Tuesday August 31st, 2010 19:41 What Are America’s Interests?

It is not clear what the President meant when he said, “Ending the war was in our interest.”

First, wars just don’t end. They are a win, a loss, or a draw. By implying that he simply “ended” the war by just following a plan - as if he were imposing a managerial solution over a public policy problem - Obama gave the American people a very a simplistic and wrongheaded notion of war.

No plan survives contact with the enemy. Obama ought to understand this better than anyone. After all, he bitterly opposed the surge which helped break the cycle of violence and made the withdrawal of U.S. troops - without Iraq collapsing into civil war - possible.

Indeed Obama’s opposition to the surge was the centerpiece of his 2008 presidential campaign. And he was dead wrong too. Arguably, if we had followed the plan he advocated as a Senator today’s speech might never had happened.

It was not his plan that turned the war. It was fighting and defeating the insurgency. To suggest anything else is hubris.

Nor is it clear that the war has “ended”—The enemy still gets a vote. There may be more fighting ahead. And there is a war in Afghanistan that still must be won.

Second, the President’s rhetoric seems to suggest that fulfilling a campaign promise to “end the war” is the measure of defending U.S. vital national interests.

It is not.

If defending U.S. interests in Iraq requires additional combat, then we expect the President will fulfill his responsibility to lead the fight and protect our national interests.

The President’s opposition to the war was shrewd political calculation that helped him get elected.

After hearing how he talked about “ending” the war in tonight’s speech he may just be making another one.

This speech, to be frank, smacks too much of politics at the expense of presidential leadership. This is no small thing, and frankly it has tremendous policy implications (not just political ones). Obama is sending signals that “ending” the fight is more important than protecting America’s interests, just as he did when he opposed the Iraq war to appease the Left wing of his party, the same Left wing now trying to drive him out of Afghanistan. This manner of framing U.S. interests does not bode well for U.S. policy in Afghanistan. If the fighting does not go well there the President could begin focusing on the bogus interest of ending the conflict rather than the real mission in Afghanistan: protecting vital U.S. national interests.

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

, In: The CapitolNo Comments

Friday August 27th, 2010 05:53 Follow the Money: Could Mayor Bloomberg’s Media Business Interests in the Middle East Have Anything to Do with His Support of the Ground Zero Mosque?

Call us cynical but we wonder whether Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s passionate backing of the building of a controversial mosque near Ground Zero stems as much from Bloomberg’s belief in America’s “freedom of faith” as it might from the Mayor’s belief in the “virtues of Islamic finance?”

Does the Mayor’s unshakable support have anything to do with The Bloomberg (company) becoming a ‘single provider of information that caters to the Islamic business market’?  A Bloomberg five-year business plan for an Islamic finance portal via a Bloomberg hub at the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) is already a reality.


Michael Bloomberg, has become a staunch supporter of the Cordoba House (Park51) Ground Zero Mosque.  In the process, the Mayor has lectured opponents on “religious liberty” and, by extension, implied that opposition to the mosque is largely based on bigotry.

Lately, Bloomberg has become so insistent on the mosque’s being built at its planned location that The New York Post has labeled him Pro-Mosque Mike.”

A defiant Mayor Bloomberg, saying there should be no compromise, insisted last night that a mosque be built near Ground Zero, declaring, “We must do what is right, not what is easy.

While Bloomberg hasn’t been shy about questioning the motives of those opposed to the mosque’s location, the media has shied away from the Mayor‘s motivations.  But what of the Mayor’s motives? What might they be? Does a strong passion for religious liberty explain all?

Some of Bloomberg LP’s officials may hold some clues.

On October 2, 2009, The Dubai Chronicle reported Chairman and President of Bloomberg LP Peter T. Grauer met with UAE Vice President, Prime Minister and Ruler of Dubai His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum at Maktoum’s Emirate office. According to the Dubai Chronicle, Grauer gave a presentation of Bloomberg future expansion plans in the ‘area of business information’ in the United Emirates, North Africa, and India. Grauer stated the UAE was a great place to expand, the UAE’s “logistic facilities” the ‘biggest incentive for investors and companies to expand their businesses in the country and the region beyond’.


“Particularly since the meltdown of the western capitalist system, there has been an increasingly large focus on the virtues of Islamic finance. Today, there is no one single provider of information that caters to the Islamic finance market. So by Bloomberg being here, we are in the process  of building out an Islamic finance product. We are very confident that we can build a product that meets the needs of the market right now.”

–Max Linnington, Regional Head of Bloomberg Middle East and South Asia on the company’s plan to build a Bloomberg hub in Dubai at the Dubai International Financial Centre(DIFC), October 29, 2009

Some details about the DIFC:

The DIFC is the world’s fastest growing international financial centre. It aims to develop the same stature as New York, London and Hong Kong.

It primarily serves the vast region between Western Europe and East Asia.

Could the plans of Bloomberg LP have an influence on Bloomberg the Mayor?

Recently he claimed, “We would send a signal around the world that Muslim-Americans may be equal in the eyes of the law, but separate in the eyes of their countrymen.”

Might the Mayor be more interested–even just the tiniest bit–in some parts of the world than in others?

Might Bloomberg’s speech have sent a signal to the Middle East – which by a great coincidence, is the site of the Dubai International Financial Centre, the location of one of Bloomberg LP’s ten worldwide hubs?


On March 10, 2010, the Khaleej Times reported Bloomberg Set for Dubai expansion in bid to double revenues by 2014.

“Bloomberg, a leading global provider for financial data and news services, plans to “significantly boost regional operations from its Dubai hub as it is bullish about growth prospects of the emirate as a global financial center, a top executive said.”

The coincidences continue: the Mayor’s company is banking on “doubling revenues by 2014″ in a region that just happens to be largely populated by Muslims.

The Mayor, when he isn’t busy rallying support for a mosque opposed by a large majority in NYC and 70% of Americans at large, is in the newsgathering business. Bloomberg makes a lot of money providing financial news in a timely manner.

One more coincidence: if you do a search for financial news from Dubai and the Middle East, chances are, your only sources-outside the Mayor’s own Bloomberg.com — are The National, the Dubai Chronicle or the Khaleej News.

While we were able to easily access articles from the National, Dubai Chronicle or the Khaleej News about the Bloomberg Dubai hub, a search of Bloomberg.com came up empty.  Ten pages of results: nothing.

Does it concern the Mayor that Bloomberg.com is getting scooped on news about Bloomberg LP?

Michael Bloomberg has made billions of dollars being a savvy businessman. Might a savvy businessman consider it prudent to maintain good relations in the Muslim world–a part of the world where the Mayor’s company hopes to “double revenues by 2014?”

How does Mayor Bloomberg’s support for the Ground Zero mosque — based, he says, on the issue of freedom of faith – square with the “virtues of Islamic finance” and an Islamic finance portal in Dubai with Bloomberg LP‘s aim of becoming “the world’s single provider of information that caters to the Islamic finance market?”

One more important question: will the NYC media ask Hizzoner if he has any potential conflicts to act as an impartial broker on Park51? Doesn’t it seem just that the survivors and families whose loved ones lost their lives on 911 receive some answers — before receiving any more lectures from the tiny, Boston-born Democrat turned Republican turned Independent turned Republican turned Whatever Mayor of the City of New York?


It’s easy to imagine the Mayor becoming enthusiastic over opportunities when billions of dollars are to be made. Enthusiasm is a hard emotion to contain.

Even when a majority of his constituents remain opposed to the latest object of Bloomberg’s enthusiasm.

Big Journalism

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , In: The CapitolNo Comments

Thursday August 26th, 2010 10:24 When Special Interests Use The State To Create Monopolies: Priests Under Fire From The Big Funeral Racket

That’s some bad karma, casket dudes:

After the storm pummeled much of a pine forest they had long relied on for timber and income, the monks hatched a fresh plan: They would hand-craft and sell caskets.

But now, local funeral directors are trying to put a lid on the monks’ activities. The state funeral regulatory board, dominated by industry members, is enforcing a Louisiana law that makes it a crime for anyone but a licensed parlor to sell “funeral merchandise.” The morticians are serious. Violators such as the monks can land in jail for up to 180 days.

“I don’t relish that thought,” said Abbot Justin Brown, head of the 107-year-old abbey, as he sipped coffee in the monastery on a recent misty morning.

St. Joseph’s 36 monks, whose pastimes include baking raisin bread for the homeless, are putting up a fight. On Aug. 12, they filed a lawsuit in federal court in New Orleans to try to overturn the state edict. In the filing, the monks argue that the state law violates their right to pursue a gainful occupation. “We’re not just going to sit back and let these guys bulldoze us,” says Deacon Mark Coudrain.

As an aside, funeral operations are notoriously overpriced and take advantage of the grieving (not all). Over 90% of funeral homes are corporate rather than family operations and they make big bucks selling super expensive caskets.

Not only that, you HAVE to have a casket, even if you’re going to be cremated. Ridiculous. And the government aids and abets these criminals.

I want a plain pine box and cremation and to have my ashes spread in the Library of Congress. You think I’m joking.

Liberty Pundits Blog

, , , , , , , , , , In: The CapitolNo Comments

Thursday August 26th, 2010 10:18 Interests: hockey, music, acting and killing Infidels — Canadian Idol contestant arrested for jihad plot

Clearly the judges were “Islamophobic”

Maybe losing Canadian Idol drove him to seek revenge upon the kuffar. “Third terror suspect was ‘Canadian Idol’ contestant,” by Michelle Shephard and Richard J. Brennan for the Toronto Star, August 26 (thanks to Dave):

OTTAWA-A third terrorism suspect- one who moonwalked across a Montreal stage during an audition for Canadian Idol - was detained early Thursday, the Star has learned.

Khuram Sher was arrested as part of an RCMP national security investigation, as police continue to investigate a possible cell allegedly plotting to attack targets at home.

Sher told judges on the popular reality show in 2008 that he hailed from Pakistan and was a fan of “hockey, music and acting.”

He sings an off-tune rendition of Avril Lavigne’s “Complicated” with - as the show’s website describes - some “nifty” dance moves.

“Have you ever thought of being a comedian?” asks one of the judges of the 26-year-old.

Another remarks: “The dance moves were good, the singing, bad.”

One source close to the investigation said Sher was actually a Canadian-born physician and graduate of McGill University - quite a different persona from goofy contestant wearing a traditional Pakistani shalwar kameez and pakul hat as he performs robot dance moves and a Michael Jackson moonwalk….

A physician. No doubt driven to jihad terrorism by his desperate poverty.

Jihad Watch

, , , , , , , , , , , In: The CapitolNo Comments

Wednesday August 18th, 2010 10:13 “Smart Policy” Change in Cuba Policy Will Not Advance U.S. Interests

style="float: right; margin-bottom: 1px; margin-left: 1px;"> class="alignnone size-full wp-image-5073" title="Cuban President Fidel Castro (L) and his brother Raul, chat on December 23, 2003 in Havana, during a meeting of the Cuban Parliament. Raul Castro succeeded his brother Fidel Castro as the president of Cuba on February 24, 2008, in a historic power shift expected to keep Havana firmly on its communist path, officials said." src="http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/fidel_raul0904091.jpg" alt="Cuban President Fidel Castro (L) and his brother Raul, chat on December 23, 2003 in Havana, during a meeting of the Cuban Parliament. Raul Castro succeeded his brother Fidel Castro as the president of Cuba on February 24, 2008, in a historic power shift expected to keep Havana firmly on its communist path, officials said." width="400" height="241" />

The Obama Administration is apparently readying a “Fall Surprise” regarding its policy toward Cuba. href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/17/world/americas/17cuba.html?_r=2">The New York Times reports that the White House intends to ease restrictions on travel to Cuba and return to the “people-to-people” policies of the Clinton Administration. It will also reportedly make private assistance flows easier. Claimed one Democratic policy mandarin, the Administration has worked up “a smarter Cuba policy.”

The decision to loosen restriction comes as Cuba’s mismanaged economy is again href="http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/08/04/1760056/cubas-quick-fix.html">in free fall and seeks help from any quarter. Cubans recently were informed that they must further tighten their belts since as much as a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/01/raul-castro-cuba-governme_n_666799.html">fifth of the nation’s workforce may soon be let go. href="http://www.postchronicle.com/news/breakingnews/article_212315678.shtml">Food production continues to fall despite Raul Castro’s tinkering. And Cuba’s exploitative href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703977004575393202684254756.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">export of doctors and medical personnel was recently exposed. id="more-41358">

Changes would also take place at a moment when the convalescent 84-year old Fidel Castro is making a return to the public stage. Acting more like Nostradamus than the “maximum leader,” Castro is given to prognosticating that nuclear href="http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2010/0808/Fidel-Castro-warns-of-nuclear-war-climate-change-ignores-Cuba-issues">Armageddon is just around the corner because of U.S. imperialistic confrontations with Iran and North Korea.

It is surely an ironic fact that in October 1962 at the height of the Cuban Missile crisis, href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/35_kennedy/psources/ps_attackus.html">Castro urged the Soviet Union’s Khrushchev to launch a nuclear war against the U.S. if JFK landed U.S. troops in Cuba. An unrepentant Castro sees in Iran’s deadly nuclear quest the same visceral anti-Americanism that remains the guiding star in his geopolitical firmament.

Fidel’s return is, according to veteran Cuba analyst Brian Latell, “ href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9e8ad9e0-a31f-11df-8cf4-00144feabdc0.html">unbridled narcissism.” Valiant blogger href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/04/AR2010080405455.html?hpid=opinionsbox1">Yoani Sanchez captures the muddle that is the political scene in Cuba: Fidel, she observes, “has come forward again to shamelessly display his infirmities and announce the end of the world, as if to convince us that life after him would be lacking in purpose.”

The Administration will move ahead despite the fact the Cuban are still holding href="http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/urges+Cuba+free+contractor/3346427/story.html">AID worker Alan Gross, who was arrested in December, 2009 , and his being held without charges. Gross was engaged in a “people-to-people project” that ran afoul of Cuba’s ever-present security apparatus.

While failing to advance any substantial U.S. economic [jobs, exports], political [democracy, respect for human rights, freedom for Mr. Gross ], or security interests, the Obama Administration proposes to serve up the Castros and their moribund communist regime with a fresh bunch of carrots—more visitors, easier private assistance aid, and heightened legitimacy. This policy is the opposite of “smart.”

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

, , , , , , , In: The CapitolNo Comments

Monday August 16th, 2010 07:58 Al Qaeda advises Shabaab to keep low profile on links, attack US interests

Al Qaeda’s senior leadership has advised Shabaab, its affiliate in Somalia, to downplay links between the two terror groups and suggested that future attacks be directed at US interests in East Africa.

“Al Qaeda’s top leadership has instructed Shabaab to maintain a low profile on al Qaeda links,” a senior US intelligence official who closely follows al Qaeda and Shabaab in East Africa told The Long War Journal. The official, who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the subject, said the information was passed between the top leadership of both groups.

“Al Qaeda has accepted Shabaab into the fold and, and any additional statements would only serve to draw international scrutiny,” the intelligence official said. “Al Qaeda is applying lessons learned from Iraq, that an overexposure of the links between al Qaeda central leadership and its affiliates can cause some unwanted attention.”

Shabaab’s double suicide attack in Uganda on July 11 was well received by al Qaeda’s top leadership, who want Shabaab to continue to hitting US interests in Africa.

“Al Qaeda is pleased with the double suicide attack in Uganda, but suggested Shabaab reserve future strikes at US interests in the region,” the official said.

The July 11 double suicide attack in Kampala, the capital of Uganda, killed 74 civilians as they watched the World Cup’s final soccer match. The mastermind of the Kampala attacks, Isah Ahmed Luyima, said he executed the bombings with the intent of maximizing US deaths.

“I targeted places where many Americans go,” Luyima said in a press conference hosted by Ugandan police on Aug. 12. “I was made to believe that Americans were responsible for the suffering of Muslims all over the world.”

The Shabaab cell that carried out the Uganda attack called itself the Saleh Ali Nabhan Brigade. Saleh Ali Slaeh Nabhan was a top al Qaeda and Shabaab leader who has been indicted by the US for his involvement in the 1998 bombings at the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Nabhan was indicted with several top al Qaeda leaders, including Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri. Nabhan served as Shabaab’s top military commander before US special operations forces both downplayed any ties after security forces attacked terror training camps operated by Atom in the Galgala Mountains in late July.

Shabaab’s links to al Qaeda

Al Qaeda has praised Shabaab and its predecessor, the Islamic Courts Union, for years prior to accepting Shabaab into the fold. For years al Qaeda has helped produced propaganda for the Islamic Courts and Shabaab and has addressed the group in its own propaganda tapes. Osama bin Laden endorsed the Islamic Courts during a speech back in 2006.

“We will continue, God willing, to fight you and your allies everywhere, in Iraq and Afghanistan and in Somalia and Sudan until we waste all your money and kill your men and you will return to your country in defeat as we defeated you before in Somalia,” bin Laden said. Al Qaeda leaders Ayman al Zawahiri and Abu Yahya al Libi have also directly addressed Shabaab and voiced their support for the terror group’s activities.

During the summer of 2008, Shabaab sought to formally join al Qaeda. By the end of that year, al Qaeda had accepted Shabaab as its official affiliate in East Africa.

Shabaab’s former spokesman and top military commander, Sheikh Mukhtar Robow, admitted that many Shabaab leaders have trained with and take instruction from al Qaeda. “Most of our leaders were trained in Al Qaeda camps,” Robow told The Los Angeles Times in August 2008. “We get our tactics and guidelines from them,” he continued. “Many have spent time with Osama bin Laden.” Other Shabaab leaders have also admitted to links with al Qaeda.

“We will take our orders from Sheikh Osama bin Laden because we are his students,” Robow continued. “Al Qaeda is the mother of the holy war in Somalia.”

In September of 2008, Shabaab formally reached out to al Qaeda’s senior leadership in an effort to better integrate with the network and its strategic nodes across Africa and the Middle East. The effort came in the form of a 24-minute video that featured Nabhan.

In the tape, Nabhan declared an oath of bayat (loyalty) on behalf of Shabaab to bin Laden and al Qaeda and encouraged fighters to train in Shabaab-run camps and participate in the fight against the transitional federal government, Ethiopian forces, and African Union peacekeepers.

The response to Shabaab’s declaration came two months later, on Nov. 19, 2008, when al Qaeda operations chief Ayman al-Zawahiri acknowledged the group in a propaganda video by calling them “my brothers, the lions of Islam in Somalia.”

“[R]ejoice in victory and conquest,” Zawahiri said in an official transcript acquired by The Long War Journal, “and hold tightly to the truth for which you have given your lives, and don’t put down your weapons before the Mujahid state of Islam and Tawheed [oneness with god] has been set up in Somalia.”

Most of Shabaab’s top leaders are foreign al Qaeda operatives. Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, who also was indicted for his involvement in the 1998 attacks in Kenya and Tanzania, served as Shabaab’s top intelligence official before replacing Nabhan as Shabaab’s top military leader. Al Qaeda also appointed Fazul as its operations chief for East Africa.

Shaykh Muhammad Abu Fa’id, a Saudi citizen, serves as a top financier and a “manager” for Shabaab. Abu Musa Mombasa, a Pakistani citizen, serves as Shabaab’s chief of security and training. Mahmud Mujajir, a Sudanese citizen, is Shabaab’s chief of recruitment for suicide bombers. Abu Mansour al Amriki, a US citizen, serves as a military commander, recruiter, financier, and propagandist.


Uganda suicide plot meant to kill more Americans, The Associated Press
Shabaab claims credit for dual suicide attacks in Uganda, The Long War Journal
Uganda attack carried out by Shabaab cell named after slain al Qaeda leader, The Long War Journal
Senior al Qaeda leader killed in Somalia, The Long War Journal
Al Qaeda names Fazul Mohammed East African commander, The Long War Journal
Puntland forces claim victory against Shabaab in the ‘Tora Bora of East Africa’, The Long War Journal
Excerpts from the Osama bin Laden Tape, The Long War Journal
Zawahiri praises Shabaab’s takeover of southern Somalia, The Long War Journal
Qaeda figure calls for attacks on new Somali govt, Reuters
Shabaab leader admits links to al Qaeda, The Long War Journal
Al Qaeda leaders play significant role in Shabaab, The Long War Journal

The Long War Journal

, , , , , , , In: The CapitolNo Comments

Friday August 13th, 2010 12:30 Russian Deployment of S-300 Missiles Threatens U,S. Interests in the Caucasus

style="float: right; margin-bottom: 1px; margin-left: 1px;"> class="alignnone size-full wp-image-3258" title="A picture taken on April 9, 1992 shows a Russian S300 missile burning away from its pad in Priozorsk during a training launch. Russia on December 22, 2008 denied that it was delivering sophisticated S-300 surface-to-air missiles to Iran, following reports it was about to supply the weapons to the US arch-foe." src="http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/russian_s300missile090304.jpg" alt="A picture taken on April 9, 1992 shows a Russian S300 missile burning away from its pad in Priozorsk during a training launch. Russia on December 22, 2008 denied that it was delivering sophisticated S-300 surface-to-air missiles to Iran, following reports it was about to supply the weapons to the US arch-foe." width="150" height="210" />

On Wednesday, Gen. Alexander Zelin, the commander of the Russian Air Force, href="http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20100811/160159125.html">announced that Moscow had deployed a state-of-the-art S-300 (SA-20 Favorit) long- range air defense system in Abkhazia, a region of the Republic of Georgia that Russia has occupied since the August 2008 war.

Since then, Russia recognized breakaway Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent republics. According to Zelin, the task of the air defense systems is “to prevent violation of Abkhaz and South Ossetian airspace and to destroy any aircraft intruding into their airspace href="http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=22586">no matter what their purpose might be”.

However, there is much more than the defense of Abkhazia to the Russian deployment. Taken together with the S-300 base in Armenia, it extends the strategic air space over South Caucasus and over parts of the Black Sea, furthering Russian control.

The response from the Obama Administration was faint. P. J. Crowley, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State and State Department spokesman said: “I believe it’s our understanding that Russia has had S-300 missiles in Abkhazia for the past two years.” He later claimed that this is “not necessarily” a new development. This is another example of the Obama Administration’s “don’t let your missiles interfere with my reset policy” approach. id="more-41118">

However, with this move Russia is yet again flagrantly violating the August 2008 ceasefire agreement, negotiated by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. It called upon both countries to withdraw troops to pre-war positions and restore status-quo ante bellum. In addition, Russia has built up to five military bases in Abkhazia and South Ossetia in the past two years alone.

Although the range of the system is about a 120 miles, the deployment has to be seen in the context of recent Russian policies in the Caucasus. Moscow negotiated a contract extension for basing troops in the Armenian Gyumri military base till 2044. It will assume joint control over Armenian borders. As the leading member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, Russia controls air space over Armenia. Now Moscow is href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704164904575420983022047918.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">reportedly selling an S-300 air defense system to Azerbaijan.

There is a clear strategy behind these actions. While Secretary of State Hillary Clinton href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704164904575420983022047918.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">hails “soft power” in the Caucasus, Moscow engages in a hard, classic political-military power projection in this strategic region, which connects the Atlantic (via the Black Sea and Mediterranean) with the energy riches of Eurasia. As President Medvedev stated in his post-war 2008 speech, this is “a zone of Russian exclusive interests”, where it is willing to use force.

Most importantly from the perspective of the United States, Russian actions are aimed at denying the United Space airspace and over-flight options. The surveillance aspect is no less important—depending on the actual deployment of the air defenses: associated radars will be able to picture or “paint” much of western Georgia and the adjoining Black Sea coastline. The ultimate objective for Moscow is to become an uncontested hegemon in the South Caucasus. And of course this has potential implications in case of an Iranian contingency.

The Russians are committed to deployments in the Caucasus that lead to the strategic denial of U.S. power projection in that region. This bears on the U.S.’s future ability to resupply Afghanistan; to use power to disarm a nuclear Iran; to ensure energy supply from the Caspian; and to help pro-Western friends and allies. These are hardly great accomplishments for the Obama “reset” policy”.

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

, , , , , , In: The CapitolNo Comments