Is Gordon Brown Losing the Plot ?

The Daily Mail: Reports on the stability of the UK PM Gordon Brown. It seems from reports that our PM might need Prozac if he reacts this baldy to questions from reporters. This is why Gordon Brown is a dodo in political terms, he does not have the political skills of Tony Blair or President Obama. If New Labour wants to fall off a cliff keep a glum and dour Gordon Brown as PM. Also Labour spin masters, drop the constant argument that it is substance that matters, in other words our leader is toast but we cant get rid of him so please be nice to him, we don't want him on Prozac!! The sad part is that Gordon Brown has put the rest of the UK on Prozac.

The Power Meet over Afghanistan at the White House

The New York Times: Reports on the review of Afghanistan by the Obama Administration, the President will discuss the McChrystal report with the US Command in Afghanistan, General McChrystal. The NYT writes the following on the meeting, " McChrystal has not spoken with Mr. Obama since submitting his grim assessment of the war a month ago..." Lets hope President Obama listens to General McChrystal and his Military advisers and not the Vice President Biden. The President is facing contrasting opinions, the US military under General McChrystal in Afghanistan wants forty thousand more troops, while VP Biden wants to reduce troops and use drones to attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan. The President from leaks wants to take his time over such an important decision, but perception is reality, the President is facing the perception that he is weak, that could lead Iran to push for the bomb. Thus an attack by Israel, it is important that the President comes to a quick and correct decision, if he follows the Biden view it can be guaranteed that Israel will see that this is weak and they have to defend their own national security.

No Talks on Nuclear Issue - Iran

Fox News: Reports that Iran has refused to discuss its nuclear plans when it meets the UN on Thursday. It seems somewhat of a pointless meeting, as stated as I was not holding my breath for this meeting. It will be another round of tedious talks, the Government in Tehran will play games, it will try to split the Western Allies and Russia and China over the issue. Also as the NYT has reported it looks like its all spin from Moscow, they will be critical but not to critical, they are a neighbour of Iran and have a Muslim population, thus does not want Iran causing havoc in Russia proper. Lets see what harsh sanctions the Obama Administration can come up with, they have to be harsh or Israel will see them as feckless and weak and then strike Iran. Like something out of the TV series 24. This is President Obama's Jack Bauer moment, the problem is that he also has to deal with Afghanistan, Iran can cause havoc in Afghanistan. Lets see if President Obama has the backbone to be Jack Bauer, this is not about his own arrogance but the security of Israel and the West.

Obama Health Care Reform and Abortion

The New York Times: Reports on the fight within Congress on the issue of Abortion and if it should be covered by the Obama Health Care Reform Bills, the NYT writes the following, " And the abortion opponents are getting enough support from moderate Democrats that both sides say the outcome is too close to call. " This is a very substantive issue, women should have the right to an abortion at any time, also the Government should pay for it, thus it should be covered by any Obama Bill. This is the only thing that Liberals and this Blog have agreement on, Liberals should force the Obama Administration to take on the right on this issue, abortion should only be an issue between a woman and her doctor, it is a privacy issue. If there is going to be a health care bill let it be fair to both genders, thus Liberals should force President Obama to fight for this issue when it comes down the line.

Intelligence and the Political WILL over IRAN

The New York Times: Reports on the shadow debate within the intelligence world as to the next stage for Iran's nuclear plans, the NYT writes the following, " debate among American, European and Israeli spies about a separate component of Iran’s nuclear program: its clandestine efforts to design a nuclear warhead. " In this case we have seen a tougher Western line out of France and the UK, as the NYT states the CIA and US intelligence networks don't think Iran has managed create a nuclear warhead. The problem with such intelligence if your wrong it can be to late, thus it can be argued that the Israeli Mossad might have a better handle on Iran than the CIA or even the UK's own MI6. If your in Israel you cant wait for the USA to be wrong, thus still hold to my prediction that Israel will strike Iran.

Our Man Diem, SORRY its Karzai = USA

The Times: Reports that the Obama Administration has accepted that President Karzai will be running Afghanistan for the net few years. It can be argued that President Karzai needs a strong Western presence at his side, in other words to keep him on the straight and narrow path. Also get the new Karzai government to give security to the people of Afghanistan, be less corrupt, bring in moderate Taliban/Terrorists in to the government. Have to be honest, as with Iran not holding by breath, as long as Karzai keeps on the Western reservation on the whole don't care how he runs Afghanistan.

Afghanistan Front News

MOD: Has released the name of the soldier killed on Sunday, the soldier was " Private James Prosser from 2nd Battalion The Royal Welsh " Lets hope there are no more deaths in Afghanistan, if Obama and Brown are not going to surge the troop level and in the UK case increase the kit for our soldiers we should get them out. The War in Afghanistan seems to be following the pattern of Vietnam and Korea.

One chat with US Commander in Afghanistan - General McChrystal

The Washington Times: Reports on the one chat between the US Commander in Afghanistan General McChrystal and President Obama. It seems we now we really see the face of the Obama Administration, President Obama has only spoken once to his Commander in Afghanistan, the same Commander who has just asked for forty thousand more troops. It seems that Obama does not get it, 9/11 seems to have passed him by, also he seems to have missed that the US and its Allies have taken heavy casualties of late in Afghanistan, Obama is another Jimmy Carter but with shades of Neville Chamberlain. At least in the TV series West Wing, that President had Leo as his Chief of Staff, could get his President to see the real world beyond his own press releases. I am sorry to say American voter you were conned in 08, Obama is not a post racial candidate, his comments on a stupid police department shows that, his Just War view of Afghanistan was a election gimmick, another three years and three months of a tax and spend liberal who really hates the USA, then you can vote him out, to be a warm act for another failed President, Jimmy Carter. But on the bright side we might get another Ronald Reagan.

What COST Poland and the Czech Republic ?

The New York Times: Reports that Russia might be playing a double game when it comes to sanctions against Iran, the NYT writes the following, " But the relatively conciliatory statements by Russia’s president, Dmitri A. Medvedev, present an opening to the administration that could turn out to yield little. " As Iran is a close neighbour of Russia, the Russian bear does not want it to cause problems in its Muslim population, thus while it might give the impression that it will do a deal over Iran when it gets down to the details Russia might stay on the fence with China. Thus the selling out of Poland and the Czech Republic by the Obama Administration in the long term might cause problems for the Democrats in 2010 and 2012 if Russia does not agree to harsh sanctions against Iran. One can see the political ads now 2010 in the Mid Term Congressional Elections and in the Presidential Election of 2012, the image of President Obama fades in to the image of Neville Chamberlain. Lets hope Obama has not fallen like Bush 43 for a Russian bluff, the Russian bear does not have a soul when it comes to politics, it has steel claws.

Long Range Missiles Tests in Iran

BBC News: Reports that Iran has tested its long range missiles. This is another marker stone to an Israeli strike on Iran, lets see what the Obama Administration can come up with on Thursday, when the Western powers meet Iran in Geneva. NOT HOLDING MY BREATH.

Obama and the Secret Nuclear Plant in Iran

The New York Times: Reports that while the Obama Administration is open to talks with Iran it is also getting tougher, the NYT writes the following, " In interviews and public comments, the administration’s tone has clearly changed in recent days, becoming tougher and more confrontational. " It down to one word folks, Israel, the Israeli government has a starting pistol over the heads of the West and the UN. Israel has stated that it will give Obama time for talks, but not forever, its a classic Iran tactic, start talks then agree then backtrack start talks, you get the idea. The secret mission by the Israeli PM to Russia shows that Israel does not want Iran to gain any defensive missiles that could take down any Israeli planes that might attack Iran. Lets be clear here folks, Obama has sold out Poland, Czech Republic and has gone wobbly over Afghanistan, if he could it can be argued live with a nuclear armed Iran, Israel can not, Israel will not allow itself to be sold out, also Israel has the Israeli lobby in the USA, its very powerful and Obama does not want to annoy it, he has to much on his plate. Either Iran will be totally frank on Thursday or down the road Israel will be frank with Iran, the consequences for the region and the world is beyond imagination.

Those Old Glory Days - then it was Vietnam NOW its Afghanistan

Guardian: Reports on Anti War marches that will face the Obama White House when it comes to Afghanistan. One can almost see the 60 year oldies reliving their youth, this is the time for them to fight Vietnam Again, they should really be at home doing the garden.

Good Point Mr Rich of the New York Times

The New York Times: Interesting Op - Ed piece by Mr Rich of the NYT, he compares President Obama's choices over Afghanistan to JFK's decisions over Vietnam. Also he makes a good point that if you beat the Taliban in Afghanistan, " how would that stop Al Qaeda from coalescing in Somalia or some other criminal host state? " There are no good decisions when it comes to Afghanistan, there are just bad to disastrous policy choices, just look after the USA pushed the USSR out of Afghanistan in 1988, the US pulled back from the region, and what did you get, the Taliban in bed with the ISI of Pakistan taking over Afghanistan and then 9/11. If the USA had taken an active part in Afghan politics after 1988 the rest of the world would have stated that the USA was acting like an Imperial power aka the British Empire. One can almost guarantee that what ever policy is decided by the Obama Administration, looking back it will look bad, that the fate of being in Afghanistan.

Drone ATTACKS in Pakistan

The Sunday Times: Reports that the Obama Administration is thinking of more extensive strikes in Pakistan to take out Taliban/Terrorists. This change of policy from more troops in Afghanistan to a more extensive drone attacks in Pakistan would be a mistake, the secular government of Pakistan could fall, on the one hand its looks better option that sending another thirty to forty thousand troops to Afghanistan, but its an illusion, very tempting but not real. If Obama dumps Afghanistan his Just War talk of the 08 Campaign will be seen hypocrisy of the first order, he would have lied to the American voter in 08 and as President he would have sold them a dud policy in March. President Obama has to remember one fact, if Israel thinks that Obama is weak and a hypocrite that could sell them out under enough pressure they will strike Iran. Thus in many respects President Obama created his own political box, he wanted to be POTUS and thus his Just War view of Afghanistan as compared to Iraq, now Afghanistan is biting him in the backside his West Wing hacks are wobbly and some are fighting Vietnam again, this decision will tell the West and the US voter if they have elected another Ronald Reagan or Neville Chamberlain.

Obama Administration SPLIT on Afghanistan

The New York Times: Reports on a split in the Obama Administration over Afghanistan policy, the NYT writes on the contesting forces for the Presidents ear, " ( Obama ) has discovered that the military is not monolithic in support of the plan....some of the civilian advisers he respects most have deep reservations. " This is Vietnam all over again, the question what path does Obama take, does he reverse his Just War to a War he can throw away, the West Wing is split, the VP Biden wants to reduce troops and use drones to attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan, he has a pre - 9/11 mindset, in other words throw Afghanistan to the dogs, and the deaths of NATO troops pointless, on the other hand the US military believe that they have learned from Iraq and can win in Afghanistan. As mentioned in previous post Obama linked the future of Pakistan to Afghanistan in March in his new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, the only real change is the fact that old Vietnam hands are having flashbacks to Vietnam and are fighting that War again. Lets hope President Obama gets the fact that if he sells out Afghanistan, this will be the third country he has sold out, lets not forget Poland, Czech Republic, if your in Iran what would take from this decision, yes that Obama is weak, he is another Jimmy Carter or worse Neville Chamberlain thus the green light to go nuclear. Lets hope Obama does not listen to the BS of VP Biden.

Long Range Missile Test by Iran on MONDAY

BBC News: Reports that Iran has announced it will carry out a long range missile test on Monday. As Iran is meeting the USA , UK and its UN allies on Thursday this could be a show for domestic consumption while Iran gives ground on Thursday, one has to look at all the options, on the other hand it can be postulated that that Iran will give enough on its nuclear plans to drive a wedge between the USA, UK and Russia and China. At the end of the day it will come down to Israel, they will have to decide if they can wait for the Obama magic to work on Iran.

Death in Afghanistan

MOD: Reports that a soldier has been killed in Afghanistan today, the soldier was from the " 2nd Battalion The Royal Welsh ". Thus since 2001 the UK has lost 218 of its Armed Forces Personnel in Afghanistan, of that total 187 have been killed in combat operations, the other 31 have died due to illness, accidents or other incidents.

McChrystal vs Obama

Fox News: Reports on a meeting between the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen and the US Commander in Afghanistan General McChrystal, the article states that Mullen will agree that McChrystal needs between thirty and forty thousand troops in Afghanistan. Thus President Obama has Afghanistan and Iran on his plate, never mind health care reform, am reading the McChrystal report at the minute and as stated in previous post can understand why Obama is having third thoughts, I would also, but the time for third thoughts was at the start of the Administration, that's the problem when you make one war the Just War and the other war the bad war, in this case Iraq. At the start of the Administration Obama sent out another twenty one thousand troops, taking the US forces up to seventy thousand troops in theatre, now that the US military is asking for thousands more the West Wing is getting wobbly, the major player for the reduction of troops is VP Biden, he is opposed by the Secretaries of State and Defence and the US military. As Obama has sold out Poland and Czech Republic already can he afford to sell out Afghanistan, if he does wobble Iran will know it has clear had to go nuclear, and then we have an Israeli strike on Iran. Thus the Afghanistan decision will ramifications beyond Afghanistan, it could decide the fate of Pakistan, Israel and Iran.

Obama and Iran

The New York Times: Reports that President Obama has become more hawkish about Iran, the NYT writes the following, " Mr. Obama appears to have made a leap toward viewing tough new sanctions against Iran as an inevitability. " It will be interesting to see how the Liberal New York Times plays this story, the extreme Liberal NYT would like nothing better than for President Obama to go to Iran and accept a nuclear Iran, the NYT sees no difference between Iran and Israel when it comes to nuclear weapons. Of the statements this afternoon UK time, of the three leaders it can be argued that President Obama looked more tepid, the President stated the following, " It is time for Iran to act immediately to restore the confidence of the international community by fulfilling its international obligations. We remain committed to serious, meaningful engagement with Iran to address the nuclear issue through the P5-plus-1 negotiations. " As with Afghanistan one gets the impression that Obama has a problem being tough, like LBJ he wants to be loved, than can be problem, at the end of the day the President of the United States carries the Big Stick, POTUS should be feared, Reagan was feared, Reagan ended the Cold War, one gets the impression that when it comes to the hard slog of running a Government Obama does not have the temperament, he lacks both LBJ and Reagan's skill with Congress and his fear of getting another Vietnam in Afghanistan is showing to his Allies than in a corner you cant count on Obama, just ask Poland and the Czech Republic. The liberal elite will start to argue that since Israel has the bomb the West should allow Iran to have the bomb, you heard it here first folks. The Anti War movement will added a defence of Iran to their calls for the USA to get out of Afghanistan, they will argue that the US presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is one of the reasons that the Iran wants to go nuclear. Thus we shall see if Obama can stand up to his left, if in Israel gets the planes fuelled, it seems Israel will have to protect Western security if Obama fails the test.

Secret Second Nuclear Plant in Iran

BBC News: Reports on the reaction by the USA, France and the UK on the discovery that Iran has a second secret nuclear plant. Of the three statements UK PM Gordon Brown has the strongest reaction, PM Brown stated the following, " America, the United Kingdom, and France are at one. Iran's nuclear program is the most urgent proliferation challenge that the world faces today. As President Obama and President Sarkozy have just said, the level of deception by the Iranian government, and the scale of what we believe is the breach of international commitments, will shock and anger the whole international community, and it will harden our resolve. Confronted by the serial deception of many years, the international community has no choice today but to draw a line in the sand. On October the 1st, Iran must now engage with the international community and join the international community as a partner. If it does not do so, it will be further isolated. And I say on behalf of the United Kingdom today, we will not let this matter rest. And we are prepared to implement further and more stringent sanctions. Let the message that goes out to the world be absolutely clear: that Iran must abandon any military ambitions for its nuclear program. " It can postulated that Iran will try to draw out any discussions, the hope being that while the West talks Iran can become a nuclear power. The Government in Tehran want tough sanctions, the left wing elite media will play up the result, how the sanctions hurt the innocent people of Iran. This road has one end, Israel will hit Iran and Iran will strike US forces in Iraq, its now matter of a tedious process.

Obama's War = Afghanistan

The New York Times: An Editorial in praise of President Obama at the UN, but even the extreme Liberal New York Times sees Afghanistan as a problem, the NYT writes, " Afghanistan has now become Mr. Obama’s war. America, its allies and the world need to hear his plan. " The problem for President Obama is that a good speech on Afghanistan will not cut it on Afghanistan, he set out a new strategy in March, now that Liberals are wobbly over Afghanistan the Obama West Wing is looking outside the box and has found VP Joe Biden, the then Senator who wanted to break up Iraq. If BS was a company Biden would be a major Share holder, Ronald Reagan called him a demagogue in his diaries and Kennedy's close Aide Theodore Sorenson has called him a political hypocrite in his Memoir, thus my advice to President Obama don't trust Biden. It can be argued that Bdien didn't give up a cushy seat in the US Senate to be one term Vice - President. President Obama has to look beyond the political ambitions of his VP, he has to secure the West and protect Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Don't SELL out Afghanistan

USA Today: Article on how it would be a mistake to reject the request for new troops for Afghanistan, the article states the following, " we might ultimately have to fall back on a narrow counterterrorism option. But that would be a major setback, and a major danger,.." As President Obama stated in March the future of Afghanistan has a major effect on Pakistan, at the end of the day the War in Afghanistan is a hard negative war, its not about Afghanistan its about Pakistan. If we sell out Afghanistan what are the chances for the survival of the secular Government of Pakistan, the West would be seen as weak, this could be read by Iran and Russia to makes moves in their region. Thus the decision by President Obama will have significant security effects for the USA and the World. Read of the Day.

WMD Charge in the USA

Fox News: Reports that Najibullah Zazi a US resident but from Afghanistan has been charged with attempting to use Weapons of Mass Destruction in the USA. If you think beyond this case this shows the problems for President Obama, how can he ditch Afghanistan if there are terror plans being devised in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This case might have more implications that just criminal, lets see some of the details, might this effect US Foreign Policy.

Wider Taliban Attacks in Afghanistan, Orders from Pakistan

The New York Times: Reports that the Taliban of Afghanistan have out foxed the Western Allies, they have moved attacks to once peaceful areas of Afghanistan. The NYT writes the following on the command and control of the Taliban, " showing a.... level of sophistication and organization, are using their sanctuary in Pakistan to stoke a widening campaign of violence in northern and western Afghanistan..." Thus President Obama is facing the same problems that LBJ had over Vietnam, the badlands of the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan allow the Taliban/Terrorists to have bases in Pakistan that are secure from land attack by Western Troops. Any major attack on Taliban/Terrorists bases in Pakistan with Western troops could bring down the secular Government of Pakistan, and Pakistan is nuclear armed. But if the USA does not take action, the War in Afghanistan can not be won, its that simple and brutal. The Army of Pakistan has had recent success against the Taliban of Pakistan in the Swat Valley but Pakistan has its own internal problems, the ISI the Intelligence service of Pakistan has supported the Taliban over the years against the enemies of Pakistan. It is like shadow boxing, you never quite win, and you tire yourself out in the long term. Having started to read General McChrystal full report I can see why President Obama is having third thoughts but it could be to late, the surge in March will bring US troops levels up to near seventy thousand, it Obama's War, it does not matter if he wants it, its his bag, to use a modern term. As he stated in his remarks in March Afghanistan is to important to lose, but it might not be winnable either in the long term, President Karzai has become the new Diem. The question is has Obama become the new LBJ.

The Special Relationship, the USA and the UK

BBC News: Reports on the perceived fraught relationship between President Obama and UK PM Gordon Brown. The Special Relationship even at its most special has had its up and downs, FDR during the World War Two thought he alone could deal with Stalin without Churchill. In the 80s Lady Thatcher was not happy with President Reagan when he invaded Grenada, when Bill Clinton won the Presidency in 1992 the UK Government of Sir John Major was out of favour due to the fact that it was seen as having tried help Bush 41 beat Clinton in the Presidential Election. In 1999 UK PM Tony Blair was more hawkish than the President for tougher action in the Balkans, Blair wanted to use ground troops. In 2001 Bush 43 found a political soul mate in UK PM Tony Blair, thus the war in Iraq. At the end of the day US Presidents can think that they don't need the UK but when the teabags hit the fan, its the UK that is by the side of the USA. President Obama should be remained that after the US the next major force in Afghanistan in the UK. If the Obama Administration does not need the UK then we don't need Afghanistan.

USA, Russia and Iran

Fox News: Reports that Russia is now open to place sanctions on Iran. It seems behind closed doors that there was a deal between Russia and the USA when it comes to Iran, the USA removes the missiles shield from Poland and Czech Republic and Russia backs tough sanctions on Iran. The question is will the sanctions be tough enough, will Iran not go nuclear. The answer to both question is NO. If your Iran you have seen that North Korea gets a semi Presidential visit with the visit of ex President Bill Clinton to North Korea. Thus if your in Tehran you might read Obama as weak, you would see that the USA is still in Afghanistan and Iraq, that Afghanistan is causing a political fight between semi Hawks ( VP Biden ) and Hawks ( Every one else ) in the Obama White House, that this might be the time for Iran to simply go ahead with your nuclear programme. At the end of the day sanctions will not work, you also need the CIA to take covert action in to Iran to soften up the regime, how will the CIA react to such a request when the Obama's Attorney General wants to place CIA officials in jail for preventing another 9/11. In other words it will come to down to Israel to preserve Western Security, thank God for Israel.

Afghanistan = Vietnam in the Obama White House

The Times: Reports that the ghost of LBJ and Vietnam is hanging over President Obama and the White House over its strategy in Afghanistan. This blog for years has been against a heavy troop presence in Afghanistan, when Obama was checking in and out of the Senate to run for the Presidency this blog was opposed to an Afghan War with Western troops. As with all things there have been changes, Obama at the start had the chance to scale down Afghanistan, not make Afghanistan the main battle area for the War on Terror, but it had been the Just War in his Campaign for the Presidency, also the Bush surge had worked in Iraq, thus it had fallen from the headlines. In March of this year President Obama stated that he had a new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, what the President said about the importance of Afghanistan is now causing him problems, the President states the following, " Many people in the United States -- and many in partner countries that have sacrificed so much -- have a simple question: What is our purpose in Afghanistan? After so many years, they ask, why do our men and women still fight and die there? And they deserve a straightforward answer. So let me be clear: Al Qaeda and its allies -- the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks -- are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from its safe haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban -- or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged -- that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can....The future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan.......For the Afghan people, a return to Taliban rule would condemn their country to brutal governance, international isolation, a paralyzed economy, and the denial of basic human rights to the Afghan people -- especially women and girls. The return in force of al Qaeda terrorists who would accompany the core Taliban leadership would cast Afghanistan under the shadow of perpetual violence. " Thus the President is up a creek without a paddle, as stated this blog, what ever decision the President takes it will cost lives, this blog has changed its view, from wanting a small footprint in Afghanistan to the support of more troops. If the President had scaled back at the start of his Administration then we might not be her now, the Taliban within 12 months of winning and the UK not having lost some heroic soldiers. But we here, the USA and the UK have taken heavy losses. Is Obama really going to turn around and say it was pointless. The political hacks in the West Wing might think Obama could sell a broken down second hand car but this would be a bridge to far, Obama might as well back his books to go back to Chicago in 2012 if the think he would win. An act of treachery of selling the people of Afghanistan down the river would make Jimmy Carter look like Ronald Reagan. A holding strategy in Afghanistan would be Vietnam all over again, Obama sooner or later would be forced to send more troops, by then in political terms it would be to late, also Obama would have to face the fact that his decision will have cost more US and UK lives, also it would allow the Taliban to hit Western Forces and wait them out, NATO would be finished, Russia might think this was the chance to retake his past satellite countries, Ukraine, Poland and the Czech Republic. The Obama decision is more important that the political fate of Obama, this is about Western security, if Obama wobbles Iran will go nuclear and Israel will have no choice but to hit Iran. Lets hope Obama has more Steele than wind.

Obama on the WORLD STAGE = UN

Courtesy of the White House: President Obama at the UN, 23/09/09

The White House Blog: Full Text of President Obama's speech to the UN. The President today at the UN tried again to start to talks with Iran and North Korea, the President stated the following, “ In their actions to date, the governments of North Korea and Iran threaten to take us down this dangerous slope.　 We respect their rights as members of the community of nations.　 I've said before and I will repeat, I am committed to diplomacy that opens a path to greater prosperity and more secure peace for both nations if they live up to their obligations. But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards; if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people; if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East -- then they must be held accountable.　 The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced.　 We must insist that the future does not belong to fear. ” The problem for President Obama is that due to his actions in Poland and the Czech Republic he is seen as weak by the international community, thus Israel has stopped the Obama Agenda for the Middle East. Also the open political warfare in D.C over how the USA should act in Afghanistan, this is starting to effect the perception of the Obama Administration. On the one hand you have VP Biden who wants to redirect US forces to Pakistan at the expense of Afghanistan on the other you have the US Military and the Secretaries of Defence and State who want to to send another thirty to forty thousand more troops to Afghanistan. In essence Iran sees a weak President, someone they can roll, Obama so far has not used the big stick, a lot of talk not lot of action

New Take on Afghanistan

The New York Times: Reports that President Obama might be having third thoughts about Afghanistan, 1st in the election of 2008 Obama as a candidate argued that the War in Afghanistan was the Jus War, 2nd President Obama argued that the USA needed to defeat the Taliban to beat the threat of terrorism from the region, now we come to the third idea pushed by VP Biden, the NYT states the following policy view of Biden, " to scale back American forces ( in Afghanistan ) and focus more on rooting out Al Qaeda there and in Pakistan.." In other words the Just War can be thrown in the bin, while you doing that throw the people of Afghanistan in to the bin. The Biden policy is based on the theory that Al Qaeda wont go back to Afghanistan, lets see the Taliban hate Western values, they hate the secular government of Pakistan, a close ally of the West, why would the Taliban of Afghanistan not take back Al Qaeda, a major threat to the USA and the West and its friends. Lets hope President Obama is not following a trend of selling out different Alliances based on the political pressure form his left, if this is case we do have another Jimmy Carter on hour hands, if your a Republican that is great, we have the 2010 Mid Term Congressional elections and then the 2012 Presidential Election in the USA. The Republicans should make major gains in 2010 and win the Presidency back in 2012.

Obama's New York Blues

Politico: Reports on the Democratic infighting between President Obama and the New York Governor David Paterson, the Governor has stated that his polls are down due to the weak record of President Obama in Congress. Lets have a look at the background folks, this is politics at its most cynical, the real deal of low down politics. The Obama West Wing has seen that Governor Paterson's polls are in the toilet, he is a drag on Democrats who are up for re-election in 2010. Thus what did the Obama White House try to do, get Paterson not run, this idea went down faster than a New York minute, so what does the Governor do, light some fires under the Obama record in Congress.

The Allies, Obama and Afghanistan

The New York Times: Reports on how Afghanistan is not just an Obama problem, but how Obama can make it worse, the NYT writes the following, " How do you convince America’s allies to stick with the plan..... when.....strategy itself is being reconsidered.... for the second time in six months? " This does recall when JFK was seen as weak by the USSR, thus you had the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, thus far Obama has sold out Poland and the Czech Republic, has given the impression of appeasing Russia, has set the dogs on the CIA while the terrorists still plot to harm the USA and the West, and now we have leaks that the Obama West Wing political hacks think they can run a War by selling out Afghanistan. Even Jimmy Carter after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan got the fact that he would use covert means to defeat the USSR, Obama is starting to make Carter look like a real hard edge realist. If your a suppose Ally of the USA do you trust an Obama Administration, they seem more than willing to sell out their allies, they just seem to prefer talking to totalitarian regimes like Iran and Cuba.

Time to Decide Mr President - Afghanistan

The Washington Post: Reports that the Obama West Wing wants to change the military strategy from Afghanistan to Pakistan. In essence no more troops for Afghanistan, they want to sell out Afghanistan as they have sold out Poland and the Czech Republic. This is why Democrats are never trusted on national security issues, if Obama follows this route he is throwing Afghanistan to the dogs, in other words the Taliban. The idea that you can deal with Pakistan at the exclusion of Afghanistan shows no understanding of counterinsurgency, if you sell out Afghanistan then who in the region is going to trust an Obama Administration. What of the costs in lives and treasure that Afghanistan has cost so far, was it pointless, is the Just War that Obama wanted to fight no longer a Just War. I must admit a line from Lady Thatcher comes to mind, after Iraq invaded Kuwait, Lady Thatcher told Bush 41 not to wobble. It seems that the political operators in the Obama West Wing are in different stages of wobble. If Obama sells out Afghanistan he will be the next Neville Chamberlain, he has already sold out Poland and Czech Republic over missile defence, one can postulate that Israel will seen President Obama as weak and thus take military action against Iran. All actions have consequences lets see if Obama can see beyond his own arrogance.

Afghanistan Front News

MOD: Has released the name of the soldier killed yesterday in Afghanistan, the soldier was " Acting Sergeant Michael Lockett MC from 2nd Battalion The Mercian Regiment " Our thoughts are with the family of Acting Sergeant Lockett.

1,000 more UK Soldiers for Afghanistan

The Times: Reports that the UK will send another one thousand soldiers to Afghanistan as part of the new strategy of General McChrystal. This would be a good move as long as President Obama has the backbone to support the call for more US troops. It has been reported that General McChrystal will ask for another thirty to forty thousand US troops to give security to the population of Afghanistan and build up the security forces of Afghanistan, this is causing heart failure in the White House and in Congress. The War in Afghanistan is does not have good poll ratings and Liberals in Congress want to pull the plug on Afghanistan, they see it as another Bush War. In many respects Obama is up a creek with out much of paddle, what ever his decision it becomes his War, if he says YES to the surge it becomes Obama's War, thus lets be honest here there is a great chance for failure. If Obama says NO, and tries to keep the force level as it is, the War will be lost in 12 months. Thus the Just War that Obama wanted to fight could define his Presidency, he would become the next Jimmy Carter but also LBJ and Nixon due to the fact the he would have lost a WAR on his watch. The problem for President Obama is that the Taliban like the Viet Cong in the Vietnam War can wait him out, a holding War would lead to more losses and Obama would be blamed for not taking the advice of his military, thus he would lose re-election in 2012. The decision that the President takes on Afghanistan is like the decision that LBJ took in 1965, either the USA is in or out of a War, this decision more that health care will define President Obama.

Death in Afghanistan

MOD: Reports that another British soldier has been killed in Afghanistan, the soldier was form the " 2nd Battalion The Mercian Regiment " Thus since 2001 the UK has lost 217 of its Armed Forces Personnel in Afghanistan, of that total 186 have died in combat operations, another 31 have died due to illness, accidents or other incidents. Can we win in Afghanistan, and what does win mean when it comes to Afghanistan, how many more deaths, at what point do we leave, it is Obama's War, at what point do we leave?

End Result in Afghanistan

The New York Times: Reports the following on General McChrystal report to the Obama Administration on Afghanistan, " unless he is provided more forces and a robust counterinsurgency strategy, the war in Afghanistan is most likely lost. " Thus can President Obama carry a holding strategy for Afghanistan, keep the force level at is present of just seventy thousand troops but with no increase, the simple brutal answer is yes but it will be at the cost of more casualties for US troops. This is 1965 all over again, in other words the Vietnam War, in 65 LBJ had a crushing victory over the Republicans with the promise that he would not send more troops to Vietnam. There is a difference with Obama in 2008, Afghanistan was the Just War, not the War of choice as Iraq was seen for Bush 43, in essence Obama tied his political fortunes to winning in Afghanistan. Thus we come to report by General McChrystal that is blunt, either more troops or the US will fail in Afghanistan, Obama wants to keep Afghanistan on the side lines while he fights for health care, LBJ wanted to fight his real love, the social change of the Great Society, but like Vietnam for LBJ, Afghanistan is not a War that you can fight when you want to fight it, its now and its urgent. In 1965 LBJ didn't want to send troops to protect the airfields of US planes in South Vietnam but they need protection from the Viet Cong, thus the start of the massive troops presence in South Vietnam, Obama has a choice , either more troops or lose, Afghanistan taken over by the Taliban would be a threat to Pakistan, and the rest of the region, Pakistan is nuclear armed, one really cant see a way out of this for President Obama, he cant risk losing but winning might feel like losing. TO WIN IS TO LOSE!

The Report on Afghanistan by General McChrystal

The Washington Post: Reports on the Report that has rocked Washington D.C. In essence more troops for Afghanistan or fail. Click here to READ REPORT. This is Obama's LBJ moment, he is either in our out of Afghanistan, in 1965 LBJ could have withdrawn from Vietnam but he believed in the domino theory, if South Vietnam fell to the communists this would drag the rest of Asia in to the communist fold, does Obama believe that if the USA was to leave Afghanistan that Pakistan would be safe from the threat of the Taliban of Pakistan, at the end of the day the War in Afghanistan is more about Pakistan than Afghanistan. As Obama has shown he has sold out Poland and the Czech Republic, will he now sell out Afghanistan and Pakistan. The decision the President takes now will define his Presidency and the security of the USA and Afghanistan and Pakistan.

More Troops or Failure in Afghanistan = General McChrystal

BBC News: Reports on a clear message that the US Commander in Afghanistan has sent to the Obama Administration, more troops or failure in Afghanistan. As noted yesterday President Obama it seems is getting wobbly about Afghanistan, the revolt of the Liberal base to the idea that the US should send tens of thousands of more soldiers to Afghanistan has affected the Oval Office. What is interesting is the nature of the leak to the Washington Post, it either came from the Defence Department, someone wants to place pressure on the President to send more troops, does recall Vietnam all over again, and as the New York Times stated Obama's does not want to be another Lyndon Johnson, he does not want his domestic agenda destroyed by a War, in the case of LBJ it was Vietnam, in the case of Obama it could be Afghanistan. Or the leak could have come from the CIA, as noted in previous posts, Eric Holder the Attorney General of the United States, a close friend of President Obama has launched an investigation in the torture practices of the CIA. It can be postulated that this could be the CIA getting its own back on the Obama White House. Lets recall that the CIA leaked against Bush 43 with great effect, the leaks didn't help Bush 43 with the Congress or the public. At the end of the day President Obama does not have the leisure of taking his time over Afghanistan, health reform is important but the security of US soldiers take precedent, thus Afghanistan if Obama is not careful could become his Vietnam and Iraq.

Will UK PM Brown be OUT of OFFICE by Xmas ?

The Daily Mail: Reports that former UK PM Tony Blair and Lord Mandelson the Business Secretary think that UK PM Gordon Brown could resign before the next election in 2010. Lets be honest here folks, there is more chance of VIEWS becoming POTUS than Gordon Brown winning the next election. The public finances are in the sewers, there will have to be cuts, reports today suggest that education will get a hit, the Unions will not be happy, Mr Brown is to dour to be a PM in bad times, if the economy was good to great it would not matter but in bad times you need a leader that brings you confidence, not a leader that makes you wish that you lived on Mars, what ever President Obama's faults, and they are many, he does have a kind of charisma to those that don't see politics beyond the spin.

Is Obama ready to SELL out Afghanistan ?

Politico: Reports on the Obama world tour of the Sunday TV shows; minus Fox News; and the subject of Afghanistan. The President from the various interviews seems to be sending the signal that there will be no more troops for Afghanistan. In other words after selling out Poland and the Czech Republic, President Obama is now going to sell out Afghanistan and the US military. It has been reported that the US military will ask for tens of thousand more troops as to fight the Taliban/Al Qaeda, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has in essence stated that Afghanistan is going down the toilet, a new strategy and troops are needed to give the US a chance in Afghanistan. It seems that the Democratic rebellion to a troops surge has made its way to the Oval Office, if President Obama does not approve the troop surge the UK should withdraw its troops from Afghanistan, why should our Armed Forces die if Obama has not have the political will to take some heat from his liberal base. One can hope that his caution is based on the political need to keep his liberal base on side while he fights for his health care reform, but if this is another sell out then UK PM Gordon Brown should inform President Obama we are out of Afghanistan. Lets hope the US voter shows his/her disapproval in the Democratic way, lets vote out the Democrats in the Congress in 2010 and vote Obama out in 2012 to be a warm act for that other hopeless President, Jimmy Carter, on the speech circuit.

Is Obama the next LBJ ?

The New York Times: Has lessons for the Obama Administration when it comes to health reform from the Administration of President Lyndon Johnson. I think the Liberal New York Times is missing a point here, Obama is no LBJ, Obama checked in to the US Senate and checked out to run for the Presidency, LBJ was the most effective Majority Leader in US Senate history. In many respects Obama has the charisma of JFK but charisma does not get you Bills passed in the Senate. As LBJ noted Kennedy could get nothing through the Congress, its one thing to be President it another to roll the Congress, LBJ and Reagan had the skills to roll the Congress, and in Reagan's case right over the Liberal Speaker Tip O' Neill. Obama in many respects has some serious domestic and international problems, the US Government has bailed out the banks, the economic sector, the card industry, now Obama wants to take over the US health sector, and on the international front, he has Iran that will go nuclear, he also has to deal with the real fact that Israel will never allow a nuclear armed Iran. Then there is Afghanistan becoming Obama's Vietnam, he does not want to be another LBJ forced out of the Presidency, in 1968 LBJ was forced out office due to the Tet offensive by the Viet Cong in South Vietnam. Obama wants a second term in 2012. The next few weeks will show if Obama can really manage the Congress, if he forces through a health care reform package with just Democratic votes the Republicans could vote with Democrats when it comes to Afghanistan to wreck the Obama Administration.

Suspect Terrorist Plot in New York

Telegraph: Reports on a suspected terrorist plot in New York and how the FBI has take preventive action by taking the suspects in to custody. This is the reason that Afghanistan and Pakistan are important, it seems while the Obama Administration has a pre - 9/11 with its investigation of the CIA as reported by CNN, the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan still have the USA as their main target. Although there have not been any formal arrests in the above case in general it can be argued that President Obama does not see the world in the same light as Bush 43, on 9/11 the USA was attacked and Bush 43 made it his mission that there would not be another major terrorist attack on the USA. Thus the CIA was set lose, one job no more attacks. The Obama Administration has a pre 9/11 mind set, it sees the War on Terror as a police matter, thus the Attorney General Eric Holder, a close friend of Obama's is going after the CIA while the terrorists are going after the USA. As stated many times in this blog, Al Qaeda only have to get lucky once, while the West has to keep its guard up at all times. If your in the CIA will you take action that prevents another major attack if your going to be dragged and accused of breaking the rights of the terrorists, as that seems more important to the Obama Administration than the security of its own people, you only have to look at the Obama appeasement of Russia over the Missile Defence Shield.

100 Billion ( Real Money ) = 2 Billion for Pakistan

The Times: Reports on recent remarks by the President of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zardari, the President stated that Pakistan needs a hundred billion dollars to fight back against Islamic Terrorists, but at the minimum Pakistan needs two billion to break the education hold of these terrorists. This is about winning hearts and minds of the young of Pakistan, at present the Islamic terrorists through their schools can twist the Muslim religion to convince the young to fight and die for the terrorists. As stated many times, there is need for a massive civic programme in the badlands of the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, there is the need for hope, thus the in the long term the West should save money by pumping money in to this region, thus new secular schools should be built, hospitals, new roads, show some light to the poor people of Pakistan. If the secular state of Pakistan fails the cost to the West could be more than a one hundred billion dollars. It is time for policy makers to think long term, invest now and save lives in the future.

Review of Joss Whedon's dollhouse, Season One

I came to the new show of Mr Whedon with some worry, have seen clips of the show but had only seen the final full show, unseen in the USA. The clips I had seen had me confused, also the premise of the show that people could have their minds wiped and replaced with new imprints for the pleasure of clients had me worried to say the least. Then I bought the box set, have to admit I am a fan of Buffy, Angel and FireFly all by Joss Whedon, thus know he produces, directs and writes excellent shows, thus was it worth it, and answer is YES. Its is an excellent show, should note that it has 15 rating. It deal with what is oneself, what is the soul, is dramatic, even funny, of course Eliza Dushku is fantastic, stunning, dramatic, funny and she can sing. A bit of fan of Faith from Buffy and Angel and True Calling! Thus worth a look, also the show has gotten a second second, will be interesting to see what direction they go, my only needle is the premise, this is quite a Conservative Blog, but its up there with Buffy/Angel but more darker, how can shows that dealt with Vampires be more darker, simple its about humans minus Vampires, and lets be honest humans have a great light but also great darkness, it can be argued that humans need both but with the exception of politics; that is all cynic and thank god for that; prefer the light, this is a Conservative Blog after all folks.

Not Talking to Allies - Obama's Arrogance AGAIN!

Fox News: Reports that the Polish Government was informed that the USA was scrapping the missile defence shield, it was not a negotiation between Allies. This does recall when Neville Chamberlain sold out Czechoslovakia in 1938 at Munich, has Obama started another Munich, but not this time for the Poland and the Czech Republic but for the Ukraine. Poland and the Czech Republic are in NATO, thus are protected by treaty, even if Obama wanted to sell them out he cant, there are limits to the power of Obama. The decision over the missile defence could allow Russia to move in to the Ukraine, they see a weak President and react, lets recall last year they invaded Georgia, lucky Bush 43 was in the White House, the response from then Senator Obama was mild, appeasement has its origins. The tough talk by Bush 43 forced the Russians out, after the tepid response of Obama to the democratic riots in Iran, if your Western supporter like the Ukraine and Georgia, would you trust an Obama Administration to come to your aid should Russian take military action. Thus the road paved in the light of appeasement might have started on the 17th of September 2009, Russia and Iran might take advantage of this weakness and thus the West has another Jimmy Carter in the Oval Office.

The New York Times and Missile Defence

The New York Times: Interesting News Anaylsis by the Liberal NYT, one gets the impression that the US paper of record is not completely on board with the Obama plan to sell out Poland and the Czech Republic, the NYT writes the following, " Rather than focusing first on protecting the continental United States, it shifts the immediate effort to defending Europe and the Middle East. " Also the Liberal NYT has set President Obama challenge, as the article states the original point of Ronald Reagan's SDI project or Star Wars was to protect the USA, Obama has moved the goal posts, even left the USA a target, as the NYT writes Obama could could come under critical review for such a policy move, I thought the main duty of the the President of the United States was to protect the USA. The challenge by the Liberal New York Times to President Obama is can he be another Reagan, can he make his missile defence system work, not in practice but in the political sphere, can he be another Reagan.

Afghanistan Front News

MOD: Has released the names of the British soldiers that died on Wednesday, the soldiers were " Trooper Brett Hall from the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment and Acting Serjeant Stuart McGrath from 2nd Battalion The Rifles " Our thoughts are with the families of these heroic soldiers.

The Ice Chill in Eastern Europe = Russia

The Times: Excellent analysis of the Obama decision to surrender to Russia over Missile Defence. It has been argued that President Obama has a pre - 9/11 mindset, one can postulate that the President has a pre - 1989 mindset. It seems that he has no interest in Eastern Europe, all the success post 1989 seem to have passed President Obama, it was not on his watch thus his break of faith with Poland; on the day it was invaded by Russia after the agreement between Nazi Germany and the USSR seventy years ago; also the Czech Republic must think this is Munich 1938 again, Obama like Neville Chamberlain more interested in his own arrogance that honour and trust. Thus my prediction that the President will lose his re-election bid in 2012. Also look out for Russian take over some or all of the Ukraine, Obama after losing his election bid will look back at this decision that set his course. Read of the Day.

Review of Obama's Missile Defence Statement

The White House: Full Text.

Here are some of the most interesting comments by the President Today. ( My comments in red, reading the Presidents mind. )...

As Commander-in-Chief, I'm committed to doing everything in my power to advance our national security. And that includes strengthening our defenses against any and all threats to our people, our troops, and our friends and allies around the world. ( Wants to give the impression that he is a strong President, in other words political spin ) .....One of those threats is the danger posed by ballistic missiles. As I said during the campaign, President Bush was right that Iran's ballistic missile program poses a significant threat. ( That must have made him choke to say something nice about Bush 43 ) And that's why I'm committed to deploying strong missile defense systems which are adaptable to the threats of the 21st century. ( I cant really do what I want to do, that is ban this stuff, what if Iran is really a threat )....This new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems, and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 European missile defense program. ( This shows I will defend the USA and Europe, I AM NOT JIMMY CARTER OR NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN )...First, we have updated our intelligence assessment of Iran's missile programs, which emphasizes the threat posed by Iran's short- and medium-range missiles, which are capable of reaching Europe. ( I am not conning you, trust me, this is not like me telling you that my economic package will work ) There's no substitute for Iran complying with its international obligations regarding its nuclear program, and we, along with our allies and partners, will continue to pursue strong diplomacy to ensure that Iran lives up to these international obligations. ( I am the ONE, why wont Iran talk to me, I have always gotten my way ) But this new ballistic missile defense program will best address the threat posed by Iran's ongoing ballistic missile defense program. ( It better or Israel will sink by Presidency without looking back )... We will continue to work cooperatively with our close friends and allies, the Czech Republic and Poland, who had agreed to host elements of the previous program. I've spoken to the Prime Ministers of both the Czech Republic and Poland about this decision and reaffirmed our deep and close ties. ( Why didn't I check my calender ) Together we are committed to a broad range of cooperative efforts to strengthen our collective defense, and we are bound by the solemn commitment of NATO's Article V that an attack on one is an attack on all. ( There Russian Bear, NATO will make up for me being Jimmy Carter. )...We've also repeatedly made clear to Russia that its concerns about our previous missile defense programs were entirely unfounded. ( I will surrender, I am to arrogant to be wrong, I am no Ronald Reagan, he was old and fought for Star Wars and bought down the USSR, but why ? ) Our clear and consistent focus has been the threat posed by Iran's ballistic missile program, and that continues to be our focus and the basis of the program that we're announcing today. ( Keep on message, the elite media will cover for me )...In confronting that threat, we welcome Russians' cooperation to bring its missile defense capabilities into a broader defense of our common strategic interests, even as we continue to -- we continue our shared efforts to end Iran's illicit nuclear program. ( I have given you what you want Russia, don't vote against sanctions against Iran )..I'm confident that with the steps we've taken today, we have strengthened America's national security and enhanced our capacity to confront 21st century threats. ( The Liberal base will be happy but if I fail, me fail, my own PR cant be wrong, Israel will attack and I can join the speech circuit with Jimmy Carter, I can be his warm up act, )

30 - 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan ?

Fox News: Reports that US Commander in Afghanistan, General McChrystal has asked for another thirty to forty thousand troops in theatre to work through his new strategy for Afghanistan. This is a major problem for President Obama, on the one hand he has used the support of his National Security structure to change US policy on Missile Defence, now his national security team will ask for a major increase in troops for Afghanistan. On the other hand his Liberal base are anti any war, they see Iraq and Afghanistan as Bush 43 wars, thus they want out. After health care, Afghanistan will define the Obama Presidency, will he have the backbone to stand up to his Liberal base or will he be weak and make the US and the West weak for the next four years.

Obama's Bad Timing on Missile Defence!

The New York Times: Reports that the Obama West Wing is losing its PR touch, the news of the scraping of a missile defence shield for Europe came on a historical significant date, the NYT writes the following, " But it made for unfortunate timing, as Thursday is the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland at the start of World War II,..." Thus it could be seen from the Polish view that their Western Allies as they did after World War Two have sold them down the river to the Russians. It takes a special kind of arrogance to miss this important date for Poland. It shows how risky this move is by the Obama White House that the Liberal New York Times goes out of its way to stress that Obama is not giving up on missile defence, in fact it will get to Europe faster. In other words the Liberal NYT knows Obama is in trouble over health care, they know he can not afford to be seen as a Neville Chamberlain, and more important he cant bee seen like that when its the day seventy years ago that Russia invaded Poland.

Selling OUT Eastern Europe ?

BBC News: Reports on the statement by President Obama that the US is to scrap the planned Missile Defence Bases in Poland and the Czech Republic to protect the USA and Europe from a missile threat from Iran. When I heard the news this morning that President Obama was to withdraw the Missile Defence Shield from Poland and the Czech Republic my mind turned to Munich of 1938 when the appeasement policy of Neville Chamberlain lead to the sacrifice of the then Czechoslovakia to Hitler. Then to 1945 when the Iran Curtain came down and the West allowed Poland to become a satellite of the then USSR. I was ready to call Mr Obama the heir to Neville Chamberlain, this would not be the first time, lets be honest folks. Thus a lesson wait till one gets all the facts, after the Presidential Statement the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates stated that the USA and Europe would be protected by Naval surveillance and interception, it has been tested and works, also the Defence Secretary stated that down the line that Poland and the Czech Republic could have land based missile defence. But the worry for the political operation of the Obama White House should be how many other people had the same thought, that Obama was selling out Easter Europe as to keep his Liberal base happy, also there is no real deal that Russia will go along with tough sanctions on Iran. The nightmare for President Obama is that he thinks he has a deal between the USA and Russia over Iran and when it comes to a vote at the UN the Russians do end run and veto any sanctions. Lets hope Obama has not looked in to the soul of the Russian bear and seen what his arrogant eyes wants to see, the price could be an invasion of the Ukraine by Russia. I did notice that in the short statement by the President that he stated that any attack on a NATO member is an attack on all, thus since Poland and the Czech Republic are part of NATO, this was a signal to Russia, don't see a mirage.

Death in Afghanistan

MOD: Reports that another British soldier has died in Afghanistan, the soldier was from the " 2nd Battalion The Rifles ". Thus as of 16/9/09 the UK has lost 216 of its Armed Forces Personnel in Afghanistan, of that total it has lost 185 in combat operations and 31 due to illness, accidents or other incidents. This month alone the UK has lost 6 of its Armed Forces Personnel in combat, we need to secure the security of our soldiers, we need more experts on IEDs on the ground, the US is sending out three thousand more soldiers to deal with IEDs, what has the UK done, from the look of it not a lot. The UK needs more boots on the ground, it needs more secure transport from the air to the ground. Lets protect our troops using all of our equipment, why cant we have 24/7 satellite coverage of Afghanistan.

Blue Dog Democrats SUPPORT Baucus

The Hill: Reports that Conservative Democrats have supported the compromise health bill produced by Senator Baucus. The one problem could be Liberal Democrats in the House and Senate, they want a public option, this is time for President Obama to show his LBJ skills to bring Liberals along, my one critic of the Bill is that it should allow for abortion, its a private matter between the a woman and a Doctor, thus the Government should not state that it should not be covered. On the whole support the Bill.

Death in Afghanistan

MOD: Reports that a British soldier has died of his wounds in the UK after being in combat operations in Afghanistan. The soldier was from the " 2nd Royal Tank Regiment ". Thus since 2001 the UK has lost 215 of its Armed Forces Personnel in Afghanistan, of that total it has lost 184 in combat and 31 due to illness, accidents or other incidents. Thus with this death the UK has lost five soldiers in September, it is still less than July and August, lets hope we don't match those deadly months. Our thoughts are with the families of all those killed in Afghanistan.

Middle Class to PAY for Health Care Reform

ABC News: Reports on divisions within Democratic Senate ranks over the new health bill from the Finance committee, Senator Rockefeller is critical of the Baucus Bill, he argues that it soaks to Middle Class in Taxes. It always the details that be more fraught than the idea, President Obama has stated that taxes will not raise on those earning less that two hundred and fifty thousand, well if those in the Middle Class that don't have medical cover it will be a new tax. Its the real world folks, Obama will have to sell a tax increase on the middle class to cover those that don't have cover.

New Health Plan from Senate Finance Committee

The New York Times: Reports on the compromise health bill out of the US Senate, the NYT writes the following, "... 223-page proposal, ( Senator) Baucus said that he had pared the 10-year cost of the bill to $856 billion,... " As stated this blog was waiting for the details of the Bill, it not perfect, but on the whole it sounds like a good bill, there is no public option, people will be forced to buy medical coverage, the insurance companies will not be able to turn any one way who has a pre - existing condition or throw them out should the costs go up for the cover. Also more important the price tag is lot lower that the one trillion of the House package, this cost will as reported by the NYT will be 856 Billion. If the banks can be bailed out, and Obama can pander to the his Liberal base with his economic package then the US government can take care of those that cant take care of themselves. Thus the Democrats on a morale point of view if they cant get Republican support should push it through with the nuclear option in the Senate, but then they own it, like Iraq, it it does not work its their bag, lets see how the Blue Dog Democrats respond to the Bill.

Democrats USE the RACE card Again!

BBC News: Reports on the recent comments of former President Jimmy Carter, it seems that if your opposed to the Obama health care reform package your a racist. If Democrats follow the political advice Jimmy Carter then they are in real trouble. Lets recall that under Carter that Afghanistan was invaded by the USSR, and US Diplomats in Tehran, Iran saw their Embassy taken over and they themselves taken hostage. If Democrats really believe that the opposition to Obama is about race they are heading for a washout in the Mid Term Congressional Elections in 2010. The opposition to Obama comes from the fact that President Obama ran as a moderate and has turned out to have conned the US voter, Obama is an extreme Tax and Spend Liberal. Thus this is the reason that Blue Dog Democrats should oppose any Congressional Bill that has a public option, if Blue Dog Democrats want to lose at the next election just vote for a public option in any Bill. Also lets recall the Obama camp used the race card on President Bill Clinton the first " Black " President in the eyes of many Democrats.

For Political Geeks, Polls from Truman to Obama

USA Today: A great site for political geeks, has all the Gallup Polls from Truman to Obama. Read of the Day.

Long and Bloody Road in Afghanistan

Guardian: Reports that the UK Defence Secretary, Bob Ainsworth has stated in essence that the War in Afghanistan for the UK has a long road before we can win against the Taliban. This is why we need a heavy weight at the Defence Department, can you think that the Dark Prince himself, Lord Mandelson would be so negative, he would point out the success not that we are in trouble in Afghanistan. This is not to argue that we need a spin on Afghanistan like LBJ did over Vietnam but we need a Defence Secretary that will point out the we are pushing the Taliban back, there was an election in Afghanistan, we didn't lose our brave soldiers for nothing, there is hope for Afghanistan.

The Politics of Afghanistan - USA

CNN News: Reports that the death toll of US troops in Afghanistan has hurt its support in the USA, a new CNN/ORC poll has support for the war at 39%, while those opposed at 58%. This follows the UK pattern of support, President Obama has to sell the War in Afghanistan, he has to take on his Liberal base otherwise they will pull the plug on Afghanistan, in the process of taking the USA out of Afghanistan the Liberal base would destroy the Obama Presidency. These are the kind polls that will give the Taliban/Terrorists heart, they will see this another Vietnam, that the USA will tire and leave Afghanistan. The US voter is not the Liberal base, if they see President Obama as another Jimmy Carter they will give Congress back to the Republicans in 2010 and Obama will have a heavy loss in 2012. That how important Afghanistan is to the Obama Presidency.

Obama and Afghanistan, CALL FOR MORE TROOPS AND TIME

The New York Times: Reports that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen has stated that Afghanistan will need more US troops and time. The NYT writes on the effect on Democrats and Republicans, " position seconded by a top Republican but challenged by a leading Democrat. " The Obama White House has one real war on it hands in Afghanistan and a political war with health care reform, on health reform the President will get Democratic votes in the Congress, the problem for the President is that the Democrats are scared silly by Afghanistan, they see it as another Vietnam, the Democrats are still in therapy over Vietnam. The War in Vietnam destroyed the Great Society of LBJ and forced him out of office in 1968. Thus when Obama comes to request for support to send tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan he will need Republican support. The question the Obama White Houses has to ask if they burn the Republicans on health care they Republicans can support Democrats who want out of Afghanistan. The Chicago group with Obama in the West Wing might be expert at local politics but they share a common failure for Democrats, they have no clue about Foreign Policy, they think they can burn the Republicans over health care and push it through the Senate with 51 votes but they will need the Republicans for Foreign Policy and Afghanistan. It would be ironic if Obama makes himself the next Jimmy Carter, as Carter also failed to understand Congress.

The New Forgotten War - Iraq

BBC News: Reports on the visit of US VP Biden to Iraq, while the VP was Baghdad there was terrorists strikes near the US Embassy. Iraq has become the new forgotten War in the Obama White House, the Bush 43 surge worked thus by the time President Obama took over in January of 2009, it was Afghanistan that become the hot topic in town, lets recall folks that the US as reported by icasualties.org has lost 4344 of its Armed Forces Personnel in Iraq, if you include the losses of its Allies such as the UK the total goes up to 4662. The US has withdrawn from the towns, and by next August next year the majority of US troops will be out of Iraq. The last forces of around thirty five to fifty thousand troops will leave in 2011. The next hurdle in Iraq will be the elections next year, it is important that they go off with out bloodshed or the mess of Afghanistan. The New York Times writes the following on the Biden visit and the elections next year, " intended to focus on political issues as Iraqi leaders position themselves ahead of national elections.......have increasingly colored almost every thing the government has done....." Thus all politics is local, for the Obama Administration it is essential that Iraq does not blow up like Afghanistan, if the bloodbath of the first three years after the invasion is repeated this would throw the Obama Foreign Policy off kilter. Also it is important for President Obama that the different ethnic groups take part and see Iraq as united country and do not try to split Iraq as was the original idea of then Senator Biden. If Iraq was to go up in flames like Afghanistan it would be down to Obama, Bush 43 with his surge calmed the troubles, if the US starts to lose troops again it will be down to the Obama White House. Thus the reason for the VP visit, Obama does not want to hear the call that the Democrats can add Iraq to the countries they have lost while they have been power, the loss of China in the late 40s really hurt the Democratic Party.

Afghanistan Front News

MOD: Has released the name of the soldier killed on the 13/9/00. The soldier was " Kingsman Jason Dunn-Bridgeman from 2nd Battalion The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment (2 LANCS) " Lets hope this month is more quite on the casualty front.

The Shadow of the Taliban

The Times: Reports that latest British Soldier to die in Afghanistan was in a district that was supposed to have been cleared of the Taliban, as the article notes so far the District of Babaji has been deadly to UK forces since the end of Operation Panther’s Claw, the UK has lost five soldiers with the death today. Thus the need for the UK to send more forces, the point of the new strategy by the US Military is to gain security for the local population, but if we cant secure our own forces how can can we gain security for the local population. The latest death is pure PR terms is not good for the UK, the Taliban from their twisted cowardice view of the world have had a success, and back home in the UK the Labour Government will come under more pressure to get out of Afghanistan. At the end of the day we need boots on the ground, we need keep and secure areas we take from the Taliban, it is pointless to gain ground if the West can not secure the security of the population and its own forces. It is about time that PM Gordon Brown accept that he cant not fight a war on the cheap, we are either in our out, and since it does not look like we are leaving soon, our troops and our reputation needs protection. The problem for PM Brown is that the UK economy is in the sewers, there might be green leaves in some aspects of the economy but people are still out of work, and the UK is in debt big time. Thus what ever government take over in 2010 after the General Election there will have to be cuts, but this time it cant be defence, we have a major commitment to Afghanistan, thus either Labour or Conservatives will have to find cuts in other departments, this will hurt either party. But at the end of the day to protect our troops and the honour of the UK we have to send more troops, keep them secure and give security to the people of Afghanistan.

Death in Afghanistan

MOD: Reports that another British soldier has died in Afghanistan, the soldier was from the " 2nd Battalion The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment, operating with The Light Dragoons Battle Group " Thus since 2001 the UK has lost 214 of its Armed Forces Personnel in Afghanistan, of that total, 183 have died due to combat operations, another 31 have died to illness, accidents or other incidents. On the whole September has seen a decline in the death toll for UK forces, so far only four deaths this month. Lets hope there are not more deaths, it seems that it is US forces that are taking the brunt of losses due to the Obama surge. It can be postulated that there will be more sad days for the families of Western Forces in Afghanistan.

A Deal in Afghanistan ?

Guardian: Reports on pressure from the West for President Karzai of Afghanistan and Dr Abdullah Abdullah to do a deal over the governance of Afghanistan. It can be argued that the Obama Administration needs a deal more than Karzai and Abdullah, the US this year has lost as reported by icasualties.org, 200 of its Armed Forces Personnel, and it only September folks. Thus if the political elite in Afghanistan can not come to together, the Obama Administration will have to decide what horse it wants to support. As noted in the Guardian article there can not be a new election due to weather conditions in Afghanistan are about to get worse, also whats to stop another fraudulent election. Thus the Obama White House might have to think outside the box, the West either cares about the election or it does not, is the mission to nation build Afghanistan or to get the terrorists, they are not the same thing folks. It can be argued that President Obama should allow President Karzai to have another term, but give him a warning, that Diem of South Vietnam didn't change, and his government was removed by a green light from Washington D.C. This is why Afghanistan is such a nightmare folks, no easy way to win but a lot of ways to lose.

Iran Style RIOTS in Afghanistan ?

The Sunday Times: Reports that Afghanistan could face Iran style riots over the fraudulent election. This is the last thing that the Obama Administration needs, it is already under fire from the liberal left who do not want to send more troops to Afghanistan, it has been reported by CNN that the Defence Secretary Robert Gates wants to send three thousand more troops out to Afghanistan to deal with the IEDs on the roads, this would be separate from the predicted need to send another forty five thousand troops out just to have a chance of winning in Afghanistan. It would be a PR nightmare if the opposition to President Karzai went on the streets, Karzai would be another Diem, the Obama Administration would have to decide either to support Karzai or get a new government. Either action would have an Imperial tone to it, as it would be the USA taking over the old British role of placing a friendly power on the throne of Afghanistan. One has to wonder does Obama get that Afghanistan will be his Afghanistan what ever he does, he seems obsessed by health care reform, what he is missing that when it comes to Afghanistan it not his base that will support him in Afghanistan, its Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats and Independents. The question President Obama has to ask himself, if he goes nuclear on the health care reform and pushes it through with just Democrats and burns Republicans, they can flush his Administration down the nearest singularity, inside a Black Hole when it comes to voting for more money for Afghanistan, Republicans can support Democrats who want to get out of Afghanistan. The American voter might take Obama's health care reform but they will throw him back Chicago if they think they have another Jimmy Carter in their hands. Thus does Obama get it, his best friends might not be his base if he wants to keep US presence in Afghanistan and win re-election in 2012, it might be Republicans. Lets recall when Bill Clinton lost health care reform in his first term he had to move to the centre as the Congress had gone to the Republicans. This move to the center lead to his re-election in 1996. If Obama does not move he will lose big in 210 Mid Term Congressional Elections and for re-election in 2012. Also riots on the streets would hurt UK support for the War, its already in the toilet, PM Gordon Brown can not afford to be seen supporting a Chicago type fix in Afghanistan.

Health Vote = NEW MARCH ?

The New York Times: Reports on a massive demonstration in Washington D.C against President Obama, the NYT writes the following, " A sea of protesters filled the west lawn of the Capitol and spilled onto the National Mall........... opposition to a health care overhaul............broader...........government. " Am impressed that the Liberal New York Times even reported mass demo against Obama. I guess it was to big to be called a bunch of crazies. The Liberal New York Times of course picked out those that are on the edge of the demo, of course missed Democratic scandals and of course Stalin. Lets have another mass demo when the House of Representatives vote on any Bill that is not the compromise Senate Bill that does not have the public option. On the whole support the compromise Senate Finance Bill.

Afghanistan Front News

MOD: Has released the name of the soldier killed on 9/9/09, the soldier was " Corporal John Harrison from The Parachute Regiment " Lets hope there are no more deaths this month in Afghanistan.

Lady Thatcher on ONE Germany - Cold War History

The Times: Article on the political stands of Lady Thatcher at the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The article notes that Lady Thatcher was not keen on a united Germany from the USSR records. It should be noted that these are copies of USSR records, to get a fair and balanced view it can be argued that historians needs the records from the archives of Downing Street and the Foreign Office. Read of the Day.

Obama=LBJ / Afghanistan = Vietnam Redux

The Hill: Reports that President Obama could face push back should he request more funding for Afghanistan. Lets recall that although health care reform is important, the USA has forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. It has been stated by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs that Afghanistan is not going well, also since the USA removed its troops from the cities of Iraq we have an increase in bombings. In many respects the situation faced by President Obama is worse that faced by LBJ in the late 60s. The latest US military review has stated that the USA needs a new strategy in Afghanistan, going from killing the Taliban/Terrorists to the protection of the people. In many respects this is not new, the Kennedy/Johnson policy of Strategic Hamlets in South Vietnam was meant to protect the people, it didn't work, it was a revision of a British counter terrorism policy of taking the people away from the terrorists, thus moving the people, all it did was make the people furious. Thus it can be postulated the new US policy will not make that mistake, thus the US will have to place troops in the small villages around Afghanistan. Thus that will mean a massive troops increase, that will cost, anything less and you might as well take the troops home, you will lose troops for nothing if you don't back them with more troops. Also in Iraq we have an election in the new year, also there will be around thirty to fifty thousand troops in theatre till 2011. The USA can not afford to leave Iraq in the hands of a nuclear armed Iran, simple reason it has oil. Thus Obama at the end of the day will have to challenge his Liberal base, any failure and he will be Jimmy Carter and he will lose re-election in 2012.

Does Al - Qaida Matter NOW ?

Guardian: Article on the present state of Islamic terrorism. The problem for President Obama and UK PM Brown it can be argued that in many respects the terrorism of 9/11 was defeated by the tough tactics of Bush 43, the USA military removed the supporters of Al - Qaida the Taliban from power in Afghanistan, the CIA lets be honest here used torture, it worked. Thus the USA manged over the years through overt and covert military force to break up Islamic threats. That's the perception, of course the terrorists hit back thus 7/7 and the plots to to down airplanes on the way to the USA. The Guardian article points out that the command and control of Al - Qaida due to the constant US military pressure has been broken, thus new attacks to use a term used these days, is a franchise, the same ideology but not with direct links back to Al - Qaida, or if links very hard to prove. Thus we come to today, the USA and the UK are in Afghanistan, who are fighting the Taliban, it can be argued that Al - Qaida as a presence is in Pakistan, thus we are fighting the Taliban, thus we are in a civil war within Afghanistan. If it was just a civil war that was the issue the West could leave Afghanistan to its bloody fate, but then there is Pakistan. The Taliban of Pakistan are a threat to the secular government of Pakistan, and Pakistan has the bomb. Thus is dark ironic way the War in Afghanistan has nothing to do with Afghanistan, its about Pakistan, if the West was to leave Afghanistan the Taliban of Afghanistan and Pakistan could attack Pakistan from bases within Afghanistan, thus the War in Afghanistan is not a positive war, its not about building up Afghanistan, but that is by product of Western presence it about making sure that the Taliban does not keep bases in Afghanistan as to attack Pakistan. Thus as is held by security services that Al - Qaida is in Pakistan, is it a threat, of course, its a terrorists cell structure, thus it only takes about half dozen men to change the world, as happened eight years ago today. That's the sad part of this War, it will never end, it will be a constant military and police struggle, that's the fate of the 21 Century that was born on 9/11. Read of the Day.

Obama, Health Care and Afghanistan

The New York Times: Reports how there could be delay in sending more troops out to Afghanistan as to keep President Obama's base on the reservation for the fright for health care reform. The NYT writes the following, " A delay on deciding whether to increase American troop levels would also have the political advantage of pushing down the road a split within (the) party " This does recall 1964 when LBJ running in the 1964 Presidential Election tried to keep Vietnam off the front pages, but events in Vietnam forced themselves on to the front pages. Thus can President Obama hope that Afghanistan does not become a major issue over the next few weeks, the Taliban/Terrorists are not enchanted by Obama as is the New York Times. At the end of the day President Obama has two choices, get out of Afghanistan or go in all the way, the middle cause of just keep going with the present policy will lead to a Taliban victory in the end. Thus lets look at the options, if Obama leaves Afghanistan to the Taliban, this places a nuclear armed Pakistan under the threat of the Taliban of Pakistan. Thus the option of cutting and running is not an option, it never was, thus Obama will have to send in more troops. The Democratic Party was enchanted by LBJ at the start, the Great Society all that money for their pet projects, then there was Vietnam and that call by those protesting the War, " How many Kids have you killed today LBJ. " Just replace LBJ with BHO. Thus it will not be health that defines the Obama Presidency, Great Society did not define the Presidency of LBJ it was Vietnam, thus the same with Afghanistan for Obama. The sad part is that Obama shows that he does not get that, if burns the Republicans on health and rams it through Congress with the nuclear option of only 51 votes in the Senate, the Republicans can flush him down the toilet when it comes Afghanistan, if they go with the majority of Democrats who want out of Afghanistan they can make Obama the next Jimmy Carter with aspects of Neville Chamberlain.