Archive for Russia

Hillary Clinton’s Foreign Policy

Posted in Foreign Policy, Politics, Presidential Election with tags , , , , , , , on November 3, 2016 by authorcarloscardoso

hillary-what-difference-reuters

Hillary Clinton keeps trying to scare the American people on how dangerous Donald Trump would be to America because he would lead us into a world war. The truth is that the Obama and Clinton foreign policy have put this country in the most danger we have been in since before the beginning of World War Two. Their policies and actions in Egypt, Libya, Iraq and especially Syria have brought us closer to a serious confrontation that threatens the entire world than we’ve been since the Cuban missile embargo.

Hillary Clinton said in the presidential debate that she would impose a no-fly zone in Syria. This is the most irresponsible action that America could possibly take now. Obama put America’s reputation on the line and talked tough about attacking Bashar Al-Assad and the Syrian government if they used chemical weapons, calling it a red line. They then backed down and reached out to Russia and opened the door to giving them influence in the Middle East which had been America’s unquestioned sphere of influence. Syria has remained a Russian ally since the cold war and was Russia’s only naval base in the Mediterranean Sea.

Fast forward to today and now Russia has committed not only airpower but ground troops as well to back their former ally. Turkey a NATO ally has already shot down a Russian fighter they claimed violated their airspace raising tensions to a higher level. Meanwhile American airpower is being used to fight ISIS and back the rebels fighting Assad’s regime while the Russians are bombing the rebels we are backing. Trump has said he would meet with Putin which is more of an example of a statesman who would enter into diplomacy than our former Secretary of State.

A no-fly zone over a country in defiance of the long standing government historically backed by Russia would be a provocation that we would not tolerate given a similar situation. What are the chances that at some point American and Russian jets would engage and a shooting war would begin? Putin has been modernizing his nuclear capability while we have not. He has been testing American and NATO defenses with nuclear bombers and buzzing our naval vessels in international waters with no response from this administration. While we have shown weakness, Putin has threatened nuclear war if provoked.

That is the type of poor decisions that Hillary Clinton makes. She touts her experience as Secretary of State as an advantage over Trump yet when pressed to name a single accomplishment in her tenure she is at a loss to name one. In fact her tenure and legacy are a disaster. When she ran against Obama in the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries she had a commercial with a phone ringing and the question was asked if there was an emergency at 3:00 AM who would you want to be on the other end of the line? Now looking back at her record I would say I wouldn’t want it to be either Obama or her.

When that actual call did come on September 11, 2012 from Benghazi, Libya neither bothered to take the call or even consider the consequences important. They sent an unarmed drone to watch as brave Americans risked their lives fighting against overwhelming odds for 13 hours waiting for help that never came. No one to this day has come up with a straight answer as to why nothing was done to help once the attack started or why the State Department ignored their calls for added security when everyone else had evacuated Benghazi.

Obama flew to a fundraiser in Las Vegas being held the next morning where his only comments were,” Yesterday we had a pretty rough day”. Hillary who was the Secretary of State when an American ambassador was killed for the first time in 30 years lied to the families and sent a surrogate in Susan Rice to make the rounds of the Sunday talk shows to lie to the American people. We know she lied because it has come to light that she emailed her daughter and told her it was a terrorist attack.

Yet the most compelling part of this story was her response during the congressional hearings. Her answer should tell you all you need to know about the woman who says she’s fighting for you. When asked about the attack she said, “at this point what difference does it make”. The difference it should make in the minds of American voters is here is a woman who didn’t care about those Americans who died heroically in Libya protecting other Americans waiting for help that never came. To her it made no difference that these people were killed by terrorists while she watched and did nothing. Why should we believe there would be a difference in her caring about us?

President Obama’s Syrian Quandary

Posted in Foreign Policy, Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 1, 2013 by authorcarloscardoso

The President has been hesitant to get involved in the Syrian civil war from the beginning. However during the heat of his re-election campaign in trying to sound strong on foreign policy he made an unnecessary blunder and declared that if the Syrian regime used chemical weapons it would be a “red line” that if crossed would draw United States military intervention. This statement along with his use of the same “red line” description for not allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons puts the credibility of the United States in question both with our friends and foes alike at a very dangerous time in the region. To do nothing makes us seem weak and to do something ineffectual or worse leading to unintended consequences such as starting a broader war in the region could be catastrophic.

The fact is that we have not intervened in the over two year civil war and to do so now would not be in our national security interests. Syria has been supported by the Soviet Union throughout the cold war and still is, as Russia has sent them arms to use in the fight against the insurgents. The facts are that our limited intervention as outlined by the White House will not change the strategic balance in the war. Assad’s forces have gained the upper hand after insurgent gains made by mostly Islamic militant fighters aligned and led by elements of Al Qaeda. This means that we would be facing a historically Russian ally with ties to Iran while supporting an Al Qaeda Islamist group, neither of which is in our interests.

The Syrian regime is financed by Iran and spreads arms to terrorist organizations in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories to Hezbollah and Hamas.  This has been true for many years and if we had been able to put together a coalition of moderate Syrian forces looking to bring liberty and arm them in the infancy of the insurgency then we may have been able to make a difference. We missed our opportunity and are left with no viable options outside of an all out invasion taking out the current regime, securing the weapons of mass destruction and trying to build a national consensus government in an area with no such history. The Middle East as it stands today is the haphazard partitioning of the Ottoman Empire after World War One which was the final defeat of the Muslim jihad that began in around 600 BC and led to the establishing of an Islamic Caliphate that spread from the Middle East to Africa and across most of Europe into Spain. What we are seeing now is the rise of Islamic power trying to once again conquer the lost lands and ultimately the whole world.

Our dilemma is if we do nothing we lose face in front of the whole world, emboldening our enemies and frightening our allies. However, given our current fiscal problems to launch a limited attack as outlined by the President with no reason to do so other than to save the President’s and the United States’ reputation is going to be a tough sell to the American people. The President knows there is nothing to be gained by his planned military action strategically and even more importantly politically here at home. His speech on Saturday seeking Congressional approval for a much more limited action than he began in Libya without seeking it then is nothing more than seeking political cover for his foreign policy failure. We should not be in this position where there is nothing to be gained and much could possibly be lost. It is another example of this President’s failed leadership.

The Congress will debate and vote on whether or not to authorize the limited use of force the President has planned. If they vote to not authorize the use of force the President said he still feels he has the authority to do so but the consequences will be his and his alone. If he fails to act America’s reputation will be irreparably harmed and the rise of radical Islam will be emboldened and Israel will be left feeling that they will have to strike at Iran alone before they can become a nuclear power. If they do authorize it and it turns out bad the President has political cover for the fallout if it leads to all out war in the Middle East.

 Unfortunately it will be up to the brave men and women of our Armed forces and the American taxpayers who are going to have to pay the consequences. The real national security issues would be if Syria was to fall and their weapons were to fall into the wrong hands, or Syria began smuggling chemical weapons and or advanced weaponry to Hamas and Hezbollah. The other is will Iran be allowed to become a nuclear power. Now with the specter of Iran on the horizon this situation grows exponentially in importance. None of this would have been necessary if it weren’t for the President’s political posturing and poor choice of words putting America’s reputation on the line when no national security interests were at stake

 

President Obama Caught Unguarded Speaking with President Medeved

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 29, 2012 by authorcarloscardoso

<a href=” p://revolutionof2010.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/president-obama-caught-unguarded-speaking-with-president-medeved-2/” title=”President Obama Caught Unguarded Speaking with President Medeved” target=”_blank”>Obama tells Russian PM “After Election I Have More Flexibilty

The president caught unguarded by ABC News this time again seemed to try and cover up an indiscreet moment where his intentions seem suspect. Interestingly enough the video begins with a commercial touting Obama’s” all of the above energy policy & how it has lessened our dependence on foreign oil  and runaway gas prices.”This at a time when gas prices are historically high, hurting all Americans. Missile defense has been the essence of our rise to prominence. It initially brought down the Soviet empire through the leadership and vision of President Reagan to the present. This President has already cancelled planned installation of missile defense sites protecting Europe and won nothing in return from the Russians. Notice that according to ABC’s written story much is left out. The reporter, Jake Tapper gives us important perspective.

The conversation begins with President Obama saying, ” On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.” President Medvedev again believing no one is listening, replies,” Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you.”

The video begins with President Obama saying, “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” President Medvedev finally concluded, “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

Note also the President’s posture this does not seem like a man dealing with the strength we expect in the United States. This while dealing with a Russia that is less free and does not support us or our positions in the world. Russia under Putin is no friend of the United States and this President continues to act like we are weak and seek international support against our national interests and security.

Then a senior administration official tells ABC News: “this is a political year in which the Russians just had an election, we’re about to have presidential and congressional elections – this is not the kind of year in which we’re going to resolve incredibly complicated issue like this. So there’s an advantage to pulling back and letting the technical experts work on this as the president has been saying.”

Watch the video and the way he speaks. If you need further perspective, I advise you to watch his dismissive comments as he personally responded to the situation. It seems that he speaks haltingly when one questions his actions,  he’s suddenly at a loss for words.

Tea Party Blamed For Debt Deal Debacle

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 6, 2011 by authorcarloscardoso

The article begins with a baseless and offensive attack against conservative Americans in its title, “Tea party has engaged in economic terrorism”. The truth is that the Obama administration and the super majority in both houses of congress gave the Democrats the ability for 2 years to raise the debt ceiling to whatever level they wanted to finance all their spending plans and failed to do so. The President offered no vision, plan or any sense of urgency on resolving the issue until the Treasury Department declared the country would default on its obligations to pay our debts unless the debt ceiling was raised by August 2, 2011. This statement was misleading and began to cause concerns in the markets. They should have assured the world that the US would not default on any loan payments. The federal government could have begun looking at non-essential government workers and beginning to implement a furlough program to extend the government’s ability to pay for all essential services.The federal government didn’t do what all local, county and state governments did when faced with that dilemma, cut government spending. No they proposed allowing them to spend more. They needed to find unnecessary bureaucracy and cut the size of the federal government. The Tea Party wasn’t the irresponsible group in this fiasco, no it was the Democrats who refused to consider significant spending cuts when they knew this path of spiraling debt is unsustainable especially in this weak economy. The author who is nationally syndicated could have debated her points without resorting to calling those who disagree with her, “economic terrorists and equating their actions with that of Al-Qaida. Then she went on to call them” ignoramuses” again degrading and slandering her opponents because she cannot win in an honest and open debate on the issues without resorting to name calling. The Tea party which is an ideal shared by many American citizens who understand that we must fix our economic situation if we are to regain our place as the leader of the free world.

This country is at a crossroads and the choice has never been clearer, do we want a government that believes that taxing, spending and borrowing, leading to unfathomable amounts of debt is the proper course for our nation to take? Debt that our generation will not be able to pay to leave to our children and grandchildren to pay is unconscionable. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Then I say the earth belongs to each of these generations during it’s course, fully, and in their own right. The 2d. generation receives it clear of the debts and incumbrances of the 1st., the 3d. of the 2d. and so on.”Or do we want a limited government that can live within its means. The Wall Street crash and downgrading of our nation’s credit rating prove the debt must be addressed now. How sad is it for our country to have to listen to Vladimir Putin of Russia call the United States a parasite on the world because we can’t live within our means. China has said the good old days of borrowing are over.

The stock market has been plummeting since the debt ceiling debate showed that this administration had no intention of significantly cutting spending any more than they had to. They also showed their hypocrisy when they continued to talk about revenues, meaning tax hikes after they agreed to the idea that the economy was too weak in the lame duck session of congress to raise taxes and they agreed to extending the Bush tax cuts until 2012. This President has the ignominious honor of being the first President to lose the country’s triple A credit rating and having more people receiving government assistance than ever before in history. All while unemployment remains above what he said it would in spite of the stimulus package that needed to be passed immediately to avert a possible depression. Now with our credit in question, our economy in shambles, unemployment and foreclosures up and the housing market severely weak, here come rising interest rates and further devaluation of the dollar to further weaken our economy. The President needs to take responsibility for the economy and his role over the last two years through the effects of his policies. He also needs to use his influence to end the toxic atmosphere in politics by calling for an end to the bashing of his opponents and toning down this incendiary rhetoric.