Sandbag Your Friends, Encourage Your Enemies

    Obama's weakness on Middle Eastern policy is something to behold.  Consider the developments in the last few weeks:

    On the eve of a visit from Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, President Obama takes the opportunity to undermine one of Israels primary negotiating tools with the Palestinians by saying that the 1967 Israeli borders should be the basis for the borders of a Palestinian State. Yeah, Yeah, he mentioned "land swaps", but does anyone seriously believe this after thought changes his overall meaning?  Rather than praising the only functioning democracy in the Middle East and one of our closest allies in the world, Obama sandbags its Prime Minister by suggesting that Israel should give up land.  Keep in mind that the only reason Israel has this land is because IT WAS THE VICTIM OF AN UNPROVOKED ATTACK!  Our President seems to want Israel to give back land to those that attacked them in exchange for... (wait for it) NOTHING.  This is a shabby way to treat any friend but it is especially shabby in this case because by suggesting concessions from Israel, you are necessarily supporting the other side. And who is on the other side? Well as of a few days ago Hamas (you remember them, the bus bombing, kidnapping, "Israel must be wiped off the face of the earth" folks) is back in the fold with Fatah, and that is just the Palestinians.  The other side also includes Hezbollah (those guys in Lebanon that periodically lob rockets at school children), and Hezbollah's masters in Damascus and their masters in Tehran.  So by sucker punching our ally rather than praising them as the only beacon of freedom in the entire region, our President has sided with some of this country's worst enemies.

     Not only did Obama criticize a friend, he essentially failed to offer any meaningful support for the courageous protesters in Syria that are being slaughtered.  Obama's policy of bombing Libya for threatening civilians while offering up only limp-wristed sanctions against Syria for the same thing is at best incoherent but is likely worse.  Libya, by all accounts, had pretty much given up on getting nukes and on terrorism. We are not saying Gadhafi is a great guy, but he was probably not a big threat to the U.S. or our allies (including Israel).  Syria, on the other hand provides massive support to Hezbollah and Hamas (the bus bombing rocket lobbers for those of you with a short attention span) and is essentially a client state of Iran.  It is through the Syrian regime that Iran supports both Hamas and Hezbollah (they send the rockets to lob at school children and the explosives to blow up the buses) and foments instability in Lebanon.  Rather than focusing on toppling the Syrian regime in support of the protesters and thereby dealing a serious blow to our enemies in Tehran as well as the bus bombers and rocket lobbers, Obama decides to bomb Libya.  As if this is not bad enough, he bombs Libya but fails to remove the regime so we are left with either an expensive stalemate enforced by a no fly zone or a dictator that has renewed interest striking back at this country and our allies. 

     Last but not least Obama addressed Egypt, a country in flux after successfully ousting its longtime ruler in favor of a temporary military government.  It is difficult to know what to do with Egypt because it is impossible to know whether its eventual government will be pro-western and a potential ally or if the Muslim Brotherhood will take power and drag Egypt down the road of Islamic extremism.  Faced with this difficulty, Obama followed his instincts.... SPEND MONEY.  He proposed an additional 2 billion dollars of on top of the existing 2 billion we provide to Egypt annually.  Given our country's financial condition and uncertainties in Egypt, this hardly seems like a good idea but it does provide further evidence of one thing:  With Obama in charge you are better off as an unknown or an enemy of the U.S. than as a dictator that poses no threat to us in Libya or as a steadfast friend in Israel.  

     Hats off to President Obama. Just when we thought our Middle Eastern policy could not get any worse, he manages to weaken our friends and encourage our enemies.  This will not help to bring peace to this troubled region. Well done Mr. President!

                                                                                                             --Hand

“To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering.”
                                                                            -Barry Goldwater
   

Terrorists, Despots and Porn... Oh My!

     Some of the cable outlets are now reporting that among the treasure trove of documents and data taken from Bin Laden's compound was a fairly large stash of pornography.  Is anyone seeing a pattern here?What is it with fanatical leaders and porn collections?  Uday (or was it Qusay?) Hussein was reported to have a vast collection of porn and that little perv, Kim Jung Il in North Korea, is rumored to have the world's largest collection of porn (and nary a Korean "actress" in the bunch I'll bet).  Even the grand daddy evil despot of all time, Adolph Hitler, was rumored to have a soft spot for some pornographic movies among his many proclivities.   

     So what is behind this pattern of "perversion"?  Maybe these guys were just used to doing whatever they wanted and hey, if you just got done with a hard day of massacring your own people or starting a war, you may not be too concerned about the social stigma of watching porn.  Or maybe its as simple as dudes like porn.  After all, it is a multi-billion dollar business and seems to take up half the internet (you should have seen what we came across googling Hitler liked porn).  These explanations seem pretty satisfying for the Hussein boys, and Kim and Adolph but less so for Bin Laden.  Osama claimed to be all about spreading a strict brand of Islam where women and men can't even go out for a drink, much less make dirty movies. And women must be covered from head to toe when the leave the house.  If the guy likes a little skin, why is he willing to kill thousands to institute the burqa rule?  He clearly likes a little porn on the one hand but is ok with Taliban style public executions for adultery on the other? Maybe he thought those people in the movies were married.

     In the end this is just another example of the hypocrisy of the so called Jihad movement.  Hopefully Osama's stash will help to show others in the Muslim world just how bankrupt and empty Bin Laden's cause really is, but I'm not holding my breath. Now... what's on Cinemax later tonight?

                                                                                                  -- Hand

     "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious."
                                                 -Peter Ustinov

Bin Laden Success Overshadowing Libya Debacle?

 
     The situation in Libya is a disaster in the making and were it not for the Bin Laden success, this would be increasingly clear to the American People.  Lets recap what happened in Libya before our involvement. First there was the dramatic uprising of the Libyan people against a vile dictator, protests in Tripoli and rebel forces capturing important oil towns and facilities. The regime was teetering and the rebels had the momentum but could not quite force the dictator from power. They requested help from us and the West did nothing. If we were to lend our support, this was the time.  Sadly, Gadhafi regrouped and counterattacked, regaining lost ground and savagely beating back the rebels in a brutal crackdown.  A few days later Gadhafi was on the verge of crushing the uprising.  It looked as though the uprising would be put down and Gadhafi would survive.  Then in the 11th hour the ever mealymouthed U.N. passed a resolution for a "no-fly zone" to protect civilians.  Let the debacle begin!

     Just when Gadhafi was on the verge of regaining control, the U.S. and European forces move in with air power (and cruise missiles) to enforce the U.N. resolution.  At this point Obama begins making statements that Gadhafi must go.  Hmm, that is not what the U.N. resolution said.  Are we using force in Libya to protect civilians pursuant to the U.N. resolution or are we overthrowing Gadhafi?  At about the same time Obama announces that there will be no American troops on the ground in Libya and that the American military would be stepping back (taking our gunships and A-10's with us) to allow the Europeans to take the lead.  Hmm, Gadhafi must go but there will be no troops to force him out.  No troops? At this point Gadhafi must have been thrilled!  He knows we can't force him out with air power and the rebels are not very well armed or organized.  So all he has to do is wait us out.  And it is not as though Gadhaifi will have to wonder how long the U.S. will stay in the fight.  Just as he has done in Afghanistan, Obama undoubtedly will provide Gahafi with a timeline of just how long we will continue to harass him before giving up.

     So what's the endgame?  Well it is looking like either there will be a divided Libya maintained by ongoing expensive enforcement of  a no fly zone or Gadhafi will wait us out and retake all his lost territory.  Statements that "Gadhafi must go!" from the President of the United States will prove to be nothing but hollow rhetoric, and further establish Obama's weakness as a world leader.  Worse still, Obama will have managed to transform Gadhafi from a despot that had surrendered his nuclear research and backed off of terrorism to one that will likely redouble his efforts to attack our country.  So while we have taken out one terrorist leader in Pakistan, we may well be creating another, this time with the resources of an oil rich nation behind him. How long will our success against Bin Laden overshadow this disaster in the making?  Maybe Obama will give us a timeline. 

                                                                                                --Hand

        "Words may show a man's wit but actions his meaning."
                                                           -- Benjamin Franklin
 

    
    

Disgusting Hypocrisy

     As Obama (rightfully) trumpets the success and perseverance of  our fine military and intelligence services in putting an end to Bin Laden, AG Holder continues his investigation and threat of prosecution of members of those very same intelligence services.  Worse yet, these investigations are not of some handful of rogue operatives, they are of interrogation professionals following the interrogation rules then in place.   Threatening CIA interrogators with jail while simultaneously applauding them when they get results is sickening and speaks volumes about our President's true regard for our intelligence services.   Can this do anything but hurt our ability to attract top flight talent to our intelligence agencies? 

    The President is traveling to Kentucky to meet some of the special operations forces that took part in the Bin Laden raid.  While it is wholly appropriate for the Commander in Chief to give these brave people a pat on the back, maybe one of them could prevail upon him to stop prosecuting our own CIA officers so that we might have more of these successes in the future! 

                                                                                      Frustratedly yours,
                                                                              
                                                                                                                 Hand

    "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far"

                                                                           --Theodore Roosevelt

Opportunity Lost?

     The successful operation that resulted in the death of Bin Laden is the high point and greatest moment of the Obama presidency (and there is no close second).  Even a politician with whom we seldom agree deserves a pat on the back when there is a genuine accomplishment and the killing of Bin Laden certainly qualifies.  So consider this that pat on the back Mr. President. 

     With that said, why did we feel it necessary to immediately disclose the success of our mission?  Today there are reports all over the news networks about how the CIA is feverishly working to analyze the "treasure trove" of information recovered from the Bin Laden compound before the cockroaches scatter.  Would it not have been better to wait a couple of days to announce the raid?  The items gathered in the compound could have been analyzed and perhaps acted upon before the entire world knew that the information was in CIA hands.  It is possible that word of the raid would not have spread quickly.  After all, there was no phone or Internet connection at the compound so no one would become concerned that Osama had not called or emailed.  And the Pakistanis would probably not have been in any hurry to publicize the raid since the news paints them as either harboring the world's most wanted terrorist or being horribly incompetent.  So we could have had valuable time to maximize our use of the information obtained.

     Another interesting point that has been touched upon by some news outlets and predictably not touched upon by others is the possibility that the initial information that led to the killing of Bin Laden was developed through "enhanced interrogation" methods (read water boarding and sleep deprivation).  If that is the case, is it possible that the terrorists subjected to these techniques would not have given up Bin Laden's couriers in the absence of such techniques?  Back during the Bush Presidency the initial line of the left criticizing water boarding, sleep deprivation and the like was that these techniques are tantamount to torture.  I'm not sure that this ever gained much traction outside of those who think the prisoner experience should be substantially similar to spending time at a Sandals resort (ok maybe not Sandals but one of those crappy all inclusives where booze is not included).  Most folks recognize the difference between keeping someone awake for a long time and having your finger nails pulled out one by one with pliers.  So when the torture argument lost traction, the argument became that the information obtained this way is not reliable.   Well, it would seem that at least in this instance it lead to the death of the most wanted man in the world.   With a result such as this, we would be fools to jettison such tools without more consideration. 

    Thanks for stopping by and let us know what you think.
                                
                                                                                  --Hand


"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
                                                                                               -- Thomas Jefferson

An Auspicious Beginning

     What a day for our inaugural post here on The New Invisible Hand! Thanks very much for stopping by to check us out.  I am going to talk briefly about what you can expect to find here going forward and the purpose of this little spot out in the blogosphere.  But first I would be remiss if I did not touch on the great news that broke last night regarding the death of Osama Bin Laden.

     There is some debate about what the practical effect of Bin Laden's death will be. Some are hailing it as a turning point in the war on terror, others argue that the Al Qaeda network long ago spread into many separate "franchises" and the death of Bin Laden will have little practical impact on their operations.  What ever the case, the United States and the world is better off now that Bin Laden no longer lives and we Americans owe a debt of gratitude to all those brave soldiers, intelligence personal and operatives that worked for so long to make this moment possible.  The impact of his death on terrorism may not be immediately known but one important  message has been sent in no uncertain terms:  We will not forget, not forgive and never stop pursuing our enemies no matter how long it takes or how far they run.  And to our enemies hiding out there, know that you are not safe anywhere and we are coming for you.  There is plenty more to talk about with respect to Bin Laden's death but we will leave that for future posts.

     And now a little about this blog and what you can expect to find here.  As you might have guessed from our description, politics will play a central role here and sometimes the topics will be serious. We believe in individual freedom, free markets and limited government.  Most of the time however we will endeavor to bring some humor, levity and lightheartedness to our discussions. And from time to time we will stray into topics that, in  nut shell, we find interesting; from the NFL lockout to new scientific discoveries.  Most importantly we look forward to hearing from you.  We will do our best to respond to your comments and questions whether you agree with us or not and we look forward to spirited discussions.  Feel free to drop us a line any time at thenewinvisiblehand@gmail.com. 

Thanks for joining us for our first post! Stop by often and tell us what you think.

                                                                                                      -- Thanks much,
                                                                                             
                                                                                                          Hand

            "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Benjamin Franklin