"A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men
from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government."
(Thomas Jefferson)

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Frank Gaffney: Peace Despite Weakness?

Everyone in this Country with a computer needs to start reading what Frank Gaffney and others have to say at the Center for Security Policy starting with members of the Senate who foolishly ratified that START Treaty in the lame duck without all the details.

Secretary of Defense Gates looks foolish himself touting the Obama 'can't we all get along' ('kum by yah') agenda in China no less  -- Gates acts like we don't have anything to be afraid of from the Chinese or the Russians.  Excuse us if we take the Dick Cheney approach and don't trust them.  (NOTE:  Before anyone goes over the edge on our use of 'kum by yah' to describe Obama and Carter, we know the origin and learned the song at Church camp, but it is used by pacifist and the anti-war movement and has taken on a meaning of  'can't we all get along?'  (appeasement) in our opinion which we feel describes the Obama and Carter Administrations.)

Electing someone with almost zero experience like Obama with a leftist agenda is hurting our national security more and more along with the people he chose for his cabinet and National Security Team. Gates is not our favorite Secretary of Defense but hate to think who Obama is going to choose next. Here is a snippet of what happened with Gates in China:

We better not kid ourselves. Secretary Gates’ China visit – in which he was reduced to pleading for improved military-to-military communications (as though they would actually mitigate the danger posed by PRC’s steadily increasing offensive power) and for Beijing’s “help” in containing North Korea (as though the latter poses a threat to the United States, but Communist China does not) – is but a taste of what is to come.  (Center for Security Policy)
Frank Gaffney is not a doom and gloom person but someone who isn't afraid to speak the truth. For years we have been strong following President Ronald Reagan's election and his agenda of 'Peace through Strength' which now that looks to be tossed out the window as Gates has offered up $178B in defense cuts. Reminds us of the Carter years where they kept cutting defense and his 'kum by yah' approach to national security was a huge failure which not only hurt our military but countries were not afraid of the United States and their kumbyya President shown by Iran and their taking of hostages at the American Embassy.

What is with some of these people in the White House and Congress with their failure to stand up and be strong on national security?   We are not dealing with 'kum by yah' countries but countries who are our enemies not our friends. Hillary Clinton as Secretary of States scares us almost as much as Obama because she wants so bad to be at the top, we believe she would sell out just to say she brokered an agreement.

Somewhere along the line with the fall of the Berlin Wall too many people assumed the Cold War was over and that we had nothing to fear from the Russians including a lot of Republicans.  Even when Putin was put in charge, President Bush refused to acknowledge that maybe he was not what he portended to be.  He came from the ranks of the KGB who are not exactly our friends.  For years it has been Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld who were not willing to become even a little kumbyya -- we need people like that in office who put America first so the bullies know that America is not an easy mark.

Scary times we live and more attention needs paid to national security in our opinion. Without a strong national security, most other issues don't matter. Hard to figure out people who don't understand that national security also means border security. With part of our borders still open including the northern border who knows who enters the United States.

If you get a chance, visit Center for Security Policy to learn more about what is happening in the world.  Armed with the information provided, we can start contacting our members of Congress to remain vigilant and not be swayed by a 'kum by yah mentality that we are seeing out of this Administration.

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public.
When Frank Gaffney says non-partisan, he means it as we have seen him take after both sides. We believe his Center for Security Policy has all of our backs even when the politicians refuse to see a problem. He doesn't quit on all of us and keeps right on putting out the truth and facts. He is a true American Patriot.

Frank Gaffney: Peace Despite Weakness?
January 11, 2011

Two recent episodes offer an insight into a world in which the United States deliberately adopts a policy of pursuing international peace despite weakness, rather than practice what Ronald Reagan called “peace through strength.”

First, prior to and during Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ present trip to Communist China, his hosts lifted the veil of secrecy on a brand new, “fifth-generation” stealth fighter aircraft. This “J-20” is clearly intended to compete with, and perhaps defeat, America’s inventory of such planes – the F-22, whose production Mr. Gates insisted on terminating prematurely, and the F-35, whose production he is now slowing.

U.S. intelligence evidently was taken by surprise that the Chinese have made such progress in so sophisticated an area of military design and manufacturing. In part, faulty estimates about the likelihood of “peer competitors” fielding stealthy air superiority fighters and the like have been used to justify – or at least rationalize – the sorts of unilateral-disarmament-measures-via-budget-cuts that Bob Gates is affording President Obama the political cover to make.

As it happens, a further pall was cast on the Pentagon chief’s visit to the Middle Kingdom by another revelation: Just after Christmas, the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, Admiral Robert Willard revealed that Beijing had achieved “initial operational status” on a new ballistic missile designed to destroy aircraft carriers at sea at ranges up to 2,000 miles from China.

The technical term for these sorts of developments is “game-changers”: They are clearly meant to threaten access to and freedom of operation in the Western Pacific for the United States’ most important power-projection forces.

Second, the Washington Times’ Bill Gertz revealed last week that the chief of the Russian armed forces staff had just made a no-less-portentous announcement: General Nikolai Makarov declared that his country would have by 2020 an “impenetrable” defense against missile attack: "The state will have an umbrella over it which will defend it against ballistic missile attacks, against medium-range missiles, air-based cruise missiles, sea-based cruise missiles, and ground-based cruise missiles, including missiles flying at extremely low altitudes, at any time and in any situation."


History suggests that when bullies, etc. perceive this sort of opening, it does not conduce to peace. As one of Secretary Gates’ predecessors, Donald Rumsfeld, put it: “Weakness is provocative.” And what it provokes is not peaceable impulses, but warlike ones, on the part of freedom’s foes.

To those who say we can no longer afford to be strong and must make at least the $178 billion in cuts in defense spending sought by Messrs. Gates and Obama, there is a time-tested reality: We can pay now for peace through strength, or pay later and vastly more in lives and treasure for the costs of failing to achieve that peace through our provocative weakness.

Excerpt: Read More at Center for Security Policy

No comments: