A New Foreign Policy

This country needs a new foreign policy…..the old Cold War mentality does not translate well in the 21st century…..this country should be the prime cheerleader of a peaceful world….instead we spend more on our endless wars that about 15 countries combined.

But most people ask…how can negotiations bring about peace?

How Can Negotiations Bring Wars to an End?

There are attempts….and all should be pursued as doggedly as we pursue war.

Global Peacebuilding Act: Authorizes a transfer of $5 billion from the Pentagon’s Overseas Contingency Operations budget to the State Department to create a new, multi-lateral Global Peacebuilding Fund.

Stop Arming Human Rights Abusers Act: Establishes red lines based on internationally recognized gross violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law. Once a country crosses those lines, it automatically triggers a prohibition on security aid of any kind, arms sales including those controlled by the Commerce Dept. (tear gas, etc.), and exchanges with U.S. law enforcement. Read the billPDF iconhere.

Global Migration Agreement Act: Instructs the State Department and U.S. Ambassador to the UN to take the lead on creating a binding international agreement on global migration. Read the billPDF iconhere.

Congressional Oversight of Sanctions Act: Requires a joint resolution of Congress to approve sanctions issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) within 60 days of being back in session after the sanctions are announced, and requires Congressional approval to renew existing sanctions. Read the bill PDF iconhere.

YouthBuild International Act: Replicates the highly successful domestic YouthBuild program – which helps disadvantaged youth obtain the education and employment skills they need to achieve economic self-sufficiency. Read the billPDF iconhere.

Resolution on the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child: The United States is the only country in the world not to have ratified the UNCRC. Protecting the rights of children is fundamental, and we should be a world leader on this issue, which we can’t be unless we’re a state party to the Convention. Read the bill here.

Resolution on the Rome Statute, and the International Criminal Court: The United States has been a leader on international criminal justice since Nuremberg, and our hostility towards the ICC has always been at odds with our commitment to the rule of law, accountability, and to the principle that no one is above the law. we need to send a strong message in support of international criminal justice. Read the billPDF iconhere.

You can read more on the Pathway to PEACEPDF iconhere.

Yes I am an antiwar wonk and would do all I can to bring the topic to the forefront….

It is probably too late to search for peace……why?  Profits!

Peace will be possible when peace is as profit making as armed conflict……and those days are a ways off sadly.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Americans And War

American students are seldom taught about the war as they are being fought…..only ones that can teach a historic perspective…..we need to teach about conflict as our citizens are fighting and dying…..

“I don’t know…I mean I want to be one of those people…you know who do things, who create change I guess…this was inspiring…it made me want to create change…but I guess I don’t know how.” Three students and I were sitting in a small room gathered near a round table in the corner of the social studies office. The students had just completed a three-week instructional unit focused on two essential questions: What is a just war? How do we end war? Their teacher and I had co-created the unit both interested in whether focusing on critique of and resistance to war would bulster students’ sense of agency, help them develop a more critical perspective of war and help students understand that war can be stopped by active and engaged citizens. By the end of the unit, the students weren’t so sure.

“I’m always surprised by how schools in America teach. I mean there’s wars all around us and the teachers here act like they don’t exist and then don’t directly teach the wars they do teach.” The other students in the discussion agreed. “Yeah, it’s like they teach that war is bad…but we already know that…we never teach in depth. I mean I know 1939 and Eisenhower and all that…I got an A but I feel like I know it skin deep. We never really talk about anything.” Another student agreed providing an example of when they did go in depth. “When we studied the Atomic Bombs being dropped on Japan we had a two-day seminar examining documents but it wasn’t really anything different from what was in our textbooks. I mean we all know that atomic bombs are bad, but didn’t anyone speak out against them besides like Einstein? I didn’t know there was like an anti-war movement for like always until this unit.”

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/01/20/teaching-war-so-it-matters

After almost two decades and only a few bloggers/journalists are questioning the wars we fight……[after Hollywood gets finished with the subject we then have become war addicts…..

My first question is simple enough: After 18-plus years of our forever wars, where are all the questions?

Almost two decades of failing American wars across a startlingly large part of the planet and I’d like to know, for instance, who’s been fired for them? Who’s been impeached? Who’s even paying attention?

I mean, if another great power had been so fruitlessly fighting a largely undeclared set of conflicts under the label of “the war on terror” for so long, if it had wasted trillions of taxpayer dollars with no end in sight and next to no one in that land was spending much time debating or discussing the matter, what would you think? If nothing else, you’d have a few questions about that, right?

War Addicts, Inc.

In other words this nation has become conditioned to the reality of war………..

As tensions escalated with Iran last week, it seemed bewildering to many that the United States could once again be on the brink of war. We like to think of ourselves as a peaceful people and our country as a benevolent force in the world—so why is military conflict a constant presence in American life?

Despite our self-image, we have been conditioned for war all of our lives. Through a combination of cultural forces, some overt and others subtle, Americans are taught from a young age to accept their country’s militarism without question. This conditioning has numerous ingredients. Themes of nationalism and militarism are frequently injected into public life through the media and other institutions, for example, as is a sense of righteousness, a rarely challenged belief that the country is almost always a force for good.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/our-humanity-naturally/202001/youve-been-conditioned-war

It is time to find candidates that do not want war or the ones we are fighting to continue…..but sadly the media will make sure that the foreign policy especially our war footing ever sees the light of day.

Look at all the Dem debates….very little foreign policy or conflict management has made the stage…..it is as if all are afraid to voice an opinion on war without being labelled a traitor or naive or any other insult they can think of…..

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

VOTE!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

What Happened To Foreign Policy?

I am a foreign policy wonk and spend a lot of time on international issues when not writing about the most broken political system this country has seen in a very long time.

It is not secret that I am not a fan of Trump’s foreign policy….to be honest there were some decisions he made that I agreed with but then he would walk back that decision and he lost me again.

So it leads me to ask….what has happened to our foreign policy?

President Trump campaigned and was elected on an anti-neocon platform: he promised to reduce direct US involvement in areas where, he believed, America had no vital strategic interest, including in Ukraine. He also promised a new détente (“cooperation”) with Moscow.

And yet, as we have learned from their recent congressional testimony, key members of his own National Security Council did not share his views and indeed were opposed to them. Certainly, this was true of Fiona Hill and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. Both of them seemed prepared for a highly risky confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, though whether retroactively because of Moscow’s 2014 annexation of Crimea or for more general reasons was not entirely clear.

How did this unusual and dysfunctional situation come about? One possibility is that it was the doing and legacy of the neocon John Bolton, briefly Trump’s national security adviser. But this doesn’t explain why the president would accept or long tolerate such appointees.

https://outline.com/AtAq2z

Part of the problem, other than the president’s temperament, is the country is losing many lifetime diplomats and DoD members…people that put our foreign policy to work…..

This month, December, we will lose 5 of the top people at DoD….

Since Dec. 5, the following officials have tendered their resignations:

  • Tina Kaidanow, senior advisor for international cooperation.
  • Kari Bingen, principal deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence.
  • Randall Schriver, assistant defense secretary for Indo-Pacific security affairs.
  • Jimmy Stewart, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness.
  • Steven Walker, director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

Separately, Defense Secretary Mark Esper fired then-Navy Secretary Richard Spencer on Nov. 24. Esper later told reporters he was “flabbergasted” to learn that Spencer went behind his back to try to negotiate a deal to allow Navy SEAL Chief Eddie Gallagher retire with his trident.

https://taskandpurpose.com/pentagon-leaders-resign

Brookings is  tracking the losses from the Trump admin……

The rate of turnover among senior level advisers to President Trump has generated a great deal of attention. Below, we offer four resources to help measure and contextualize this turnover. The first set of resources tracks turnover among senior-ranking advisers in the executive office of the president (which does not include Cabinet secretaries), whereas the second set of resources tracks turnover in the Cabinet.

Tracking turnover in the Trump administration

Finally. the Trump admin has NOT lost the last of the top advisers in State or DoD…..

2020 will be very telling on the direction this country will travel in the next decade….our foreign policy is no longer a stable instrument for international situations….chaos has replaced stability.

Will we continue to be the joke at international cocktail parties?

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Must It Be Endless?

I have made it a lifetime endeavor to study conflict (war) and analyzing cause and effect…..and since 9/11 it seems that the US is in a cycle of endless wars……most of which had little to do with the actual attacks on 9/11…….and those that defend the endless nature of conflict…..

A continuous and repetitive thread in the commentary on the decade since 9/11—one might almost call it an endless and open-ended theme—was the plaintive observation that the struggle against al-Qaida and its surrogates is somehow a “war without end.” (This is variously rendered as “perpetual war” or “endless war,” just as anti-war articles about the commitment to Iraq used to relentlessly stress the idea that there was “no end in sight.”)

I find it rather hard to see the force of this objection, or indeed this description. Was there ever a time when we involved ourselves in combat, or found ourselves involved, with any certain advance knowledge about the timeline and duration of hostilities? Are there two kinds of war, one of them term-limited? A bit like that other tempting but misleading separation of categories—between “wars of choice” and “wars of necessity”—this proves upon closer scrutiny to be a distinction without much difference.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2011/09/in_defense_of_endless_war.html

Personally observation…..endless wars benefit NO one but those that supply the implements of war….it is about the profits not the reason for the war.

We can make peace profitable if we truly wanted to….there is the rub….there is NO WILL!

Geopolitical Sins

World events can be traced to the psuedo science of Geopolitics…..all international situations can be written off as tricks of the trade.

But then who knows the actual definition of geopolitics?

Geopolitics is the study of the effects of geography on international politics and international relations. Geopolitics is a method of foreign policy analysis which seeks to understand, explain, and predict international political behaviour primarily in terms of geographical variables. Typical geographical variables are the physical location, size, climate, topography, demography, natural resources, and technological advances of the state being evaluated. Traditionally, the term has applied primarily to the impact of geography on politics, but its usage has evolved over the past century to encompass wider connotations. Geopolitics traditionally studies the links between political power and geographic space, and examines strategic prescriptions based on the relative importance of land power and sea power in world history. The geopolitical tradition had some consistent concerns with geopolitical correlations of power in world politics, the identification of international core areas, and the relationships between naval and terrestrial capabilities. Academically, the study of geopolitics analyses geography, history, and social science with reference to spatial politics and patterns at various scales. Also, the study of geopolitics includes the study of the ensemble of relations between the interests of international political actors, interests focused to an area, space, geographical element or ways, relations which create a geopolitical system. Geopolitics is multidisciplinary in scope, and includes all aspects of the social sciences—with particular emphasis on political geography, international relations, the territorial aspects of political science and international law.

(Freebase)

The US is losing its grip on diplomacy…..

Mike Pompeo, the newly-confirmed Secretary of State, announced to his new workforce that together they would “get our swagger back,” an unspoken but clear reference to the rock-bottom morale in Foggy Bottom during the tenure of his predecessor, Rex Tillerson. While Pompeo may see the Department of State’s doldrums as related solely to the management-style of his predecessor, Ronan Farrow argues persuasively in The War on Peace: The End of Diplomacy and the Decline of American Influence, that the department’s declining capacity and gradual exclusion from policy making began long before Tillerson’s ill-fated “restructuring” or what he sees as the militaristic inclinations of the forty-fifth president.

Farrow served in the State Department under the late Richard Holbrooke in his ill-fated quest for peace in Afghanistan, and those years inform the narrative of The War on Peace. Winner of the 2018 Pulitzer Prize for his investigation into Harvey Weinstein, Farrow turns his precocious investigative talents and punchy writing towards the long decline of the State Department and American diplomacy.

https://mwi.usma.edu/cataclysmic-event-gradual-erosion-decline-us-diplomatic-power/

One main problem is that the US has learned absolutely nothing from its many wars…..we keep stepping in the manure time after time…..

It’s time for the Washington foreign-policy establishment to consider the seemingly unthinkable: perpetual foreign-military operations and occupations do not enhance American national security and economic prosperity.

Overwhelming evidence—currently on painful display in Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen —reveals the stark reality that these operations drain our nation of critical resources, produces a slow-bleed of U.S. troops, and deteriorates our ability to respond to potentially existential battles in the future. Changes must be urgently made if we are to reverse this negative condition.

It’s time for the Washington foreign-policy establishment to consider the seemingly unthinkable: perpetual foreign-military operations and occupations do not enhance American national security and economic prosperity.

Overwhelming evidence—currently on painful display in Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen —reveals the stark reality that these operations drain our nation of critical resources, produces a slow-bleed of U.S. troops, and deteriorates our ability to respond to potentially existential battles in the future. Changes must be urgently made if we are to reverse this negative condition.

After the catalyzing and emotionally powerful attacks that struck America on 9/11, a succession of U.S. presidents and senior officials have settled into the belief that the only way to handle difficult international problems is to use lethal military force.

This tendency has become so deeply ingrained that even the consideration of using nonlethal means to address tough problems is almost reflexively dismissed as appeasement.

AS a foreign policy wonk I worry about our lack of a diplomatic mission worldwide……this situation could put America in the backseat of any international situations…..not a good place to be….all of our hard work since WW1 is going for naught……can we return to glory or will it be the end of “American Exceptionalism”?

(Please do not use the recent North Korea deal as proof of a diplomatic mission….)

Only Takes A Spark!

OMG!  There is so much tension around the world that it is starting to look more like the beginning of the end.  I know that sounds a bit much…..but look at the world…..NK is strutting around with its missile in hand, US is verbally threatening so many countries, Turkey is fighting but NO one knows for sure who they are fighting, China, India and Pakistan are all pushing along their borers with each other….and then there is the “games”…all being played in and around the Baltics and Southwest Europe….all along the old borders of the Cold War dividing the USSR from the West.

Right now the US and its NATO allies have a military build-up along said borers and Russia has done likewise….all under the pretense of “war games”.

This September in Europe was a tense month of military posturing and preparations. Sweden recently began a three-week war game, its largest since the Cold War. Even as it did so, across the Baltic Sea, Russian and Belarusian forces concluded the Zapad military exercises – which NATO officials called “serious preparations for a big war”.

Major war games such as these bring a risk of real conflict. But neither the Russian invasion that Russia’s neighbours fear, nor the NATO incursion implicit in the Zapad scenario, are likely events. Our research on conflict escalation suggests that the U.S., Russia and Europe should worry about a far riskier contingency: what if a separate crisis emerged at the same time that large numbers of troops and equipment are already deployed in the region?

A crisis could be precipitated from at least three different types of events: unattributable attacks, unilateral actions by anxious allies, and military accidents. Such dangerous situations could quickly produce unintended consequences that slip Russia and the West into armed confrontation.

Source: What Would It Take to Trigger War Between Russia and NATO? Just a Spark | RealClearDefense

It is not a “war game”…..at best it is a stare down.

Who will blink first?

Of course…..a simple blink could light the fuse of no return.

North Korea

My normal region of focus is the Middle East…..I never studied other regions much at all….but since North Korea and the world are having a good shouting match I have decided my horizons.

The news these days is fascinating…..one day it is Russia….the next DACA…..the next North Korea….all this while two or three major conflicts are being fought daily with little notice.

As it is today we have two macho bullies showing who has the biggest penis.

North Korea in the last couple of years has exploded several large nuke weapons and fired off many missiles to show their resolve…..and of course as a retort the US has shown its cajones by threatening all sorts of retaliation.

Their latest missile firing has indicated that they are progressing well and has struck the fear of the spirits in Japan…..

President Trump on Wednesday followed up on his “all options are on the table” warning to North Korea by suggesting that negotiations are not one of those options. “The U.S. has been talking to North Korea, and paying them extortion money, for 25 years,” he tweeted. “Talking is not the answer!” It’s not clear what Trump means by “extortion money,” notes the New York Times. The new warning follows the North’s decision to fire a ballistic missile over Japan for the first time, and an analysis at 38 North sees a potentially “ominous” clue in the test results: The missile flew a relatively short distance of about 1,700 miles. It’s possible engineers deliberately shut down the engine early, but the distance (and reports of the missile breaking into three pieces) suggests a more troubling possibility: Pyongyang is testing something called a “post-boost vehicle” on the missile.

PBVs are standard on US and Russian ICBMs, explains Michael Elleman, because they not only provide an added boost for the payload (some kind of warhead), they also provide for more accuracy. If the North had tested the missile with a PBV, and the test failed, the distance traveled would make sense. If that’s the case, “it is another sign that Pyongyang is deadly serious about developing and fielding nuclear-tipped missiles capable of striking the US mainland, and critical US military bases in the Pacific Ocean,” writes Elleman, who thinks North Korea is a year or two away from posing a credible threat to the US. Meanwhile, the Navy shot down a medium-range ballistic missile during a test off Hawaii, reports NBC News. “We will continue developing ballistic missile defense technologies to stay ahead of the threat as it evolves,” says a Pentagon official.

Of course the word coming out of the US is that any attempt to strike an ally would be shear suicide for NK.

But would it be suicide?  What would the US be willing to sacrifice?  LA?  Maybe Chicago?

“Are we really willing to risk Los Angeles or Chicago in retaliation for an attack on a US military base in the region? Probably not,” nuclear strategy specialist Vipin Narang tells the AP. And that’s exactly the calculation that gives North Korea a small shot at “winning” in a nuclear conflict, challenging the assumption that launching a nuclear weapon would be automatic suicide for the country. If North Korea feels threatened to the point of using a nuclear weapon, a first target would likely be a US military base in Japan; North Korea would then use its long-range nukes to threaten the US mainland and avoid a retaliatory strike. Experts say this is Kim Jong Un’s “theory of victory”—one that President Trump may be attempting to combat with an unsuccessful version of the “madman strategy.”

Trump said “all options are on the table.” This was, all things considered, a “measured” response from the president, according to the Atlantic. It was an official statement instead of a tweet, didn’t threaten “fire and fury,” and avoided calling Kim Jong Un a “wack job.”

While this situation is being mulled over by the “experts”……and then NK set off what is being called an “H-Bomb”……..(new twist)……

North Korea detonated a thermonuclear device Sunday in its sixth and most powerful nuclear test to date, which it called a “perfect success” as its neighbors condemned it. Though the strength of the blast is undetermined, the artificial earthquake it caused was several times stronger than tremors generated by previous tests. It reportedly shook buildings in China and Russia. The test was carried out at 12:29pm local time at the Punggye-ri site where North Korea has conducted nearly all of its nuclear tests. Seoul put the magnitude at 5.7, while the USGS said it was 6.3. North Korea’s state-run television reported Sunday that Kim Jong Un attended a meeting of the ruling party’s presidium and signed the go-ahead order. Earlier in the day, the party’s newspaper printed photos of Kim examining what it said was a nuclear warhead being fitted onto the nose of an ICBM.

North Korea in July test-launched two ICBMs believed to be capable of reaching the mainland US, reports the AP; this is the North’s first nuclear test since President Trump assumed office. The North claimed the device was a thermonuclear weapon—commonly called an H-bomb. That could be hard to independently confirm. It said the underground test site did not leak radioactive materials, which would make such a determination even harder. The North claims the device was made domestically and has explosive power that can range from tens to hundreds of kilotons. Outside experts suggested the yield might be in that ballpark, though closer to the lower range. The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a 15-kiloton yield. Kim, according to the state-run KCNA, claimed all components of the device were domestically produced, which he said means the North can make “as many as it wants.”

What does that mean?

In military planning “all options” are always on the table….matters not the region…all angles must be covered.

Trump’s world becomes a bit more dangerous with each passing Tweet.

Who’s The Enemy Today?

Since I began writing and analyzing stuff the US has had a wide array of so-called “enemies”…..those entities that pose a problem to the American worldwide agenda.

Until the 1990’s Russia was our leading adversary….We have had Grenada, Panama, the Balkans, al-Qaeda, the Taleban, ISIS, Iraq and so many minor “enemies” and in all that time, since 1979, the one constant has been Iran.

These days there seems to be a couple constant ones also……Russia (again), the various terrorist organizations, Iran (as always) and North Korea.

I am an old fart so I can look back at recent history and see the long line of potential “enemies”….it is almost like the soup du jour…..it changes on a whim from the powers that lead.

I do a lot of reading daily and the other day I was reading a pro-Libertarian site, Hornsberger’s Blog, that was covering this ever changing landscape of “enemies”…….

…….Everyone needs to resign himself to the discomforting reality of living under a national-security state and an overseas empire: There is always going to be an official enemy or official enemies. It never ends. The process is perpetual.

How else could the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA justify their ever-increasing budgets, influence, and power? Official enemies are the coin of the realm. They never run out of official enemies.

Source: A Constantly Shifting Array of Official Enemies – The Future of Freedom Foundation

This “enemies” thing is a classic propaganda ploy….give the populace something or someone to fear.

This “enemies” thingy is so touchy that the advisers in the White House are debating which is which and who is who….to the point that it could become an internal civil war….

But this time the “enemies” are internal…….

An internal White House enemies list of alleged Obama loyalists to be fired early in the Trump administration is a key contributor to a long-running feud between the National Security Adviser H. R. McMaster and White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, two senior administration officials tell The Daily Beast.

Team Trump never acted on the list, the officials said, and now those employees have finished their tenure at the National Security Council and returned to their home agencies.

Source: White House ‘Enemies List’ Drove McMaster-Bannon Feud

Enemy to the Left, enemy to the Right, enemies all around…..

Not much new here…Nixon had a list…..and Clinton, Bubba not Hillary, had a list…but this White House enemies list has a different feel to it….if you know what I mean.

We’ve Heard This Tune Before

First let me say tyhat I have written more about North Korea in the last 3 months than anytime in the previous 10 years.

What little expertise I have is on the Middle East….I leave Asia to those better qualified to write on the region.  But in this case all the rhetoric and chest thumping is very similar to the days before two Gulf Wars.

I am talking about the political rhetoric…….

Gulf War 1 or Desert Storm as it was known worldwide was predicated on lies.  Yes, Iraq had invaded Kuwait but the “sources” that were used to go to war were the Iraqis inhumane treatment of hospital patients….especially when he took the “iron lungs” and left the occupant on the floor to die.  When that did not work the public into a frenzy then the old reliable was used…..Saddam was looking to get nuclear weapons…that worked…the country was so outraged at this prospect that war was inevitable.

Then there was the run up to Gulf War 2……many different situations were floated to whip the public into a war frenzy….of course there was the usual WMDs….then again with the nukes….Saddam was in search of yellow cake uranium…eventually the country was worn down and to war we went (again).

Well this time it is that small country of North Korea…..the rhetoric continues…..NK is working on a nuke weapon……then he, Li’l Kim, fired off some missiles that kept getting larger and traveling further…….until we have a missile with the capability of reaching as far inland as Chicago.  The problem was that their guidance systems sucked so the missile would not be accurate for another year or more.

Then there was the nuke warheads…..we know he has exploded several bombs but according to intel NK has not figured out how to miniaturize the warhead to fit on a missile.

Well that intel was mistaken…… The Washington Post is out with a chilling report about North Korea’s nuclear capabilities: It says Pyongyang has figured out how to make a nuclear warhead small enough to be carried by a missile. The news comes from a newly completed assessment by US intelligence officials, and it suggests that the North has passed the crucial milestone years ahead of schedule. It’s not known whether the North has actually tested such a warhead, though it has boasted of doing so. Combined with the nation’s progress in testing intercontinental ballistic missiles, which could someday reach US shores, the news will only raise the pressure on President Trump and the international community.

With that intel now available our president has taken to the airways to threaten NK…….

Trump made a jarring statement: “North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States,” he told reporters, per ABC News. “They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.” He said Kim Jong Un has been “very threatening” and reiterated that the North “will be met with fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which the world has never seen before.”

That looks like a Trump impression of Churchill….and a bad impression at that.

He has drawn a line in the sand….but there is a small problem with the intel…….It remains unclear just how firm the new assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency is, notes the Atlantic. The Post reporters were read an excerpt of the report and did not see it in its entirety. “What we don’t know … is how confident the agency is in its assessment and what its assessment is based on. Nor is it clear whether other US intelligence agencies share this view.”

It appears that we have threatened war on some possibly shabby intel….maybe it would be more prudent to wait until all agencies weigh in before we go to war…..Just a thought.

After the “Fire and Fury” threat from Trump then it was Kim’s time to shine……

North Korea says it is examining its operational plans for attacking Guam to contain US bases there, the AP reports. The army said in a statement distributed Wednesday by the state-run news agency that it is studying a plan to create an “enveloping fire” in areas around Guam with medium- to long-range ballistic missiles.

Yes shabby intel…..this is the same prediction that the DIA made in 2013….is it true this time or is it just a re-release of an old memo?

But dammit the MSM has taken this story and run with it……doing what they do best…..misleading the public to support a much desired war.

I can recall the shabby intel that got us into our last war….how about you?

Has the Fire and Fury started yet?

Stay Tuned!

We Will Always Have Afghanistan

The title is something I got from a line in Casablanca, “We’ll always have Paris”…..(damn fine movie)

It seems this country will always have Afghanistan…….stretches all the way back to 1979 and we are still “sorting it out”…..

First some sad news….

Two US soldiers were killed today just outside of the major Afghan city of Kandahar, when a suicide bomber attacked the NATO convoy they were traveling in. NATO confirmed “casualties,” but did not specify if there were any wounded on top of the two slain.

The two slain today makes nine US soldiers killed in Afghanistan so far this year, and while that’s not a lot, increased interest in putting US fighters back on the front lines has definitely made them more available targets in recent months, and this trend of casualties could be rising after dropping off in the past couple of years

During the campaign of 2016 candidate Trump made the comment that “He knows more than the generals” when is talking about Iraq and Afghanistan…..if that is true then he should back up his old kit bag and venture to Afghanistan and set the generals straight.

He reinforced his belief (erroneous I might add) recently at a meeting of his cabinet…..

President Trump isn’t happy about the situation in Afghanistan and his proposed solution is one that will be familiar to Celebrity Apprentice viewers, insiders say. Sources tell Reuters that during a July 19 meeting in the White House Situation Room, an angry Trump said military leaders should consider firing Gen. John Nicholson, commander of US forces in Afghanistan, over his performance. “We aren’t winning,” Trump said, per the sources, described as senior administration officials. “We are losing.” Trump also complained about NATO allies and said the US should demand some of Afghanistan’s estimated $1 trillion mineral wealth, the officials say.

The only way to prove his assertion is to go to Afghanistan and see for himself.

The problem is that there is not a decent golf course close by so he probably will never venture to the country.

Then there is the demand he is making that Afghanistan should share their mineral wealth with the US.

Seriously?

He wants Afghanistan to pay “tribute” to the invaders.

Alexander the Great was thew last to “tame” Afghanistan….there have been many others that have tried…..and all have failed and failed miserably.

What makes our president think that we will be the first in many centuries?