Syria, Other Middle East Nations Take Advantage Of Obama Weakness

If your foreign policy is one of weakness, of inattention, of fantasy, what do you think will happen?

(Washington Post) Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is taking advantage of the rift between Russia and the United States over Ukraine to press ahead with plans to crush the rebellion against his rule and secure his reelection for another seven-year term, unencumbered by pressure to compromise with his opponents.

The collapse last month of peace talks in Geneva, jointly sponsored by Russia and the United States, had already eroded the slim prospects that a negotiated settlement to the Syrian war might be possible. With backers of the peace process now at odds over the outcome of the popular uprising in Ukraine, Assad feels newly confident that his efforts to restore his government’s authority won’t be met soon with any significant challenge from the international community, according to analysts and people familiar with the thinking of the regime.

Well, in Obama’s defense, Assad was going to take advantage no matter what. Of course, part of that is because Obama is too weak to be dictating to Syria what they should do. But, wait, it gets better!

The Syrian war is only one of a number of contentious issues in the Middle East that expose the vulnerability of U.S. interests to a revival of Cold War-era tensions with Russia such as those that have surfaced in Ukraine. The nuclear accord with Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, both of which rank higher on the Obama administration’s foreign policy agenda than Syria, are also dependent to an extent on Moscow’s cooperation.

Because Obama is weak internationally. Pixie dust doesn’t work. Finger wagging and speeches about the “international community” do not work. Think Iran isn’t watching? The Palestinian Authority?

In a less-noted development in recent months, newly ambivalent U.S. allies such as Egypt and Iraq have been quietly concluding significant arms deals with Moscow, largely spurred by concerns that the Obama administration’s reluctance to become embroiled in the messy outcomes of the Arab Spring means that Washington can no longer be counted on as a reliable source of support.

Most Arab countries have remained silent on the Ukraine crisis, and some could well move further into Russia’s orbit should Washington be seen to be wavering, said Theodore Karasik of the Dubai-based Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis.

So we could easily lose those nations who were confederates of the U.S.

An Assad adviser has blown off the call for international monitoring in Syria this week regarding elections.

“Putin sees the world as one big chessboard on which he can play two or three moves at the same time. I am not sure the West can do that,” he said. “I don’t see the Russians backing off their support for Assad, and I think Assad will continue to do what he has always wanted to do, which is to win militarily.”

This is the part where Obama is only thinking in the here and now. He doesn’t seem to be able to focus on multiple issues, so he bounces from subject to subject, pivots for a few, then jumps away. Certainly, not everything can be blamed on Obama’s lackadaisical, tepid, wobbly foreign policy, as nations will often do things regardless of what other countries and leaders say. However, those same Obama qualities lead them to act sooner, to blow off and statements from the US, and move them away from the U.S.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Syria, Other Middle East Nations Take Advantage Of Obama Weakness »

Warmist Wants A Revolution To Kill Off Capitalism

This is exactly why I attack “climate change”, ie, the notion that every change in the weather is caused by Mankind’s release of CO2, primarily from fossil fueled vehicles, from a political position, with a smattering of science and data: because the issue is primarily political, pushed by hardcore leftists to enact a hardcore leftist political system

Not even climate change will kill off capitalism

As long as the conditions for investment and profit remain, the system will adapt. Which is why we need a revolution

Arguably the single most important mistake the revolutionary movements of the 60s and 70s made was to overlook the resilience of capitalism. The idea – catastrophism, as it is often called – that the system was going to crumble under the pressure of its own contradictions, that the bourgeoisie produces its own “gravediggers” (as Marx and Engels put it in the Communist Manifesto) has been disproved. When the rate of profit started showing signs of decline in the first half of the 70s, the redistributive policies implemented after the second world war were terminated and the neoliberal revolution was launched.

Interestingly, many of those fighting the system were pushing for less government. They said to not trust the government, to not trust anyone over 30. To get government out of our lives. Freedom. Love. (along with other notions). Today’s fools are pushing for more and more Big Government, with more intrusion into our personal lives, and more government control over Other People’s lives. These Progressive wankers always think that the rules will never affect themselves.

Anyhow, after bashing capitalism and extolling Marxism/Progressivism for the rest of the article, we end with

Nothing in the system’s logic will make it go away. A world of environmental desolation and conflict will work for capitalism, as long as the conditions for investment and profit are guaranteed. And, for this, good old finance and the military are ready to serve. Building a revolutionary movement that will put a stop to this insane logic is therefore not optional. Because, if the system can survive, it doesn’t mean that lives worth living will.

At least Razmig Keucheyan has the honesty to tell us what the true goal of the climate change movement is. And, from the comments

As to environmental ruin, I urge you to look at such paradises of Marxist environmental love as East Germany and Ukraine.

And Russia and it’s previous satellite nations. How’s China doing? And then there’s North Korea, which has significant environmental degradation, to go with their dearth of power, food, and modern living conditions.

Read: Warmist Wants A Revolution To Kill Off Capitalism »

If All You See…

…are awesome trees sucking carbon pollution from the atmosphere, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Camp Of The Saints, with a post on the revolution in America.

PS: This was another picture a friend bet I could not do a Warmist post with.

Read: If All You See… »

Obama To Give Speech To Kids Telling Them To Take On More Debt

CNN is heavily focused on whether or not Obama will take a long weekend vacation, without mentioning that the Ocean Reef Club is meant for the uber-rich which Obama demonizes, and works hard to say “hey, the guy deserves it!!!!!” But there are two other nuggets in the article which are wee more important

(CNN) At his event Friday, staged at a Miami magnet high school, the President will try to persuade more students to complete the paperwork required to obtain federal financial aid for college.

So, he’ll extol high schoolers to take on crushing debt? Might it be better if he tells them to get a job…oh, wait, yeah, bad idea in the Obamaeconomy. How about studying hard and getting a scholarship? Nope, sorry, he wants these kids on the hook to the federal government. I’m not sure which is worse, the above, or the next paragraph

The White House says the U.S. Department of Education will begin identifying individual students who haven’t filled out the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and use the information to try and convince students to apply.

If I’m reading this correctly, the Dept of Education is going to intrude into the lives of minors, gathering information on them without a warrant, and contact them, potentially browbeating them to take on debt. That should concern everyone, especially the parents, regarding the role of government, and how invasive it has become.

Read: Obama To Give Speech To Kids Telling Them To Take On More Debt »

3rd Highest North American March Snow Extent

I blame you for driving a fossil fueled vehicle to work after taking a long shower

(USA Today)  As of Tuesday, North America is covered by the third-highest amount of snow this late in the season since records began in 1966, according to NOAA’s U.S. National Ice Center.

Only 1969 and 1978 had more snow cover at this point in the year, according to Sean Helfrich of NOAA’s National Ice Center.

“Given that the vast majority of Canada is snow-covered at this time of the year (except in a very mild early March), the signal is virtually entirely a function of snow extent variations in the lower 48,” he said in an e-mail.

Wait, I thought Warmits told us snow would be a thing of the past? Oh, wait, my bad, now they blame snow and cold on greenhouse gas output from Mankind.

Read: 3rd Highest North American March Snow Extent »

Poll: Majority Support Keystone XL

As usual, the hardcore enviro-weenies/Warmists are on the wrong side of the debate

(Politico) Nearly two-thirds of Americans back the construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, according to a new poll.

Sixty-five percent of Americans say Keystone should be approved and 22 percent are opposed, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Republicans are most supportive of Keystone, with 82 percent approving. Support among independents and Democrats is also high, at 65 and 51 percent, respectively.

Politico notes that 47% think the pipeline poses significant environmental risks (the Washington Post gets it wrong, too). The number is actually just 26% who strongly believe that, with another 20% somewhat concerned. Put me in the “somewhat concerned” category. I’m hoping that when they build the pipeline they are really careful to the environment. Of course, those who are in the 26% bracket are probably worried about “carbon emissions”, and drive fossil fueled vehicles themselves.

62% strongly believe it would create significant numbers of jobs, with another 24% somewhat believing that.

Read: Poll: Majority Support Keystone XL »

Suprise! Uninsured Barely Signing Up For Obamacare

Wasn’t the stated purpose of the “Affordable” Care Act to make sure that the 30-45 million Americans without health insurance receive health insurance? How’s that working out?

(Washington Post) The new health insurance marketplaces appear to be making little headway in signing up Americans who lack insurance, the Affordable Care Act’s central goal, according to a pair of new surveys.

Only one in 10 uninsured people who qualify for private plans through the new marketplaces enrolled as of last month, one of the surveys shows. The other found that about half of uninsured adults have looked for information on the online exchanges or planned to look. (snip)

One of the surveys, by the consulting firm McKinsey & Co., shows that among people who are uninsured and do not intend to get a health plan through one of the exchanges, the biggest factor is that they believe they cannot afford it.

Strange. Cannot afford it. That survey stated that only around 27% of the signups were for the previously uninsured.

“If there is one point to the law, it is to lower the number of uninsured,” said Larry Levitt, a senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a health-policy organization. “Ultimately, that has to happen for the law to be judged a success.”

Well, surely HHS will have a way of measuring this, considering the billions dumped into starting the Exchanges, right?

But the online application, which most people use to enroll, asks whether people want to apply for coverage but does not give them a place to indicate whether they have insurance now or have had it in the past. As a result, HHS analysts have no way to assess how many of the online enrollees were uninsured in the past.

Excellent! No way of measuring the stated point of the law. Sam Baker discusses this a bit more.

Meanwhile, the number who state that Obamacare has hurt them has inched up to 23%, with those saying it has helped dropping from a whopping 13% down to 10%. 63% say no effect.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Read: Suprise! Uninsured Barely Signing Up For Obamacare »

Playing Devil’s Advocate On Ukraine

Consider

*ABC News:

“Any discussion about the future of Ukraine must include the legitimate government of Ukraine. In 2014, we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders,” Obama said in a hastily announced statement in the White House Briefing Room.

Let’s play Devil’s advocate:

February 2010: Viktor Yanukovych declared winner in presidential election, judged free and fair by observers.

Yet, he was forced out by protesters in what he and some call a “coup d’etat”. Is it? The majority party and Yanukovych were elected. Would the world be acting the same, and would Obama feel the same, if it was him that was unceremoniously thrown out on his rear, forced to flee, over his almost dictatorial policies, verbally going after political opponents, using the powers of the federal government against them? Obama has the powers of the NSA, TSA, DHS, HHS, and the IRS, among others, to use against his own citizens, and has. Would he be so cavalier if there was a revolt against him?

BTW:

Vladimir Putin has put President Barack Obama’s vacation plans on hold.

Obama is headed to Coral Reef High School in the southern part of Miami, Fla., on Friday for an event about education and the economy that first lady Michelle Obama had been expected to attend as well. What hadn’t been known was that Obama’s daughters were planning to come with them, and that the four were going to extend the trip for a brief family getaway.

Now, the White House tells POLITICO that he’s reconsidering.

So, he might come back Friday (doubtful). Notice he just serendipitously scheduled an official event in Miami. “Hey, we were already here, might as well take a few days off.”

*I managed to cut this, somehow, which gives full context to post.

Read: Playing Devil’s Advocate On Ukraine »

Looking At “Climate Change” Politically Is Amoral Or Something

Interestingly, all the solutions advanced by Warmists are political ones based on Doing Something to Other People. Rarely do they involved practical application of their talking points to their own lives

(Guardian) Devastating extreme weather including recent flooding in England, Australia’s hottest year on record and the US being hit by a polar vortex have a “silver lining” of boosting climate change to the highest level of politics and reminding politicians that climate change is not a partisan issue, according to the UN’s climate chief.

Christiana Figueres said that it was amoral for people to look at climate change from a politically partisan perspective, because of its impact on future generations.

So, wait, it’s a “silver lining” that these weather events, which have happened before and will happen again regardless of whether Ms. Figueres takes a fossil fueled flight, allow Warmists to bring “climate change” up politically, but it’s “amoral” that people look at this from a politically partisan position? Oh, right, what her inner fascist is saying is that people who do not subscribe to the notion of man caused Hotcoldwetdry should just shut up.

She added: “We are reminded that climate change events are for everyone, they’re affecting everyone, they have much, much longer effects than a political cycle. Frankly, they’re intergenerational, so morally we cannot afford to look at climate change from a partisan perspective.”

Intergenerational, huh?

(Lord Monckton) Seventeen and a half years. Not a flicker of global warming. The RSS satellite record, the first of the five global-temperature datasets to report its February value, shows a zero trend for an impressive 210 months.

You can insult Lord Christopher Monckton personally all you want, Warmists, but the data speaks for itself. And hard data is more important than “computer models”, most of which have failed. Predictions of snow and ice free have failed. The Great Lakes have the 2nd highest ice extent on record. Niagara Falls froze for the 2nd time this winter. Record snow in Scotland. Cold and snow records have fallen across the US, Canada, and Europe. Lots and lots of subzero days. What we’re seeing is a pause where the global temp is elevated from the beginning of the 20th century, which goes 95% against the grain of Warmists models, and 100% against Warmist talking points. It in no means there hasn’t been warming, and won’t be again. It does highlight that it is mostly/solely natural, rather than man-induced.

Read: Looking At “Climate Change” Politically Is Amoral Or Something »

If All You See…

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle causing cold and snow winters from GHGs, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Last Tradition, with a post on the Crimean parliament voting to be part of Russia.

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove