Jimmy Carter, Dan Hicks and the Hot Licks

Mr. Carter, How can we miss you when you won’t go away?

There he goes again. The very man who brought you the Iranian Hostage Death in the Desert Debacle is warning our current government against threatening Iran. In an interview with Candy Crowley of CNN Carter pontificated:

“They have a right to purify uranium and plutonium to use for nuclear power,” Carter said. “If Iran is on the borderline, the constant threats that we or the Israelis are going to attack Iran is the best thing to force them to say, ‘Let’s defend ourselves.’ I don’t think Iran has made up their mind what to do, and I think the best thing we can do is engage them and stop making these idle threats.”

Carter has made two erroneous assumptions in his analysis. 1) that Iran has a legitimate need to defend itself with nuclear weapons, and 2) that threats from the EU, the US and Israel are idle. It is incredible that Jimmy Carter (shouldn’t he go by James? I mean we don’t call President Madison Jimmy Madison) has NEVER publicly denounced Ahdemenajad’s stated intentions of annihilating Israel. And now he wants us to be nice and engage with the Iranian SOB. Sounds a lot like Neville Chamberlain. I have to believe that the average American of good will is sick and tired of the political correctness demanded of our foreign service and of all Americans to tip-toe around issues so as not to anger those who beat their women and are living in the 4th Century.

Back to JimBob, or Jimmy. Like a boxer who does not know when to retire, Carter keeps jumping in the ring and getting knocked out. He isn’t relevant anymore. He is neither a brain trust nor a wise ex-President but he is adept at embarrassing himself and  the country by often being on the wrong side of a cause or by spewing moronic opinions. that cause his friends and colleagues to flee as if they don’t know him. He is truly like the mother or father-in-law from hell, weighing in on everything and always telling others what to do, and they stay way too long.

Without sounding too mean or disrespectful, and keeping in mind that this blog seeks to moderate topics with music that is relevant, I must refer Jimmy to Dan Hicks and the Hot Licks’ hit, HOW CAN I MISS YOU WHEN YOU WON’T GO AWAY. Enjoy:

IRAQ: Stay the Course or Cut ‘N Run?

Iraqi leadership demonstrates skill at politics American Style

al Qaeda says “Thank you very much”

As the U.S. Military re-deploys away from the cities in Iraq, one must consider the impact that politics had on the decision. John Kerry and Al-Maliki, candidates for President of their respective countries, serve as excellent examples.

John Kerry, U.S. Senator & Candidate for President, February 2007

My recent trip to Iraq and the Middle East strongly reinforced my view that setting this deadline is the key to making Iraqis stand up for Iraq. We must give the Iraqis more control over their own destiny, as they have repeatedly requested — and make them accountable for making the hard political compromises necessary to achieve a lasting political solution. I am more convinced than ever that a combination of serious, sustained diplomacy and the enforcement of benchmarks for progress by the Iraqi government, leveraged by a one year deadline for redeployment of U.S. troops, is the best way to achieve our goal of stability in Iraq and security in the region.

AP June 25, 2009

Al-Maliki, a Shiite, has pinned his re-election hopes largely on security gains that have driven violence to wartime lows — an issue that’s become his stump speech in an undeclared campaign for a second term. Seven months before national elections, he tells audiences that he’s quashed major violence, dismembered al-Qaida and stamped out Shiite militias. Much of his recent rhetoric has focused on June 30, part of a security agreement that calls for American forces to leave Iraq by the end of 2011. On Saturday, al-Maliki declared that date a national victory and urged Iraqis to hold steady in the face of more violence, saying “don’t worry if some security breach occurs here or there.” A few hours later, suspected Sunni insurgents struck in northern Iraq. A truck bomb packed with nearly a ton of explosives exploded in a Shiite town just outside the ethnically tense city of Kirkuk, killing 82 people. Officials blamed al-Qaida in Iraq for the attack.

Isn’t it interesting that John Kerry was arguing that a fixed deadline for re-deployment (argued by some as cut n’ run) will result in better security for Iraqis along with his theory that U.S. forces are attracting insurgents like moths to a spotlight, and Al-Maliki, also running for President, is currently arguing that Iraqi Forces need to “hold steady” (ie. Stay the Course) all-the-while a truck bomb was being driven to Kirkuk where 82 Iraqis were summarily blown up yesterday. Staying the Course or Cutting ‘n Running seem to be more about getting re-elected than what might be called for by common sense. Al-Maliki is calling getting rid of the occupiers (us Americans) a Great Victory.

Gen. Mahmoud Muhsen sees it differently:

Far from a celebration, the deadline has provoked uncertainty and even dread among average Iraqis, underscoring the potential problems that Mr. Maliki could face if bloodshed intensifies. Even some Iraqi officers are worried. Brig. Gen. Mahmoud Muhsen, a commander with the First Division of the Iraqi National Police, grimly predicted that sectarian violence could return. He warned that control of Iraq’s borders remained ineffective, allowing more foreign fighters to enter. “They are taking away all the equipment that the Americans provide,” he said, “and with the agenda of countries neighboring Iraq, it is a recipe for disaster.”

In short, politics continues to drive the deciders, and in the history of American peace-making, the end-game in Iraq has become a matter of pure politics that will devastate the common Iraqi civilian. When we rely on marginal leadership driven solely by political interests, without a true commitment to finish the job we set out to do, failure is inevitable.

Ain’t That a Shame?

You’re damn right. Fats Domino said it all:

News Flash for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

The Kids Are Alright-

Dear Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The Way Back Machine doesn’t work. We can’t go back to the 7th Century. Mr. Peabody and Sherman were cartoon characters, for cryin’ out loud!

The youth in your country (aside from the right wing students who clearly suffer from the Stockholm Syndrome) thirst for freedom of thought, of speech and ability to participate in the global community without worrying about being lashed, beaten or hung from a crane based on some ancient proscription or custom.

The Kids (Reformists) in your country realize that the time to change the old way of doing things is now. The future of any society always rest with the youth. Have faith in them, leave them alone and let them thrive.The Kids are Alright.

The Who had it right in 1971. You might read the lyrics  and listen to their song, because the Kids of Iran are Alright and they Won’t Get  Fooled Again:

We’ll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

And the world looks just the same
And history ain’t changed
‘Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war

I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
No, no!

There’s nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again
No, no!

Ayatollah, promise you’ll  watch the whole video-Keith Moon’s Drum solo at the end is awesome!! Don’t miss it.

The Music Died for 42 Million Refugees in 2008-OMG

WHERE DO YOU RUN WHEN THERE IS NOWHERE TO GO?

While the election in Iran and N. Korea’s low self-esteem nuclear babble are grabbing the headlines, the Voice of America news service reported on the almost impossible-to-comprehend, refugee experience for the year 2008.

The U.N. refugee agency reports 42 million people were forcibly uprooted by conflict and persecution at the end of last year. In its annual report, the UNHCR said most of the world’s refugees and internally displaced people are in developing countries…The total includes 16 million refugees and asylum seekers and 26 million internally displaced people uprooted within their own country. The U.N. refugee agency noted the number of IDP’s it cares for has more than doubled since 2005. This indicated that more people are being forced from their homes as a result of civil conflict than international wars.

42 million people, either displaced within their own country or on-the-road, trying to find a place to land in another country. It is shameful. Listen to the music from the soul of an Eritrean refugee in Ethiopia.

Don’t you wish you knew the words to the song? Is he singing about his love, his family, food, shelter? it would be good to know.

With North Korea and Iran-What Would Brian Boitano Do?

President Obama seems to rely heavily on historical figures in describing the character of this country. His many references to Abraham Lincoln remind us of Lincoln’s resolve and singular goal to maintain the Union. In times of crisis it is common for our leaders to speak with senior leaders who have confronted similar challenges. In our pop culture, people ponder challenges by posing the question What would Brian Boitano do? Some Christians ask What would Jesus do? With respect to the threats to world peace and stability courtesy of Iran and North Korea, President Obama should NOT consider asking what Jimmy Carter would do. After the failed rescue attempt of the hostages in Tehran, Carter shamed himself and damaged the cause in his address to the nation in April 1980 in which he concluded with the following statement:

We will seek to continue, along with other nations and with the officials of Iran, a prompt resolution of the crisis without any loss of life and through peaceful and diplomatic means.

Watch this:

Let me understand: The Islamic Revolutionaries kidnap our citizens; hold them for 440 days, we lose several aircraft and lives trying to rescue them, and then he reassures the world that we aren’t going to try something stupid again, but will rely on diplomatic and peaceful means.

Did he think the Iranians would appreciate the new peaceful approach? In my opinion, this was a shameful display of weakness that tactically and strategically was doomed to failure. And so went his Presidency.

In contradistinction, take a look at President Kennedy’s private discussion with President/General Eisenhower during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Kennedy as confirmed by Eisenhower understood the stakes and took a calculated risk that fortunately worked. It was nonetheless the right position to take. It took both wisdom and guts:

So what would Brian Boitano do?

I think he would ask John Kennedy!!!

Yosemite Sam Jong Il

If Kim Jong Il didn’t have nuclear devices and missles he would be pretty damn funny-Big talker, full of piss and vinegar; a short peculiar wierdo with a low self esteem and a pair of six guns. Not unlike Yosemite Sam.

Predictably, China is unwilling to do anything in terms of serious sanctions; after all, they are comrads and enjoy anything that challenges the United States and Japan. Robert Gates clearly described the mobius strip we have been on for years with North Korea. We keep going a long way around and back to the beginning, buying Yosemite Sam Jong Il off with cash, goods and appeasement.

“I think that everyone in the room is familiar with the tactics that the North Koreans use. They create a crisis and the rest of us pay a price to return to the status quo ante,” he said in a question and answer session after his speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue.

“As the expression goes in the United States, `I am tired of buying the same horse twice.’ I think this notion that we buy our way back to the status quo ante is an approach that I personally at least think we ought to think very hard about. There are perhaps other ways to try and get the North Koreans to change their approach,” he said.

There might limited options for a Looney Tune like Yosemite Sam Jong Il. Check out this idea:

 

Was General MacArthur Right?

With North Korea out of control, and the Chinese either unwilling or unable to establish some discipline in the region, one must ask whether General Douglas MacArthur demonstrated foresight in wanting to cross the Yalu?

While it’s hard not to love Harry Truman, in light of the provocative and crazy actions of North Korea over the last year, it is fair to re-examine MacArthur’s recommendation of crossing the Yalu River and bombing Manchuria in an effort to drive the Chinese off of the Korean Peninsula. And while an expanded campaign presented the potential risk of Soviet involvement in the conflict, the limited and seemingly endless war ended badly and without any peace agreement.

I guess no good deed (staying south of the Yalu) goes unpunished to the extent that the Chinese have not exerted maximum leverage on North Korea and might even be enjoying the distraction it creates for the west. While we will never know for sure the effect that MacArthur’s proposed incursion into Manchuria would have had on today’s events, it would have at least conditioned China (and Russia) that we are serious when it comes to the stability of the Peninsula and support for South Korea.

North Korea is a proxy for China and we should make it clear that we hold China responsible for its misbehavior. Our rather weak response to the events of the last several weeks is of utmost concern and may create a belief on the part of the Chinese that we don’t have the backbone to back up our demands.

So maybe the Old Soldier knew something that Truman didn’t foresee. Ah, the luxury of the retrospectascope.

See great article in CS Monitor at  http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0528/p08s01-comv.html

Does the Monroe Doctrine Require Action Against Venezuela and Iran?

In 1823 President James Monroe introduced the Monroe Doctrine telling Europeans to stay out of our hemisphere-that efforts to colonize or interfere with Central and South American Countries would be considered aggression against the United States justifying intervention. The (Teddy) Roosevelt Corollary extended the Monroe Doctrine to allow the U.S. to intervene militarily if any Latin American Country engaged in flagrant and chronic wrongdoing. Given the conduct of Hugo Chavez in his efforts to consolidate power in a rather classical Stalinist manner, and the suspicion that Venezuela is providing uranium to Iran, one has to ask the question, should the Monroe Doctrine be invoked against Venezuela?

Now, I am not recommending the invasion of Venezuela by any stretch-but the Monroe Doctrine isn’t an unimportant footnote in the history of our foreign policy. Originally lauded by Simon Bolivar himself, it was a statement to outside powers to stay out of Central and South America-that colonialism would no longer be acceptable. In effect it supported the natural growth of independent nations in this hemisphere.

Teddy Roosevelt extended the Doctrine reserving the right for the U.S. to intervene in any Latin American Country that was engaged in flagrant abusive conduct. To be sure, there has been significant commentary on the Monroe Doctrine and its progeny and there is no lack of criticism in the literature. Detractors of the United States point to it as evidence of American expansionist policies-an arrogant extension of the notion of Manifest Destiny.

And while there have been controversial adventures by the U.S. into Latin American activities, the concern that spawned the Monroe Doctrine, should  be a continuing priority today. As stated by John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missle Crisis,

The Monroe Doctrine means what it has meant since President Monroe and John Quincy Adams enunciated it, and that is that we would oppose a foreign power extending its power to the Western Hemisphere and that is why we oppose what is happening in Cuba today. That is why we have cut off our trade. That is why we worked in the OAS and in other ways to isolate the Communist menace in Cuba. That is why we will continue to give a good deal of our effort and attention to it.

While we can’t prevent Chavez and Ahmenijhad from being buddies, we can recognize the threat they present to our Hemisphere. They have formed an alliance of sorts, with a $2 Billion joint fund to help countries “throw off the yolk of U.S. Imperialism”.  Chavez is quoted as saying, that Venezuela would “stay by Iran at any time and under any condition.” Ahmedinejad has found a soul mate in Chavez stating,  “I feel I have met a brother and trench mate after meeting Chávez.”

Chavez and Ahmenijhad certainly qualify for special treatment under the Monroe Doctrine. They collectively present an anathema that we simply cannot tolerate. I don’t know enough to suggest exactly how we go about it; but our rhetoric and actions should be direct, clear and seek to totally isolate them from the modern world.

Hugo Chavez-A Pato of Mammoth Proportions

Up here in North America we have a phrase, if it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. And while Hugo Chavez is playing the role of savior, father, leader and vindicator of the sins of the U.S. on poor Venezuela and South American, he is truly a vacuous and dangerous man. He claims to be a democratic leader truly interested in the welfare of Venezuela. To the contrary, Hugo Chavez is a Pato with a bad case of megalomania.

There isn’t a lot of good news these days coming out of North Korea, Iran and Venezuela these days. The vicious almost frantic vilification of the west by the Presidents of these three countries is alarming. Setting aside the real concern over the proliferation of nuclear weapons, they really present a comedy team of epic proportions. Like, say, The Three Stooges.

Unfortunately, they are nothing but trouble and focusing on own back yard, Hugo Chavez continues to extend his hold on the Venezuelan people under the guise of Bolivarianism. Today he made a little visit to the owner of the last independent TV station in Venezuela and intimidated him under the pretext that he had too many new cars on his property (he owns an automobile dealership). It is fortunate that Jay Leno doesn’t live in Venezuela for sure.

Of course ones associations are important. Chavez  considers some real nutbags as his friends including Fidel Castro, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Kim Jong-il. Now there is an axis of idiots if there ever was one.

By vilifying the “elite” and enfranchising the masses of the previously disenfranchised poor, dictators like Chavez are brilliant in packaging their quest for total power under the guise of democratic totalitarianism. And while the early stages of this disease may arise out of a few elections, bathed in snappy slogans and platitudes, the undemocratic consolidation of power is the transparent and singular goal of such dictators. Chavez continues to muzzle and intimidate the free press and make moves towards the nationalization of critical industries and businesses.

The real danger is from the west who does not take these extremists seriously. Our propensity to be politically correct is actually appeasement-a policy that is ineffective with such men. It is akin to sitting down and having a talk with the aphids who are destroying your rose bushes hoping that in sharing your feelings with them, they will stop.

Remembering Keith Moon and The Who At The Cow Palace 1973

In 1973, I was a sophomore in college, a Who freak, and friends with Steve P. who always got tickets to great concerts. And so, during one of my Navy Reserve weekends in the Bay Area, we crossed the Bay and saw Lynard Skynard (before the tragic plane crash) and The Who.

After Lynard Skynard played, we squeezed into the center of the floor about 20 yards from the stage and saw a great concert. It was also noteworthy because it was the concert where the drummer, Keith Moon, passed out two or three times and was eventually replaced by a volunteer drummer from the audience.

Keith Moon was an incredible drummer and unfortunately passed away at the age of 32. Ironically, Moon and the bass player, John Entwistle, in my opinion combined to really make the sound that was The Who while Roger Daltrey and Pete Townsend received most of the attention. (Of course, they were both awesome too).Enjoy the following clip taken from a concert at the Isle of Wight. Here’s to Keith Moon.