Russian Scientists say period of global cooling ahead due to changes in the sun

April 29, 2013

Reblogged from Watts Up With That?:

Click to visit the original post

From Radio Voice of Russia:

Russia’s Pulkovo Observatory: “we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years”

Scientists at Russia’s famous Pulkovo Observatory are convinced that the world is in for a period of global cooling.

Graph by David Archibald

Global warming which has been the subject of so many discussions in recent years, may give way to global cooling.

Read more… 475 more words

I'm not going to run out and buy a parka just yet, but the idea of extended cooling based on solar activity makes much more sense to me than a catastrophic heat rise based on CO2. At least for the sun's effects, there is a demonstrable historical correlation. Not that it's proven (yet), but there's more evidence for solar-induced climate cycles than for anthropogenic global warming.

Ye shall judge a man by his enemies: If Russia does not like Mitt Romney…

July 3, 2012

…Then I call that a big point in Romney’s favor, especially when the Russians deign to tell us Obama is acceptable:

Alexey Pushkov, chairman of the international affairs committee of the State Duma, said in a recent interview that Russian leaders have noted Romney’s comments with concern, and are watching with interest as neoconservative and “realist” advisers maneuver for influence within the campaign.

“We don’t think that for us Romney will be an easy partner,” said Pushkov, an ally of President Vladimir Putin. “We think that Romney will be, on the rhetorical side, a replay of the Bush administration.”

He also noted Romney’s statements that the United States should assert its dominance in the 21st century.

“If he is serious about this, I’m afraid he may choose the neocon-type people…In the first year of his presidency, we may have a full-scale crisis,” he said.

(…)

Pushkov said that the “reset” in U.S.-Russia relations that Obama has portrayed as a signature foreign policy accomplishment “is stuck, basically. It needs another reset.”

Nevertheless, though the U.S. and Russia are at odds on issues such as Syria and missile defense, Obama would be “acceptable” as a partner for Russia in a second term, Pushkov said.

I guess the information was transmitted to Vladimir, as promised.

Romney’s communications shop is sharp. Expect to see this in a commercial some time between now and November. While the economy is the dominant issue, foreign affairs are still important, and Russia is ruthlessly pursuing its perceived self-interest in a desperate struggle to remain a relevant power. (Which will get harder and harder — they’re dying demographically.) I’d much rather have someone in office who believes a dominant America is a good thing for the world, rather than someone who perceives American power as the problem and chooses decline and appeasement.

Oh, and thanks for the concern, Alexey! We’ll be sure to take your advice into account on Election Day!

LINK: More at Hot Air

PS: Romney 2012

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


(Video) Operation Hot Mic!

March 30, 2012

I was wondering when someone would make an ad about Obama’s offer of flexibility to the Russians, and now I have my answer:

Brilliant!!

via the geniuses at American Crossroads and Adam S. Baldwin.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


More about the Obama-Medvedev open-mic moment

March 27, 2012

Yesterday, while writing about the president’s inadvertent moment of transparency during his talks with Russian President Medvedev, in which Obama offered that he could be more flexible regarding missile defense after his reelection, I wondered the following:

Or maybe it’s the interests of others? This should make all those former possessions of the Soviet empire feel real secure.

Turns out we didn’t have to wait long to find out the truth in that. A headline in a major Polish tabloid read (translated)

“Were they trading Poland? Puzzling Obama talk with Medvedev about the missile shield.”

You can see the original at Buzzfeed, via Hot Air.

Poland has an unfortunate history of being the meat on the carving board whenever other great powers deal with Russia; Obama’s 2009 sellout over missile defense was only the most recent example. Now with Obama asking for “space” so he can be more flexible later, I don’t blame the Poles nor anyone else in Russia’s “near abroad” for being nervous. I’d be looking for a target on my back, too.

Meanwhile, with yesterday’s “nothing to see here, move along” statements apparently not convincing many people, Obama himself stepped before the cameras (this time knowing the mic was on) to insist he wasn’t hiding anything:

A defensive President Obama said Tuesday he wasn’t guilty of “hiding the ball” when an open microphone caught him pleading with the president of Russia to delay missile shield talks until after this year’s elections.

“The only way I get this stuff done is If I’m consulting with the Pentagon, with Congress, if I’ve got bipartisan support and frankly, the current environment is not conducive to those kinds of thoughtful consultations,” Mr. Obama told reporters at a nuclear security summit here. “This is not a matter of hiding the ball.”

(…)

“What I said yesterday … is something that I think everyone in this room understands,” the president said. “Arms control is extraordinarily complex, very technical, and the only way it gets done is if you can consult and build a strong understanding, both between countries and within countries.”

Shorter Obama: “Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying ears?”

Like I wrote yesterday, I understand political difficulties in an election year. But consulting Congress and the Pentagon isn’t what Obama was talking about in his tete-a-tete with Medvedev. He was specifically asking for “space” with the promise that he himself could be more flexible next year regarding Kremlin demands, when he would no longer be accountable to the voters. It wasn’t a simple “let’s wait until next year when US politics are calmer to talk about these things,” it was a plea for Russian help for Obama’s reelection effort. As Andrew Malcom of IBD put it, it was “backstage conniving.”

And lest anyone say this is just Right-wing panic over nothing, consider the president’s record with Russia: the embarrassing reset moment; the horrible deal in 2010 in the latest START treaty; the appeasement over missile defense in 2009 at the cost of betraying allies; and the flaccid reaction to Russian arms sales to Hugo Chavez, an avowed American enemy; the willingness to give up British nuclear secrets. I’m sure there are other moments of Smart Power that illustrate the same point: far from having a clear vision of America’s national interests, Obama is intellectually trapped in an outdated worldview that sees a dominant United States as part of the problem, not the best hope for a peaceful, prosperous world. His foreign policy is dangerous because it is dangerously naive.

That’s why critics don’t trust his whispered sidebar conversations with our traditional enemies: a leftist ideology married to alarming naivete is a recipe for disaster.

And that’s one big reason he has to go in November.

UPDATE: It figures. Democrats are just fine with Obama’s whispered words and approvingly cite President Medvedev (!) to bash Mitt Romney.  But they’ll scream bloody murder when we question their patriotism because of it.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


And just what does President Obama need “space” for?

March 26, 2012

"This thing hates me."

Oh, those wacky open-mic moments.

In South Korea on an official visit, the President was coming out of a meeting with Putin’s Chew-Toy Russian President Dmitri Medvedev for a joint press availability and –once again– didn’t realize that the funny thing with wires might actually be on.

Thus giving us this moment of presidential “D’oh!”:

President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.

President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…

President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

ABC’s Jake Tapper (1) relayed this White House attempt to pull the presidential foot out of the presidential mouth:

A senior administration official tells ABC News: “this is a political year in which the Russians just had an election, we’re about to have a presidential and congressional elections — this is not the kind of year in which we’re going to resolve incredibly complicated issue like this. So there’s an advantage to pulling back and letting the technical experts work on this as the president has been saying.”

As far as it goes, I agree with the “senior administration official’s” statement; major initiatives are hard to pull off in an election year, because anything you do is grist for your opponent’s mill, a hammer with which he can beat on you endlessly. It’s a truism of American politics and one reason why presidents don’t often get much accomplished in the final year of their first term.

But the official’s explanation also begs the question: Just what does President Obama need the space for? Just what was he discussing regarding missile defense? He’s already scaled back our promising program severely. What more was he discussing with the Russians that would be too hot for public consumption in an election year?

And why is he even discussing missile defense with Russia? Our program is aimed at one or a few missiles lobbed by rogue states, such as North Korea. Even if funded to the max, our missile defenses would be nowhere near capable of dealing with an arsenal the size of Russia’s. Nor is Russia even a credible threat to launch a first strike; the Cold War ended a long time ago, and Russia is in deep decline as a world power. This seems to be another example of Obama’s obsession with the strategic issues of the 1980s, when he was in college, the halcyon days of the nuclear freeze movement and arms-control agreements.

Oh, and just what does he mean by “all these issues?” What else needs to be put off until after his (God help us) reelection? What other of our interests is he willing to make a deal on?

Or maybe it’s the interests of others? This should make all those former possessions of the Soviet empire feel real secure.

William Jacobson is right: this moment of unintended transparency shows Obama will feel free to do whatever he wants if reelected. Remember, this is the man who wished he could “work his way around Congress.”  Unfettered by the need for reelection and with the broad powers the presidency has in foreign affairs, he may well get his wish — to the nation’s detriment.

Let this serve as a reminder that, no matter how unsatisfying the Republican candidates may be, the overriding goal is to defeat Obama in November.

And God bless open mics.

RELATED READING: If you want to understand the “strategic vision” of the liberal internationalists now running our foreign affairs, start with Krauthammer’s “Decline is a Choice.”

LINKS: Ed at Hot Air thinks Obama has promised a total cave-in on missile defense. Pirate’s Cove is “grateful.” Joel Pollak calls it a promise of surrender. Fausta asks a very good question.

UPDATE: The head of the House Armed Services Committee wants answers.

via Power Line

Footnote:
(1) Genuinely one of the best MSM reporters covering the White House.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Sunday Book Review: “The Candy Bombers”

March 18, 2012

Call it the first battle of the Cold War.

For much of 1948, the world worried that another global conflict, “World War III,” was about to break out. Over the preceding years since the end of World War II, the Soviets under Stalin had clenched an iron fist around the throats of the nations of East and Central Europe, quashing democratic movements and establishing Communist governments in Poland, Rumania, Hungary and finally Czechoslovakia, where Foreign Minister Jan Masaryk was murdered, an event that shocked and frightened the West. Stalinist Communist parties and unions threatened the weak democratic governments of Italy and France, while Communists were in open revolt in Greece, leaving people to wonder if these nations would be next.

And then Stalin blockaded Berlin.

That’s the situation in Andrei Cherny’s “The Candy Bombers: the untold story of the Berlin Airlift and America’s Finest Hour,” which tells the story of this increasingly and undeservedly forgotten struggle. He takes the tale from just before Germany’s surrender — the meeting of the Soviet and American armies at the Elbe and the surreal, horrific Battle for Berlin– to the moment in 1949 when Stalin lifted the blockade and the West realized it had won. The cast of characters is large, ranging from American presidents and Soviet generals to children surviving in the rubble of Berlin, and sometimes their treatment borders on cursory (often necessary in a single volume on a huge topic), but, taken as a whole, they come together in a fascinating story. That cast includes people such as:

  • Harry Truman, a hack machine politician who suddenly became president, faced with having to thread a course between appeasement and all-out atomic war (and win an election he was expected to lose);
  • Lucius Clay, an American general who had never fired a shot in battle, but who became Military Governor of Germany and found himself surrounded in Berlin;
  • James Forrestal, the brilliant, eccentric Secretary of Defense who clearly saw the Soviet threat and was desperate to get American ready for war — and who went mad in the process;
  • Ernst Reuter, a Social Democrat who rallied the people of Berlin to resist the Soviets and take a stand for democracy;
  • William Tunner, an Air Force general and logistics genius who made the Airlift work;
  • …and Gail Halvorsen, the original “candy bomber” and an “average Joe” from Utah who became a hero to the Germans and a celebrity back home.

As Cherny tells it, the story of the Berlin Airlift is one of transformations and evolutions: of individual Americans, who came to occupied Germany hating Germans and wanting to punish them hard for starting two devastating wars, but who then came to sympathize with and even like Germans, risking war to save those they could from Stalin; of the Germans, nearly stripped of civilization itself by the conquest and its aftermath (in the first years after the war, Berlin women would great each other not with “Hello,” but with “How many?”, as in “how many times have you been raped by Russians?”), who went from a shell-shocked passive hatred of Americans to shock at our generosity to eventual love and admiration, as well as passionate defenders of democracy; and of the United States as a whole, from a desperate desire after Depression and war to just enjoy life and tell the world to go away, to recognizing that a new, different war had begun and only America could lead it.

Cherny writes with a fluid, easy style that never drags. While engaging his audience and painting dramatic portraits of people and events, he never over-simplifies or resorts to cliche. One particularly effective device, one that humanizes for the reader an otherwise vast story, is the interspersing of letters from children and adults to Lt. Halvorsen, thanking him for what he was doing and often asking if he could drop candy over their houses. (One girl gave him very specific instructions about how to find her house, but Halvorsen never could. He finally mailed her the candy.) Those letters, and Halvorsen’s own back home to his girlfriend, Alta, remind the reader that the great events of history are always inhabited by individual people with names, families, hopes, and fears.

If I have but one criticism, it’s that very little is told from the Soviet view. While one meets and even comes to like individual Soviets (and even sympathize with some clearly uncomfortable with what Moscow had ordered them to do), the motives behind Stalin’s actions can only be theorized from outside, observing events as they happened. What the decision process of the USSR leadership was, what options they considered and what risks they were willing to take, are as obscure as anything hidden behind the Kremlin’s walls. Of course, the nearly non-existent access to Soviet archives (except for a brief period in the 1990s), makes this lack almost inevitable and no real fault of the author’s. Still, one wishes there was a way to “see their side of it,” even if that side is one of utter evil.

Summary: If you like narrative history that relates great events through the people who lived it, and if you yearn to read a true story of American heroics in which the good guys face huge odds and win big, you’ll enjoy The Candy Bombers.

Afterward: While Cherny’s book focuses rightfully on the American effort to supply Berlin, the British and French also played important roles, which the author notes. But it is also fair to say that, without American leadership and will behind the Airlift, it would never even have taken place, let alone succeeded. Berlin would have fallen, to the incalculable detriment of Western Europe. The Berlin Airlift truly was one of our finest hours.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Russia’s North Korean slaves

December 16, 2011

Citizen! Have I got a job for you!

An appalling, but sadly unsurprising revelation at The Daily Caller that the world’s largest prison camp masquerading as a nation, North Korea, rents out its own people as slaves in Siberian camps:

Q. In this Vice Guide you are traveling not to North Korea, but into the Siberian region of Russia where the North Koreans have outsourced North Korean workers to the Russian state. Call me crazy, but it appears that the Russian government is essentially participating in a modern day slavery racket, no?

A. Correct. The Russians are making money. The North Korean state is making money. The companies using the slave labor are making money. Everyone is making money save the people actually doing the work. Long live the revolution!!

Q. Tell me about these prison camps? What are the North Koreans doing there?

A. They are forced to live and work in the middle of nowhere, under horrific conditions for 10 year periods, for little or no money, under threat that if they run away their whole families will be put into similar work camps in the Homeland.

Q. And the camps are made to resemble life in North Korea, right?

A. Some of the workers actually think they are still in concentration camps in DPRK even though they are thousands of miles away. Why? Because all they see are trees and villages that look EXACTLY the same as they do in DPRK. They have the same propaganda, the same newspapers, they have the same types of buildings, everything. It’s quite eerie actually.

Oh, and if these figure out where they are and try to escape? Their families back home get a one-way ticket to North Korea’s gulag.

Kim Jong-Il and Valdimir Putin: a partnership made in Hell.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Putin claims Hillary responsible for Russian unrest

December 9, 2011

Okay, it’s no secret I’m not a fan of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. I think she’s as much of a Leftist as Barack Obama (if made more cautious by her drubbing in HillaryCare); she was nothing more than a moderately competent senator who carpetbagged her state; she only stayed married to Bill after his serial infidelities because he was her road to power; her conduct of our foreign policy has been mostly incompetent, and she’s given to Biden-esque fantasies. In other words, she is less than the dust on my boots.

And yet I may have to change my appraisal of her.

I mean, she scares Vladimir Putin:

Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin accused Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday of inciting unrest in Russia, as he grappled with the prospect of large-scale political protest for the first time in his more than decade-long rule.

In a rare personal accusation, Mr. Putin said Mrs. Clinton had sent “a signal” to “some actors in our country” after Sunday’s parliamentary elections, which were condemned as fraudulent by both international and Russian observers. Anger over the elections prompted a demonstration in which thousands chanted “Putin is a thief” and “Russia without Putin,” a development that has deeply unnerved the Kremlin.

Speaking to political allies as he announced the formation of his presidential campaign, Mr. Putin said that hundreds of millions of dollars in “foreign money” was being used to influence Russian politics, and that Mrs. Clinton had personally spurred protesters to action. The comments indicate a breakdown in the Obama administration’s sputtering effort to “reset” the relationship between the United States and Russia.

“I looked at the first reaction of our U.S. partners,” Mr. Putin said. “The first thing that the secretary of state did was say that they were not honest and not fair, but she had not even yet received the material from the observers.”

“She set the tone for some actors in our country and gave them a signal,” Mr. Putin continued. “They heard the signal and with the support of the U.S. State Department began active work.”

Oh, that wily Hillary. With just a toss of her poorly-coiffed locks, she can send Russians into the streets to protest against the new Tsars. Such power she has! A former KGB operative quakes before her might! The guy who flattened Chechnya in a brutal campaign reminiscent of Stalingrad now quails before the threat posed by the former First Lady of the United States.

Yeah, right.

I may refer to her as “Lady Macbeth” (and accurately so, I claim), but what’s happening in Russia is a reflection of Russian disgust with yet another corrupt, rigged election. (Our problems are minor in comparison.) Putin is doing what comes naturally to tyrants, especially paranoid Russian rulers: looking for outsiders to distract his people from his own failings.

But, somehow, I don’t think the Russian people are buying it this time.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


#Occupy the Department of Energy! Or, loans for Russian billionaires?

October 27, 2011

I must’ve missed the memo announcing the rebirth of the Friends of Angelo program under the aegis of the Department of Energy.  Under the leadership of Secretary Chu (Like his boss, a Nobel Prize winner. Be impressed.), the DoE has fast-tracked and awarded loans with preferential terms (1) to a failing “Green” energy company, Solyndra; a “Green” car company, Fisker, which plans to make its cars in Finland, when they get around to actually making the cars; and another “Green” automaker, Tesla, which builds Gaea-friendly cars for the elite one-percent. And on which Tesla loses money.

All these loans, totaling about $1.5 billion taxpayer dollars, were doled out to companies with connections to big donors to the Democrats and Obama. (See also.)

But this one has to be the cake-topper — $730 million to a Russian billionaire:

Another controversial U.S. Department of Energy “green” loan is coming under scrutiny.

Last July the Obama administration issued a $730 million low interest “green” loan to Russia’s second largest steel company, whose chief executive is a Russian tycoon personally worth $18 billion and who has close ties to Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

An influential House oversight chairman is now questioning why taxpayer funds from the Department of Energy are being used to assist the highly capitalized foreign-based steel company.

The DOE renewable energy loan was awarded this summer to Severstal North America to produce high strength steel at its Dearborn, Michigan facility. Steel is not in short supply in the United States and current U.S. steel plants are operating under capacity.

The DOE loan is part of a controversial $40 billion renewable energy loan program organized under its Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program  called ATVM.  The program is supposed to help financially starved companies in the green auto manufacturing field by providing taxpayer-supported low interest loans.

As PJM’s Richard Pollock points out, the billionaire, Alexei Mordashov, is the 29th richest man in the world. Mordashov’s company, Severstal, recently made $1.2 billion from the sale of several steel mills in Ohio and other states. He could finance Dearborn plant out of his own pocket and still have enough left over to buy his own miniature giraffe. (2)

And then there’s the question of why Severstal, a fully-capitalized company that’s neither in the auto or “Green industries,” qualifies for loans meant to help “green auto manufacturing.”

Why, if I were a cynic, I might suspect some sort of a payoff here.

Nah. I must just be a RAAAAACIST!! and a hater. Or something.

Footnote:
(1) Read: “They get the gold mine, the taxpayer gets the shaft.”
(2) I love that commercial.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


The fruits of Smart Power: Czechs walk out on missile defense

June 16, 2011

It may come as a surprise to the Smartest President Ever(tm) and his brilliant foreign policy team, but when you pull the rug out from under an ally in order to appease the guys they fear, they aren’t likely to want to play with you anymore:

The Czech Republic is withdrawing from U.S. missile defense plans out of frustration at its diminished role, the Czech defense minister told The Associated Press Wednesday.

The Bush administration first proposed stationing 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and an advanced radar in the Czech Republic, saying the system was aimed at blunting future missile threats from Iran. But Russia angrily objected and warned that it would station its own missiles close to Poland if the plan went through.

In September 2009, the Obama administration shelved that plan and offered a new, reconfigured phased program with an undefined role for the Czechs. In November 2009, the Czech Republic was offered the possibility of hosting a separate early warning system that would gather and analyze information from satellites to detect missiles aimed at NATO territory.

Defense Minister Alexander Vondra told the AP that the Czech Republic wanted to participate but “definitely not in this way.”

“Shelving the plan” is much too antiseptic a description for what really happened. As I wrote at the time:

This is an utter, craven appeasement of Moscow, which has never wanted this system installed in its former empire, making ridiculous claims that it somehow threatened Russia. As originally conceived, the radar stations and roughly a score of interceptor missiles were to protect Europe from a growing Iranian threat. They represented no threat to Moscow. In fact, the Bush administration offered to cooperate in a partnership with the Russians on a European missile shield. Russia’s outrage was in fact a cover for their fear of a continuing loss of influence over their former subject peoples in Central and Eastern Europe.

Poland and the Czech Republic saw this in a similar manner. They cooperated with the US over Afghanistan and Iraq (even sending troops to both places) and agreed to the missile-shield proposal. This was done not just out of a sense of interests shared between fellow democracies, not just out of a sense of worry over Iranian ambitions, but out of a very real geopolitical calculation that closer military ties to the world’s remaining superpower would protect them from a resurgent Russian bear. For the last eight years they have stuck their necks out to help us, and now President Obama has made fools of them.

And Washington expected Prague to accept a consolation prize? Seriously? Why not give them some DVDs, too?

Way back when, Ed Morrissey points out, the Obama Office of the President-Elect (1) transition team promised to “restore our standing in the world.” This is just the latest example of how that’s working out in practice.

The building of alliances and friendships between states is the result of painstaking diplomacy in which each side not only seeks to meet its own best interests, but to assure the other side that such an alliance is in their best interests, too. It’s a mutual exercise in trust-building that includes confidence that one party won’t stick a knife in the other’s back.

And like the husband who comes home to find someone else in his bed, it only takes one betrayal to wreck all that effort. As with Britain, as with Israel, and as with Poland, Obama administration foreign policy seems to be all about pimp-slapping our friends to appease our rivals, going out of its way to betray that trust, as if telling these nations “you won’t leave us; you’ve got nowhere else to go.”

Except the Czech Republic decided otherwise and left. As Team Obama pursues the “Welcome Back Carter” (2) style of diplomacy, don’t be surprised to see other nations decide their best interests are served elsewhere, too.

Footnotes:

(1) I’d forgotten about this bit of egoism.

(2) Glenn Reynolds famously worried that “Jimmy Carter, part two” might be the best-case scenario. I’m worried he’s right. Though, while reading Schweizer’s book “Reagan’s War,” the resemblance between Carter and Obama’s approach to national security is stunning.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Proof that spam can be deadly

January 28, 2011

No, not the (supposedly edible) stuff that comes in a can, but the kind you get in unwanted text messages. The kind that makes the suicide belt you’re working on go boom early:

The unnamed woman, who is thought to be part of the same group that struck Moscow’s Domodedovo airport on Monday, intended to detonate a suicide belt on a busy square near Red Square on New Year’s Eve in an attack that could have killed hundreds.

Security sources believe a spam message from her mobile phone operator wishing her a happy new year received just hours before the planned attack triggered her suicide belt, killing her but nobody else.

She was at her Moscow safe house at the time getting ready with two accomplices, both of whom survived and were seen fleeing the scene.

Kind of makes the jihad meaningless if the only person you take out is your own stupid self, doesn’t it?

Darn.

via Legal Insurrection

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


In other words, 13 Republican senators were idiots

January 27, 2011

That’s the number of senators who crossed the aisle to ratify the new START treaty with Russia that the administration rammed through last December, during the lame-duck session. That’s also the same number of senators who, per William Jacobson, failed to see that it did not decrease Russian launchers and warheads at all. In fact, they can still increase them. Only we have to make cuts.

Genius!

Anatoly Serdyukov, the Russian defence minister, told Russian senators that the treaty would not damage Russia’s interests and would have little impact on its nuclear arsenal however.

“The limits on delivery vehicles and nuclear warheads outlined are substantially more than our current possibilities,” he said. “We do not possess so many (warheads and delivery vehicles).” The treaty’s future hung in the balance towards the end of last year when Republicans, who are sceptical about the agreement, won more seats in the US Senate.

Remember, START stands for “Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.” I didn’t realize it had been changed to STAART: “Strategic American Arms Reduction Treaty.” If these are the fruits of Smart Power, I’d hate to see what Moron Power could do.

And speaking of morons, here’s the list of Republican senators who, in a spirit of bipartisanship, failed to do even the basic due diligence the Constitution requires of them and instead voted for this bad joke of a treaty:

Republicans Yes

Alexander, Tenn.; Bennett, Utah; Brown, Mass.; Cochran, Miss.; Collins, Maine; Corker, Tenn.; Gregg, N.H.; Isakson, Ga.; Johanns, Neb.; Lugar, Ind.; Murkowski, Alaska; Snowe, Maine; Voinovich, Ohio.

Thanks, guys. Glad to know you’re watching out for our interests.

AFTERWORD: Some may look at that quote above from Defense Minister Serdyukov and wonder why on Earth the administration agreed to this: Were they nuts or incompetent? Is this report false?

In short, the answers are no, maybe, and no.

The decision to lower our nuclear arms while Russia doesn’t fits the behavior of an administration hell-bent on weakening America. It’s the result of a leftist worldview that sees American dominance and the unequal distribution of power and wealth in the world in our favor as a problem, not, as most of us would, as a good thing. There is an excellent article by Charles Krauthammer you should read called “Decline is a choice” that outlines this strategy — for that’s what it is.

Oh, and regarding the “maybe.” While this may be part of a deliberately executed strategy, that doesn’t mean its authors aren’t incompetent.

UPDATE: Welcome Ace of Spades readers! Have a look around and feel free to leave a comment. :)

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Looks like I was right

January 26, 2011

A commenter took me to task for saying that it was likely that the suicide bombers who struck Moscow’s Domodedovo Airport a few days ago were Muslims bent on jihad.

I hate to say “I told you so,” but…

Moscow airport bomb: suicide bombers were part of squad trained in Pakistan

The two suicide bombers who carried out the Moscow attack were thought to be part of a suicide squad trained in Pakistan’s al-Qaeda strongholds sent to the capital to target the city’s transport system.

(…)

A newspaper close to Russia’s FSB security service published what it claimed was a warning to Moscow police issued in December that said there was credible intelligence that a suicide squad made up of three women and one man from Chechnya was headed to Moscow.

The memo said the team had spent time in Pakistan and Iran and that one of the women had a relative with a flat in Moscow that might be used as a bomb making factory. Another group of five Islamist militants trained in Pakistan was also expected to cross into Russia soon, it added.

An al-Qaeda linked website said that the group Islamic Caucasus Emirate, led by the rebe Doku Umarov, was poised to claim it had staged the attack. It said that Russia’s harsh military measures against independence activists in the Caucasus had provoked the attack. It said: “You disbelievers are the firewood of Hell. You will enter it.”

As the article relates, the dress of the attackers and methodology for the attack fits with prior operations launched by Umarov. While it’s in the realm of imagination that this was some sort of false flag operation by Russia’s FSB* or another intelligence service for Machiavellian purposes, I think it about as likely as the sun rising in the West.

No. This was an act of terrorism launched by Muslims waging jihad fi sabil Allah, and innocents died because of it.

*There have been accusations that the FSB was behind a 1999 apartment bombing that was used by then-PM Putin to justify resuming the war in Chechnya. The FSB denied this, but there’s been no solid proof either way.


They’re still trying to kill us

January 24, 2011

In case anyone had forgotten about those brave, brave jihadis who are trying to make the world safe for sharia, we were given a grisly reminder this morning as a suicide bomber in Moscow killed 31 and wounded over 100:

A suicide bomber killed 31 people and wounded more than 130 in a terrorist attack today at an airport in Russia’s capital.

Russian police said a suicide bomber detonated his vest in the middle of a crowd at the baggage claim at an international arrival terminal at Domodedovo International Airport. Domodedovo is Moscow’s largest airport, and the attack took place in the late afternoon, around 4:30 p.m. local time, when the airport is busy.

Twenty of those wounded are reported to be in critical condition; it is unclear if foreigners are among those killed.

While no group has claimed the deadly attack, suspicions fall on the al Qaeda-linked Islamic Caucasus Emirate, the terrorist insurgency in Russia’s southern Caucasus region. No statement has been released yet by Kavkaz Center, the propaganda arm of the Caucasus Emirate.

Read the rest at The Long War Journal.

While the odds are that this atrocity was committed by groups fighting the Russians in Chechnya (Where the Russians have been no angels either, to say the least), this is part of jihadist Islam’s global campaign to force the rest of us to submit to sharia law: 9/11, the London Tube bombings,  Madrid, Alexandria, Bali, Nigeria… The list goes on.

And innocents keep dying.

LINKS: Hot Air, where Ed has posted Russian video from the scene of the massacre.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


What’s Russian for “Buyer Beware?”

December 26, 2010

The Russians have agreed to purchase two amphibious warships from France:

After a long hesitation and arduous negotiations, Russia has decided to buy at least two of France’s advanced Mistral-class amphibious warships in an unprecedented military deal between Moscow and the West, the two nations said Friday.

The multimillion-dollar sale, announced jointly by the Elysee Palace and the Kremlin, marks the first time in modern history that Russia has made such a major defense acquisition abroad, illuminating a fast-evolving relationship with former Cold War enemies. The swift changes were dramatized at last month’s NATO summit in Lisbon, when President Dmitry Medvedev agreed to work with NATO on ways to cooperate with the U.S.-led alliance in erecting a missile defense system for Europe.

The Mistral sale, whose financial terms were not disclosed, also signaled a triumph for French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s relentless salesmanship and a boost for France’s sagging defense industry and 10 percent unemployment rate. It will, the Elysee declaration noted, provide the equivalent of 5 million hours of work over four years for 1,000 qualified French employees at the STX shipyards at St. Nazaire on the Atlantic Coast. And it might lead to the purchase of two more vessels.

“Presidents Medvedev and Sarkozy hail the concretization of this unprecedented cooperation, which will benefit industry and employment in our two countries, and which illustrates the will and capacity in France and Russia to develop large-scale partnerships in all areas, including defense and security,” the Elysee said.

Dear President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin: You may want to rethink that deal.

More seriously, the article notes the strenuous objections of the nation of Georgia, parts of which were recently ripped away and occupied by the new Czars, and also objections from Republicans in Congress. Not surprisingly, the Obama administration has been silent. Still hitting that reset button, I guess.

To be honest, though, I doubt we could have done much to stop the sale without putting a serious strain on our relationship (such as it is) with France; they have a problem with high unemployment, too, and have a national interest in maintaining a naval shipbuilding industry.

Whether the ships they build work or not is another matter…

*To answer the question in the subject: Покупатель Остерегайтесь

via Gabriel Malor on Twitter


Russians make RINO, squish, aisle-crossers look like chumps

December 24, 2010

Because they ARE chumps. For weeks during this recent lame-duck session of Congress, the White House, Democratic senators, and the liberal media were telling us that the latest START arms-reduction treaty with the Russians had to be  approved now, in spite of serious, legitimate concerns. It absolutely could not wait until the new Senate was seated with new members who would actually reflect the will of the voters as expressed in the recent election. Nope, it had to be done now, or the universe would implode… or something.

So they finally found some “bipartisan” Republicans and ratified it.

And now the Russians say that, gosh, they won’t be able to get it done on their end until next year:

Russian lawmakers gave preliminary approval on Christmas Eve to the so-called New START treaty with a vote in the lower house of parliament. But Konstantin Kosachev, head of the State Duma’s foreign affairs committee, said it would take until next month “at the earliest” for the treaty to receive its three required readings and get a final vote. Lawmakers’ vacation lasts until Jan. 11.

The assessment seems to put the brakes on the document President Obama called a top priority as he whipped up the Republican votes needed to pass it before the end of the lame-duck session. Vice Adm. Jerry Miller said the Russians appear to be having some fun at U.S. expense.

So, explain to me again, Senators Lugar, Alexander, Bennett, Brown, Cochran, Collins, Corker, Isakson, Johanns, Murkowski, Snowe, and Voinovich: what was the big rush? Couldn’t you have waited for a Senate that had an actual mandate from the people to do more than minimal government business? And do you hear the chuckles coming from Moscow? How does it feel knowing you’ve been played — again?

Idiots.

LINKS: Power Line calls the Republicans listed above Obama’s useful idiots. Jennifer Rubin, who’s been critical of the treaty, points out that, inter alia, we did get something to protect missile defense. The Russian press respectfully disagrees. Legal Insurrection wonders if Republicans will ever learn. Ace of Spades thinks Putin “Pwned” Obama, again.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


This would probably have adversely affected my childhood

December 6, 2010

In 1969, I was eleven years old, and my family had just moved to Sacramento. Little did I know, as I started sixth grade and worried about making friends, that the Soviets were on the verge of nuking the tar out of China:

The Soviet Union was on the brink of launching a nuclear attack against China in 1969 and only backed down after the US told Moscow such a move would start World War Three, according to a Chinese historian.

The extraordinary assertion, made in a publication sanctioned by China’s ruling Communist Party, suggests that the world came perilously close to nuclear war just seven years after the Cuban missile crisis.

Liu Chenshan, the author of a series of articles that chronicle the five times China has faced a nuclear threat since 1949, wrote that the most serious threat came in 1969 at the height of a bitter border dispute between Moscow and Beijing that left more than one thousand people dead on both sides.

He said Soviet diplomats warned Washington of Moscow’s plans “to wipe out the Chinese threat and get rid of this modern adventurer,” with a nuclear strike, asking the US to remain neutral.

But, he says, Washington told Moscow the United States would not stand idly by but launch its own nuclear attack against the Soviet Union if it attacked China, loosing nuclear missiles at 130 Soviet cities. The threat worked, he added, and made Moscow think twice, while forcing the two countries to regulate their border dispute at the negotiating table.

So, while Moscow was planning on reducing Beijing (and Canton and Shanghai and…) to radioactive cinders, Nixon was promising to do the same thing to Mother Russia, if the Kremlin didn’t back off.

This was the period of Nixon’s outreach to China, and his and Kissinger’s grand scheme saw the Chinese as a counterweight to the USSR’s aggression. They were also worried about the effect a nuclear strike on China would have on US troops in the region, and undoubtedly on our allies in the area, too. The President played the ultimate US trump card and, fortunately, Brezhnev and company weren’t willing to call him on a bluff.

Not only is this another illustration of how close we sometimes came to ending the world, but it also stands in contrast to our modern confrontation with would-be nuclear powers, especially Iran. While Moscow was indeed on the verge of nuclear war, the USSR was still a modern European state with a rational interest in its own survival. In the face of a credible threat from the US, it made a calculation of its interests and decided the price for carrying out its planned attack was too great to pay. It is just this kind of rational decision-making in an environment of mutually assured destruction that paradoxically kept us all safe from the end of World War II to the Soviet Union’s collapse.

But, would this threat work with Iran, whose leaders see themselves as having a divine mission to bring about the Islamic version of the End Times? Their intellectual paradigm is very much different from that shared by US and Soviet leaders, and I fear that, after gaining the bomb, Tehran might decide the price of a devastating counterstrike would be worth paying, in order to bring about the return of the Mahdi and Islam’s final victory.

In that case, many, many children will not have the close escape I had.

PS. Do click through to the article, if only for the picture of Nixon with Brezhnev. Britons especially will appreciate the gesture Tricky Dick is making toward the Soviet leader.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


The neverending jihad

July 13, 2010

In Russia, authorities broke up a gang of female suicide bombers who were about to go into action:

Russian security services have broken up what they described as a terrorist cell in a Muslim region of the country that was preparing female suicide bombers for attacks on major Russian cities, officials announced on Monday.

They said six women had been arrested who had already written “farewell letters” as they were being prepared for deployment. But the officials did not disclose whether attacks were imminent, or any other details about planning.

Two men were also arrested, including one said to have played a role in attacks by two female suicide bombers on two subway stations in Moscow in March, which killed 40 people.

This is a war that began in the 7th century and, while there have been periods of quiet, it has never really ended.

(via Gabriel Malor)


Didn’t we used to be the Americans?

June 20, 2010

I must be confused. First, the French lecture us about toughness in foreign affairs. Then the Germans make us look like spendthrifts. Now even the Russians understand better than we how low taxes create prosperity:

Russia to drop capital gains tax to attract investment

Russia will scrap capital gains tax on long-term direct investment from 2011, President Dmitry Medvedev has said. Mr Medvedev said that in terms of improving Russia’s investment climate “we, I hope, are moving forward”. … Its oil revenues fund, which has been financing the deficit, is expected to end next year, and the government wants to attract more foreign investment to boost the economy.

Meanwhile, our tax environment is set up to do everything it can to drive businesses out of the country, and many states such as California make it worse.

Who are we again?

Via Dan Mitchell, who explains why there should be no cap-gains tax:

RELATED: German Chancellor Merkel say her government and the EU will end stimulus programs and focus on debt. The world really has turned upside down.


Obama’s new national security strategy: unicorns and rainbows

May 25, 2010

Good news! In his speech at West Point, the President of the United States outlined his plans to keep our country safe. Key to his strategy? Hope, change, and constitutional rights for terrorists:

President Obama’s speech at West Point Saturday is the most sweeping statement yet of his plan to create a national security policy emphasizing education, clean energy, green jobs, anti-climate change measures, the granting of full American constitutional rights to accused terrorists, and “engagement” with America’s enemies.

Yeah, I bet al Qaeda, Moscow, and Beijing are quaking in their boots even now. From laughter.

We are so dead.  Doh


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 9,959 other followers