Liberal Left and Terror

NYT: In between the lines it can be seen that the NYT is not happy that the Congress has passed a bill that will help the government when it comes to national security.

Democratic Credit on National Security

On the whole it can be argued that the Democratic Party has a hill to climb when in comes to the issue of National Security. But this time the Congress has passed a Bill that will help the US Government go after Terrorists over the water. The Bill allows the US Government to listen to communication that goes through the USA but connects people in different countries.

Obama's Path?

A recent Foreign Policy Speech ( pdf required ) by Senator Obama has raised a few eyebrows in the Beltway on the one hand hawkish and dovish, does reality of the world effect Presidential politics.

Roll Call : Obama has called for troops to be sent in to Pakistan to chase after Terrorists who struck on the USA on 9/11 on the other hand he wants to talk to to Iran and others. The article states the following, " Obama clearly means to be the torchbearer for a new generation. But America also needs a president with the experience to avoid a Bay of Pigs, a Vietnam or an Iraq War. " In the article the actions of past Presidents are looked at how they had negative and positive effects. Thus JFK and his polices to the USSR and how this effected Cuba, Reagan and his tough policy towards the USSR. I think the Beltway Press are a missing a basic point, Obama has to win the Democratic Nomination, these early stages are about the base, moving to the Centre comes later in the process. If Obama can win the Nomination he is clever enough to move to the centre early next year.

Chicago Sun - Times: On his speech Obama is getting attacked by his Democratic Opponents and from the White House. On the Democratic Side for being hawkish, troops in to Pakistan and from the White House for not being a Liberal, the respect for International Law and the Sovereignty of Pakistan. Obama might be on the right track, attacked from both sides about the speech.

New York Post: The article points out that Obama is not stating a new plan, the article states the following, " First, there was little new in Obama's proposition for fighting al Qaeda. In fact, he might be alarmed to learn that he's basically taken a long-standing page from the Bush administration's playbook in the War on Terror. " Also an attack without the green light from the government of Pakistan could cause major problems even lead to its fall.

Pakistan is a Nuclear Power, what if terrorists get hold of them, this would bring in India, also a nuclear power. The article states that all opitions should be on the table but we need the government of Pakistan to work with the West. Politics is 24/7 and different candidates have different ideas that is the point of politics, but politicians from both USA parties have to make sure that their plans and their rheotric does not have a long term negative effect on the American Foreign Policy. Obama who could became the next President could find himself boxed in by his own words. What if a few years down the line he is President and he is told that UBL in found and he needs to send in the troops, what if he cant, his words could be used to attack him when he would face re - election in 2012.

Washington Post : The article looks the political conflict between Obama and Clinton. The past versus the Future.

More Deaths in Afghanistan

Since the last blog two more soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan. UK Deaths now stand at 68.

Media and the Special Relationship

A look at how the Media has covered the meeting between Bush and Brown:

Guardian: A interesting article that points out that it is not the spin of the Brown that counts but what the UK does, VIEWS still states that the UK will not cut and run from Iraq. Brown wants to win a election and Iraq going to hell in a hand basket would not help his chances. Think mass murder every day on TV from Iraq and the very same reports asking what the UK is going to do to get out of Iraq asking how we can get back in to to save the people of Iraq.

Telegraph: As the article points out, different time, a different British PM and therefore a different Special Relationship,

Iraq Round Up

Here are some interesting articles on Iraq:

Washington Post: A first, a Democrats who has some common sense when it comes to Iraq. The Article reports that the Majority Whip in the House wants the Democrats to hold their fire when it comes to Iraq. There is concern that the up coming report in September could cause major problems for the Democrats if the report is positive.

The New York Times: Has the NYT smelled the coffee and decided to cover itself in case Iraq works. A article that suggests that the USA might win in Iraq. Yes it is in the NYT and it is real.

The Special Relationship

Courtesy of the White House: PM Gordon Brown and President George Bush

30/7/07



I wonder did President George W. Bush miss his old friend Tony Blair over the weekend. The Special Relationship has a new start. Brown has seen how getting to close to President Bush hurt the political prospects for Tony Blair, one of the reasons for his early retirement as PM and of course Iraq. On the other hand the Special Relationship between the USA and UK has always had its ups and downs, Roosevelt/ Churchill. Kennedy/MacMillan, Reagan/Thatcher, Bush/Blair worked. On the other hand, Johnson/ Wilson and Clinton/ Major was on the down side, Wilson would not get in to Vietnam, wise move, and Major was a Conservative while Clinton was a Democrat, different views of politics.

It can be argued that Brown and Bush have to much to lose to go different paths, we are in two theatres of War together, Iraq and Afghanistan. It does not matter how they get on in the personal relationship side, what counts is their national interest that will decided Foreign Policy. The UK might want to get out of Iraq but it can not afford to push the Americans away as we might need them as they are the only super power. Europe has the bluster of France but no spine, real trouble and they fold, in the end there is only the USA and the UK that matter, because when the old tea bags hit the fan its the UK and the USA that has to clean up the mess.