Category Archives: War Commentary

President Narcissist

Thoughts on Mr. I, Me, Mine:

So what is the problem with a charismatic, narcissistic president? After all, most presidents by definition must be somewhat self-absorbed. Yet the rub is that the world has tuned Obama out. All his prime-time rhetoric from Afghanistan, the cool multicultural accentuation of Pakîstan and the Talîban, the photo-op reminders that it was Obama who ordered the mission that took out bin Laden — all this meant nothing to the Taliban, who will now patiently wait us out, unleash a North Vietnamese–like offensive very soon, and remind us that just because we don’t believe there are still things like victory and defeat in our messy wars, that does not mean there are not.

In other words, I worry that Vladimir Putin, the Iranian theocrats, the North Korean apparat, the Chinese central committee, the Muslim Brotherhood, and all the others who detest the United States have sized up Barack Obama. For 40 months they have acknowledged that his postracial image and his youthful charisma, as David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs rightly insisted, threw them for a loop — for a while. And that “for a while” is now ending, replaced with a new belief abroad that the more Obama talks about himself and his team, and the more emphatic he becomes with his “Make no mistake about it” and “Let me be perfectly clear” vacuities, the more he can at first safely be ignored, and then, quite soon, safely be taken advantage of.

Let’s hope it’s not for more than a few more months.

President Roosevelt Takes Credit For Terrorist Assassination

April 19th, 1944

WASHINGTON (Routers) President Roosevelt celebrated the first anniversary of the death of Isoroku Yamamoto with a national radio address on Tuesday, declaring the war essentially won as a result, despite the fact that Congress approved the extension of the Lend-Lease Act for another year today.

Yamamoto was the mastermind of the terrorist attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawai’i two-and-a-half years ago, that killed both civilian and military personnel. His air transport was supposedly shot down last April 18th by several “Allied” P-38 “Lightning” fighters after the Army received intelligence of his whereabouts on the island of Rabaul in the southern Pacific Ocean. Some are skeptical of his death, however, because the War Department has never released photos of the dead commander, despite rumors that they exist in Japanese hands.

Many view it as a controversial action, because the intelligence that allowed the Lightnings to surprise the aerial armada was obtained through the cracking of Japanese codes [Full disclosure: this news agency was the only one brave enough to report this]. However, the administration continues to defend such practices, and has expressed outrage at publication of the fact that they have done so, claiming that it would somehow compromise the war effort. Skeptics, however, have complained that such behavior is a violation of the rules of war. They say that the enemy deserves to be treated with respect and honesty, and that the nation loses its moral standing in the world with such tactics.

In his speech, the president also said that the terror leader would still be alive had someone else been in the White House at the time. Referring to Governor Thomas Dewey, the presumptive Republican nominee in the coming fall election, he said that “…the little man on the wedding cake wouldn’t have had the guts to order that mission, as I did. He won’t even debate on foreign policy.” Many say that the president has a point, given that Dewey only wants to discuss domestic policy and the possibility of communists in key posts in the Roosevelt administration.

Republicans, however, say that the president’s speech is unseemly and un-presidential. “Certainly the president deserves credit for the death of Yamamoto, but the notion that Governor Dewey wouldn’t have done the same thing is ludicrous,” said a campaign staffer. “He can’t possibly know that, and any president, even Woodrow “League of Nations” Wilson would have done so. This is nothing but politics in an election year where the president feels vulnerable.”

An unnamed senior official at the War Department followed up with the president’s speech, stating on background that, “…the ‘War on Aircraft Carriers’ is over.” He went on, “”Now that we have killed tens of thousands of Japanese troops with the president’s brutal island-hopping strategy, and destroyed their morale with the death of their leader, the Japanese people have come to see the potential for legitimate means of expression, people who once might have gone into the Japanese Imperial Forces now see an opportunity for a legitimate Shintoism.”

Administration critics scoff at the notion. “Yes, I suppose you could say ‘the War on Aircraft Carriers is over’ if you ignore the fact that the Japanese still have fifteen of them, and continue to commission new ones almost every month,” said one Republican Senate staffer. “We’re slowly taking back the Pacific, island by island, but it’s a long bloody mess ahead, and the Nazis still control the continent of Europe. If this is a war that’s ‘over,’ I’d hate to see one that was raging.”

The United Nations Today

A case study in failure:

The absurd and inconsequential nature of the General Assembly is reflected in the bodies and commissions that depend on it. Groups like the Commission on Human Rights are international laughingstocks and rightly so. At best they are irrelevant; at worse they actively undermine the causes they were, theoretically, established to advance.

…The Security Council represents a 1945 compromise between power realities and political correctness. That is, the UK, the US and the USSR were great powers in 1945. China and France weren’t, but it was convenient to pretend otherwise. Today, a majority of permanent Security Council members aren’t great powers, and there are significant powers (like India and Japan) who aren’t permanent members.

A majority of the Security Council’s permanent members are European states and ex-great powers to boot. This is farcical, and the Security Council’s growing weakness is the natural and inevitable result.

Like the UN, the Outer Space Treaty is outdated as well. In my talk at Space Access on Saturday, I pointed out the real problem with Article VI — its assumption that space activities, and particularly human space activities, would be performed by governments, for governments. Its nanny approach and demands that a government be responsible for anything its citizens do off planet is utterly impractical in a modern era of private spaceflight.