out of his way to disrespect women.  I wouldn’t have said so at the time, but he was clearly a narcissist.

Growing up in an Italian neighborhood in the Bronx, I have been around men like him all my life.  They’re going to do this; they’re going to do that.  They have this; they have that.  I took him to be a person so full of himself that his company would be unbearable.

I didn’t give him much hope of winning the presidency, either, but as election day neared, friends would ask what I thought a Trump presidency would look like.  Forced at that point to think about it, I would say that as a businessman, at least he would make quality appointments to the power positions in his administration – you can’t run a successful business without being able to delegate authority to a strong team of employees. 

As far as Trump’s narcissism, I’m not sure that hurts him as a president.  Sure, he could show better discretion with what he says – he does seem to have an almost Plaxico Burress-type dedication to shooting himself in the foot (see L’Affaire Comey).  Yet I think you need to have a certain amount of narcissism to be a successful president, although it doesn’t guarantee success. 

Just look at our second-most recent president, a solipsist so narcissistic he actually thought his mere presence would slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet.  Barry took narcissism to a new level, seemingly believing himself some kind of god, a belief fed by the nearly total hagiographic coverage he received from the Fourth Estate, our once nationally treasured free press, reduced to sycophantic (more like “sycofanatic”) exaltation of the “light bearer,” the man with the “crease.”

The difference between Barry’s narcissism and Trump’s is this: Trump is the guy who looks at the most beautiful girl at the party and says, “I can get her number.”  Barry would look at the same girl and say, “She wants me.”  Trump would then pursue the girl, and Barry would walk away, because obviously, she is not good enough for him, and besides, someone told him there’s a mirror in the next room. 

(more…)

Share

CALIF GOV BROWN IMPOSES MASSIVE REGULATIONS

Saturday, May 20th, 2017

 

California Governor Brown imposing massive regulations for meaningless climate goals

Share

THE U.S. NAVY MUST BE EVERYWHERE AT ONCE

Monday, May 8th, 2017

 

The U.S. Navy Must Be Everywhere at Once

A recent mishap with the USS Carl Vinson is a case study for rebuilding the fleet to about 350 ships.

The USS Bataan fires a missile during exercises in the Atlantic Ocean, Jan. 11.

The USS Bataan fires a missile during exercises in the Atlantic Ocean, Jan. 11. PHOTO:AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

Mr. Lehman, secretary of the Navy under President Reagan, is the author of the forthcoming “Oceans Ventured, Oceans Gained” (W.W. Norton).

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  The next step is to reform the overgrown defense bureaucracy and overhaul the Pentagon’s dysfunctional procurement process. According to the Government Accountability Office, cost overruns have ballooned to more than $450 billion over the past two decades. The Navy needs to take authority back from the bureaucracy, end the culture of constant design changes and gold-plating, and bring back fixed-price competition.

Recall the development of the Polaris nuclear-missile system in the late 1950s. The whole package—a nuclear submarine, a solid-fuel missile, an underwater launch system, a nuclear warhead and a guidance system—went from the drawing board to deployment in four years (and using slide rules). Today, according to the Defense Business Board, the average development timeline for much less complex weapons is 22.5 years.

A case in point is the Ford-class aircraft carrier. The program is two years delayed and $2.4 billion over budget. The ship was designed to include 12 new technologies, such as electric instead of steam catapults that had not yet been developed. Many of these systems don’t work after 10 years of trying, and the ship will be delivered to the Navy without fully functional radar and unable to launch or recover aircraft. Yet the defense firms involved still profit under cost-plus contracts.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – BILL WHITTLE – PRESIDENT FAILURES SMART DIPLOMACY

Monday, May 9th, 2016

Share

KRAUTHAMMER – DEFY AMERICA, PAY NO PRICE

Saturday, January 9th, 2016

 

 Opinion writer January 7, 2016 
If you’re going to engage in a foreign policy capitulation, might as well do it when everyone is getting tanked and otherwise occupied. Say, around New Year’s Eve.
Here’s the story. In October, Iran test-fires a nuclear-capable ballistic missile in brazen violation of a Security Council resolution explicitly prohibiting such launches. President Obama does nothing. One month later, Iran does it again. The administration makes a few gestures at the U.N. Then nothing. Then finally, on Dec. 30, the White House announces a few sanctions.
They are weak, aimed mostly at individuals and designed essentially for show. Amazingly, even that proves too much. By 10 p.m. that night, the administration caves. The White House sends out an email saying that sanctions are off — and the Iranian president orders the military to expedite the missile program.
Is there any red line left? First, the Syrian chemical weapons. Then the administration insistence that there would be no nuclear deal unless Iran accounted for its past nuclear activities. (It didn’t.) And unless Iran permitted inspection of its Parchin nuclear testing facility. (It was allowed self-inspection and declared itself clean.) And now, illegal ballistic missiles.
The premise of the nuclear deal was that it would constrain Iranian actions. It’s had precisely the opposite effect. It has deterred us from offering even the mildest pushback to any Iranian violations lest Iran walk away and leave Obama legacy-less.
Share

VIDEO – MARCO RUBIO ON WORLD EVENTS

Friday, January 8th, 2016

Share

WAR CLOUDS ON THE HORIZON? VICTOR DAVIS HANSON

Friday, December 5th, 2014

 

         
December 4, 2014 
War Clouds on the Horizon?
A large war is looming absent preventive American vigilance.
By Victor Davis Hanson

The world is changing and becoming even more dangerous — in a way we’ve seen before.

 

In the decade before World War I, the near-hundred-year European peace that had followed the fall of Napoleon was taken for granted. Yet it abruptly imploded in 1914. Prior little wars in the Balkans had seemed to predict a much larger one on the horizon — and were ignored.

The exhausted Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires were spent forces unable to control nationalist movements in their provinces. The British Empire was fading. Imperial Germany was rising. Czarist Russia was beset with revolutionary rebellion. As power shifted, decline for some nations seemed like opportunity for others.

The same was true in 1939. The tragedy of the Versailles Treaty of 1919 was not that it had been too harsh. In fact, it was far milder than the terms Germany had imposed on a defeated Russia in 1918 or the requirements it had planned for France in 1914.

Instead, Versailles combined the worst of both worlds: harsh language without any means of enforcement.

The subsequent appeasement of Britain and France, the isolationism of the United States, and the collaboration of the Soviet Union with Nazi Germany green-lighted Hitler’s aggression — and another world war.

We are entering a similarly dangerous interlude. Collapsing oil prices — a good thing for most of the world — will make troublemakers like oil-exporting Iran and Russia take even more risks.

Terrorist groups such as the Islamic State feel that conventional military power has no effect on their agendas. The West is seen as a tired culture of Black Friday shoppers and maxed-out credit-card holders.

NATO is underfunded and without strong American leadership. It can only hope that Vladimir Putin does not invade a NATO country such as Estonia, rather than prepare for the likelihood that he will, and soon. (more…)

Share

WHEN THE U.S. ABDICATES, DISASTER USUALLY FOLLOWS

Sunday, August 24th, 2014

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
WHEN THE U.S. ABDICATES, DISASTER USUALLY FOLLOWS
By

Philip TerzianMr. Terzian, literary editor of the Weekly Standard, is the author of “Architects of Power: Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and the American Century,” (ReadHowYouWant

Aug. 21, 2014
The gradual disintegration of Iraq has prompted any number of backward glances: At President Obama and his policies; at the stewardship of Iraq’s now ex-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ; at the forces of religion and tribalism. My own backward glance is to January 2008, and the early stages of the campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. At a town meeting in New Hampshire, candidate Sen. John McCain was asked to comment on President George W. Bush‘s assertion that American troops might have to remain in Iraq for 50 years.

“Maybe one hundred,” Mr. McCain replied. “As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, it’s fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where al Qaeda is training, recruiting, equipping, and motivating people every single day.”

All hell broke loose in the media. Democratic candidates then-Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama swiftly condemned what was widely regarded as a gaffe. On CNN Mr. McCain felt obliged to clarify. “It’s not a matter of how long we’re in Iraq,” he explained, alluding to our military presence in Japan, Germany and South Korea, “it’s if we succeed or not.”

 cat

Sen. John McCain (R., Az.) while speaking at a town hall meeting in Salem, N.H., in 2008. Getty Images

In retrospect, Mr. McCain was correct: He predicted that setting a timetable for withdrawal would mean “chaos, that means genocide, that means undoing all the success we’ve achieved.” This is now happening. But the press consensus, then as now, was that the American people were war-weary and a President McCain would perpetuate Mr. Bush’s “failed” policies. (more…)

Share

STUMBLING TOWARD DAMASCUS – JOEL KLEIN

Friday, September 13th, 2013

 

http://swampland.time.com/category/in-the-arena/

Obama and Syria: Stumbling Toward Damascus

The President’s uneven Syria response has damaged his office and weakened the nation. It’s time for one more pivot

Send to Kindle
President Barack Obama walks along the colonnade of the White House from the residence to the Oval Office to start his day on September 10, 2013 in Washington.
Kristoffer Tripplaar / CNP / AdMedia / Sipa USA

President Barack Obama walks along the colonnade of the White House from the residence to the Oval Office to start his day on September 10, 2013 in Washington.

On the eve of the 12th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Barack Obama made the strongest possible case for the use of force against Bashar Assad’s Syrian regime. But it wasn’t a very strong case. Indeed, it was built on a false premise: “We can stop children from being gassed to death,” he said, after he summoned grisly images of kids writhing and foaming at the mouth and then dying on hospital floors. Does he really think we can do that with a limited military strike—or the rather tenuous course of diplomacy now being pursued? We might not be able to do it even if we sent in 250,000 troops and got rid of Assad. The gas could be transferred to terrorists, most likely Hizballah, before we would find all or even most of it. And that is the essence of the policy problem Obama has been wrestling with on Syria: when you explore the possibilities for intervention, any vaguely plausible action quickly reaches a dead end.

The President knows this, which makes his words and gestures during the weeks leading up to his Syria speech all the more perplexing. He willingly jumped into a bear trap of his own creation. In the process, he has damaged his presidency and weakened the nation’s standing in the world. It has been one of the more stunning and inexplicable displays of presidential incompetence that I’ve ever witnessed. The failure cuts straight to the heart of a perpetual criticism of the Obama White House: that the President thinks he can do foreign policy all by his lonesome. This has been the most closely held American foreign-policy-making process since Nixon and Kissinger, only there’s no Kissinger. There is no éminence grise—think of someone like Brent Scowcroft—who can say to Obama with real power and credibility, Mr. President, you’re doing the wrong thing here. Let’s consider the consequences if you call the use of chemical weapons a “red line.” Or, Mr. President, how can you talk about this being “the world’s red line” if the world isn’t willing to take action? Perhaps those questions, and many others, fell through the cracks as his first-term national-security staff departed and a new team came in. But Obama has shown a desire to have national-security advisers who were “honest brokers”—people who relayed information to him—rather than global strategists. In this case, his new staff apparently raised the important questions about going to Congress for a vote: Do you really want to do this for a limited strike? What if they say no? But the President ignored them, which probably means that the staff isn’t strong enough.

(MOREIn Prime Time, Obama Struggles to Reason With Nation Over Syria) (more…)

Share

THE CITIZEN OF THE WORLD PRESIDENCY

Sunday, August 18th, 2013

 

COMMENTARY


The Citizen of the World Presidency

In 2007, early in the improbable presidential candidacy of Barack Obama, the young first-term senator began a series of foreign-policy speeches that seemed too general to provide a guide to what he might do if elected. Aside from making it clear he was not George W. Bush and would get out of Iraq, the rest read like liberal boilerplate: “We have seen the consequences of a foreign policy based on a flawed ideology….The conventional thinking today is just as entrenched as it was in 2002….This is the conventional thinking that has turned against the war, but not against the habits that got us into the war in the first place.” In 2008, he visited Berlin and told an enraptured crowd: “Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for president, but as a citizen—a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world…the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together.”

In Obama’s fifth year as president, it is increasingly clear these vague phrases were not mere rhetoric. They did, in fact, accurately reflect Obama’s thinking about America’s role in the world and foreshadow the goals of the foreign policy he has been implementing and will be pursuing for three more years. Obama’s foreign policy is strangely self-centered, focused on himself and the United States rather than on the conduct and needs of the nations the United States allies with, engages with, or must confront. It is a foreign policy structured not to influence events in Russia or China or Africa or the Middle East but to serve as a bulwark “against the habits” of American activism and global leadership. It was his purpose to change those habits, and to inculcate new habits—ones in which, in every matter of foreign policy except for the pursuit of al-Qaeda, the United States restrains itself.

 I

In the beginning came “engagement.” In his first State of the Union speech in February 2009, Obama told us that “in words and deeds, we are showing the world that a new era of engagement has begun.” A few days later he delivered a speech about the Iraq war and said again that “we are launching a new era of engagement with the world.” There would now be “comprehensive American engagement across the region.” In his first speech to the United Nations General Assembly, in September 2009, he repeated the phrase: “We must embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interests and mutual respect….We have sought, in word and deed, a new era of engagement with the world.” (more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories