Sic Semper Tyrannis

Recycling old nonsense

Toward the end of the war in Vietnam there were a number of odd arguments concerning withdrawal advanced by people suffering from non-combat fatigue.

One had to do with the idea that because people had been lost in the war, it would be necessary to fight until the psychological arithmetic involved in the loss could be justified emotionally by "victory" or at least "pay back."  I have heard that one several times in the last couple of days from dizzy blondes on 24/7.

A second argument was made in those days  concerning personal investment and profit involving; the careers people had made related to SE Asia, the loot collected by "Alaska Barge and Transport" or "Foremost Dairies," etc.  One was asked, "surely you do not believe that those so "invested" will ever allow the war to end?  Surely.  That argument has returned as well.

Then, there were the Democrats of the left.  Post Cronkhite, they wanted nothing so much as an immediate end, in all ways to American participation in the war.  Out!  Out now! The devil take the hindmost.  In 1975 they got their way by enacting their wish into law.  The devil DID take the hindmost.  If you don't think so ask the Vietnamese diaspora.  Ask them.  Now the Democratic Left is unhappy because President Obama has decided that we will leave Iraq in a prudent way.

Well, that war DID end and so will this one, the only question is "How?"  pl

A Farewell to Iraq

President Obama's policy speech at Camp Lejeune today -

It was a bravura performance.

It would be strange if I had not liked this speech.  The policies involved are ones that I have advocated for years.

In straightforward, statesmanlike, dare I say soldierly, fashion, he laid it all out:

- Major combat forces out of Iraq in 2010.

- ALL forces out of Iraq by the end of 2011 (no bases)

- A regional approach to serious diplomacy

- Outreach to Iran and Syria

- A reasoned study of what the US should do about Afghanistan and Pakistan. (not completed yet)

- Congratulation to the armed forces for duty faithfully and successfully performed.

His words could not have been clearer, and the 2011 date was completely unequivocal.  After that date it is up to the Iraqis.

No sooner had President Obama stopped speaking than the geeks and freaks assembled by MSNBC began to tell us that the plain sense of his words did not mean anything at all.

Before the president spoke, the same crew claimed that "the generals" would insist on a renegotiation (repudiation) of the recent US/Iraqi agreement on withdrawal.  This was and is patent nonsense.  The Iraqis played hardball with the United States last year over this agreement and got pretty much all they wanted.  What possible reason could they have now for agreeing to "renegotiate" anything with us?  They understandably want us out of THEIR country.  There are still many here who can not believe that we have not acquired Iraq as a neocolonial possession, a "jewel in the crown of empire."  Many of the media people are either challenged with regard to "the vision thing" or unable to deal with the idea of a selfless effort.  Perhaps they should have made careers in finance.

The marines understood Obama.  They did not applaud when he entered the room.  They stood, of course, but they did not applaud.  By the time he was finished they were with him 100%.  Barry McCaffery (the sane man among the G&F crowd) said that Obama had spoken perfectly to a military audience, especially to combat people.  I understand that.  For such as they, things do "go bump in the night."  McCaffery also said that his eyes filled with tears at several points.  McCaffery is a hard man.

Mine too, general, mine too.  pl

COIN is a platinum plated axe

"Support for the proposed influx of troops to Afghanistan, however, comes as Americans are about evenly divided about whether the war there has proved to be worth its costs. They also split 50 to 41 percent on whether it is essential to win in Afghanistan to succeed in broader efforts against terrorism.

Nearly four in 10 who said the war has not justified its costs back the new troops, signaling that some people may expect better results after the troop levels rise. (Among Democrats, that number is closer to 50 percent.) While most Americans opposed Bush's early 2007 decision to send additional troops to Iraq, the percentage who saw significant progress there trended sharply higher from the summer of 2007 through the end of last year." Washpost

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Kilcullen's graphic (above) on the elements of insurgency is interesting and instructive.  He attempts in that "mess" to show how complicated this kind of warfare may be.  Imagine how much more complicated are the efforts necessary to counteract all of that.  Those efforts collectively make up what is call "counterinsurgency."  (COIN)

I did COIN.  I did it in South America.  I did it in SE Asia.  I did it in Arabia.  I did it. 

It works.  It worked in Iraq.  It has been very expensive in Iraq, expensive in money, expensive in political capital, and very expensive in blood if some of that is yours.

Was it necessary to do COIN in Iraq?  Yes.  It was.  The ground was ripe in Iraq for irregular warfare against the US occupation.  The "human terrain" was perfect for it.  The illusions that accompanied the occupation made the US occupying force a perfect target for irregular warfare.  Having made so many mistakes in Iraq, COIN was the only method that would bring the US success in Iraq other than mass murder.  The Republican and neocon slogan word "Surge" is just code for COIN.  The additional US troops were just part of that COIN effort.

Afghanistan is another place where COIN can work.  The ground in Afghanistan is even more fertile for long term irregular warfare against the foreign other than was Iraq.  Irregular warfare in Afghanistan is an age-old way of life.  In Afghanistan, the people in the next valley are often one's tribal enemy.

Nevertheless, COIN can work in Afghanistan.  The question is not if COIN will work in Afghanistan.  The question is whether or not we should pay the exorbitant price that COIN will exact from us for the privilegege of using this methodology in that country.

Ten years? 150 billion dollars?  5,000 dead (ours)?  What will the cost be?  Do I know? No.  Neither does anyone else, but everyone who knows anything knows that it will be very expensive.

There are other ways to accomplish the goal of "neutering" Islamist extremists.  I, and other people have suggested them.  None of them involve becoming Afghanistan's "godfather."  pl

"Business Cycle" or "Gotterdammerung?"

"The S&P Case-Shiller National Home Price Index reported that prices sank a record 18.2% during the last three months of 2008, compared with the same period in 2007.

Case-Shiller's index of 20 major metropolitan areas fell 18.5%, also a record.

"The broad downturn in the residential real estate market continues," said David Blitzer, chairman of the Index Committee at Standard & Poor's, in a statement. "There are very few, if any, pockets of turnaround that one can see in the data."

All 20 metro areas in the 20-city index recorded declines, with home prices falling more than 20% in eight of those cities. National home prices have dropped 26.7% since they peaked during the second quarter of 2006.

The decline does not seem to be slowing - just the opposite. The average home price dropped 2.52% between November and December in the 20 top metro areas. That was a larger increase than the 2.25% drop a month earlier."  CNN.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Ironically, the real estate market in Washington seems the least affected by all this.  We sit near the trough.

I wish to propose here an economic question for which I will, at least rhetorically, not admit of having an answer of my own.

Whether for crass political reasons or for genuine difference of opinion, the two American political parties are projecting diametrically opposed views of the nature of the present economic crisis and its probable outcome.

The Democrats state that the present depressed state of the economy is different both in quality and depth from any recession that we have seen since WW2.  They seem to believe that, if left to its fate, the economy of the United States and therefore probably of the world will spiral downward into a dark abyss from which it might well not climb for a long, long time.  In that pit would be; very high unemployment rates, deflation, low levels of investment, etc., We have not seen doctors and lawyers paid for their services with baskets of eggs and dead chickens for a long time, but that seems to be what the Democrats seem to think possible.

On the other hand the Republicans seem to think, or at least to say, that what is going on is really just the trough inherent in an exceptionally deep business cycle.  They seem to believe that if left alone the economy will "right" itself like a swamped boat, shrug off the water and rise to the surface.  Having that view, they say that all the money being appropriated and disbursed for "recovery" is just unnecessary and a surreptitious means to enactment of the Democrats' desired socialist re-structuring of the United States.  The belief in the "business cycle" theory of the crisis appears to be largely ideological, but subject to test by events, but the "socialist conspiracy" theory is, to some extent, supported by some of the items that the House Democrats chose to fund under the "stimulus" bill.  The Democrats would argue of course that all expenditures are stimulative.

I am curious to hear the arguments on both sides.  pl

PS  Watch your language.

 

"How to win in Afghanistan?" National Journal blog

http://security.nationaljournal.com/2009/02/how-to-win-in-afghanistan.php#1296359

pl

Will Netanyahu kill the US/Israel romance?

"Moreover, Netanyahu will in all likelihood swiftly return to his old habit of alienating Israel's friends. Even Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak once admitted the Israeli nationalist leader made him "very, very, very exasperated." Jordan's King Hussein, who at one point ceased all contact with the former premier, openly accused him of betrayal and trying "to destroy all that I have worked to build between our peoples."

And who can forget how the Americans talked about him after his last stint as premier? Former White House staffer Aaron David Miller described in his book how President Bill Clinton reacted to Netanyahu's habit of lecturing foreign leaders: "Who the f*** does he think he is? Who's the f***ing superpower here?" Former White House spokesman Joe Lockhart described him as "one of the most obnoxious individuals you're going to come into - just a liar and a cheat." Surely President Barack Obama will have even less patience for Netanyahu's attempts to obstruct a peace settlement."  Daily Star

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably so.

It is unlikely that Barack Obama will tolerate Netanyahu's normal arrogance and overbearing demeanor.

It is, however, likely that Netanyahu will "try it on."  Why?  Because he is compulsive and will not be able to help himself.  Like a lot of extreme nationalists in various parts of the world, Netanyahu deeply believes in the intellectual and moral superiority of what he thinks of as his people.   For him, innate feelings of group superiority are the bedrock of his personality.  The Oval Office encounter which I forecast some time ago is inevitably in the cards now.  Ah, to be a fly on the wall in that one.

To see such a confrontation approaching does not require "moral and intellectual superiority."  Therefore one must ask why the Israeli electorate has created the preconditions for that meeting.  I will leave the question open for debate.  PL

 

Of course it was racist!

"The cartoon shows a police officer, after his colleague just shot dead a chimpanzee, saying, "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."

Critics said yesterday that the chimpanzee served as a crude interpretation of Obama, the nation's first black president, who signed the $787-billion economic stimulus package into law Tuesday. The cartoon sparked a heated debate among journalists, elected officials and community leaders about the appropriateness of comparing an African-American president to a primate."  Newsday

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hate to agree with C. Matthews, but this cartoon was so obviously a crude, humorless, racial insult to the president and all Black people that one must take notice of it.  Newscorp and the Murdoch people everywhere should "examine their consciences" over this.  The reference to the stimulus bill makes the target of the cartoon as clear as it could be.

Some people have said that this cartoon might have been funny fifty years ago.  That is not true.  It would never have been funny.  Decent people have never thought that idiotic comparisons of Blacks to animal primates were amusing or acceptable as humor.

The New York Post has the largest circulation in the city?  Well then, there is an obvious corrective for this kind of behavior.

Don't buy it.  pl

http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/longisland/ny-popost196040929feb19,0,7014832.story

National Security Blog - 17 February, 2009

Should the NSC function be strengthened?  pl

http://security.nationaljournal.com/2009/02/a-more-powerful-nsc.php#1293128

How far down are the banks and real estate headed?

I think these are fair questions:

Are we headed for a general collapse of the big banks, the ones that the federal government has shoveled money into?

Is the crisis of mortgage foreclosure going to take down the structure of price and value to the point that the banks fall into an inevitable federal seizure situation?

Is the general economic trend going to be deflationary for several years?

Any good questions that I missed?

There are a lot of smart, experienced people here?

Let's hear it!  pl

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-finance-qna18-2009feb18,0,986612.story

Let's Talk Talking Heads

I am inspired by listening to Thaddeus (Christopher) Matthews (a member of the Philadelphia "troika" of Smerconish, Shields and Matthews) to invite a general discussion of the personalities and views of the talking heads seen on our present media.  pl

Bill Clinton: I should have better regulated derivatives

"Former President Bill Clinton: I think that the only thing that our administration did or didn't do that we should have done is to try to set in motion some more formal regulation of the derivatives market. They're wrong in saying that the elimination of the Glass-Steagall division between banks and investment banks contributed to this. Investment banks were already...banks were already doing investment business and investment companies were already in the banking business. The bill I signed actually at least puts some standards there. And if you look at the evidence of the banks that have gotten in trouble, the ones that were most directly involved in there ... in a diversified portfolio tended to do better.

Some of the conservatives said that I was responsible because I enforced the Community Reinvestment Act, and they said that's what made all these subprime mortgages be issued. That's also false. The community banks, the people that loan their money in the community instead of buying these esoteric securities, they're doing quite well. "  CNN.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everybody's favorite charming rogue uncle, or, in my case, charming rogue nephew.  We pretty much all like this guy, having gotten over the chagrin of his more or less public bad boy behavior.  What came after made his philandering look trivial.  What the hell, if his wife could say at her swearing-in as Secretary of State that he had contributed immensely to the enrichment of her experience...  Interesting.

What he says here makes a good deal of sense.  The whole derivatives/hedge fund/naked shorting scam should have been reined in and he must bear part of the blame for that.

On the other hand, it is true that the local and community oriented banks who have been content to abide in the retail banking markets have done very well.

They should be proud of their membership in the club of merely local pomposity.  They have done us all a service and that should be worth a comfortable round of golf at the country club any day.  pl

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/16/bill.clinton.qanda/

Nationalize the Beggar Banks

"The U.S. banking system is close to being insolvent, and unless we want to become like Japan in the 1990s -- or the United States in the 1930s -- the only way to save it is to nationalize it."  Washpost.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Roubini and Naseem Taleb (the Black Swan man) were on CNBC last week impatiently explaining to the money honeys and intellectually challenged staff pomposities that the financial system is so broken that it will not reconstruct itself and that the reason the financial system is broken is the unfortunate truth that it is largely populated by even greater (and often equally challenged) pomposities as the staffs of the 24/7 business news channels.  The news pomposities are those men of wisdom who bleat the numbers of the day and hope for a rise in the markets.

The big beggar banks are driven by people for whom greed and arrogance are the hallmarks of likely success in the "bidness."  Roubini says it simply - "Nationalize the big banks now, or nationalize them later under worse conditions."

I will not repeat at length my opinion of the financial traders, those "rational actors," who were indifferent to the likely effect of trading oil futures, mortgage based securities and other such instruments to the sky regardless of the sustainable short term prices of the underlying commodity.

The best that can be said of "this class of people" (Roubini quote) is that some of them had the wit to try to "call" the inevitable crashes in such a way that they had cashed out in time.

Let us hope that many of them failed to do that,  pl

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/12/AR2009021201602.html?nav=hcmoduletmv

Contractor Corruption in Iraq

"Court records show that last month investigators subpoenaed the personal bank records of Col. Anthony B. Bell, who is now retired from the Army but who was in charge of reconstruction contracting in Iraq in 2003 and 2004 when the small operation grew into a frenzied attempt to remake the country’s broken infrastructure. In addition, investigators are examining the activities of Lt. Col. Ronald W. Hirtle of the Air Force, who was a senior contracting officer in Baghdad in 2004, according to two federal officials involved in the inquiry.

It is not clear what specific evidence exists against the two men, and both said they had nothing to hide from investigators. Yet officials say that several criminal cases over the past few years point to widespread corruption in the operation the men helped to run. As part of the inquiry, the authorities are taking a fresh look at information given to them by Dale C. Stoffel, an American arms dealer and contractor who was killed in Iraq in late 2004."  NY Times

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

There has been a lot of "tarnish on the blade" in the aftermath of this major war.  A lot of money was thrown around, and is still thrown around much too loosely.  Some of that is inevitable, but not this much.  The Obama Administration needs to tighten up the controls on what is being done with contract money spread across networks of American contractors and sub-contractors and trickling down eventually to Iraqis who actually do the work.  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/world/middleeast/15iraq.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all

Open Thread

There are a number of interesting topics available for comment today but I am going to pass on all of them and leave them to you.  pl

"Dead Dogmas of the Past" Richard Sale

Download Dead Dogmas of the Past

Aaron David Miller - Envoy to Iran

I have been listening to this gent for a while now.  I met hin several times when times were good.  He was Ross' deputy for a long time but he seems to know whom he is, and that is a grown up, non-tribal American.  I heard him say tonight that the US should not be dragged around by tiny interests and that a Syria/Israel treaty should be at the top of the agenda. 

God Bless You, Sir.  How difficult it must that have been to come to as a position!

You have my support to be US envoy to Iran.  pl

Kiracofe on US/Israel relations

"the inevitable Israeli test of Barack Obama's independence from AIPAC pressure"

Yes indeed. So for openers Team Obama should:

1. Task the intelligence community for a fresh NIE on Israel which includes counterintelligence issues.

2. Justice Department puts prosecutions on fast track for the AIPAC case/Franklin case.

3. Justice Department then requires AIPAC to register as a foreign agent (of Israel) just like other foreign agents/lobbyists around town must do.

4. Justice Department investigates status of "Religious Right" organizations, the Christian Zionist Lobby, to determine whether such organizations should also register as foreign agents of Israel. This would include CUFI, Christians United For Israel, led by Hagee.

5. Justice Department and appropriate intelligence community assets investigate any counterintelligence issues associated with "Religious Right" and its relationship to Israel and lobbying on the Hill and general influence peddling in Washington and nationally.

Once these openers are under way, we can move to some hard ball. Israelis forewarned that any attack on Iran by Israel to be treated like Ike treated Israel at Suez in 1956 (in an election year no less) along the following lines:

1. Embargo all US weapons to Israel.

2. Halt all foreign assistance to Israel.

3. Deny tax exempt status for State of Israel bonds and freeze all sales of such bonds in United States financial markets.

and so on.

Clifford Kiracofe

Israel Moves to the Right

"Livni, 50, is a relative newcomer to Israeli politics and would be the second woman to become prime minister. A lawyer in private practice and a onetime agent in Paris for Mossad, an Israeli intelligence service, she was first elected to Parliament a decade ago and held her first ministerial post under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. She has risen partly on her reputation for honesty and integrity.

She was born to a hawkish Zionist family that opposed any territorial compromise in the name of peace. But along with many members of Likud, she shifted toward the center in the past decade and ultimately helped set up Kadima in the center. She now argues fervently that Israel's future security depends on the establishment of a stable Palestinian state.

Netanyahu, 59, was prime minister from 1996 to 1999 and stayed in Likud when Sharon and others formed Kadima, although he considers himself a pragmatist and says he, too, would like to form a centrist governing coalition.

He said that he had formed a good rapport with President Barack Obama in two meetings when Obama was the Democratic candidate and that he plans to bolster Palestinian economic and civil institutions before starting more serious political negotiations.

Livni has countered that a right-wing government led by Netanyahu would inevitably clash with Washington."  IHT

---------------------------------------------------------------------

However you inspect this result, the message seems clear that the Israeli electorate has moved significantly to the Right.

That is not good from the US standpoint. 

This means that the new government (whichever) will have a greatly restricted set of options in dealing with the Palestinians and the other regional powers.  This means that the "hair-trigger" of retaliatory sentiment will be set for quick action in any of the many possible kinds of "incidents" that will undoubtedly occur.

This means that the inevitable Israeli test of Barack Obama's independence from AIPAC pressure will be tougher and more persistant than it might have been.

This means that pressure for military action against Iran will be severe.  pl

National Journal Blog - Iran

"The structure of the question implies a situation in which the United States has more or less complete freedom of action in which to pick and choose among options. That is not the case. As Paul Krugman has pointed out, America stands on the brink of disaster economically. The shape and condition of our social contract a year from now is debatable if the economic crisis can not be mitigated. In that context it is doubtful if we can afford the two wars we are now fighting much less the costs that would inevitably derive from yet a further war against Iran. This overriding economic restraint makes a mockery of loose talk of an American war with Iran. In purely military terms, are there serious people who can not see how much the position of our forces in Iraq would be damaged by regional reactions to an American attack on Iranian nuclear facilities or the mere perception of American complicity in an analogous Israeli attack? What has happened in the Khyber Pass recently speaks volumes of the kinds of additional dangers that a rash use of military force would bring on."   See more. pl

 

What do we want in Afghanistan?

"The Obama administration is conducting a high-level strategic review of the war in Afghanistan and says it will unveil the results before NATO holds a 60th anniversary summit in early April.

Petraeus, who also serves as commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, said part of the review will determine whether successes from the so-called "surge" in U.S. troops in that country could be applied to Afghanistan. As in Iraq, he said, a central task in Afghanistan will be to bolster the legitimacy of the central government in Kabul, which has little sway outside the capital. He also said U.S. and NATO forces need to pay more attention to political and cultural factors as they attempt to build alliances with local tribal leaders, an approach that has worked in Iraq.

To do so, he said, military commanders and their units would need to integrate themselves as much as possible in local villages instead of operating from isolated bases, mimicking another tactic tried in Iraq.

"You can't commute to work in the conduct of counterinsurgency operations," he said. Such an approach, he added, "requires, of course, many cups of tea." "  WaPo

------------------------------------------------------------------------

It must be the Afghans who need Afghanistan, or do they?

The various Pushtun, Uzbek, Hazara, Tajik, Turkman, Persian (in the west), Baluch and Arab (southwest) peoples of the state of Afghanistan have little in common other than an adherence to a wide variety of forms of Islam.  Their main languages are mutually incomprehensible and even within the main ethno-linguistic groups like the Pushtun they are deeply divided into confederations, political factions and among local leaders.  The state of Afghanistan is a 19th Century creation of the Russian and Indian (British) empires as a convenient way of creating a buffer zone between them.  Serendipitously, that buffer zone contained many fractious and ungovernable peoples who were far too much trouble for permanent occupation and "la mission civilizatrice."  The name, "Afghanistan" was rather arbitrarily adopted from the name of one of the larger Pushtun factions whose Khan had pretensions to royalty and who had a fair amount of power in the area of Kabul.

Kindle and Beyond

I think there is a reading revolution starting up and devices that enable portable reading of e-books are what the revolution is made of.

Statistics may prove me wrong when wielded by one of our readers, but my impression is that reading of actual physical books has been on the decline for a long time now.  The "tactile pleasure" of holding a book is great but it does not seem to have been enough to hold the formerly reading public.  On the other hand I have noticed that people are much more willing to read a finished book with covers, etc., than they are to read a manuscript that contains exactly the same words.  Go figure!

In any event, I have ensured that my two novels, "The Butcher's Cleaver," and "Death Piled Hard," (available next month) will be "kindlized" (Sony as well) from the start.  The intelligence book "Intelligence: The Human Factor" is not my property andI can't fix that.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/159113/ebooks_take_center_stage.html

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/159155/amazon_kindle_a_road_warriors_best_friend.html

"On the Edge" Paul Krugman

"...Washington has lost any sense of what’s at stake — of the reality that we may well be falling into an economic abyss, and that if we do, it will be very hard to get out again.

It’s hard to exaggerate how much economic trouble we’re in. The crisis began with housing, but the implosion of the Bush-era housing bubble has set economic dominoes falling not just in the United States, but around the world.

Consumers, their wealth decimated and their optimism shattered by collapsing home prices and a sliding stock market, have cut back their spending and sharply increased their saving — a good thing in the long run, but a huge blow to the economy right now. Developers of commercial real estate, watching rents fall and financing costs soar, are slashing their investment plans. Businesses are canceling plans to expand capacity, since they aren’t selling enough to use the capacity they have. And exports, which were one of the U.S. economy’s few areas of strength over the past couple of years, are now plunging as the financial crisis hits our trading partners."  Paul Krugman

----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Do not stare too long into the abyss lest the abyss take notice of you..."  I "improved" that a little, but...

The abyss seems to have noticed us.  I watch too much 24/7 news, particularly the business channels.  I have it running in the background while I work.  After a while a cumulative impression grows that Krugman is right and that we do stand on the edge of the abyss looking down into eternity.  Rothko painted the feeling in that scene.  Actually, he painted it over and over again until it killed him.

A total collapse is a possibility, a collapse of everything; the economy, the social order, government authority.  How high does unemployment have to rise in a country full of people raised to believe in their "right" to instant gratification before the restraints that protect the "rights" of wallstreeters to their undeserved bonuses seem trivial things?

The Republicans do not want to spend money uselessly?  They may wish soon that the money they saved would buy something, anything.  I lived in occupied Germany as a child.  Our father was one of the occupiers.  I remember the Germans when they had wheelbarrows full of Reichsmarks.  Only the intervention of the victors revived their fortunes.  Who will revive ours?

I am not sure that President Obama's stimulus package will do what is hoped.  The idea seems a kind of half-assed Keynesian notion that dumping a lot of money into the economy will jump start the patient.  The image of Barack Obama with the paddles in his hands is distracting.  I surely do hope that will work.  If it does not, then we should all look to our situations.  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/opinion/06krugman.html?em

An "A" Team for Iran - Ignatius

"My nominees are Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft, former national security advisers for Presidents Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, respectively. They would elevate the Iran mission, connecting it to the tradition of bipartisan strategic thinking that shaped America's role in the modern world. And, like our youthful new president, these two octogenarians understand the need for America to "turn a page" in its foreign policy and to connect with what Brzezinski has called a "global political awakening." "  Ignatius

-------------------------------------------------------------------

For once I agree with Ignatius.  These two men are among America's finest public servants and thinkers.  They represent a balanced bi-partisan set of view points and spheres of interest in the United States.  What could be better?  pl

Would the US Defend Iraq's Airspace?

"The second agreement is a long-term "strategic framework" the administration has said will establish "cooperation in the political, economic, cultural and security fields." A "statement of principles" that Bush and Maliki signed in December said the framework, which they plan to sign by July 31 to take effect Jan. 1, included "security assurances and commitments to the Republic of Iraq to deter foreign aggression against Iraq that violates its sovereignty and integrity of its territories, waters, or airspace."

Congressional Democrats have said that the agreement, as outlined by the administration, constitutes a defense treaty commitment requiring Senate ratification. The administration has said it is "nonbinding," will not include language on specific troop numbers or authorize permanent bases, and does not commit the United States to defend Iraq. It also asserts that the agreement is within Bush's executive authority. "  Karen de Young last Spring

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Against whom?   You know the answer. 

The Muslims will laugh at the thought that the US might defend Iraq's airspace against the Israelis, but the Israelis went to GW Bush to ask for overflight clearance to reach Iran and Natanz.  This clearance was denied by the US.  The United States is obligated by international law to defend Iraq.  President Bush's bogus assertion notwithstranding, an occupying power is obligated to defend the territory of a state that it occupies.  That is a general principle.  The agreement between the US and Iraq is specific at Paragraph 27, subparagraph 3.

Download SE_SOFA

Israel has been steadily working itself into a frenzy over the Iranian nuclear program.  The Iranians launched an orbiter of their own this week. The Israelis are now under intense international scrutiny (unobstructed by the Obama Administration) for their conduct in Gaza.  They are having a national election next week in which the advantage seems to lie with whichever party can make the most bellicose noises.  All of these factors point to increasing Israeli instability in decision making.

Would Israel try to "bull" its way past the US Air Force and across Iraq relying on a US "failure of will" to make the thing work?  This would be a crazy thing to do, but many crazy things have been seen lately.

I trust that US air defense posture in Iraq is adequate?  pl

National Journal Blog This Week

http://security.nationaljournal.com/2009/02/reforming-intelligence.php#1273753

pl

Daschle should withdraw.

"Former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, said he is "deeply embarrassed and disappointed by the errors that required me to amend my tax returns," in a letter dated Monday to the senior Democrat and Republican on the Senate Finance Committee that was provided to CNN.

"I apologize for the errors and profoundly regret that you have had to devote time to them," Daschle said in the letter to Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Montana, and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

Daschle has been nominated by Obama to be secretary of Health and Human Services.

A committee memo obtained Friday by CNN indicates committee members want to discuss the use of a car and driver that Daschle didn't disclose on his income taxes, and nonpayment of taxes on more than $80,000 he earned in consulting fees after leaving the Senate.

Daschle emphasized to Baucus and Grassley in the letter that "My mistakes were unintentional.""

-----------------------------------------------------------------

The only thing Tom Daschle is "disappointed" about is that he got caught cheating on his income taxes,  emphasis on the "got caught" part of that sentence.

Several of President Obama's nominees have now had tax or other financial problems.  It would seem that the difference between Republican and Democratic political types is that the Republicans steal/cheat on a grander scale.

And now we have the sorry spectacle of senators insisting on continuing to back Daschle's nomination from sheer "clubbiness."

Daschle should relieve the president of this embarrassment by withdrawing his name from consideration.  Failing that, President Obama should withdraw Daschle's name.  

If that does not happen, the whole "change we can believe in" business goes right out the window.  pl  

"Cast Lead" failed.

"Gaza militants launched rockets and mortar shells into southern Israel on Sunday, wounding three Israelis, drawing a threat of "disproportionate" retaliation from the prime minister and further straining a cease-fire that ended Israel's Gaza offensive.

The flare-up in violence came just over a week before Israel's parliamentary vote, pitting Israeli Foreign Minister Livni — one of the architects of the offensive — against the more hawkish Bemnjamon Natanyahu. Continued fighting could influence the outcome by raising questions about the effectiveness of Israel's actions in Gaza.

Three people — two soldiers and a civilian — were wounded in a late afternoon mortar barrage on an Israeli village next to Gaza, police and the military said. Earlier, a rocket landed near a kindergarten in a community near Gaza, police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said. Warning sirens sent residents scrambling for shelter."

--------------------------------------------------------------

What part of this was hard to foresee?  As we stated here during the "offensive," any continuation of rocket fire into Israel from Gaza after a cease fire would signal to the world that the Israeli display of firepower had failed miserably to move the wall of flesh with which Hamas opposes the Jewish state.

Having failed in this latest attempt to intimidate the Palestinians, what is left for the Israelis to try?  More firepower?  More dead kids for the world to contemplate?  Maybe napalm this time?  How about mass expulsions?  Creating new "facts on the ground?"

Ground penetrating radar?  The Israelis are not as technology obsessed as we Americans.  I doubt if they really think that gadgets like this will prevent Hamas shooting into Israel.  The Israelis have run out of ideas and are now grasping at straws.  Some US military officer attached to the State Department probably dreamt this up for Condi Baby on her way out of town.

A truce?  Did I see that magic word in the article?  Could it be?

If not, then an escalation?  There really is not much to differentiate Natanyahu from Livni on major issues like Gaza.  The next Israeli prime minister (whoever it is) will have to "fish or cut bait" on this problem.

What'll it be, mass expulsions, extermination, or a truce?  pl