Sunday, April 27, 2014

A Message to the People of Russia

It has come to my attention that many of you have pick up my page, FOUNDATION, and have noticed my posts about Ukraine, among other subjects.

I would like to reach out to all of you, and offer a plea for peace.

First, you have noticed my posts about Ukraine, and their desire to join the west, of at least western Ukraine.  

I am fully aware that the people in eastern Ukraine, or at least in Donetsk and Luhansk are mostly of Russian origin and many want to become part of Russia, or at least ally with them.  In this issue, I support both the East and the West.

I know Crimea was always Russian territory until 1956, when Khrushchev, on a whim, decided to give it to Ukraine as a gift, against the will of the Crimean people.  I know that after all these years, these people wanted to remain Russian and return to Russia’s fold.

I am also aware of the majority of the people in eastern Ukraine, or at least in the two easternmost provinces, also want to return to Russia’s fold, either as part of Russia, or an independent country allied with Russia.

I can sympathized with you, even support your position;  but I also support the people of western Ukraine in their desire to join the West and become a part of the European Union.  We, in the United States and Europe did not encourage them to do so, nor are we encouraging them to shun Russia, your country.  They themselves made this decision, and whether you like it or not, you have to respect them for it.  Each country must respect any desires of a neighboring country, whether the neighboring country likes it or not.  This equally applies to the U.S. in the affairs and both Canada and Mexico.

I also know that Ukraine is a cleft country, and that the eastern Ukrainians are of the Orthodox faith (religion does matter), the same as you, and that they are mostly ethnic Russian and want closer relations with you.  That also has to be respected.

What should be done is simply have a free and fair referendum in Eastern Ukraine, with international observes, for the people to decide for themselves what they want.  They can either vote 1) remain a part of Ukraine;  2) secede from Ukraine and join Russia; or 3) become an independent country, call it East Ukraine and ally with Russia.  Should they decide #2 or #3, fine.  We can live with it.  In return, Russia should let the rest of Ukraine go its own way and compensate Ukraine and its people for the land they’ve forfeited such as debt cancellation and supplying them with free natural gas from Russia for a certain number of years.

All this can, and should be achieved peacefully, with both sides having mutual respect for each other.  Ukraine and the European Union pose no threat to your country whatsoever.

What I am trying to say is that the present situation in Ukraine is not an excuse for your president, Vladimir Putin, to station troops along the Ukrainian border and threaten to invade Ukraine, even if the people of Donetsk and Luhansk desire it.  War, invasion, or any other form of hostile action is not the answer, and isn’t helping your own people any, even if you benefit by uniting the Russian people and acquiring more land.  What Putin is doing isn’t making things better for you, it’s making it worse, and he is aliening all of you from the rest of the world, at great expense to Russia itself.  

Should Putin order an invasion, you will lose more than you’ll gain, even if Russia wins militarily.  What Putin will be doing, in simple terms, is leading your country down the road to perdition, beginning with a deteriorating economy put on by sanctions, and a loss of international standing, and I know you do not want that.

Russia is a great country with a great people, having an amazing history.  Just by itself, without Ukraine, Russia is a giant landmass.  You are the largest country in the world and you have land stretching from eastern Europe all the way to the Bering Strait, along with an abundant amount of natural resources that have yet to be developed.  

If you were to develop all your resources throughout the country, can you imagine how much of an economic powerhouse you would be?  Your country and people would acquire more wealth, your standard of living would greatly increase, and you would provide intense competition for Europe, Japan, the United States, and China, without any need for the military.  Your people have great potential, and you have the ability to achieve a greatness, much more than you have already acquired throughout your entire history.

With all of this, you have no need to acquire any more land or invade any other country, and no other country wants to go to war with you.  In regard to your history, your borders today are safe.  What we all ask is to respect the sovereignty of your neighbors, as you expect them to respect yours.  Equal and mutual respect is the key, and should a problem arise, you should be able to settle it peacefully, without any need for your military.  That is all we ask.

What President Putin is doing right now isn’t helping you or Russia, it’s making your situation worse, and the world is distancing itself from you.  Should President Putin give the order to invade Ukraine, he will only make things worse for your society, and he will lead you and your country down the road to perdition;  in what ways, I don’t know, but it will happen.  What is really sad is that Putin knows this, but he doesn’t seem to care.  It hurts me very much to have to say this.

Is it worth it?  I don’t think so.  Do not allow this to happen.  Do not let Putin become like Adolf Hitler in 1939, when he invaded Poland, and I do dare to say that.  Please stand down and rejoin Europe, and the rest of the world.  I feel that by doing this, we can work together, and get through this crisis by finding a fair and peaceful solution that will be to everyone’s satisfaction.  It is only by achieving a win-win situation that we can have peace and prosperity for all.

Alastair Browne

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

UKRAINE - Part Four: What Should be Done to End This Crisis, Once and For All (April 15, 2014)

“Ukraine or rather Eastern Ukraine will come back in five, ten, or fifteen years.  Western Ukraine can go to Hell.”
                                                                     -A Russian General  (circa 1995)


And so, Ukraine now has its civil war.  It doesn’t matter what is happening right now, that’s just what it is.  In Eastern Ukraine, Russian-Ukrainian are occupying government buildings, building barricades, begging for Russian troops, now amassed across the border, to come in and invade.  One rumor has it that Russian agents are already in Ukraine instigating these disturbances, where, should the Ukrainian government crack down, Russia will have the perfect excuse to come in and invade to protect the Russian people living there.  Putin will find any excuse to do whatever he wants anyway, and he knows he can get away with it because the rest of the world isn’t doing much to protect Ukraine, save imposing sanctions.  
As of the present moment, the Ukrainian government is cracking down on its dissenters.  Who knows what may happen next.
I have stated, from Samuel Huntington’s book, “A Clash of Civilizations,” that Ukraine is a cleft country.  Western Ukraine is composed mostly of ethnic Ukrainians, who desire to join the European Union and the West in general.  Eastern Ukraine is composed of a mixture of Russians and Ukrainians, with the two easternmost provinces, Luhansk and Donetsk, with a majority Russian population, and a few other cities outside these two provinces, such as Kharkiv, having enough of its Russian populace to stir up some kind of trouble.  However, it is in Luhansk and Donetsk where the major crisis looms.
So there we have it.  Western Ukraine has found its freedom, the two provinces in Eastern Ukraine, Luhansk and Donetsk, are making life difficult for everyone else.
One thing that has to be noted is that many of these Russian Ukrainians do not want to be annexed to Russia.  They want to remain a part of Ukraine, with Ukraine maintain close Russian ties.  In other words, they want all of Ukraine to be Russia’s junior partner, under their full protection;  but it’s not going to be that way.  The Ukrainians want to break out of Russia’s orbit completely, and be free to do as they please;  i.e.  join the European Union, and as long as Putin is in power, NATO as well.

Here is what I propose.
Have Luhansk and Donetsk, and any other Eastern Ukrainian province, hold a referendum.  This referendum is to be completely fair, by secret ballot from each Ukrainian citizen, and to be supervised by international observers, including those from the United States and Europe.

This ballot is to give two choices, and no more.  These choices would be:
  1. Have that province secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation, living under Russia’s laws and protection henceforth.
  2. Remain a part of Ukraine, to live under Ukraine’s laws, and abide by any foreign policy decision Ukraine may make.                                                                

There will be NO federalizing Ukraine or any of its provinces, as Putin proposed, for that would only be to Russia’s advantage.

As a result, should the two renegade provinces, and any other connected to the Russian border vote to join Russia, they will be free to do so.

BUT, there will be a price.  
  1. Russia is to cancel all debts owed by Ukraine to the Russian Federation, no exceptions.
  2. To help Ukraine, Russia should supply Ukraine natural gas, free of charge, for the next five to seven years to help Ukraine get back on its feet.
  3. Russia should compensate Ukraine for the land they sell to Russia (I said sell, not give or forfeit) with natural gas, as stated, and money to help move Ukraine’s economy in the right direction.
  4. Ukraine shall be free and independent to take whatever course it chooses to do so, whether Russia approves of it or not.
  5. Russia is to remove all its troops from the Ukrainian border.
  6. Ukraine shall be free to join the European Union and fully integrate into European society.
  7. Ukraine shall be fully free to join NATO, and establish NATO bases in their country.  This applies to the rest of Eastern Europe, including the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
  8. Should Russia not approve the #7, then the alternative shall be that Russia will have no military bases within 1600 kilometers of any borders of any European country, including Ukraine.

This is not giving in to appease the Russians, like Neville Chamberlain tried to do with Hitler in 1938.  This will be Russia paying for new territory, reuniting Russians from other countries with their own, but at a price.  If Russia wants these lands, they have to pay for them.  They cannot have them from free, pure and simple.
Here, everybody wins.  Russians will be with Russians under Russian law.  Ukraine will be rid of a peoples who are at present a thorn on their side.  They may lose two provinces, but that isn’t much.  In fact, they are not worth keeping.  Crimea is gone, but Crimea has always been a part of Russia, and was given away by Khrushchev, drunk, back in 1954, against the will of the Crimean people.  They are glad to be back in Russia, and Ukraine will just have to accept that.  Again, it really isn’t worth it.

There you have it.  This is a proposed, permanent solution to Ukraine’s present troubles, and a pathway for their long for freedoms.  It isn’t easy to swallow, but nothing ever is

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

UKRAINE - Part Three: Vladimir Putin

Russia has Crimea. Russian troops are amassing on the eastern Ukrainian border, and Ukrainian soldiers are digging trenches on the other side, like in the first world war. Meanwhile, the Transdniestr region of Moldova has applied for admission in the Russian Federation. Problem is, they are separated by southern Ukraine. Putin patiently waits for his chance. Ukraine, Europe, and the world are worried.
Putin has stated that he has no interest in either invading eastern Ukraine or annexing any more territory to Russia, but his troops on the border tell a different story. The U.S. and Europe are reacting by imposing economic sanctions on Russia, thereby isolating it. The Ukrainian military has withdrawn from the Crimean peninsula.
Once again, Europe is on the brink of an invasion and possibly a war. Will it happen. What should we do if Putin does invade Ukraine. He claims he is only interested in the eastern and southern parts, since it is Slavic, with a Russian population, and only wants to unite all the Russian peoples. Hitler wanted the same for the Germans.
How are we dealing with all this? By imposing sanctions, and it is hurting the Russian economy, but other than that, not much. We do have fighter jets over the Baltic States, being Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and performing military maneuvers in Poland, but is that enough? Even though the Russian economy is foundering, Putin doesn’t care.
Will Putin invade? How will we react if he does? What if he gets southeastern Ukraine, and the Transdniestr Region as a bonus, then what? All the Russian people will be united, but will he stop there? Suppose he wants the rest of Ukraine; then the Baltic States, in spite of the fact that they are in NATO and the European Union. We have sworn to protect those three states. What will happen then?
Being a former member of the K.G.B., one fact is certain. Vladimir Putin is a tyrant, and a bully. He’s a dictator with absolute power, and is determined to hang on to it indefinitely. He is also determined to do what he wants, with no regard to what anyone else thinks. Most of all, he doesn’t care. Yes, his official title is President of Russia, with the Kremlin backing him up, but from the time he was appointed by Boris Yeltsin to succeed him, Putin slowly chipped away at Russia’s democratic reforms until he acquire all the power for himself. It may not look like it, but that is where he is now and that is what the rest of the world, especially the U.S., has to confront.
What is happening now, what I’ve just describe, somewhat resembles the beginning of World War II. Hitler united all the German people by taking Austria, the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia, but then he wanted more. On September 1, 1939, Hitler invaded Poland, and World War II began. We are facing this again today. What is hanging over us now are the Russian troops across from Ukraine. They are not amassing just to practice maneuvers. They definitely have a plan in mind. After Ukraine, Putin will only want more. He will never be satisfied.
Vladimir Putin is no fool. What we are seeing may reflect Hitler, but Putin is more like Joseph Stalin, a lot cooler than Hitler. He sees himself as Peter the Great, but is acting like Joseph Stalin.
After 1991, when the Soviet Union broke up, Russia had the potential of becoming a great democracy and for a while, was on the way of becoming one. If Russia went all the way, and was allowed to prosper economically, they could give China, Europe, and the U.S. a run for their money. Being the biggest country in the world, from eastern Europe to the Bering Strait, Russia has an abundance of oil, minerals, and farmland. By developing its resources, Russia can be a self supporting entity, and an economic powerhouse, rivaling Europe, China, Japan, and the U.S. They do not need any more land from any other country, including Ukraine. (Russia and Ukraine have a long history together, and Ukraine is rich in farming and industry, which is one reason why Russia wants it back.)
As it is, Putin comes into power, removes all democratic freedoms, and as a result, Russian billionaires and other business tycoons have left Russia in droves, depositing all their assets in foreign banks. Economically, Russia is in a mess, and what Putin is doing now is diverting everyone’s attention from that fact. There is also a huge Muslim population that may be getting ready to rebel, again! In addition, Putin is popular whenever something like Crimea happens, but generally, he isn’t, and many want him out, and that number is increasing.
The worst thing about all this is that Putin will set the example for other would-be tyrants to invade, conquer, and start other massive wars. By this, I mean countries like China, North Korea, and Iran, for starters
What do we do about all this? I have a few suggestions here.
Cancel all debts owed by Ukraine to Russia.
Establish NATO bases in eastern Europe, and the Baltic States. Have Ukraine, even Georgia join NATO and establish bases there. Russia has already invades two states in Georgia. It was agreed that no bases would be set up, but as of now, all bets are off.
Set up new oil and gas pipelines, or import both to countries formerly dependent on Russia. Cut off all imports from Russia immediately. I know this may be a slow and difficult process, but there are ways around this.
Should Russia decide to attack, fight back. (Easier said than done, but somebody has to do it.)
Isolate Russia, economically and otherwise. How long will it be until Russia itself collapses? May not be as long as we think.
I am not a warmonger; far from it. When the Soviet Union imploded back in 1991, I was hopeful that they would finally join the western world in peace and prosperity. That hasn’t happened, and is not going to happen as long as Putin remains in office. He must be stood up to, as soon as possible, and hopefully the Russian people may stand up and get rid of him, once and for all. Of all of Russia’s enemies, their biggest enemy is Vladimir Putin himself.

Saturday, March 15, 2014

UKRAINE - Part Two: March 16, 2014



As of today, March 16, 2014, there is going to be a referendum in Crimea to either 1) become a part of Russia or 2) become a sovereign “independent” state. Note the quotation marks, meaning Crimea would be a separate country in the throes of Russia. There is no third choice to maintain the status quo. By the time you read this, Crimea, I think, will vote to become a part of Russia, being 60% Russian and a one time state of Russia anyway. I have previously discussed this in my last essay, “Why Ukraine Should Give Up Crimea.” 
I still stand behind what I have said earlier, but this is not how the reality of it is, and I do not support it. What I have had in mind was a referendum, yes, but with a third choice to remain a part of Ukraine, and the majority of the votes of whatever choice would win. This should also be on the approval of all parties involved, and should Crimea revert back to Russia, Russia should give Ukraine something in return for it. i.e., in equal value to the Crimea, as in forgiving all their debts, giving them free natural gas until Ukraine gets back on its feet, letting it go the way of Europe, and having no say in any future decision Ukraine may make concerning their own welfare, up to and including joining NATO. In other words, it should be win-win, and it should be done fair and square.
We are not going to get that from Putin, not in a million years. Putin is a tyrant, on an equal level with Joseph Stalin, and this is not an exaggeration.
I say this because Putin, as of this writing, has amassed troops on Ukraine’s eastern border, and has given thought to intervening in Eastern Ukraine to protect the Russians living there. In other words, there’s a very good chance that Russia will invade Ukraine. How will we, the U.S. and Europe, react? Will there be a new European war, the likes of which we haven’t seen since World War II? By themselves, the Ukrainian army cannot stand against the Russian army, and should the U.S. and Europe get involved, this could lead to a nuclear exchange. Is Putin willing to risk all that? We are seeing how far he will go to get what we wants, which is, the least, the Russian parts of Ukraine, and possibly, Moldova (the Transdniestr Region, the very thin slice of eastern Moldova, populated by Russians), and possibly even northern Kazahstan, in central Asia. If he feels he can get away with it, he will do it, knowing that the U.S. and Europe will scream, but do nothing.
What then, the Baltic states? Latvia does have a Russian minority. Will Putin come in and invade that, despite the fact that the Baltic States are now both part of the European Union and NATO? There are also military exercises being performed in Poland by NATO and U.S. planes are now patrolling the skies of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, with the planes being based in Lithuania.
What must be remembered is that Vladimir Putin is neither crazy nor a madman, and he is definitely nobody’s fool. He is cold and calculating, and he knows precisely what he is doing. He remains in power after 14 years, finding loopholes in the Russian constitution forbidden a President to succeed himself after two terms. He then became Prime Minister, and then President again, but all this time, he pulled the strings. Putin, like Stalin, is very cool.
There is a way to stop him, or make him pay for what he does.
First, Crimea is as good as gone. In this case, it doesn’t matter. It has a Russian majority, wants to be a part of Russia, and should it not be that, it will be a big headache for Ukraine. Ukraine, and the world, may just have to accept that.
Second, I can see two more states in Ukraine becoming part of Russia. These are the easternmost part of Ukraine that MIGHT have a Russian majority, being Luhansk and Donetsk. Should a referendum be held, with international observers, at Ukraine’s consent, and they vote themselves to be part of Russia, then fine, let them go.
Putin and Russia do NOT have the right to invade. We must show this by imposing on them a price, and this price must be high, and I don’t mean just sanctions, either. Have NATO station bases in the eastern European countries and Baltic states that are a part of NATO: Poland, Romania, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, eastern Germany, and so on. Have Ukraine join NATO, and the E.U., and set up NATO bases there, also. Set up NATO bases in Georgia, to prevent Putin from invading it again, like in 2008. Another would be to support any region in Russia itself that want to be independent. If Russia objects, too bad.
Put in more sanctions, freeze Russian assets, cancel any debt to Russia. Let any Russian businessman deposit their assets into a European of American banks. Many have already done this. Put the pressure on Putin. Make him pay. Perhaps the Russian population itself will throw Putin out of office. Perhaps, but perhaps not.
This should be done anyway, and put Ukraine under a mini-Marshall plan to build up its economy, and find ways to import gas and oil from some place other than Russia. Have the rest of Europe get off dependency on Russia for natural gas..
Again, if Putin is to continue his escapade, make him PAY for it, big time.
We all know that Putin wants to rebuild the Soviet empire, and Ukraine has been a vital part of Russia throughout both countries histories. Ukraine has both industry in the east and farming in the west. However, Ukraine has found its own identity, as did the other former Soviet republics. No matter what Russia wants, they will never get them back.
There is that part where Putin wants to unite all the Russian peoples living everywhere in Europe under one roof. Sounds good in theory, and if Russia was willing to do this peacefully, even I would support that. I have often thought that redrawing borders along ethnic lines would be a good way to peace. I am finding out that things do not necessarily work that way. Should Putin get his wish, he will not stop there. He will then want more land. Remember Hitler, uniting all the German peoples?
What is the answer? I don’t know. Hold referendums in certain states, and go along with what the people want. That’s all I can think of for the moment.
As of right now, the troops are amassing, and the world waits.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

The Shutdown, the Aftermath, and What Should be Done



We all have experienced the government shutdown, lasting for almost two weeks, due to a disagreement in whether to raise the debt ceiling.  Many Republicans, especially John Bohner and Ted Cruz, wanted to abolish ObamaCare before proceeding any further, going as far as to hold it hostage as the government shut down, and with a deadline looming on defaulting on the debt, causing a possible worldwide economic disaster should this occur.
Bohner, Cruz, the Tea Party, and the extremists on the right were willing to take this chance make President Obama blink and give in, but he refused.  After passing a bill to abolish ObamaCare 40 times, and getting vetoed 40 times, this was their last resort.
Approaching the debt ceiling, and proposing to raise it, the Republicans took the opportunity, in desperation, to hold the economy hostage until ObamaCare was abolished or changed.  It failed.

The shutdown is over, and we have lost $24 billion in goods and services, and nobody truly got what they wanted, especially the Republicans.  They gave in and were humiliated, and they deserved to be.  

Many have said that ObamaCare is draining the budget, but that program hasn’t even been implemented yet.  It has passed into law, and Congress has to realize that one, the 2012 election is over, and two, ObamaCare is now the law of the land.  Accept it!  
Give it a chance to see if it will work.  It is not free, anyone who wants it has to pay for it.  ObamaCare is not a handout, it is not socialize medicine, it is not a welfare program, it is an insurance policy, an affordable way for people to pay their medical bills without have to drain their life savings, or, in an emergency, sell their homes.  
Now there is the problem of computer foul ups for people trying to register, caused by computer programmers, and if that isn’t enough, many insurance companies are now canceling the policies of many of their beneficiaries, leaving them with no other choice but to register for the government sponsored program.
As far as ObamaCare is concerned, fix the computer glitch, let the program start up, and if there are any faults in it, and there will be, correct them.  Most of all, try and make the program self-supporting, like investing the money to multiply itself;  i.e. stocks, bonds, and real estate.

The problem of the budget hasn’t been solved, just postponed for another three months, until we hit the debt ceiling again.
We can’t go on like this, living off of borrowed money.
What should be done?

We have hit the debt ceiling many times, and have been forced to raise it, many time, and we will continue to do so, again and again.  As of right now, our national debt is officially $17 trillion, and climbing.  If we default, like we almost did now, the U.S. will lose it prominence in the world, and other countries will look elsewhere for guidance, and with the position we are in now, we cannot afford to lose this.  If our debt keeps increasing, and nothing is done, we will default, our economy will collapse, and we will lose our position in the world.  We are headed in that direction.  There will be a day of reckoning for us.
Something has to change.  A lot of things has to change, for we cannot remain in the position we are in, no matter what happens.
We cannot go on borrowing money into infinity.  Somewhere, this has to stop, and we must start repaying all our debts.  The deficit needs to be eliminated, and we need to have a budget surplus, like we did late in the Clinton Administration.  Then we need to start paying our debt, first to other countries whom we have borrow money, then to the Federal Reserve.  It won’t be easy but it can be done if we all set our energies to it.  I say “we all” and we are all in this together, whether we want to be or not.  No one is exempt.

I have a lot of proposals here to increase revenue, thereby lowering, and hopefully eliminating the deficit altogether.  Many of these proposals are radical, and will invite big controversy, some may even anger some groups of people, but one has to remember, we are in a big economic mess, and doing nothing is not an option.  We need to improve our economy and bring more money into this country, and the government, if we are to prevent not only a repeat of what happened, but a huge economic disaster further on down the road.

All this starts with our federal budget.  We need to wipe that slate clean and start from scratch.  Our money cannot be wasted, nor can it go to senseless, useless, and repetitive programs, and most of all, non-federal programs.  Our budget needs to go to federal matters only!  Period.  If a town, city, or state wants money for their own projects, they need to raise it themselves, in the form of state and local taxes, or donations from their own local populace. 

In rebuilding the budget, what really has to be focused on is what the U.S. desperately needs if we are to survive in the future:  education, science, engineering and technology, rebuilding our infrastructure, new research in new technologies, rebuilding our cities, and attracting new industries.  We need to invest in future technologies that we will need further on down the road  i.e.  new forms of energy, space technology, ways to deal with climate change, and new forms of medical technology, to name a few, in order to make this country competitive with other countries now investing in these very technologies.  The big problem here is that we are cutting these very assets we need from our present budget in leaps and bounds, not knowing, or caring, about the consequences of these very actions.  We need to sit down and point out this mistake and discuss what can be done. 

In our budget, billions of dollars are wasted on things we don’t need, even in the military.  All forms of waste needs to be eliminated.  One problem is that the government funds projects they have no business funding.  Some outrageous examples are:  an indoor rainforest in Iowa, a teapot museum, and a project polishing a statue of Vulcan in Alabama (yes, these are real).  There are grants the the government gives that focus on the ridiculous, such as the above mentioned examples.  I have also noticed that there have been advertisements, even on television, for “Free money from the government” for doing almost anything you want.  Is it any wonder why we are so deep in debt?

The military wastes money like crazy.  More money is spent of the U.S. military then in the next 13 countries combined.  Here, Congress is at fault.  They have forced the military to spend money they neither need nor want.  Weapons in excess, such as tanks, continue to be built, along with weapons that are never used.  In both these situations, the military does not want this.  They do not want an excess of weapons like tanks, they do not want useless weapons, and they do not want to spend money Congress forces on them and orders them to spend, strange as this may sound.  This may sound radical here, but could we cut the military budget in half and let the military decide for itself what money should go where.  
Cut back on foreign bases that are no longer needed, close domestic bases, if some countries need our protection, let them pay for it and apply that money to the military.  We shouldn’t be wasting our money while many of these countries we protect get a free ride.  (I am aware that we need to rearrange our military priorities, especially in the Pacific, but I’m sticking to my convictions, here.)

I have only talked about getting our budget back in line by investing in what can literally save the life of this country, and by eliminating waste.  This will not be easy, but it has to be done, or at least attempted.  The second step, which has to be done simultaneously, is to increase our budget to be able to afford all this, eliminate the deficit, and finally pay our debt.

The first step in increasing our budget will be controversial.  Some say we should raise taxes;  others say cut spending.  I say we need to do both.  California had a serious debt problem recently, and they chose to do both, and it worked.  They got out of debt and produced a surplus.
We need to raise taxes on demerit goods, such as liquor, cigarettes, junk food (apply this all to health care) and gasoline, applying the proceeds to rebuilding our infrastructure.  
Obviously, we need to raise taxes on those with the highest income, but it doesn’t have to be that much, and it can be in a way that the taxed will never miss the money.
There is a big problem in entitlements and pensions.  There are also many person receiving these who do not need them.  I propose here that we send out a letter and form stating that if they have a good income or savings account, and they are receiving government entitlements, but do not need them, to voluntarily give up their pensions, be it Social Security, Medicare, or otherwise, for the sake of fixing the economy.  Many of these people might be willing to do so, saving the government even more money.

Both parties in Congress have to cross the aisles and work with each other, respecting the other persons views.  

We need a third party, a common sense party, that can see the reality of the economic situation we are in, and knows that we have to sacrifice something.  Fixing this problem will not be painless, even though most of us want it to be this way.

II believe we should invoke term limits on U.S. Senators and Congressmen;  two terms for senators (12 years total) and three terms for representatives (six years).  In the latter case I feel we should extend their term from two to four years, and have them serve a maximum to two terms, eight years total.  If one were to serve in both houses, the total would be 20 years, and that is plenty of time to make one’s mark.
The reason why I am bringing this up is that many career politicians outlast their usefulness, and just fill space, with nothing new to contribute.  They also want to stay there because of the perks, and there are many to these.  Working only 140 days a year, with a huge salary, plus perks (free meals, free haircuts, six, yes six paid vacations per years to name a few), is a waste of good taxpayer money, and is one more reason why our debt is so high.   Of course, many of these “professional” politicians are responsible for this shutdown, which is another good reason for term limits. 
Originally, the congress was meant to attract ordinary people from all walks of life; farmers, teachers, laborers, etc., to come in, point out present issues, help to fix them, pass new laws if necessary, and leave, return to their old professions, and live under the laws they passed.  New, fresh blood will then come and focus their issues of the day, and so on.  This would be a continuous rotation of office, and we, as a whole, would keep on changing with the times.
With the advent of professional politicians, and them running for office constantly until death or retirement, we have become stagnant, and the officeholders change their position from serving the U.S. as a whole to serving their party, i.e. themselves.  This has to change back to where it was originally.
In the redrawing of congressional districts, we need to ban gerrymandering.  Districts are drawn in a very awkward manner to accommodate the political party that is presently in charge, and this has to change.
We need campaign finance reform.
Now that that’s off my chest, we need to focus on the budget, our deficit, our debt, and deal with it in a way so that what just happened will never happen again.


We need to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.  Many companies have been outsource to other countries, especially to Latin America and Asia, for cheap labor.  Many of these companies are returning because of the rise in labor and taxes, but we need to provide bigger incentives for more of them to return.   More companies in the U.S. means more jobs, less unemployment, and more tax revenue.
We also need to allow for new startups, and new technologies.
In addition, we need to reform immigration laws allowing more immigrants to come in the U.S.  Foreign college students who study here should be given the opportunity to work here and eventually, if they wish, be allowed to live here permanently.  This will help our industries a great deal with new minds and laborers contributing to our economy.
  

America is not broke.  We are (still) the richest economy in the world, and we, as a country, have plenty of money, enough to produce more wealth, get us out of debt, and once again, become a creditor nation.  To achieve this will take hard work, and it will be painful.  There is no way we can achieve this painlessly, no way.
The problem with the money in many private industries is that is sits on its ass.  We do not invest enough of it to keep it going.  You may have a trillion dollars, but if it just sits in a vault, doing nothing, it’s no good, except for acquiring interest, and that interest in very small, less than one percent.  With an amount like a trillion, you may be lucky to get two percent interest.  I remember back in 1970, when I had a savings account with five percent interest, but those days are gone.  Banking has changed, and not for the better.
To increase our wealth, we must invest the money we have.

I do not like to sneer at “the rich” or “the corporations,” for both do have a right to exist, as long as they do not influence the government into getting what they want.
Aside this, they do provide employment for masses of people.  If enough people were employed, there would be more tax revenue for the government, so they would not run out of money, creating situations like these.  We also must not waste it.
People sneer at corporations not paying their fair share, or even paying no taxes, but one little know fact is that corporations in the U.S. have the highest tax rate in the world, about 35%.  Many other countries, especially in Europe, have rates of only 20%, and that is why many of them leave here, to pay lower taxes.  
This next proposal will outrage some people, but here it is.  What we have to do is level the playing field, lower our corporate tax rate down to 20% as well, so that the corporations abroad will come back to the U.S. After the return, provide incentives for employing more Americans;  i.e. for every one million (a round figure, could be more) Americans employed, lower the rate by one percentage point, down to a floor of 15%.  More income can come from both the company, and the worker.  Many may not like this, but if this can lower unemployment and generate more tax revenue, then it has to be done.

Encourage philanthropy.  Many wealthy individual, from all professions, be it a computer company or a movie star, should be encourage to help rebuild society in a big way, even starting projects normally in the domain of the government.  If a wealthy person lives in a town or city that needs a new bridge, perhaps that person can be encouraged to pay for it, saving the government taxpayer dollars that can be used elsewhere.  It could be a bridge, a road, a hospital, a library, rebuilding or establishing a school, a youth center, and some other creative and useful project.  Obviously, the person donating the money has the privilege of naming it, either after himself, or some other name.

As stated, we need to have a campaign to not only reduce and eliminate the deficit, but the debt as well.   We owe very little of our debt to foreign countries.  Most of the debt we owe, we owe to the Federal Reserve, meaning we owe it to ourselves.  But let's focus on repaying our debt to other countries first.
We owe the most to China, about $1.6 trillion.  Why not pay it off using a barter system?  As an example, China, at present, needs coal, lots of it.  Make a deal with China to pay off their debt with shiploads of our coal, with us mining it and sending it over to China.  We would mine it, get paid, and the money would remain in the U.S.  (I am very much aware of the pollution it causes, and climate change, but China is working on cleaner coal technology, and we need to pay our debt somehow.)  Export other minerals and/or products if needs be.
This system can be adapted to other countries in which we owe money.  Another way is to point out what countries we owe money to that we have aided in the past, helping to build them up by sending them money.  If we were to converse with them to deduct the amount we have aided them from what we owe them now, our debts to them can decrease, possibly even cancel.  We have even sent foreign aid to China in the past, so they also should be included.
With these two proposals, we can pay off our debts as soon as possible.  We will then have the Federal Reserve in which to contend.

Our shutdown was a wake-up call for these country.  We needed to increase the debt ceiling, but that, too, is a bad sign, indicating that we needed to borrow more money to keep us going.  We need to stop.  Our annual budget needs to last the entire year, without the need to borrow another red cent.  We need to produce a budget surplus to pay our debts.  We need to invest in the things that we insure our survival, like education, science and technology, our infrastructure, our problems, and most of all, our people.  This can be done, but Congress needs to stop being at each other’s throats and cooperate, listen to each other, and listen to the American people.


Tuesday, September 17, 2013

The U.S. and Syria, Part Two: The U.S. Was Not Defeated

  
     As of this writing, the U.N. has confirmed that President Bashar al-Assad of Syria used chemical weapons, Sarin gas, on his own people.

     During this crisis, Secretary of State John Kerry made an offhand remark about Syria giving up its chemical weapons, and here, Vladimir Putin of Russia jumped in to take advantage of this situation, stating that he and Russia will help make it possible.  With that, Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov of Russia and John Kerry got together and within days, reached an agreement that Syria gives a full account of their weapons for the U.N. to remove and destroy them.  The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council (U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China) have also drafted a resolution to make sure Syria keeps its part of the bargain.

     There is still a few rough spots in the agreement that still need to be settled.  Russia objects that if Syria fails to comply, the U.S. and France will reserve the right to take military action.  Russia and China would veto any resolution to do so, but that option is still on the table, and there are still U.S. Navy warships awaiting orders to fire missiles at Syria should it become necessary.

      Because of this resolution, many U.S. officials, especially those leaning towards the Right, feel that Obama is weak, and allowed himself to be taken in by Putin, handing him, and Russia, prestige, while the U.S. appears to have back down on this crisis.  The Wall Street Journal labels Obama as weak and feels that the U.S. has been defeated by letting Syria off easy and allowing Assad to remain in power.

     I beg to differ.

     I think Obama did the right thing, and should Syria follow through with its end of the deal, it will show the world that the use of chemical weapons will not be tolerated.  Assad may have gotten off easy, for now, and may keep in position in power, but that’s beside the point.

     As stated, the U.S., still has warships out in the Mediterranean, with missiles still pointed at Syria, and should Assad renege on his part of the bargain, they will be fired at Syria.  Nobody is telling us to get our warships out of there.

     Russia, now that it has prestige once again, has to make sure that Syria keeps their part of the bargain.  I am aware the Russia does supply some rogue nations with weapons, and I am also aware that what they do, they do to their advantage, sometimes to the detriment to the rest of the world, and they don’t always keep their part of any bargain, but should Assad use chemical weapons again, the Russians will lose whatever international respect they may have recently gained.  

     Assad, now that he has agreed to give up his chemical weapons, has to keep his part of the bargain.  I know of the rebukes.  “The U.S. is letting Assad stay in power and he’s going unpunished.”  Well, maybe, but since the U.N. has now confirmed that chemical weapons were used, Assad, if he did use them, can no longer do so.  If he does, all bets are off, and he will be attacked, and he, Russia, and the world know this.  In addition, even if Assad does remain in power, he will still have to deal with the uprising by his own people, and that is not about to end anytime soon.

     So where is the humiliation for the U.S.?  I don’t see any humiliation, embarrassment, or defeat.  On the contrary, we won without firing a shot.  Should Syria live up to it’s part of the bargain, we will show the world that the use of chemical weapons are not tolerated, even if Assad remains in power, and even if Assad did use them once.  He cannot use them again.

     If the U.S. were to get involved in Syria, we would be bogged down in a war with no exit strategy.  Not only would American lives be lost, it would destroy our economy, not to mention the respect from the world we still maintain.  It would have been a disaster, and that is where our defeat would have lied.  Also, in many cases, the rebels are no better than their oppressors, themselves resorting to ruthless tactics and killing innocent people.  If there is a right side, we would not have found it.  Many, perhaps most, of the rebels themselves would fight against us, not with us.  We, the U.S., always end up taking the wrong side in wars, even when our intentions are good.  There would have been more atrocities on our part, and we would be hated by the world more, not less.  Once again, we would be stuck in a mire.

     It never pays to get involved in any war in the Middle East.  We no longer need their oil, and these countries, including Syria, don’t want us in there anyway.  The Syrians themselves have stated this.  Also, don’t forget Iraq and Afghanistan.

     No, we were not defeated or humiliated.  On the contrary, if the deal goes through, we will have won.   Russia has to watch itself and Syria has to give up their chemical weapons, which is what we wanted, and with our ships still in the Mediterranean, should something go wrong.  We, the U.S., and the U.N., will be watch to see if Russia and Syria keep their part of the bargain. 

     We got the best part of the deal.

Monday, September 2, 2013

The U.S. and Syria, as of September 2, 2013


          President Barack Obama is in what will probably be the toughest situation of his presidency, and how he reacts will either make or break his place in history.  He may end up making an unpopular decision that history will regard as a wise decision, or vice versa.

     From the title, I am of course discussing the situation in Syria.  As of this moment, President Obama is pondering on bombing Syria as punishment for using poison gas on its own people.  President Assad, whom many of the Syrians have been rebelling against for the past two years, has been tyrannical, and is fighting these rebels to preserve his place in power.  The rebels were winning at first, but Assad has struck back, using his military to strike back at the rebels, reclaiming much of the territory that the rebels captured.

     There are those around the globe who support these rebels, hoping that they would succeed in this endeavor.  Some of them hoping that the U.S. will come in, aid these rebels, and drive out Assad, just like they did Saddam Hussain in Iraq, with mixed results.

      Obama has tried very hard to stay out of this mess, and for good reason.  First, the American people are weary from being in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 (2003 through 2011 in Iraq), costing taxpayers money, not to mention human lives, and would now very much like to concentrate on fixing their own economy.  Obama, during his first presidential campaign, has vowed to get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan and not to get us into any more wars.

     Obama is now in a different situation.  When one becomes president, he or she finds that being in office is not so easy as running for it, and it is not so easy to keep one’s promises to change things.  He has a lot of outside forces to deal with, starting with Congress, and it gets even tougher when that particular Congress is determined to see you fail, at all costs, and that is the situation that Obama is in today.

     Obama tolerated the Syrian civil war, and he tried, with success, to stay out of it.  He did warn Assad that if he used chemical weapons, the U.S. will be forced to take military action.  That is the red line the Obama drew.

     The Red Line has been crossed.  Masses of people were killed, and there is a suspicion that chemical weapons, mainly Sarin gas, was used.  Assad denies it, and it has been said that the rebels themselves did it, and others say that there is no proof the these weapons were used.  The U.N. was in, examined the bodies, and as of this moment, they just left the country.

     As stated, many say that there is no proof that chemical weapons were used.  Syria, however does have them, and the manufacturing and storage facilities for them.  If they were not used, how did all these people die?  What was used to kill them?  How do you explain this mass killing, with all bodies not having a mark on them, if Sarin gas wasn’t used?  If they were used, should we go in?  Perhaps the Air Force should go in and destroy these plants and storage facilities.

     It was during the first World War that poison gas was used on both sides, and the outcome was so horrible, that at the Geneva Convention, held in 1925, all sides agreed that chemical weapons will not be used in any future war.

     Well, should it be found that Assad did use them, and evidence points out that they did;  so what do we do?  Should we bomb Syria as a message to Assad not to use them again?  Should Obama decide to do so, he, and the U.S., will be condemned for being war mongers and bullies.

     What if Obama decides NOT to go into Syria?  Will he be condemned by the rest of the world for looking the other way and doing nothing while masses of innocent people are being killed?  Will he be compared to those who stood by during the Hitler regime while six million people went to the gas chambers?  There is a Syrian family that lives in my vicinity that thinks just that of Obama, and wants the U.S. military to go in and bomb Syria for reasons I have already stated.  There is also the danger that other dictators that possess chemical weapons will use them with impunity, both on their own people and on other countries, and this act of inaction will be what triggers it off;  i.e. chemical weapons will become conventional weapons.

      Suppose Obama does decide to go in and bomb Syria.  Will the world condemn the U.S. for being war mongers and bullies, bombing innocent people?  Will we lose what’s left of our credibility, especially after invading Iraq?  If Assad killed 100,000 Syrians by conventional means, why should we go in when these weapons only killed about 1400 Syrians, with 400 of them being children?  Does that make sense?

     Either way, Obama will be condemned.  He is in a very tough situation.  What can be accredited to him now is deciding to obtain the approval of Congress before venturing out there.  Whatever is decided, Obama will be judged by the world in a very harsh manner.  It will be up to history to come up with the final verdict.

     My own opinion on all this is:  One, there is no way we can fix the situation in Syria and make peace there, no matter what we do.  Only the Syrian people can do that.  If we go in, it will be worse for everybody, especially us.  Two, wars cost money, and after Iraq and Afghanistan, we cannot afford to get involved in anyone else’s problems, problems that do not concern us.  Three, the Syrian people themselves have stated that, in spite of what is happening, they do not want us coming in there at all.  They want to solve their own problems, and keep the rest of the world at bay.  Four, that situation is so complex, we don’t know whose side to be on;  we just may end up choosing the wrong side, something that we are very good at doing.  Last, if we are going to attack Syria, destroy the chemical weapons plants and storage facilities, and then get out.  That, at least, will discourage other dictators from using theirs.

     It is my own conclusion that we stay out, completely.  Since we are becoming more energy independent, we should try and stay out of all the Middle East and its affairs, and let them settle it themselves, if they have the ability to do so.  They don’t want us in there anyway, and no one else can do it for them, especially the U.S.