The Trouble Is that Obama DOES Have a Strategy


Re-Posted from PJ Media by David P. Goldman August 29th, 2014 – 11:27 am

obama_iran_crossed_fingers_4-20-14-1
obama_iran_crossed_fingers_4-20-14-1

Obama’s “we-don’t-have-a-strategy” gaffe was so egregious as to distract attention from the fact that he does indeed have a strategy, which has blown up in his face. His strategy is accommodation with Iran at all costs. As I wrote earlier this month, our ISIS problem derives from our Iran problem: Bashar Assad’s ethnic cleansing, which has displaced 4 million Syrians internally and driven 3 million out of the country, was possible because of Iranian backing. The refugee flood in Iraq and Syria gives ISIS an unlimited pool of recruits. Iraqi Sunni support for ISIS, including the participation of some of Saddam Hussein’s best officers, is a response to Iran’s de facto takeover of Iraq.

Now we have analysts as diverse as Karen Elliott House and Angelo Codevilla proposing that the Saudis should use their considerable air force to degrade ISIS. Unless the U.S. commits its own forces in depth, the Saudis never will do so (unless they are defending their own territory, which ISIS is not stupid enough to attack). It is a sad day when America’s appetite for a fight is so weak that we count on the Saudi monarchy to do our dirty work for us. Codevilla writes:

Day after day after day, hundreds of Saudi (and Jordanian) fighters, directed by American AWACS radar planes, could systematically destroy the Islamic State—literally anything of value to military or even to civil life. It is essential to keep in mind that the Islamic State exists in a desert region which offers no place to hide and where clear skies permit constant, pitiless bombing and strafing. These militaries do not have the excessive aversions to collateral damage that Americans have imposed upon themselves.

That is entirely correct: in that region, air power could drastically weaken ISIS, if not quite eradicate it. It certainly could contain its advances (as fewer than 100 American sorties already have in northern Iraq). But the underlying problem will remain: Iran’s depredations have triggered an economic and demographic catastrophe in the region, and that catastrophe has created the snowball effect we call ISIS.

It may be entirely academic to argue that America should bomb not only ISIS, but also Iran’s nuclear facilities and the bases of its Revolutionary Guards. No Republican candidate I know is willing to argue this in advance of elections. Nonetheless, I repeat what I wrote Aug. 12: “The region’s security will hinge on the ultimate reckoning with Iran.”

On Canada’s Sun TV earlier today, commentator Ezra Levant asked me what Obama will do now. My guess is: very little. The reported Egyptian-UAE attack on Libyan Islamists is a harbinger of the future. Other countries in the region will take matters into their own hands in despair at American paralysis. Russia and China will play much bigger roles. And the new Thirty Year War will grind on indefinitely.

What Obama doesn’t get about the Islamic State


The core problem is that before January 20, 2009 Mr. Obama had never in his life been responsible for making decisions or been in a leadership position! There are only two places where you can get that experience at high level one as a military Officer, of O-7 rank or higher; two as a CEO of a for profit company of at least $100 million in sales. A secondary but not as good source would be governor of a state! Obama held non of these and he was expected to start making decisions and as Harry Truman said the “Buck Stops here”:

We now have almost 6 years of Obama decisions many of which were bad such that the accumulative effect has created a situation where there is no way to correct for being on the wrong path. We turned down a dead end road 6 years ago and we are almost at the spot where the road ends.

Obama plays golf now to avoid making any decisions for there are now no good ones he can make so its better to do nothing.

If you have never held one of these positions or one close to them you would have no idea of what I am talking about — only personal experience can prepare you for increasing levels of responsibility.

Trayvon Martin and Mike Brown The Similarities Continue To Mount – 51 Identical Aspects and Counting…


This case will be even better that that one — they are going to have to find a way to convict Wilson no matter what!

NORTH KOREA VOWS TO NUKE WHITE HOUSE


Not all the far fetched! They are crazy there after all!

Poor Obama, he just can’t get Iran to give up their Nuke


Not that many of us thought that Obama and Kerry were serious about stopping Iran from getting nukes but this is really ridiculous.  Extend the deadline because you are so far apart that you can’t even talk; obviously these clowns have never negotiated anything!

Re Post from Powerline by Paul Mirengoff Posted on July 16, 2014

The Iran nuclear negotiations — slow motion defeat for the U.S.

John Kerry reportedly is preparing to extend the deadline for negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran. Evidently, the two sides are too far apart to reach an agreement by the deadline date of Sunday, July 20. In fact, as Seth Mandel points out, they are sufficiently at loggerheads that they plan to stop talking before the deadline is reached.

Why are the two sides so far apart? Probably because Iran has no serious incentive to reach a deal.

America’s incentive to reach one is as strong as ever. Obama wants a piece of paper that he can tout as a foreign policy success. He also wants to preempt an Israeli attack against Iran by insisting that he has negotiated a satisfactory resolution. Israel is unlikely to put much faith in the piece of paper, but will be under immense pressure to “give peace a chance.”

By contrast, Iran’s incentive to reach a deal is now vastly diminished. The incentive that drove the mullahs to the bargaining table last year was the sanctions regime and its debilitating impact on the Iranian economy.

But thanks to the considerable relief President Obama granted Iran from sanctions last year, the Iranian economy has picked up substantially. Eli Lake reports that, according to a new study, Iran’s economy is now growing at a rate of about 2 percent per year. That’s a modest number, but a huge improvement over the 6.6 percent contraction of 2012-13.

The study estimates the value of Obama’s economic relief at $11 billion over the last six months. The value of the relief extends beyond the additional money Iran was permitted to obtain through oil sales and from the release of funds from global banks. According to Mark Dubowitz, author of the study, the de-escalation of sanctions has improved international sentiment towards the Iranian economy, thereby encouraging investors and bankers to risk doing business with Iran.

Dubowitz says that when these factors are taken into account, the overall value of the relaxed sanctions will likely exceed the $20 billion per year that he originally predicted.

With its economy recovering, Iran has little incentive to reach an agreement. In theory, Obama could try to revive the prior sanctions regime which, in theory, might reverse Iran’s economic recovery.

But Iran understands that (1) Obama is highly unlikely to walk away from the table, much less go back to square one with sanctions, since to do so would be to admit failure and (2) as we suggested at the time of the original deal, the old sanctions regime probably cannot be restored in any event given the need for international cooperation.

Thus it is not surprising that, in the words of a State Department official, “Iran has not moved from their—from our perspective—unworkable and inadequate positions that would not in fact assure us that their program is exclusively peaceful.” Why should they?

And so we’re left with the status quo, which is, by the State Department’s own admission “unworkable and inadequate.” As I said at the time the original deal was struck, “The mullahs got an easing of sanctions [and] retained their capacity to go nuclear in short order.”

Obama and Kerry blew it. Mandel concludes:

[They] had leverage: economic sanctions. They used up much of that leverage just to get the Iranians to the table, and now the Iranian leadership wants to run out the clock.

Thanks to the weakening of the sanctions, and the lack of stronger sanctions to begin with, they’re in a position to do so. And Kerry seems prepared to play along.