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.

Does Iran have the BOMB ?

The Times: Reports that the USA has stated that Iran could have the components to create a its first nuclear bomb. As stated in previous posts on this subject, Iran wants the bomb, it will never give it up and it could be down to Israel to hit the nuclear bases of Iran. The Government in Tehran is playing its usual game of cat and mouse, it wants tedious talks with the West and then it wants to go nuclear. There is a simple reason for this theory, look how President Obama sent Bill Clinton to North Korea to have face to face talks with the Stalinist Government as a means to get two reporters out of jail. It has been quite noticeable that Iran and the USA have been quite about the tourists that walked over the border between Iran and Iraq and are under arrest by Iran, the Obama Administration, the US press also Iran have been very quite as to the tourists fate, lets guess are they holding secret talks. One can see Bill Clinton being sent to Tehran, Iran to have talks about getting the tourists out and sidebar talks about Iran's nuclear ambitions.

NYT and Obama's Health Reform

The New York Times: Has some very good advice for President Obama when it comes to his health care reform package, the NYT writes the following, " Mr. Obama will need to do more than orate. He needs to twist arms among timid Democrats in Congress to get a strong bill..." Of course the Liberal New York Times wants President Obama to push his health reform package through just with Democratic votes, the advice to the West Wing is good but the President should twist arms to get the compromise Senate Bill passed that does not have a public option. The President needs to twist the arms of Liberal Democrats, he has to make sure that they get that they cant vote no on a major policy of the first African - American Democratic President. In the speech President Obama didn't have the nerve to dump the public option even after being told that it had no chance in the US Senate, thus Obama will have to show the political skills of LBJ and Reagan to move his base on a road that they don't approve, lets see if he has those political skills.

Review of the Obama Health Reform Speech

I have given myself time to think about the speech, as a matter of performance I think its B- on the whole. It had all the Obama rhetorical skills but it was flawed on its main substance, the President didn't have the courage to dump the public option in public, one can presume that he wants to do a deal outside the glare of the voter. On aspect that was pointed out on Fox News is the cost, Obama wants to give the appearance that it will not cost, that rubbish, how ever bad the government runs its health programmes, it does not cost nine hundred billion. Thus lets see if this weakness can be used by Republicans to hurt the Obama push for Health Reform. As to the actual ideas in the speech they are good but once conned you read the details. The one thing you can guarantee about health costs is that they go up, that the problem with the NHS in the UK. Either Obama actually believes his own spin or he is being economic with the truth. One can postulate that the elite media will sing the praise of the speech, its the details folks, click to read full text of speech.