N. Korea agreed to nuclear disarmament today after reaching a resolution during six party talks. The resolution calls for N. Korea to shut down it's main nuclear reactor and dismantle it's atomic weapons program within four months in exchange for aid, specifically 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil. If N. Korea continues with it's dis-armament then the US will continue to provide aid.
Former US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton stated, “It sends exactly the wrong signal to would-be proliferators around the world: 'If we hold out long enough, wear down the State Department negotiators, eventually you get rewarded,' in this case with massive shipments of heavy fuel oil for doing only partially what needs to be done."
Although I appreciate the worthy goal of disarming N. Korea and discontinuing their nuclear proliferation, I am hesitant to believe that this resolution is anything but a stall tactic perpetrated by the Communist government. I believe that Pyongyang will bid by the resolution until initial shipments of aid come in, then he will force inspectors out of the country or not cooperate with inspectors who will have the monumental task of trying to find all of his weapons depots. This is a re-creation of the Iraq conflict between 1992 and 2002.
In addition, why are we providing fuel aid to N. Korea when the United State's own fuel dilemma is in question? Currently, President Bush has ordered our oil reserves to be stockpiled in fear of a possible showdown with Iran. If we are stockpiling oil and do not have a steady supply from a country that is not torn with conflict then why are we promising that kind of aid to N. Korea.
Finally, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, stated that N. Korea could still face sanctions from the international community including Russia. Isn't it funny that just two days ago, Russian President Putin berated the United States for getting too involved in international affairs, specifically referring to Iranian nuclear development, but yet here he is involved in talks with N. Korean in regards to their nuclear development? Could it be because Russia has provided military support to Iran?
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Monday, February 12, 2007
Big Bad Billary
Yesterday at a fund raising function, Hillary Clinton claimed that she was the one person that Republicans most fear. She stated that Gingrich, Delay and Rove all have made statements in private claiming that they were afraid of Clinton becoming president.
Hillary stated, "I'm the one person they are most afraid of. Bill and I have beaten them before and we will again". This was the first time Clinton has slipped and touted previous Presidential winnings. If I were Hillary I would not be proud of what her husband did in office. Not only did he fail to defend the United States by letting Osama Bin Laden free, he also brought disgrace upon the White House and disrespect to his wife when he took advantage of his power by having sex with an intern.
I guarantee that if anyone is afraid of Hillary sitting in the Oval office it is for reasons far distant from her doing a good job running the country. I am afraid that she will spend more time allocating funds for liberal arts education then defending the country as the enemies seep across our boarders.
Hillary stated, "I'm the one person they are most afraid of. Bill and I have beaten them before and we will again". This was the first time Clinton has slipped and touted previous Presidential winnings. If I were Hillary I would not be proud of what her husband did in office. Not only did he fail to defend the United States by letting Osama Bin Laden free, he also brought disgrace upon the White House and disrespect to his wife when he took advantage of his power by having sex with an intern.
I guarantee that if anyone is afraid of Hillary sitting in the Oval office it is for reasons far distant from her doing a good job running the country. I am afraid that she will spend more time allocating funds for liberal arts education then defending the country as the enemies seep across our boarders.
Target Tehran
President Bush ordered a second carrier battle group into the Gulf headed by its flagship the USS Stennis. Opponents are claiming this is a prelude to war and that President Bush is planning a strike against Iran in the near future. President Bush stated that actions were only taken to force Iran into considering different diplomatic solutions to the problem. Yesterday, Ahmadineijad, stated that Iran will not cease enriching uranium but that it was willing to talk.
Some supporters of action against Iran believe that instead of a direct military action we should support the Mujahideen-e Khalq to rise up and fight against the seated government. However, the MEK is branded as a terrorist organization and supporting them would pose a conflict of interest within the Bush administration.
Increased tensions with Iran have developed over the past several weeks as US military has evidence linking Iran with terrorist operations in Iraq. Military officials state that Iranian serial numbers and markings have been found on numerous ordinance that has been launched against coalition soldiers. This provides a direct and unequivocal link that Iran is suppling weapons and support for the insurgent resistance in Iraq.
Opponents claim that the US is not willing to negotiate with Iran to quell the issue of nuclear development. However, the US government has tried repeatedly to negotiate with Tehran and has not received any cooperation. The time for negotiation is fast coming to an end and the time for a military response is quickly approaching.
In 2002, the majority of liberal congressmen and women supported military action in Iraq based on the belief that their was evidence of WMDs and genocidal war crimes committed by Hussein. We now have evidence starting to surface the Tehran is directly supporting the insurgency in Iraq. If we can determine that Iran is behind the Iraq insurgency and the loss of thousands of coalition lives, we are bound to deal with them swiftly and violently.
Some supporters of action against Iran believe that instead of a direct military action we should support the Mujahideen-e Khalq to rise up and fight against the seated government. However, the MEK is branded as a terrorist organization and supporting them would pose a conflict of interest within the Bush administration.
Increased tensions with Iran have developed over the past several weeks as US military has evidence linking Iran with terrorist operations in Iraq. Military officials state that Iranian serial numbers and markings have been found on numerous ordinance that has been launched against coalition soldiers. This provides a direct and unequivocal link that Iran is suppling weapons and support for the insurgent resistance in Iraq.
Opponents claim that the US is not willing to negotiate with Iran to quell the issue of nuclear development. However, the US government has tried repeatedly to negotiate with Tehran and has not received any cooperation. The time for negotiation is fast coming to an end and the time for a military response is quickly approaching.
In 2002, the majority of liberal congressmen and women supported military action in Iraq based on the belief that their was evidence of WMDs and genocidal war crimes committed by Hussein. We now have evidence starting to surface the Tehran is directly supporting the insurgency in Iraq. If we can determine that Iran is behind the Iraq insurgency and the loss of thousands of coalition lives, we are bound to deal with them swiftly and violently.
Friday, February 9, 2007
Feith's Prewar Intel
Yesterday, Michigan Democrat Senator Carl Levin released a report stating that a prewar intelligence report authored by then Under Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith was created using "an alternative intelligence assessment process", implying that it was false and not proportionate to the truth. The report, issued in 2002, stated that Iraq and Al-Queda had a "mature symbiotic relationship" and provided evidence that the two were working together to launch terrorism against the United States and allied nations.
At the time of Feith's report, the CIA had concluded that their was an "evolving" association "based on sources of varying reliability". Further, Feith's office stated that it based it's report on both "reliable and unreliable" intelligence reports. Based on these statements, I do not see the problem. Intelligence does not rely solely on facts. Not everything can be proven. Intelligence is the gathering of information from any source and when drawn together, a pattern or credible action is developed.
The CIA itself determined before the war that at the very least an evolving relationship was being developed between Iraq and Al-Queda. So a dictator with a ruthless army was involved in a evolving relationship with those who came upon American shores to murder thousands of our countrymen? Furthermore, it is now known that Al-Queda is indeed conducting terrorist and insurgent operations within Iraq, as well as a host of other war torn nations.
Levin's report states that Feith's actions, although inappropriate, were not illegal. If they were not illegal then what is the problem? Could things have been done cleaner? Yeah probably. However, the fact remains that the US went to war with a ruthless enemy, who himself was a weapon of mass destruction. He murdered thousands of his own people, invaded numerous other countries, ruled his people with an iron fist and refused to cooperate with the UN weapons inspectors.
In order to win the War on Terrorism, we must not consume ourselves with issues such as these. Although I believe we must abide by the rules of law, I also realize that some of these laws only serve to restrict our valiant actions and will undermine our intentions to win the war and destroy our enemy. If we briefly forsake certain rights, we will enable ourselves to unite as a nation, win the war and spread peace to other nations.
At the time of Feith's report, the CIA had concluded that their was an "evolving" association "based on sources of varying reliability". Further, Feith's office stated that it based it's report on both "reliable and unreliable" intelligence reports. Based on these statements, I do not see the problem. Intelligence does not rely solely on facts. Not everything can be proven. Intelligence is the gathering of information from any source and when drawn together, a pattern or credible action is developed.
The CIA itself determined before the war that at the very least an evolving relationship was being developed between Iraq and Al-Queda. So a dictator with a ruthless army was involved in a evolving relationship with those who came upon American shores to murder thousands of our countrymen? Furthermore, it is now known that Al-Queda is indeed conducting terrorist and insurgent operations within Iraq, as well as a host of other war torn nations.
Levin's report states that Feith's actions, although inappropriate, were not illegal. If they were not illegal then what is the problem? Could things have been done cleaner? Yeah probably. However, the fact remains that the US went to war with a ruthless enemy, who himself was a weapon of mass destruction. He murdered thousands of his own people, invaded numerous other countries, ruled his people with an iron fist and refused to cooperate with the UN weapons inspectors.
In order to win the War on Terrorism, we must not consume ourselves with issues such as these. Although I believe we must abide by the rules of law, I also realize that some of these laws only serve to restrict our valiant actions and will undermine our intentions to win the war and destroy our enemy. If we briefly forsake certain rights, we will enable ourselves to unite as a nation, win the war and spread peace to other nations.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Africom
In a bold but necessary move, President Bush directed Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates to develop a US military command for Africa. Currently, all military operations in Africa are directed by Centcom, which is also responsible for military operations in the Middle East.
Congressional Democrats will see this as a defiant action on President Bush's part and another step in his goal to militarize as much of the world as he can by November 2008. However, it is obvious that terrorist operations are continuing to spread to Africas from the Middle East and increased US military presence in the region is needed.
In 1998, Islamic militants associated with Al Queda successfuly bomed the US embassys in Kenya and Tanzania killing more than 250 people. Last month, US forces launched attacks on terrorits camps beleived to contain suspects who perpetrated the attacks on the embassys in 1998.
This proves, that the War on Terroism is working. We cannot expect results overnight. Intelligence gathering and tracking takes a lot of hard work and a lot more time. We must be patient. The enmies time will come.
Further, by his own words, Osama Bin Laden stated that his intentions to attack the United States and wage war with us is based on our actions in a little African town by the name of Mogadishu. In 1993, the US military was relieved of duties in the region by President Clinton after an all night battle raged taking the lives of 19 special operations officers. Bin Laden believes that if he can blacked our eye enough then we will "cut and run".
The development of Africom is a much needed action taken by this President to secure a more peacful tomorrow.
Congressional Democrats will see this as a defiant action on President Bush's part and another step in his goal to militarize as much of the world as he can by November 2008. However, it is obvious that terrorist operations are continuing to spread to Africas from the Middle East and increased US military presence in the region is needed.
In 1998, Islamic militants associated with Al Queda successfuly bomed the US embassys in Kenya and Tanzania killing more than 250 people. Last month, US forces launched attacks on terrorits camps beleived to contain suspects who perpetrated the attacks on the embassys in 1998.
This proves, that the War on Terroism is working. We cannot expect results overnight. Intelligence gathering and tracking takes a lot of hard work and a lot more time. We must be patient. The enmies time will come.
Further, by his own words, Osama Bin Laden stated that his intentions to attack the United States and wage war with us is based on our actions in a little African town by the name of Mogadishu. In 1993, the US military was relieved of duties in the region by President Clinton after an all night battle raged taking the lives of 19 special operations officers. Bin Laden believes that if he can blacked our eye enough then we will "cut and run".
The development of Africom is a much needed action taken by this President to secure a more peacful tomorrow.
Monday, February 5, 2007
The Iranian Revelation
According to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's nuclear rights 'will be established' on February 11th. This date is significant as it marks the "ten-day dawn", the end of the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979. Ahmadinejad stated, "When a nation decides to stand on its own feet to climb up the peaks, God helps it and that nation will embrace victory". Ahmadinejad also states that after seven years, he will announce that Iranian scientists have developed an herbal cure for AIDS.
Why is this story not bombarding the mainstream media?
Iran has publicly defied the United States and other allied nations, saying it is in the process of developing nuclear weapons. This came after they initially claimed they were simply developing the technology to become energy sufficient with nuclear power. They recently kicked nuclear inspectors out of their country. They have publicly stated numerous times that they seek the annihilation of Israel and western influences in the Middle East.
Sources from the International Atomic Energy Agency stated that technicians have assembled two small uranium enrichment units at Iran's underground Natanz complex. This is in direct violation of the United Nations ban. This known action marks the beginning of what Iran hopes will be a facility capable of developing numerous nuclear weapons per year.
We know from history that Ahmadinejad and other Islamic radical terrorist prefer to execute missions to coincide with the timeline of previous terrorist attacks. They may not be able to execute, but these are their intentions. Ahmadinejad claims that when his people strive to become sufficient that god will help them and they will claim victory. What he is really telling us is that if they are capable of developing nuclear weapons then it must be willed by god and that the destruction of Israel and attacks on the United States would be justified.
Why are we not listening to what he is saying?
Finally, to think that Iran has developed a cure for AIDS is laughable. I just hope the liberal agenda does not get suckered in by this claim and provide it as another reason why we need to work with Iran to develop peace in the Middle East.
Why is this story not bombarding the mainstream media?
Iran has publicly defied the United States and other allied nations, saying it is in the process of developing nuclear weapons. This came after they initially claimed they were simply developing the technology to become energy sufficient with nuclear power. They recently kicked nuclear inspectors out of their country. They have publicly stated numerous times that they seek the annihilation of Israel and western influences in the Middle East.
Sources from the International Atomic Energy Agency stated that technicians have assembled two small uranium enrichment units at Iran's underground Natanz complex. This is in direct violation of the United Nations ban. This known action marks the beginning of what Iran hopes will be a facility capable of developing numerous nuclear weapons per year.
We know from history that Ahmadinejad and other Islamic radical terrorist prefer to execute missions to coincide with the timeline of previous terrorist attacks. They may not be able to execute, but these are their intentions. Ahmadinejad claims that when his people strive to become sufficient that god will help them and they will claim victory. What he is really telling us is that if they are capable of developing nuclear weapons then it must be willed by god and that the destruction of Israel and attacks on the United States would be justified.
Why are we not listening to what he is saying?
Finally, to think that Iran has developed a cure for AIDS is laughable. I just hope the liberal agenda does not get suckered in by this claim and provide it as another reason why we need to work with Iran to develop peace in the Middle East.
Friday, February 2, 2007
Muslim Compares Britain to Nazi Germany
Mohammad Naseem, chairman of the Birmingham's Central Mosque, compared Britain's increasing Police State to that of Nazi Germany. This statement followed the arrest of nine Muslim terrorists who were planning the kidnapping and televised beheading of a British soldier.
Naseem stated, "We can change this for the better by coming together, not by coming apart...Remain calm, don't get angry. Anger is a natural emotion, but Muslims should control it. We must never give way to anger". This statement was made in front of 2,000 other Muslims inside the Central Mosque during Friday prayers.
I agree that the Muslims should not get angry. For as they state, they are being targeted because other Muslims are committing terrorists acts. However, the ideology of Xenophobia is just that, an idea. It can never be guarded against this day in age. Although our enemies are spread around the world, one distinguishing factor can not be missed, most of them are Islamic radicals.
In one of my previous post, I state that over 5,700 people have been killed and over 11,300 have been wounded in terrorist attacks perpetrated by Islamic radicals. With this in mind, tell me why we should not target all Muslims and be weary of them until such time as they can prove their alligence to peace, the United State and all other allies?
We cannot. It would not be prudent in the self interest and self defense of any nation.
We should not trust anyone on their word alone. They must prove that they stand by us in the War on Terrorism and are not just simply planning the next attack from within our own boarders. Once they have proven their worth then maybe they will stop feeling like they are being targeted.
This presents another issue though. Can anyone identify an incident where a Muslim was un-justly targeted for enforcement action when there was no other circumstances present to lead authorities to take action against him? I challenge you to find one because you will not. Security actions are taken only based on actions presented by them or circumstances surrounding them. Based on those and recent historical events, I believe that law enforcement is justified, and further, obligated to protect American citizens from any attacks.
I will not accept Naseem's statement that Britain is becoming a police state such as Nazi Germany where Jews were targeted for being Jews. The difference is this: the Jews were innocent and targeted for no reason. Until Muslims walk out the doors of their Mosque and find themselves surrounded by fencing topped with barbed wire and armed guards posted at every corner, then I refuse to accpet that Britain or any other allied Western nation is becoming a police state.
Naseem stated, "We can change this for the better by coming together, not by coming apart...Remain calm, don't get angry. Anger is a natural emotion, but Muslims should control it. We must never give way to anger". This statement was made in front of 2,000 other Muslims inside the Central Mosque during Friday prayers.
I agree that the Muslims should not get angry. For as they state, they are being targeted because other Muslims are committing terrorists acts. However, the ideology of Xenophobia is just that, an idea. It can never be guarded against this day in age. Although our enemies are spread around the world, one distinguishing factor can not be missed, most of them are Islamic radicals.
In one of my previous post, I state that over 5,700 people have been killed and over 11,300 have been wounded in terrorist attacks perpetrated by Islamic radicals. With this in mind, tell me why we should not target all Muslims and be weary of them until such time as they can prove their alligence to peace, the United State and all other allies?
We cannot. It would not be prudent in the self interest and self defense of any nation.
We should not trust anyone on their word alone. They must prove that they stand by us in the War on Terrorism and are not just simply planning the next attack from within our own boarders. Once they have proven their worth then maybe they will stop feeling like they are being targeted.
This presents another issue though. Can anyone identify an incident where a Muslim was un-justly targeted for enforcement action when there was no other circumstances present to lead authorities to take action against him? I challenge you to find one because you will not. Security actions are taken only based on actions presented by them or circumstances surrounding them. Based on those and recent historical events, I believe that law enforcement is justified, and further, obligated to protect American citizens from any attacks.
I will not accept Naseem's statement that Britain is becoming a police state such as Nazi Germany where Jews were targeted for being Jews. The difference is this: the Jews were innocent and targeted for no reason. Until Muslims walk out the doors of their Mosque and find themselves surrounded by fencing topped with barbed wire and armed guards posted at every corner, then I refuse to accpet that Britain or any other allied Western nation is becoming a police state.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
