Iran and the Neo Cons

An interesting article in the UK Guardian by Francis Fukuyama on his view that Neo Cons have learnt nothing from the War in Iraq, as they want to take strong action against Iran. Fukuyama argues the following:

• Weak states are further under threat due to Modern technology, Terrorist groups can move across borders and thus the threat from al-Qaida in these weak states.
• The Terrorist hides in the Crowd, so a massive Army is not much help, need to get local people to support moderates.
• The use of Force before an attack has failed in Iraq, and thus placed the USA in a weak place in the international community. If Iran goes Nuclear less chance of American Action.
• The Every day failure in Iraq and the lack of central control.

The above arguments are interesting but we live in post 9/11 world, thus the above views can be argued with the following views:

1. The need for Democracy is failed states, a great economic development by the West, the development of a civic structure that at its foundation can create an economic middle class that feeds down to different groups within society, thus more action by the USA, UK in political, economic and military field.
2. We need a large force but also local good relationships within the community, Large and Target military order to counter Large and small threats.
3. IF all else fails might be the time to act on Iran, If news reports are true, the President has lost support of the Religious leaders in Iran, a hard air raid on nuclear development with the threat of more action might make the President fall. Politics is about doing the right thing at the right time but when you want to act on a policy matter.
4. The Surge is the last chance, if this fails all bets are off, always have a plan b, plan b could be IRAN.

Fukuyama writes the following, ' None of these considerations, nor the debacle in Iraq, has prevented certain neoconservatives from advocating military action against Iran. Some insist that Iran poses an even greater threat than Iraq, avoiding the fact that their zealous advocacy of the Iraq invasion is what has destroyed America's credibility and undercut its ability to take strong measures against Iran. ' In war plans go wrong, but if you falter the other side wins, so IF the UN fails and International politics can not find a way out of the problem the West will have to take action, or else Israel will take action, that would cause more problems in the Middle East. Sometimes you have to hang tough and grit your teeth and take action that the Guardian will never support but is still the right action, weakness is never respected, been and acting tough gets you respect in International Politics. If news reports are true expect to hear a lot more about Iran.

Iran

Since the revolution in Iran in 1979, Iran lets be very blunt has been a pain in backside and its getting worse, a nuclear armed Iran is something Israel and the USA can and will not let happen. Here are some interesting articles on the Subject:

Bush in Warning to Iran, The President stated he would protect the Iraq and American Troops there from the threat of Iran. Iran of late gets a lot of attention from the Bush White House, with his polls in the tank, the President could argue that he has nothing to lose and Iran has to be stopped from going nuclear. A hard quick strike on their nuclear development would save Israel from taking action. The Democrats would keep quiet, Israel security is one thing even liberal Democrats cant be seen to be placing in threat.

Europe Slow Again , the slow pace of European reaction to the demand from the USA to cut economic ties with Iran shows how slow Europe reacts to a threat, so slow one has to ask if it has learnt anything from the 1930s period. The NYT states the following, " European officials argue that beyond the political and business interests in Europe are legal problems, because European governments lack the tools used by the Treasury Department under various American statutes to freeze assets or block transactions based on secret intelligence information. " The slow reaction could lead to military action, well will Europe learn.

New Hampshire

If and this is a capital IF, Clinton lost in Iowa it would come down to New Hampshire, this would be make or break time, here is a Poll from the cbs4boston.com

On the Democratic Side:

Clinton 40 %

Obama 25 %

Edwards 23 %

If Edwards could win Iowa and Obama come in second, Hillary would have a tough fight in New Hampshire. As said it is a very very Big IF.

On the Republican Side:

Giuliani 33 %

McCain 32 %

Romney 21 %

The Republican Race for political geeks might just be the better race to cover, the points are so close, more of a horse race.

2008 Election Polls

The Latest Presidential Polls, Quinnipiac University Poll: Ohio

Senator Hillary Clinton leads her Democratic rivals, here are the figures: Democratic Voters:

Clinton 38 %
Obama 13 %
Edwards 11 %
Gore 6 %

It should be noted we are year out, as Harold Wilson once said and it is always true of Politics, A WEEK IS A LONG TIME IN POLITICS.

On the Republican side we have the following Results:

Giuliani 30 %
McCain 22 %
Gingrich 11 %
Romney 4 %

Views has this feeling that the fight could really be between Romney who try and appeal to the Republican base and McCain who needs to work on the base for them to trust him. Giuliani might a heroic figure after 9/11 might just have to much personal baggage and his politics could be to much in the centre for the Republican base.

The General Election Match Up: Views found these polls interesting, even with Iraq, Hillary Clinton leads all her Republican opponents but not by much. Here are the Figures:

Clinton 46% - McCain 42%
46% - Giuliani 43%
52 - Romney 31% ( Romney at early stages here )

If Clinton cant get over 50% with McCain or Giuliani she cant win the White House, and she is way behind the field in Iowa, Edwards seem to have moved there since 2004, Senator Hillary Clinton is not Bill Clinton, if she cant win Iowa she might be finished before we get to NH.

On the Republican side the only winning combination is as follows:

McCain 41 % - 38 % Obama. Views sees Obama as another John Edwards from 2004, he needs a few more years in the Senate.

Iraq and the Senate

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee had its sound bite in opposing the War, but all fury and no teeth, they might be right but what if they are wrong. The Vote was passed by 12 - 9.

CNN on the Senate Foreign Relations Commitee vote and implications for the future. In essence the road ahead will be a real battle between politics and military reality.

The Speech and the Press

An Interesting and fun article by the Washington Post on the Speech, and more important fair, not something you find in the elite Media. The different views from the Republicans and Democrats is best described by the article at the end, " Cheney and Pelosi stood side by side, looking forward, not knowing quite what to say. " It was fun watching the Vice President and the Speaker standing when they agreed with something and not, staying put in their Seat when the other got up.

As you would expect of the New York Times, it was Iraq and Iraq, NYT managed to say something nice , " For a man who finds himself struggling to maintain public and political support, Mr. Bush delivered the speech in a confident tone, with easy and relaxed smiles. " But it but the boot in at the end, " But the Democrats have been in control only a few weeks, and polls indicate that for now the public is more likely to side with them in a fight. And it is not clear that Mr. BushÂ’s new proposals would do anything to reverse the political balance of power. " In other words the President will fail and the Democrats have the whip hand.

In Newsweek, the President former Speech writer saw the speech as a plus for Bush and a negative for the Democrats, as if he would say anything else.

The Boston Globe states the following on the Speech, " On domestic policy, the president's words were conciliatory. But he is still going it alone in Iraq, losing even many in his own party. " As we are talking of the state that has Ted Kennedy and John F. Kerry as their Senators no great news here.

The Elite Media was never going to give Bush a fair hearing, but on the whole the Speech was good, the President is no Ronald Reagan, but then few Presidents are, it will be interesting to see how the great public of the USA react to the Speech.

Quick Review of State of Union Speech

The Speech in the first half was a basket list of good ideas on the domestic front, this might play well with the American People, Bill Clinton pulled a similar trick when he was in trouble and it worked, we shall se what the elite Media think over the next few hours and days. On the International Front, the President Stood Tall, the Gipper would be proud of him, we shall see if it works.

As mentioned the speech should be seen within the context of speech of previous Presidents in their Seventh year, links down below to Reagan, Clinton and to todays Speech by President George W. Bush.

The State of the Union 2007

The State of the Union 1998 and 1999 ( The Period covered by Monica Lewinsky Scandal )

The State of the Union 1987

The State of the Union 2007

Courtesy of the White House

The President's Address to Congress in 2006.

The State of the Union this year can be bracketed in those given by Richard Nixon during Watergate, Ronald Reagan after Iran - Contra Affair story broke and Bill Clinton after his personal Scandal broke. This post will look at what the American Media is saying about the Address tonight:

Press Briefing on the State of the Union Speech - White House

2007

State of the Union Policy Initiatives - White House

Interesting in the Speech the President will state the following on the War on Terror and Iraq:

• War On Terror/Iraq: The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict – it is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq, and the President believes his new Iraq plan is the best way to succeed. Tonight, the President will propose to establish a special advisory council on the War on Terror made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties.
  
  
  Strengthening Our Military: Tonight, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to increase the overall strength of our active Army and the Marine Corps by 92,000 Soldiers and Marines in the next five years.

The President is trying an interesting ploy, after the Surge make the Democrats part owners of the plan they oppose to a man or woman.

Aspects of the State of the Union Speech. Real Clear Politics

The Media and the State of the Union Speech.

Time on the Speech: " Bush won't spend much time tonight talking about surging troops in Iraq or the Global War on Terror. Instead, he'll put forward what for him will be progressive and bold policy proposals on health care, the environment and immigration reform. " Time does not think this work, a great breaking news story there, after all the Media Elite dont like Bush.

CNN on the Speech: Is Bush already a lame duck? have a wild guess which side CNN is on, they had Carter on Sunday giving advice on Foreign Policy, give me a break. The worst President since Hoover.

IBD on a State of the Union Speech in 7th Year of A Presidency. If you go to one article go and read this, fun and to the point.

Off Subject?: Dating London Women!

In the age group between 29 -45, Views has found that London WOMEN are timid, no one is perfect, but in that age group they seem to need you to tick every box, what happened to being nice, considerate, Happy, a gentleman, always smiling and not a Player.

Hillary Clinton

Well folks the best kept secret in Washington D.C is out, Senator Hillary Clinton is running for President, what would surprise you more, Jesus Christ coming of the cross and saying " I am the Son of God " or Hillary Clinton running for President.

The Surge V Political Reality

The President faces a problem, an understatement to say the least, the Republicans in the House and Senate are worried they will be next to lose their Seats in the 2008 elections, thus the lack of support for the policy of surge, the Democrats on the other hand have a similar problem, those in the Senate that want to run for President, need the support of the base, the base is a Liberal Left body, and they want high taxes, out of Iraq and hug a tree for good measure. Thus the move by Hillary Clinton to the left, she does not want to be outflanked on the left by Edwards, Obama or Gore if should enter the race, this is a massive political mistake, in pure politics, its almost like throwing in the towel before the race has started. Its easy to move from the right to centre, Senator John McCain has supported the War, thus the base on the whole will support him, in the general election he can move to the Centre, while Hillary will try to move from the left to the centre, this will not work, what do her political operators think will happen when in their eyes the right wing secret lobby start to create an image, of a cold manipulative politician without the charm of her husband, will people buy the image that has worked in New York. I am susprised a great political operator like Bill Clinton has allowed her to be moved by the fear of Obama and Edwards, one has to ask in his hearts of hearts does he want her to win. Obama is new Edwards has been out of sight in Iowa, thus leading in some polls. Hillary Clinton is not new, people already have formed negative views of her, it might not be fair but that is the reality.

Thus we come to the 2008, it seems half of the Senate is running, Hillary Clinton is the front runner for the Democrats, but there as doubts if she can win, thus Obama, but can callow youth win over the political skills of Bill Clinton, here is the point it is not Bill running it is Hillary, it seems both Hillary and Bill will have to decided how much a role Bill plays in the election of 2008. As mentioned before, Hillary Clinton is not the most charismatic of speech givers, Bill is not bad but not that great on the whole, no Gipper but very few politicians are these days. It could be interesting to have a Edwards - Obama ticket in 2008, that might just scuttle a Hillary Clinton come back to the White House.

The Democratic Contest for President

Click Picture for Video
Courtesy of the Senator Barack Obama Presidential Exploratory Committee.

Senator Barack Obama is looking at running for President, the Senator has set up a Presidential Exploratory Committee. A New Rock Star, ala Bill Clinton or another John Edwards, who by the way is also running. And is leading both Obama and Senator Clinton in some Polls.

Senator Obama's Statement: Text

Watch Video of News

The Trial of Tony Blair

The Trial of Tony Blair, More 4 at 10pm UK Time.

Odd title, as the film was about the events leading up to such a Trial, as for the film a Satire it was funny in parts, but in the end lacked the reality of good comedy, Tony Blair for all his faults would not get himself in that position, but if your on the left wing, you will have found it to the point but it is not Yes Minister or Yes Prime Minister, that show has more truth about politics than the Trial ever will or had when in Production.

Tony Blair for all his faults is a bit part character in the Iraq War. The Production new that they could not go after President George W. Bush, no reality in such a show and they could not sell in the United States, easy target poor Tony Blair.

The President's Speech on Iraq as seen by the Political and Media Elite has gone down like a fox on a farm would be a fair description...

The Speech and the Media

Just a quick review of the Speech by the Media Elite:

Washington Post, interesting and fair, a good read.

The New York Times, as you would expect, lot of hot air but no real answers that can be used to solve the problem.

The Times, UK paper of Record. The Paper states the following, ' Mr Bush’s domestic foes, notably Nancy Pelosi, the new Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives (who has a minimal record in foreign policy) and the increasingly surreal Edward Kennedy, would simply abandon Iraq and be done with it. '


Views would read the Post and the London Times, or the surreal, and what a good term the New York Times if you want flawed thinking.

The Speech and the Verdict

Courtesy of the White House

11/1/07

Views has supported the War since the start, sometimes he thinks he, President George W. Bush and Tony Blair are the only ones left that support the War. Views is a hawk, a tough SOB in many respects, a neo - Conservative and proud of it, a Reagan/ Thatcher supporter to his last breath, so what is his verdict. This is it, one last try, this has to work for the sake of the West and Iraq, if this fails then we have to use an old British ploy, create three different ethnic countries out of Iraq and let them kill each other as long as they are not killing us. This is not an option Views wants, the creation of India and Pakistan and the deaths it caused still makes Views wish we had found another way. So here is the nuts and bolts of the Speech:

1. 20,000 more troops in to Iraq.
2. 16,000 troops in Baghdad.
3. 4,000 troops in to a Iraqi Province to deal with the Terrorists, their heartland.
4. More Iraqi troops supported by the above troops and the gloves come off.
5. The Iraqi government has to understand the UK and the USA will not stay forever. By November they will be in charge of all Iraqi areas.
6. Keep the Borders secure, stop Iran and Syria sending in aid to cause problems.
7. Economic Development, build while developing security.

One last push, one last chance, lets hope this works, Views is fast coming to end of his tether, we either win or we get out, it is that simple.

The Speech and the Media Elite

CNN reports that the President will state that the USA will not stay forever in Iraq.

Speech, Parts released by the White House, via CNN ( Adobe Reader Required ) One last throw of the dice, and the results could be with us for years.

Slate on the lack of action by the Democrats when it comes to Iraq. In essence since Vietnam they have gone so left they cant afford to be seen in the same company as Ted Kennedy, well not those those that want to run for President, and as of NOW that is half the Democratic Senate at the moment

The Washington Post on the Surge and the Costs at home and in Iraq. Very intersting, the article looks at what needs to be done in Iraq and the political backing needed at home. If you only read one link, read this link.

Speech, Aspects of the Speech on RCP

New York Times on the Speech. The Tone of the article " But the plan described by White House officials today, and by other administration officials in recent days, may fall short of what many experts inside and outside the government believe may be necessary. " If you read by Blog you now my views of NYT.

The White House
An interesting Review of Iraq by the National Security Council.

The New Policy for Iraq

The White House has released the outline for the President's Speech Tonight: Six Aspects of Policy:


1. Let the Iraqis lead;
2. Help Iraqis protect the population;
3. Isolate extremists;
4. Create space for political progress;
5. Diversify political and economic efforts; and
6. Situate the strategy in a regional approach.

On a quick read, its aspect 6 that shows how much more influence the State Department has under Condi, more of a push for regional talks, but with who is the question?

The Speech Preview

Well folks the President must come up with a corker of a Speech tomorrow, Iraq will define his two years left in the White House. On reading the American Press there seems almost an aghast that he will risk more troops and more money on a War most of the Foreign Policy elite thought was a mistake in the first place and have seen their concerns develop in to reality. Those that have supported the War and still want the USA and UK to win in Iraq are fast becoming a minority in both the United States and the UK. But failure is not an option, as stated many times before, Iraq is not Vietnam, a failure in Iraq and the region would have after effects for not just years but could last the Century. The Political and Media Elite hate Bush 43 so much that it blinds them to the real world. They think if you are nice to those that want to harm you all the world will thank you, Richard Nixon had his flaws but he was tough in the Foreign Policy field, Reagan has a simple view when it came the Soviet Union, " We Win, they lose " and he was right, the Political and Media elite if they had their way would have allowed the Berlin Wall to still stand, Freedom comes with a cost. Thus we come to today, the Bush White House has to make sure that they win in Iraq, thus Views argues that the President should send at least twenty thousand men to Iraq, more if possible, secure the Capital, break up the armed groups, secure the border, develop the economic structure of Iraq, the same policy that was followed after WW2. On the covert side, get the CIA and Special Military in to Iran and cause havoc, make Iran have the same fate as Iraq, hitting military, research establishments. If Iran gives peace to Iraq they can have peace, if they want HAVOC to let lose the dogs of war, hit their nuclear establishments before Israel gets in to the act, this is the turning point, the West either wins or loses there is no middle ground, that was lost on 9/11.

Iraq versus Vietnam

Views is waiting for the President to give his speech on 10 January from the Oval Office, comment all about the place, is a surge short or long term policy and will the Congress causes problems for the President, till then Views has been reading some interesting articles on Iraq.

The UK Guardian. In essence want the Congress to act on Iraq, same views as the New York Times.

RCP on the relationship between the Parties as the year goes ahead in the context of Iraq.

The speech is the turning point, it will be like 1968 and the speech by LBJ when he removed himself from the race in the drive for peace. The plan failed and Vietnam and the Democrats lost in the election of 1968. Bush 43, if he wins in Iraq, the the Republicans should win in 2008, if not then the Democrats will take the White House and keep Congress. The stakes and rewards are high.

New York Times and The Real World

The New York Times has lost the plot, the West is at WAR, WAR, 9/11. 7/7. This is not Watergate or Vietnam, this is worse, 9/11, three thousand dead, over 50 killed in the UK, last time we suffered something like that was in WW2. NYT get in to real World, our world of the 9 to 5 guy, security first, your liberal agenda never.

The Letter

The Democrats have not wasted their time, they have sent a letter to President Bush that states the the USA should start a phased withdrawal from Iraq and not place more troops in to combat operations. Are we seeing another re - play of Vietnam, but in many respects this time the costs are much higher, USA and the UK can not afford to lose Iraq like Vietnam, the Viet Cong did not come to attack the West, the terrorist groups in Iraq if they win could use Iraq as a base of operations to attack the West, e.g USA and UK. The President has to stand tough, weakness is never appreciated while courage of your ideas is always applauded.

The Democrats ride in to town!

Courtesy of the White House
Archive File: 9/11/06

Nancy Pelosi has became Speaker, it will be interesting to see the First Hundred Hours, will she work with the President or is this pay back time.

Here are some of the articles from the American Media on the Event:

Drudge Report

The Washington Post

Newsweek

New York Times

Also the Office of the Speaker, As of this time Web Page still under construction.

The Majority Leader, Web Page Up and Running, the Majority Leader is on the ball.

Tax and a DEMOCRAT

Interesting Article by a real Democrat on what the Democrats really want, Mario Cuomo, former Governor of New York. OR in political land, the Hamlet on the Hudson.

The Mother of Political Battles?

Its 2007 folks and the Democrats are in charge, the President wants his tax cuts to stay the same the Democrats on the whole if forced to tell the truth would want to raise the taxes of working Americans. If the Democrats start to play to the crowd then the President has no choice but to use his Veto on most Bills that come from the Democrats. The President should draw a line in the sand over a simple matter, it does not matter what, no concessions by the Democrats then they get no Bills to play to their supporters. 2008 is only two years away, the President should make every Democrat contender worry what his mad Democrats in Congress will do next. Make the candidates work for the administration. If nominees cant buck their party supporters make them pay, the President has the biggest STAGE, if they don't support his policy in Iraq, show them up to be nothing better than weak leaders. This is not a time for another Jimmy Carter.