%20(1)%20(4)%20(1).jpg)
Biden whiffs the mass media's soft balls but this time he is going to see mostly hard balls. The only advantage is that Israel has a new and totally untested administration. Good luck Joe, a possibile war with Iran might rest on this visit
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.
The fatal contradictions of Biden’s Middle East trip
The tour will focus on better relations with the Saudis and increasing the supply of oil. But these scorned allies have no reason to trust an administration determined to appease Iran.
By JONATHAN S. TOBIN
(June 20, 2022 / JNS) The decision of an American president to visit the Middle East has always been seen primarily through the lens of its impact on efforts to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That is not the case with President Joe Biden’s planned trip next month to Israel, the Palestinian territories and Saudi Arabia. With inflation and the price of gasoline skyrocketing in recent months, Biden’s priority should be to increase Middle East oil production, not resurrecting the failed policies of the past and pressuring Israel to appease the Palestinians.
That will require the president to abandon his much-publicized hostility to the Saudi regime. In recent years, many Democrats have become ardent opponents of the U.S.-Saudi alliance, finding Riyadh’s admittedly egregious human-rights record to be intolerable even as they downplayed or ignored the equally terrible if not worse actions of Iran. But with the American economy teetering towards recession as a result of Biden’s overspending and Washington needing the Saudis to help offset the impact of sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, Biden is going to have to swallow his pride. Though he had vowed to make Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman—the country’s de facto ruler—an international pariah, the president will now have to resurrect what’s left of his old glad-handing skills to get the Saudis to help him out of this fix.
The fact that the international sanctions on Russia seem to have hurt the United States more than the authoritarian government of Vladimir Putin is ironic but no joke. Despite military setbacks and Europe uniting to cut Moscow off from the international economy, Putin has doubled down on his determination to continue his illegal and brutal aggression, meaning that no end to the fighting and the rising toll of civilian casualties seems to be in sight. What’s worse, Russia appears to not have suffered too badly from the sanctions with the ruble becoming the best-performing currency, gaining value against both the Euro and the U.S. dollar, during the course of the war. While the world has been hoping that the embarrassing performance of the Russian military and economic isolation would lead to Putin’s fall, that much-desired outcome doesn’t appear to be a possibility.
That means that America’s Ukraine policy, while rooted in a justified desire to oppose aggression, seems to be turning out to be as much of a disaster as Biden’s catastrophic retreat from Afghanistan or his inability to curb inflation or deal with supply chain crises.
That’s where the Saudis, and the other Gulf emirates and the oil-producing nations of the OPEC oil cartel that Riyadh dominates, come in. OPEC has already promised to increase oil production this summer and is expected to do so again in the fall. Yet those announcements haven’t yet had any impact on the price at gas pumps in the United States, which are ascending to record highs while also increasing the price of everything else that American consumers buy.
Since they are desperate to change the subject of coverage from gas prices and economic folly, Biden officials are spinning the trip to The New York Times as more about security than economics. There’s some truth to this claim. The problem is that it betrays the basic contradiction at the heart of Biden’s Middle East policy.
While the economic blowback from Biden’s undeclared war to save Ukraine from Russia is causing problems, his other foreign-policy obsession—a revival of former President Barack Obama’s 2015 Iran nuclear deal and efforts to achieve a rapprochement with the Islamist regime—is looming over his upcoming trip.
In Israel, Biden will meet with Yair Lapid, who, with the collapse today of the coalition he led with Naftali Bennett, will be interim prime minister until new elections are held. Lapid and Bennett spent the last year trying to convince the Biden foreign-policy team to abandon efforts to revive a nuclear pact with a rogue Iranian regime that has stonewalled repeated American attempts to bribe them with new concessions.Both Israel and the Saudis would like Biden to draw the appropriate conclusions from Iran’s flouting of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s efforts to monitor their nuclear progress and change course by toughening sanctions against Tehran.
Iran is showing its contempt for the international community and how little its promises not to build a bomb mean by digging a new tunnel network to house new nuclear facilities that would be less vulnerable to bombing attacks. That has added to the fears about its increased uranium enrichment, which seem to be the prelude towards a possible nuclear breakout.
Rather than this serving to stiffen Biden’s spine, it has only increased fears that he will respond to Iranian provocations with new concessions that will allow it to become a nuclear threshold state while not suffering any penalties for doing so.
That is the context for a trip that will, at least on the surface, be part of an attempt to convince the Israelis and the Saudis that the United States is still committed to their security.
If the administration was really committed to stopping Iran, then it would be increasing its efforts to expand former President Donald Trump’s Abraham Accords to other Arab and Islamic countries to shore up a regional alliance against Tehran.
Hopes that the Saudis will swap their under-the-table alliance with Israel for a full-fledged normalization are probably misplaced. As the self-styled guardians of the Muslim holy places, the odds that the Saudi regime—whose legitimacy is rooted in its own peculiar brand of religious extremism—would ever fully embrace the Jewish state are slim and none. But as they did in 2020 when the Trump foreign-policy team made the first real breakthrough for peace in a generation, their acquiescence to other countries normalizing relations with Israel is key.
But Biden’s disinterest in widening the circle of peace is painfully obvious. His priority is keeping Israel and the Saudis from taking any actions that will undermine his hopes of a new deal with Iran, which means that it would be extremely foolish for either Jerusalem or Riyadh to place much trust in any assurances the president offers to them.
That is a painful dilemma because as much as the Saudis can flirt with trying to come to some sort of arrangement with Iran and its terrorist proxies, that isn’t a viable option since Tehran will never be satisfied until the Saud dynasty and its allies are overthrown. Nor can Israel look elsewhere for help. Both an isolated Russia and a China bent on expanding its own malign influence in the Middle East are bad actors that have no real sympathy or common interests with the Jewish state.
So, while the Israelis and the Saudis combine to present an Iran still seeking regional hegemony as well as nuclear status with a formidable foe, having the United States led by a president that cannot be relied upon to oppose the deadliest threat to stability in the region creates a problem to which there is no obvious solution.
Nor can Americans feel good about an administration that, for all of its high-flown talk about standing by allies when it speaks of Ukraine, still seems intent on discarding its real friends in the Middle East. Expecting Israel and the Saudis to have America’s back while also attempting to betray them by embracing Iran is a contradiction that may lead to yet another Biden disaster, which may be even more costly than the ones he has already blundered into.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You choose:
+++
The Ron and Don Show
BY DAVID SOLWAY
Everyone and his conservative mother-in-law are presently jousting to promote their favorite electoral prospect in the Ron DeSantis/Donald Trump apparent skirmish for the Republican 2024 presidential nomination. Arguments fly on both sides of the divide.
The Ron is young, successful, formidable, and much admired for his courage and practical intelligence. He would make a great president. The Don is aggressive in his demeanor, tends to polarize people, and would rouse opposition to his candidacy, especially from the Fourth and Fifth Estates. All this is true, though few seem to realize that the Ron, should he receive the Republican nomination, would face a media barrage of hostility and disinformation no less virulent. The fact is, I believe, that the debate between the relative merits and strengths of the Ron and the Don is utterly irrelevant and nothing short of a logomachic distraction.
As I argued in an earlier article, the Ron is needed in Florida to consolidate the state as a Republican bastion. The governorship must be his top priority, and he is young enough to await his turn for the 2028 presidential contest, when he will be only 49. Florida, as I wrote, provides a beacon of hope and security for those fleeing broken and dysfunctional states under Democrat rule and provides a vision of the potential America of the future. It cannot be left to electoral vagaries.
The issue for the Don is critical. When he arrived in the Oval Office in 2016, he was a political virgin, with no applied experience to draw on and no first-hand knowledge of the seething cauldron of trade-offs, sweetheart deals, career machinations, power moves, and financial corruption that was, and is, Washington D.C. His neophyte status was obviously a strategic weakness, but it was also his greatest strength. He was beholden to no one, had no political baggage, and was poised to proceed—notwithstanding the volleys of persecution he confronted from an army of vilifiers and saboteurs—according to his own lights. His instinct was the right one, to act for the well-being of the nation and not in the interests of the crony cabal among the governing, bureaucratic, and financial elites, and clearly not for his own benefit. He was a president who did not accept a salary and who sacrificed his own economic advantages in the private realm to perform his duties honorably.
Despite flaws of character and rhetoric—we know that people delight in dwelling on them—and given the political vendetta waged against him by the venal denizens of the swamp, as well as the betrayals he suffered from presumed allies—McConnell, Sessions, Pence, Mattis, Fauci, Barr, etc.—the list of his accomplishments against all the odds is a long and extraordinary one. The nation thrived under his leadership, employment soared, red tape diminished, the energy sector prospered, and American power and international standing were once again pre-eminent. This is not to suggest that he was free of error, but he was still an exemplary president.
Trump was allegedly—we must say “allegedly”—cheated out of electoral victory in 2020. As Michael Walsh writes in The Pipeline, this was “the hinkiest election is modern American history thanks to the illegal changes in balloting.” The infamous Time article defending the need to “fortify” the election and Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary 2000 Mules present compelling evidence of massive fraud—the Texas GOP has just passed a resolution, responsibly in my opinion, declaring Biden “not legitimately elected.” Trump clearly deserves a second term to complete the restorative project on which he embarked. He remains popular, as his enormous rallies attest, and has remade the Party in his patriot image. He has been tried in the fire, learned the extent of the nefarious campaign unceasingly launched against him, and, unlike Biden with whom he shares the calendar, is hale and vigorous. The task of Making America Great Again is his to complete.
The Ron will get his turn but in the meanwhile has much gubernatorial work to do. He cannot be spared from the Tallahassee office, not for some years to come. This should be obvious. For his part, the Don is armed for the fight, knows who his enemies are, has four years of militant experience to rely upon, may well have the House and the Senate at his back, and bears a noble agenda to bring to fruition, a mission of which he has proven himself capable. That he managed to achieve what he did despite the political cannonade under which he labored and the nest of hobo spiders crawling over his own political roof should put our doubts to rest.
Journalists, commentators, pundits, and “experts” are engaged in fostering a lusus naturae, a freak of the political circus. It is an irrelevant debate between the two main contenders for the laurels, a controversy whose only significance is that it makes for good copy. It’s time to get serious. The Ron is Florida, the Don is Washington, and a job remains to be done.
David Solway
David Solway is a Canadian poet and essayist. His most recent volume of poetry, The Herb Garden, appeared in 2018 with Guernica Editions. His manifesto, Reflections on Music, Poetry & Politics, was released by Shomron Press in 2016. He has produced two CDs of original songs: Blood Guitar and Other Tales and Partial to Cain, on which he was accompanied by his pianist wife Janice Fiamengo. His latest book is Notes from a Derelict Culture, Black House, London, 2019.
AND:
Though I would vote for him in a heart beat my candidate is de Santis and the former Sec.of State, Pompeo..
Time to move on: https://townhall.com/columnist
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Does not mean Trump would have won but it is revealing:
Texas Woman Pleads Guilty to 26 Counts of Voter Fraud in ‘Vote-Harvesting’ Operation
https://www.theepochtimes.com/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Impeach Krasner along with Biden and throw them both out of office for dereliction of duty. It is time to restore law and order or we are finished.
Soros just elected another District Attorney in Maine.
Nor should we be deterred, in the case of Trump because Kamara would take his place. If Kamara's election destroys the current Democrat Party so be it. They have earned that right.
+++
The case for impeaching Krasner
Murders have been on the rise. Yet since the district attorney took office in 2018, Philadelphia has seen drastic declines in conviction rates for serious crimes.
Black lives do matter — on that we can all agree. That’s why it’s imperative our state politicians take seriously the recently introduced articles of impeachment to remove Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner from office.
Under Krasner, Black lives are being lost at an alarming pace: 80% of 2021 homicide victims in Philadelphia were Black. Black men between the ages of 18 to 34 were the most affected, accounting for 280 homicides. Children’s lives matter, too. Forty-one children were murdered in Philadelphia in 2021 alone. Every citizen has the right to safety — this should not have to be argued on the basis of race or age.
But when it comes to Krasner, identity politics always matter because of his unilateral decision to reform what he considers a systemically racist judicial system by deliberately not prosecuting certain crimes.
The result? Black men are paying with their lives for Krasner’s progressive white savior complex.
Murders have been on the rise each year of Krasner’s tenure. Yet since taking office in 2018, Philadelphia has seen drastic declines in conviction rates for serious crimes, including fatal shootings, armed robberies, aggravated assault, and illegal gun possession. Between 2015 and 2021, only 21% of the nearly 9,000 shootings in the city led to criminal charges; fewer than one-tenth of those charges resulted in convictions.
» READ MORE: Three Pa. House Republicans say they’ll try to impeach Philly DA Larry Krasner
Why focus on Krasner? He has been brazen and unapologetic about failing to prosecute crime even as the number of shootings in the city soars. Former staffers who once agreed with his approach now call him out for advancing indoctrination over justice.
In the Pennsylvania Constitution, state lawmakers can impeach officeholders who have either committed an “infamous crime” or for any misbehavior. Krasner’s inaction does not meet the infamous crime threshold. But what about the “misbehavior” clause? A 1965 Pennsylvania court case defined it as “the breach of a positive statutory duty or the performance by a public official of a discretionary act with an improper or corrupt motive.” Krasner’s dereliction of duty and stated motive meet the definition.
Impeachment is rightly a difficult and lengthy process. The Pennsylvania Constitution gives the state House of Representatives powers to pass articles of impeachment. If successful, the state Senate holds a trial where a two-thirds majority is required to impeach — a threshold that requires bipartisan support.
» READ MORE: What happens when a city’s chief prosecutor refuses to prosecute?
Krasner has been called a “stain on the criminal justice reform movement” by other members of his office. Impeaching him will also ensure we don’t jeopardize the true bipartisan criminal justice reform that we’ve seen succeed in Pennsylvania. We can decriminalize and reduce sentences for nonviolent offenses, lower incarceration rates, and increase public safety — but not when the district attorney won’t enforce the law. Too much is at stake to let one man diminish more than a decade of progress.
Unfortunately, Philadelphia is not unique. In the past decade, George Soros spent over $40 million to elect progressive prosecutors in cities across America. In the 2017 election, Soros-funded groups contributed 90% of Krasner’s campaign funds. Today these Soros-backed district attorneys are being chased out of office. San Francisco’s violent crime got so bad that the progressive city recently voted to recall Chesa Boudin. Now George Gascón, the Los Angeles district attorney, is facing his own recall election. Impeachment sets a precedent that should not be taken lightly, but there is no recall mechanism in our city or commonwealth, so state lawmakers must act.
A Krasner impeachment will definitively show we are a state and nation of laws. If our officeholders fail to honor that, we will never be safe or free.
Jennifer Stefano is the executive vice president of the Commonwealth Foundation and a fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum. @jenniferstefano
+++++++++++++++++++++
- Across Party Lines, Senators Tell Biden to Get Tough on Assad - FDD
- US, Israel and Russian focus on Syria - analysis - JPOST
- As Iranians Continue to Protest, the Islamic Republic Fears for its Survival - DARFARI
- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
- This is abject insanity:
- +++
- In a crisis-ridden era, the US Navy focuses on...pronouns
- Winston Churchill memorably described British Navy traditions as "rum, sodomy, and the lash." In America, the lash, thankfully, is gone, and rum is for off-duty hours, but sodomy (that is, homosexuality) has moved front and center. The latest example is the childish video the Navy is having its members watch so they can learn how pronouns work, including avoiding "misgendering" fellow members of the Navy.
- Our military exists to defend America against foreign enemies, whether the battle is fought overseas or, God forbid, ends on American soil. Currently, we have a lot of enemies: Biden is busy trying to get us into a hot war with Putin, China is expanding its military and geographic reach, Iran continues its efforts to develop a nuclear bomb, and North Korea already has a nuclear bomb.
- And while those threats face America, our Navy is focused like a laser on pronouns. This focus doesn't just represent a complete collapse in the military's mission. It also represents a serious threat to the military's operational efficiency.
- Pronouns actually aren't complicated, whether in English or any other language. They are the word we substitute in lieu of nouns when referring to any person, animal, or object. A sentence such as "Mary went to her room to gather her books and bag so that she could go to her school" becomes a clunky nightmare if we remove the pronouns: "Mary went to Mary's room to gather Mary's books and bag so that Mary could go to Mary's school."
- But in today's day and age, as explained by Naval Undersea Warfare Center engineers Jony Rozon and Conchy Vaquez, both attired in the now ubiquitous "Pride" clothes, pronouns aren't about the utility and clarity of the English language. They are, instead, there to support navel-gazing self-aggrandizement. Thus, Conchy explains in the simple tones reserved for speaking to a mentally damaged child, "A pronoun is how we identify ourselves apart from our name and it's also how people refer to us in conversations."
- Personalized pronouns are also a way to reduce the English language to a nonsensical joke. Take the modern pronoun-rich sentence, "Mary went to their room to gather their books and bag so that they could go to their school." Ostensibly, that sentence is about Mary, but the literal meaning is that Mary has some sort of roommate or companion sharing her room and dogging her footsteps the entire way.
- Pronoun madness makes sentences even more unintelligible when you add in so-called "transgender" issues: "There are Carol and Fred. I told you about them. She is their father."
- Imagine a cutting-edge, time-sensitive, urgent naval emergency. And then imagine the sailors and Marines involved trying to communicate what's going on through a welter of illogical and imaginary pronouns. If they can't figure out who's doing what to whom (and who is responsible for what), ships and planes crash, bullets fly, and people die. And even if they can figure it out, they may lose so much precious time that the outcome is the same.
- Obama started the grotesque practice of turning the U.S. military, a highly functional, colorblind, well integrated, merit-based organization, into a social justice experiment. Biden has taken that misbegotten experiment and run with it. I fear that a lot of people — both in the military and in America's civilian population — are going to die because of this Marxist social justice policy.
- I have a very simple pronoun policy. If it's reasonable to believe you're female, I'll use female pronouns for you; if it's reasonable to believe you're male, I'll use male pronouns for you. If your sex is a mystery, well...I'll make my best guess. But I will not mangle English, logic, and safety to cater to your narcissism.
- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment