Archive for World

Under Donald Trump And The Republican Controlled Congress America Started Moving On A Path Away From The Peace, Prosperity And Stability That Have Defined The Past 75 Years

Posted in United States with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 6, 2017 by sheriffali

A 1-128

[WAPO] “In economics, as in life, things often take longer to happen than you think they will and then happen faster than you thought they could. So it may turn out with the catastrophic international economic policies of President Trump. It is possible that last week will be remembered as a hinge in history — a moment when the United States and the world started moving on a path away from the peace, prosperity and stability that have defined the past 75 years.

 

For all that has gone wrong in the past three-quarters of a century, this period has witnessed more human betterment than any time. The rate of fatalities in war has steadily declined, while growing integration has driven global growth and improvement in life expectancy and living standards. Progress is too slow, and not well enough shared, but Americans have never lived so well. This has been driven by remarkable developments in human thought, especially in science and technology, and a relatively stable global order that has been underwritten by the United States.

 

 

Will these trends continue? Optimists have suggested that despite the revanchist and often anti-rationalist rhetoric of his campaign, Trump has in the international sphere surrounded himself with rational establishment advisers and has either retreated or been stymied by Congress on proposals such as launching trade wars and building walls.

 

Until last week, they had a reasonable argument. No longer. We may have our first post-rational president. Trump has rejected the view of modern science on global climate change, embraced economic forecasts and trade theories outside the range of reputable opinion, and relied on the idea of alternative facts rather than evidence-based truth.

 

 

Even for conservative statesmen such as Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Henry Kissinger, the idea of a community of nations has been a commonplace. Come now H.R McMaster, national security adviser, and Gary Cohn, director of the National Economic Council, who have been held out as the president’s most rational, globally minded advisers.

 

They have taken to the Wall Street Journal to proclaim that “the world is not a global community” and advanced a theory of international relations not unlike the one that animated the British and French at Versailles at the end of World War I. On this view, the objective of international negotiation is not to establish a stable, peaceful system or to seek cooperation or to advance universal values through compromise, they wrote, but to strike better deals in “an arena where nations, nongovernmental organizations, and businesses compete for advantage.”

 

In service of this theory, the president in the past two weeks renounced any claim to U.S. moral leadership by failing to convincingly reaffirm traditional U.S. security commitments to NATO and abandoning participation in the Paris global climate agreement. The latter is probably our most consequential error since the Iraq War and may well be felt even longer.

There will be consequences to all of this, as there were to the pursuit of short-term advantage rather than systemic stability at Versailles. One does not need to subscribe to pessimistic versions of Graham Allison’s “Thucydides Trap” as it relates to worries about how China as a rising power may fill the vacuum left by the United States.

 

How, after the events of the past week, can U.S. adversaries and allies alike not follow German Chancellor Angela Merkel in concluding that the United States is now far less predictable and reliable? How can the responses be other than destabilizing?

 

It is essential that leaders in U.S. society signal clearly their disapproval of the course the administration is taking. History will judge poorly business leaders who retain positions on Trump administration advisory boards because they hope to be in a position to cut favorable deals. Elon Musk of Tesla and Robert Iger of Disney have taken the correct and principled stand by resigning their presidential appointments. More should follow.

 

What is to be done? The U.S. president is not America. The world will be watching to see whether Trump’s words and deeds represent an irrevocable turn in the nation’s approach to the world or a temporary aberration. The more that leading figures in U.S. society can signal their continuing commitment to reason, to common purpose with other nations, and to addressing global challenges, the more the damage can be contained. And, of course, Congress has a central role to play in preventing dangerous and destabilizing steps.”

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 A 1-125

A 1-130

 

 

A Promising Nuclear Deal With Iran And The Face You Make When Sabotage Fails

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 3, 2015 by sheriffali

[NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL] The preliminary agreement between Iran and the major powers is a significant achievement that makes it more likely Iran will never be a nuclear threat. President Obama said it would “cut off every pathway that Iran could take to develop a nuclear weapon.”

 

Officials said some important issues have not been resolved, like the possible lifting of a United Nations arms embargo, and writing the technical sections could also cause problems before the deal’s finalization, expected by June 30. Even so, the agreement announced on Thursday after eight days of negotiations appears more specific and comprehensive than expected.

 

It would roll back Iran’s nuclear program sufficiently so that Iran could not quickly produce a nuclear weapon, and ensure that, if Iran cheated, the world would have at least one year to take preventive action, including reimposing sanctions. In return, the United States, the European Union and the United Nations would lift sanctions crippling Iran’s economy, though the timing of such a move is yet another uncertainty.

 

Iran would shut down roughly two-thirds of the 19,000 centrifuges producing uranium that could be used to fuel a bomb and agree not to enrich uranium over 3.67 percent (a much lower level than is required for a bomb) for at least 15 years. The core of the reactor at Arak, which officials feared could produce plutonium, another key ingredient for making a weapon, would be dismantled and replaced, with the spent fuel shipped out of Iran.

 

Mr. Obama, speaking at the White House, insisted he was not relying on trust to ensure Iran’s compliance but on “the most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime ever negotiated for any nuclear program.”

 

There is good reason for skepticism about Iran’s intentions. Although it pledged not to acquire nuclear weapons when it ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1970, it pursued a secret uranium enrichment program for two decades. By November 2013, when serious negotiations with the major powers began, Iran was enriching uranium at a level close to bomb-grade.

 

However, Iran has honored an interim agreement with the major powers, in place since January 2014, by curbing enrichment and other major activities.

 

By opening a dialogue between Iran and America, the negotiations have begun to ease more than 30 years of enmity. Over the long run, an agreement could make the Middle East safer and offer a path for Iran, the leading Shiite country, to rejoin the international community.

 

The deal, if signed and carried out, would vindicate the political risks taken by President Hassan Rouhani of Iran and President Obama to engage after decades of estrangement starting from the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

 

Talking to adversaries — as President Ronald Reagan did in nuclear weapons negotiations with the Soviets and President Richard Nixon did in his opening to China — is something American leaders have long pursued as a matter of practical necessity and prudence.

 

Yet in today’s poisonous political climate, Mr. Obama’s critics have gone to extraordinary lengths to undercut him and any deal. Their belligerent behavior is completely out of step with the American public, which overwhelmingly favors a negotiated solution with Iran, unquestionably the best approach.

 

Sunni Arab nations and Israel are deeply opposed to any deal, fearing that it would strengthen Iran’s power in the region. This agreement addresses the nuclear program, the most urgent threat, and does not begin to tackle Iran’s disruptive role in Syria and elsewhere. Iran is widely seen as a threat; whether it can get beyond that will depend on whether its leaders choose to be less hostile to its neighbors, including Israel.

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

http://nyti.ms/1GlyUcb

 GOP SABOTAGE BACKFIRED

Virtues of Women! Dedicated to Malala Yousafzai

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on October 12, 2013 by sheriffali

“There is something in a woman beyond all human delights: a magnetic virtue, a charming quality, and occult and powerful motive of love and caring.

 

A beautiful woman is the perfect workmanship of God and the sole wonder of the world. When I see the elaborate study and ingenuity displayed by women in the pursuit of trifles, I feel no doubt of their herculean undertakings.

 

Man’s sin is that he has not had enough humility; woman’s that she has had too much of it. It is as if, by letting women carry the burden of being humble and pious for them, men have got rid of any need to appropriate these virtues for themselves and so have felt free to visit aggression on the world.”

 PRESIDENT OBAMA - MALALA

 

President Obama seeking Congressional Approval is not BLINKING, he is THINKING!

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 1, 2013 by sheriffali

Obama is not trying to win a Civil War in Syria, he is seeking to punish and dissuade the Syrian Regime on any further use of Chemical Weapons. The United States and the World has a moral obligation to carry out this action.

 

The International Community banned the use of Chemical and Biological Weapons in 1925, subsequent to World War 1, and the ban was reinforced in 1972 and 1993.

 

Over the past two weeks President Obama and his administration clearly stated that the President “did not” make any decision on how he was going to handle Syria, but was looking at the options provided to him by his Military Advisors.

 

It was only on Saturday August 31, 2013, the President announced that he has made the decision to strike Syria, but he was going to seek Congressional Approval.

 

Most of the Media that strive on news of “mayhem; death, destruction and scandals of all sorts,” have criticized the President for seeking Congressional Approval. Perhaps, just perhaps, the delay in Military Action interrupted the Media’s thirst to report “tragedy.”

 

Amazingly enough, this criticism was not limited to the usual suspects; Fox News and CNN.  I was most surprised to see David Gregory of Meet the Press, verbally tormenting Secretary of State, John Kerry, solely because the President sought Congressional Approval.

 

It shouldn’t be difficult for the American people to remember that it was the same Media that failed to ask questions of former President George W. Bush, but helped to sell Bush’s fantasy about Iraq’s Chemical Weapons, that to this day, “the stench of Iraq’s misery, is still with us and the International Community.”

 

The International Community banned the use of Chemical and Biological Weapons in 1925, subsequent to World War 1, and the ban was reinforced in 1972 and 1993.

 

The Syrian Government’s use of Chemical Weapons against its own people, is not just an American problem, it is the World’s problem. Thus, it is only fitting that President Obama seeks to have International Assistance in the case of Syria. The problem with the rest of the world is that they agree that what the Syrian Government did by killing over 1,400 of their own people [some 400 children] with the use of Chemical Weapons is a crime, but they stop short on offering any assistance.

 

So, with only France standing firm with America, it was very intelligent of the President to seek Congressional Approval. The President is also attending the G-20 Summit this week in St. Petersburg, Russia, and it may be his thinking that he might be able to persuade a few more countries to form a COALITION that would suggest to others, that we are not reverting back to the recklessness of Bush and Cheney “go it alone attitude.”

 

In addition, the War Weary Americans do not really want America to be involved in another war, and short of saying no, the American people by 80%, requested that the President seek Congressional Approval before any Military Action is taken.

 

It is amazing to witness the criticism of President Obama when others thought he was going to by-pass Congress and when he did not, they criticize him for doing so!

 

You are damned if you do and damned if you don’t!

PRESIDENT OBAMA - CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL

Bill Clinton is the last person that should be giving Obama advice on military matters! [SYRIA]

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 15, 2013 by sheriffali

Bill Clinton is the last person to suggest Obama would look like a “wuss” if he didn’t assist the Syrian Opposition. Mr. Clinton while he was President and was seeking reelection in 1996, allowed one of the most heinous genocides to take place on “his watch!”

 

838,000 people were slaughtered in Rwanda and Bill Clinton did not do anything. In his Presidential Memoirs he issued lots of apologies but that couldn’t bring back the dead!

 

The night before going to a court hearing for the lies he told in regards to Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton was warned by his military advisors that they did not have any proof that the Pharmaceutical Plant in Sudan was owned by Osama Bin Laden, but, “wag the dog” Clinton bombed the plant and killed 101 innocent people.

 

Mr. Clinton has no business lecturing Obama or anyone about “matters of war and peace.” I think that Obama has kept a steady hand on our foreign affairs. He got us out of Iraq and is winding down the war in Afghanistan.

 

McCain and others whined about Obama leading from behind in Libya, well, whether Obama lead from behind or in front, we successful got rid of a Dictator that baffled all of the previous Presidents, going back 42 years, and we did so without the loss of any American lives.

 

Not everything Mr. Obama had done is without fault, but, I think President Obama has been a good steward for America on Economic and Foreign Affairs, and I would quicker trust his judgment over the “talking-Head-Pundits!”

 

New York Times June 15, 2013 – Syria

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/opinion/sunday/bad-idea-mr-president.html?hp

 

 

Follow over 500,000 others on Twitter @sheriffali

 PRESIDENT OBAMA - BILL CLINTON