Saudis threaten to sell $750 billion US assets if Congress passes bill that would let 9/11 victims sue Saudi Arabia
Cut the House of Saud loose, and let them swing. They are the enemy within Islam, and the real sponsors of Islamic fundamentalism/terrorism. Let the victims of 9/1 sue the House of Saud directly, nay, build a superhighway to help the victims sue the House of Saud. Only Obama can screw this up, and with his track record, I suspect that there is a better than 50/50 chance he will. The House of Saud needs the security of US assets more than the US needs their money. We will be fine regardless of what Saud does. They, however, are in a world of hurt, fighting a losing battle with Iran, and faced with an economy nearly completely dependent upon oil, which is ready to plumb new lows. Now that we have the threat in hand, we should summarily cut off any further military assistance, and access to any further military hardware, including supplies for repairs, and any US training. On the State Department side we should highly limit and any further visas both in duration (no more than 2 weeks) and in number (a few hundred per year max). The House of Saud is a cancerous evil, and massive human rights violator, we need to deal with them seriously. The hegemon must address threats quickly, and forcefully.
Comments
Erdogan, enters the game of thrones in the Middle East, in the pending Islamic Reformation . . .4/16/2016 Erdogan urges Muslims to overcome splits, fight terror
. . . however, siding with the House of Saud is a mistake. Does Erdogan think he is fooling anyone? Besides fooling Obama, that is! At its core, foreign policy/international relations is straightforward, the Anglo-spheric, the Scandinavian, the Germanic, and a few other nations all play by adult rules, for the rest it is just like kindergarten.
Russian Jets Buzz U.S. Navy Ship at 30 Feet Putin is a big kindergartner. And like all kinders he will push until he finds the limit. President Obama is like a yielding parent, always unhappy with the fact that the child is unruly, and unwilling to listen or obey. This is a problem with the parent not the child. It is time to take Russia to task for its boundary pressing maneuvers, and China as well for its incursions into the South China Sea. As Mead suggests new protective treaties, including US or NATO troops could do the trick. We need to strengthen our support for the opponents of China's incursion into the South China Sea as well. Each of these proposals would sting, and would serve to discipline these recalcitrant nations. The real problem is that such actions must be actions, and not threats. President Obama has a history of drawing lines in the sand, and when his adversary steps over the line, he simply draws another. Policy without consequences, is like parenting without consequences. It is incompetent and does not result in the desired results. Once the line is drawn, a consequence must flow from breech. Every. Single. Time. These actions are likely to be effective and do not risk a more serious international crisis. However, splashing a couple of planes is more dramatic, and cathartic. I can say that because Obama does not have the constitution to execute. I suspect this problem will fester until we have a new President. With the current pool of candidates, I am at wits end over foreign policy. Hillary is the architect of the Obama foreign policy, it has been a disaster. Trump is an unknown, as is Cruz, as is Sanders. Now would be a good time for a brilliant Cincinnatus with both foreign policy, and domestic policy experience to pop out of the woodwork, and steal the presidential election. A guy can dream! 29 German soldiers have joined ISIS, army may contain dozens of jihadist sympathizers – report
. . . if Germany could project power as far as the Paris, but . . . German fighter jets unable to fly and mechanics forced to borrow spare parts, claims magazine Remember the entire Libya fiasco? All of Europe is incapable of projecting force. It is time to seriously consider leaving NATO, we did not sign up to defend Europe, we signed up to assist them in their defense. Europe is a joke. I treated the story as funny, but it is serious, and likely the only way to make the Europeans understand this is to leave NATO. The downside is many European countries have proven in the past incapable of behaving civilly. If untethered, how long before they return to active internecine warfare? I give them a fortnight. Olivier Blanchard eyes ugly 'end game' for Japan on debt spiral
. . . how the hell does a country decide to allow the debt level to reach 250% of GDP? "Japan is heading for a full-blown solvency crisis as the country runs out of local investors and may ultimately be forced to inflate away its debt in a desperate end-game, one of the world’s most influential economists has warned. Olivier Blanchard, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, said zero interest rates have disguised the underlying danger posed by Japan’s public debt, likely to reach 250pc of GDP this year and spiraling upwards on an unsustainable trajectory." I can still remember back in the 1980s when Japan was going to take over the world, and the value of land in Tokyo was higher than all the land in the US. Needless to say, that little bubble popped. Soon after, Japan slid into its old age, with its economy barely able to get up to use the toilet. The article starts out focused and worried about Japan, but quickly turns its attention to Europe, as it should. I keep asking myself, who would lend money to the Japanese? Only younger Japanese. Demographically, Japan is dying. There are too many old, too few young, and the workforce is contracting. They will need to achieve near perfect robotization to fill their factory floors, take care of the old, keep the water, and sewers running, and babysit the vanishingly few children. How long before all that is left is an island of robots? Well, we know when Japan has reached that point when the robots are making 2nd generation sex robots to satisfy the 1st generation sex robots. Europe is hot on Japan's heels with bad demographics, an impossibly weak economy, and a large number of nations which appear to be in permanent economic depression. The solution to these problems is not particularly difficult, but requires tax reform, work rule reforms, wage reforms, union reforms, political reforms, welfare reforms and there is less than zero interest in any of this. The Germanic north, and Scandinavia seem to be willing to make serious reforms, and when implemented, the reforms, work well. They might be slow in implementing these changes, but they happen. The south is unwilling to even contemplate real change. Eventually the article glances off the whole Brexit problem, but answers no questions. Britain is faced with this question, should it stay in the Eurozone, build its relations there becoming a full member? Or should Britain leave the Eurozone and build relations elsewhere? The above analysis seems compelling. Europe is mostly a disaster sliding into economic catastrophe. Why would Britain agree to that? Belgium, France, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, and more are in dire shape, with debt averaging well above 100% of GDP. All claim to be following the rules, but still debt seems to increase endlessly. These countries are in what amounts to a permanent depression. Exactly what does Britain stand to gain from these relationships? Debt? Obligations? Perhaps it is time to look elsewhere. Perhaps the NAFTA could provide some direction. Britain could turn away from Europe, and turn to its former colonies, like Canada, and even America. It could form, or join existing trade agreements between these nations. The nations involved in NAFTA have far more economic potential than do the European countries. These are mostly active and healthy economies. It will be interesting to see what Britain does. I await the referendum. Kyle Bass Blog Opec’s days as economic force are ‘over’ - FT.com
. . . but the Yergin seems to misunderstand why. "Opec’s economic power is broken, says the unofficial historian of the oil industry, who has argued that the association of oil exporting countries has become irretrievably divided and is unable to reverse the current slump in crude prices. Daniel Yergin, whose Pulitzer-prize winning book The Prize provides a comprehensive history of oil and power, said he believes the association’s economic prowess has been undone by its inability to agree on how to stop the oil crisis. In an interview with the Financial Times, Mr Yergin, who is also vice-chairman of data provider IHS, said the recent disagreements among Opec members have revealed how weak the organization now is. Mr Yergin said: “The era of Opec as a decisive force in the world economy is over. It is clearly a very divided organization.” Mr Bergen’s book, first published in 1990, dedicates several chapters to the rise and domination of Opec, the 13-member organisation that has caused sharp swings in the oil price by restricting or raising supplies since it was set up in 1960. But the 69-year-old argues the current oil slump has exposed the organization’s inability to act in a unified way." Ok, correct as far as it goes, but it does not go anywhere near far enough. The reason for the lack of unity is the existential war between the Shia, represented by Iran, and the Sunni, represented by the House of Saud. "Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s powerful deputy crown prince, said earlier this month a deal would only happen if Iran also signed up. But Iran wants to increase its output after sanctions were lifted in January as part of a nuclear deal with world powers. Mr Yergin said he did not think a freeze was possible until Iran clarified how much it could export. As for Saudi Arabia, Mr Yergin said it was thinking differently about oil. “I remember when the operating code was: save the oil for our grandchildren. Now the grandchildren are in charge and they are looking at it in a very different way,” he said. “They are not looking at it as precious resource . . . but rather asking how do you monetize it?'" Right Saudi wants to tie up Iran so it has no money to fight this existential war. Iran will have none of it, and so will pump oil, in order to build its more integrated economy back from the recent sanctions, and seek to fight proxy wars in the meantime. Saudi has very little economy outside of oil, and what it has, is nearly completely reliant on oil money transfers from the House of Saud. It is not that the House of Saud is thinking differently about oil, it is thinking about an existential war, and it needs as much oil money as possible to ward off economic unrest from its people, and fight expensive proxy wars. Remember in this fight the House of Saud is the banker to the Sunni proxy wars, while the Iranians are not, they train, and provide some arms assistance but do not do the majority of the bankrolling. The reason the House of Saud recently left Yemen, is to cut the costs of the proxy war there. The House of Saud is deeply concerned, and panic is just setting in. OPEC's days as oil hegemon are over. Not because "Kids these days!" But because Iran wishes to reduce the kingdom. Optimistically, this will be the warfare at the beginning of the Islamic Reformation, which will lead to an Islamic Enlightenment. But lets not get ahead of ourselves. Al-Saud is our enemy. The Shia, represented by Iran are the only real hope today for an Islamic Reformation. We need to make this work. We need to trade with Iran, and promote the full reintegration of Iran with the world economy. This will allow Iran to pressure the House of Saud, and allow Iranian businesses, and the people of Iran to build relations with America, and the West. Only this will result in the diminishment of the Iranian hardliners, and the ultimate democratization, and free marketization of Iran. Something the world needs dearly. Let's do it! Behind Closed Doors, Top U.S. Commander Frustrated With Obama
. . . and it all points to a feckless, incompetent President. "Admiral Harry Harris, the top U.S. commander in the Pacific who directs U.S. patrols in the South China Sea, seems pretty frustrated with President Obama. The Navy Times: The U.S. military’s top commander in the Pacific is arguing behind closed doors for a more confrontational approach to counter and reverse China’s strategic gains in the South China Sea, appeals that have met resistance from the White House at nearly every turn. Adm. Harry Harris is proposing a muscular U.S. response to China’s island-building that may include launching aircraft and conducting military operations within 12 miles of these man-made islands, as part of an effort to stop what he has called the “Great Wall of Sand” before it extends within 140 miles from the Philippines’ capital, sources say. Harris and his U.S. Pacific Command have been waging a persistent campaign in public and in private over the past several months to raise the profile of China’s land grab, accusing China outright in February of militarizing the South China Sea. But the Obama administration, with just nine months left in office, is looking to work with China on a host of other issues from nuclear non-proliferation to an ambitious trade agenda, experts say, and would prefer not to rock the South China Sea boat, even going so far as to muzzle Harris and other military leaders in the run-up to a security summit." Well, what should one expect. The President has his morning coffee grounds high colonic at 10, and then lunch followed by 18 holes of golf, and a fete of some tyrannical dictator in the evening. His schedule is filled, filled I tell you. The President might be mostly retired, and an incredibly lame duck, but such status will not keep him from dithering, damaging American foreign policy, and gutting the Pax Americana further. Take that to the bank. We are in the midst of the Presidential candidate season, there are decisions to be made. The Burn, and The Donald wouldn't know foreign policy from flounder, so consider them appropriately. Hillary was the brain trust behind the first four years of the Obama foreign policy debacle, again consider her appropriately. Cruze and Kasich will need a bit more evaluation, but I am sure you can find your way through. Remember, those with no executive experience like Obama become Peter Principled and fundamentally, and permanently incapable of moving forward. More executive experience is better, it allows the person to continue to learn and broaden on the job, less is worse, it moves the individual closer to Peter Principling. Choose wisely. Rising Threats: Shrinking Military
. . . a man incapable of building a high quality staff to help him run his administration. The quality of a President's staff is critically important to his decision making. President Obama had a staff of such low quality it resulted in the shocking chaos we see in the world today. For example, President Obama's feckless policy in Libya has resulted in the metastization of militant radical islam through out much of northern, and central Africa. The Middle East, and the Near East are in incredible turmoil. Military spending is increasing, a sure sign of the breakdown of the Pax Americana which has successfully maintained a more peaceful world since 1945. The Global Vote of No Confidence in Pax Americana "What’s forgotten among all the grousing by President Obama and Donald Trump about ‘free riding’ allies is this basic fact of international life: the Pax Americana was intended to suppress global geopolitical and military competition by providing a framework for international security. That benefitted the world by making countries safer at a lower cost and by assuring people that their national defense and access to world trade and markets did not require them to build huge military establishments." No one is willing to rely on the assurance that America will provide a framework of international security. While Walter Russell Mead is correct that the kvetching about free riders is over the top, it is also true that Americans are becoming tired of continually saving the world at our own cost, having the rest of the world plow their peace dividend (the money they didn't have to spend to achieve peace) into social programs, and then lecture us about how we need to toe the social welfare line. We paid billions to rebuild those countries after WWII, we paid billions more to protect them, since 1945. We created the Pax Americana, a massive and costly effort to keep the world but especially the Europeans, and Asians from murdering tens of millions more of their own. And what do we get? Pissing and moaning like adult children still living in their parents basement. They are so militarily incompetent, they cannot project power from Europe to Europe (the Balkans in the 1990s), or Libya, or Syria. Such efforts require a force mostly comprised of the US. They free ride on medical treatments, procedural advancements, new devices, and pharmaceuticals. In addition, they have created societies so uninteresting and lackluster, no one within them wants to have babies. They simply want to consume whatever they can before they die. If Europe wants to slowly die through demographic suicide, I am not sure I am concerned about their forward security. The President could prod these countries for changes which would likely reinvigorate them, but he will not. He is an inexperienced fool who does not understand the responsibility inherent in the office. His policies reflect this, and these interviews with his former Secretaries of Defense confirm it. These interviews are deeply shocking. They reveal a man who would be at home in a pot fueled freshman bull session, but completely adrift in the real world, and even worse in the presidency. I am nonplussed. Does Obama Have This Right?
. . . has Friedman ever been right? "Sulaimaniya, Iraq — As one could see from President Obama’s recent interview in The Atlantic, he pretty much hates all the Middle East’s leaders including those of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Iran and the Palestinians. Obama’s primary goal seems to be to get out of office being able to say that he had shrunk America’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, prevented our involvement on the ground in Syria and Libya, and taught Americans the limits of our ability to fix things we don’t understand, in countries whose leaders we don’t trust, whose fates do not impact us as much as they once did. After all, the president indicated, more Americans are killed each year slipping in bathtubs or running into deer with their cars than by any terrorists, so we need to stop wanting to invade the Middle East in response to every threat. That all sounds great on paper, until a terrorist attack like the one Tuesday in Brussels comes to our shores. Does the president have this right?" No! We know this because Friedman goes on to say, "Visiting here in northern Iraq, in Kurdistan, and talking to a lot of Iraqis leaves one thinking Obama is not entirely wrong." "But sitting here also makes you wonder if Obama hasn’t gotten so obsessed with defending his hand’s-off approach to Syria that he underestimates both the dangers of his passivity and the opportunity for U.S. power to tilt this region our way — without having to invade anywhere. Initially, I thought Obama made the right call on Syria. But today the millions of refugees driven out of Syria — plus the economic migrants now flooding out of Africa through Libya after the utterly botched Obama-NATO operation there — is destabilizing the European Union." This does not require any wondering, the EU is a mess because of the Libyan fiasco, and the Syrian fiasco. All of the Middle East, and all of the Northern third of Africa are under stress, and turmoil because of these failings. Now Europe more generally is caught in the conflagration. "Kurdistan and Tunisia are just what we dreamed of: self-generated democracies that could be a model for others in the region to follow. But they need help. Unfortunately, Obama seems so obsessed with not being George W. Bush in the Middle East that he has stopped thinking about how to be Barack Obama here — how to leave a unique legacy and secure a foothold for democracy … without invading." One of these, Tunisia is a Bush legacy, the other should have been, but Bush failed to take the correct action and allow the division of Iraq into pieces. This would have resulted in at least a tripartite separation between the Kurds, the Shia, and the Sunni. Instead, Bush retained the incompetent colonial boundary. This was an appeasement of Turkey. The disasters spilling from Obama's actions, and failures dwarf the problems we saw from the Bush failure vis-a-vis the Kurds. While Obama has had 7 years to correct these problems, he has done nothing constructive, to the contrary he has acted foolishly, expanding the problem to North Africa, and Europe. Atta boy, Barack! A Presidential Rebuke to the Saudis . . . he bows to the House of Saud on his first trip, and now pillories the House of Saud as repressive, extremist, free riders. Unbelievable, American Presidents do not bow to tyrants, dictators, or hooligans. How he now got this correct is a bit beyond my ken.
"Mr. Obama, who has blamed Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Arab governments for encouraging anti-American militancy, also told Mr. Goldberg that the Saudis should try harder to “share the neighborhood” by achieving “some sort of cold peace” with their enemies in Iran. The Saudis promptly fired back. Writing in the Arab News, Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former Saudi intelligence chief, argued that Mr. Obama does not appreciate all his government has done, including sharing intelligence in the fight against terrorism. But the fact is, this decades-long partnership, born of antipathy to the Soviet Union and an American reliance on Saudi oil, is growing increasingly brittle." Obama's tactic here is appropriate, but long over due. With the USSR long gone, oil prices responding to more rational economic information, we have little interest in standing beside the House of Saud in its quest to dominate the Middle East, and recreate its neighbors as Wahhabi's. Even a cursory understanding of the history of the Middle East, and North Africa shows an ever changing cascade of Sultanates, Empires, Caliphates, and Kingdoms. This will only end once Islam is reformed. The first step in the Islamic Reformation is the reduction of the House of Saud, and the Wahhabi/Salafi. If Obama keeps this up, I might just start believing he knows what he is doing. More likely he has a good advisor who has his ear on a few issues. Regardless, we could use more of this, and less of the Syrian, Libyan, Iraq, Afghanistan fiasco's. |
AuthorMaddog Categories
All
|