New Page 1

FOREIGN AFFAIRS- AMERICAN POLICY

11/16/07 The fog of politics in Pakistan is beginning to lift for the Mountain Observer. It now appears that President Gen. Pervez Musharraf overplayed his cards by declaring "emergency rule". Back on 11/04 I pointed out that "consistent polling suggests that a solid majority of Pakistanis are not inclined jihadists". While the military still holds the cards in the resolution of the current imbroglio, it is emerging more clearly with each passing day that former prime minister Benazir Bhutto is the most popular politician in the country, with her base among an emerging liberal (not Liberal) democratic middle class. The emerging coalition now is not Bhutto and Musharraf, but rather Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. Now the military needs to decide if it's own credibility, self respect and self interest lies with Musharraf or Bhutto/Sharif. Enter the United States, necessarily a silent advisor in the background. At this point we are gently nudging along the Bhutto/Sharif combination, with an early return to democratic constitutional rule hinging on military acceptance and the premise of sufficient civilian political strength to stand up to the Taliban. The chances of all this coming together partially involve the need for a rapprochement between Bhutto and the military. Benazir Bhutto has been around a long time. The problem is that some years ago she was kicked out of the prime minister position by the military on charges of tolerating too much corruption. She will have to convince the generals that this is a new day, and the generals will have to recognize that if they are to salvage their own prestige with a new middle class, clamoring for the rule of law under a constitutional government, that it is in their own self interest to return, mostly, to the barracks. There is reason to entertain cautious optimism. JES

06/20/07 Again it is time for the Mountain Observer to be blunt about Iraq. Our activities in Iraq are central to the entire effort against IslamicFascism. In the opinion of this observer, our efforts there have been successful way beyond the hopes and plans of the original authors of the policy of pre-emption against Saddam Hussein. The original thinking was "better over there than in Central Park", and that was, and remains, the fundamental logic. Far more successfully than many originally imagined, the IslamicFascists have taken the bait, and by their own admission have bought into the idea that Iraq is the focal point of the fight. They recognize, and have openly acknowledged, that it is in Iraq that they will succeed or fail. We have got them right where we want them. There has been a steep learning curve on our part, and mistakes in tactical strategy have been made along the way, however the underling strategic logic has been correct all along. Our primary problem today with the whole matter of confronting IslamicFascism is not Iraq, Iran, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, or the French. Our problem today is ourselves and our willingness to believe in ourselves and the legitimacy of our own American Purpose. In our history we have been up against this wall before; again our national character is being tested. We can either choose to prevail, which we most certainly can do, or slink back into the backwater of history with the condemnation and approbation of future generations that appeasement and surrender would most surely deserve. I could go on. General David Petraeus, carry on. JES

06/08/07 Finally, thankfully, the inside brokered deal in Congress over amnesty for illegal immigrants falls apart in the Senate. We have just witnessed Congress at its worst. In the opinion of this observer, passage of this legislative monstrosity would have been fatal to the continued existence of the nation. George W. Bush, you are now on your own. In the course of this process, you have stabbed us, your own base, in the back. This came as no surprise; we have watched this storm approaching for a long time. I do not doubt your honesty and sincerity, and never have. Your recognition of the threat of the international threat against the West after 09/11, and your decision to preemptively target Afghanistan and Iraq as you did were absolutely correct. However, in the execution department you are an absolute bumbler, both foreign and domestic. I am too disgusted at the moment to write the list here now, and in any event I would just be repeating myself anyway. This matter of your ideas about border security and amnesty for illegal aliens however, just pushes everything over the top. General David Petraeus, who is now running the show, carry on. I look forward to your forthcoming report in September. For Iraq, it will be determinative. It is ironic that your boss in the White House, by his own actions and operational decisions, has done as much to undermine the War on IslamicFascism in several ways as all the Democrats and RINOs in Congress, and those Americans who elected them. This observer fears that another 09/11 event, perhaps nuclear, will be necessary to get folk's heads on straight. JES

03/24/07 Again the Chinese are wooing the Russians for Siberian oil. Russian and Chinese foot dragging in the United Nations on really tough trade sanctions against Iran are running up against a wall as Iran's complicity in sabotaging Iraq become more widely exposed. The pieces of the puzzle are as follows: The American "surge" in Iraq is showing signs of results, and in Congress, Democrats are stumbling in their efforts to sabotage the war effort. The renewed credibility of American determination suggests the real possibility of a collision with Iran, not only over the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons ambition, buy also over Iranian hegemonic ambition in Iraq and the entire gulf state region. The United States has pushed very hard in the Security Counsel for some really tough economic sanctions against Iran, and both the Russians and the Chinese have stood in the way. Russia historically has had an interest in trade access to the south, many times frustrated. The Chinese are rather desperate for oil to power their exploding economy; they have very little of their own. While the Mountain Observer is generally skeptical concerning the effectiveness of trade sanctions and boycotts, in this situation with Iran the fact of the matter is that they are very vulnerable to some real damage if a genuine and tough boycott was applied and enforced. Even so, boycotts have a limited lifespan of effectiveness; witness the post Gulf War experience with the boycott against Saddam's Iraq. The appeal to our side (Democrats excluding themselves) to a tough boycott against Iran is that it might have sufficient short term effectiveness to force an internal political correction to the power of the mullahs and the policy ambitions of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against many of his scared neighbors. The Iranian economy today is on shaky legs, and ordinary Iranians are politically very restless. The Mountain Observer remains skeptical that all this diplomatic maneuvering will produce effective results, but at the same time recognizes the political need to run the trapline. And I would suggest that both the Russians and the Chinese recognize that we are closing in on the end of that trapline, even if American Democrats don't. If the Russians and the Chinese don't begin to cooperate more closely with the American efforts to utilize the boycott route, then the United States is really left with no options whatsoever but to confront the Iranians directly militarily, with negative implications both for the supply of Chinese oil and a spectrum of Russian (Putin) national priorities. Thanks to Mitch McConnell, we may yet be able to stall off the desire of Democrats to run and hide under a pillow. JES

02/17/07 Pretending that only their favored constituents notice, a Democrat House of Representatives, joined by a handful of gutless Republicans, pass a "nonbinding" resolution against the "surge" of troop deployments to Iraq. However, of course, the resolution is binding in the sense that our enemies are watching and taking inspiration, and those in Iraq, and the Middle East generally, who have supported us learn again that American resolve is not to be trusted. So as a sequel to the outcome of the November elections, the American people, through their elected representatives, have virtually guaranteed defeat in Iraq, invited expanded terrorism directly upon us, propelled re-examination of the foreign policies of others worldwide premised on non-existent American resolve, and virtually guaranteed a world war, point future, with Iran as the flash point. The Senate is likely to add to the disaster later today. If belief that the President is so in error as to justify undercutting the troops, then the principled response should have been to defund the enterprise and get out now, but the cowards on the Left want no responsibility for the consequences militarily, politically, or morally. What else could one expect of those who are intellectually and morally bankrupt. As the refugees begin to stream, and the deaths and tortures accelerate, we on the Right will remember where responsibility really lies. The fact of the matter is, and always has been, that the original decision to invade was correct, and in spite of the considerable government bungling that has occurred since, the enterprise was, and still is, winnable. But this will not happen: Americans have become self-serving cowards. Our real problem is not Shiites and Sunnis. It is Iran, and it is the moral corruption of America. Drunk with the personal chase for dollars and personal comfort, an obvious consequence of decades of immersion in Material Secularism, Americans, as this is written, are consumed with the intrigue of the death of a 39 year old bimbo who herself was a statement for everything wrong with our culture. The values that informed the American Founding seem to have slid beneath the surface, and our entire political and social culture is complicit. The only point in continuing the website is that at some point, a future generation will be rocked by reality, and begin to re-think the disgusting performance of their parents that caused the mess. The process of correction will not be pretty.

It is possible to make the case that our problem is that the French affliction, after centuries, has finally overwhelmed us. I quote Jean Jacques Rousseau, arguably the father of all that has gone wrong in the western world since: "Let us begin by setting aside all the facts, because they do not affect the question". And so it has gone since. JES

02/07/07 Three years too late, Lt. General David Petraeus replaces General George Casey as the top U.S. military commander in Iraq. The significance of this is that Lt. General Petraeus wrote the U.S. military manual on counterinsurgency. He represents a group within the military that has long pushed for a reorientation away from more traditional Army thinking focused on large formations consistent with European Cold War planning. He has been handed a tough job at this point, and his biggest problem are matters over which he has little control: American public attitudes, an Army starved of sufficient size and strategic focus, not readily corrected as rapidly as may be necessary, and an Iraqi population that has perhaps lost faith in an American ability to establish credible security. There is no doubt that from May 2003 forward the post war planning and execution was seriously flawed, and that issue comes to rest directly at the feet of President Bush; the failures falling across the responsibilities of several departments and agencies. Within the bounds of respect for an Administration conducting a war, the Mountain Observer has raised questions all along. Now the fact of the matter is that General Petraeus might succeed in his mission, and the entire American military establishment has the right to expect the support and respect of all Americans in accomplishing a victory in what history will come to recognize as a critical turning point in western resistance to IslamicFascism. A failure to succeed will be devastating, in terms of both blood and treasure, for years to come. It would seem that too many Americans do not yet comprehend the true nature of IslamicFascism, and what we are really up against. JES

12/07/06 Regarding the Iraq Study Group aka How Best to Surrender Without Telling Anybody Group, up real close. Click, and take a hard look yourself. Analysis by the Mountain Observer currently a work in progress. JES

12/03/06 The idea of negotiations with Iran and Syria is absolutely the dumbest idea I can imagine. Anyone who even thinks such a move could be constructive is a mental case in need of immediate institutionalization. All the wrong moves have started; the destruction commenced on 11/07, and will prove to be virtually irreversible. Democrats did not win this election; Republicans, and Americans, lost it. The Mountain Observer will continue in its task of charting the way things ought to be, recognizing the fact that the United States has begun its long decent straight into hell. JES

11/01/06 Now as it turns out, in chasing Osama bin Laden, perhaps we have not been chasing the real guy, but a decoy so to speak. A new theory is beginning to emerge within the intelligence community that, perhaps, the real guy is one Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, aka KSM, aka Mukhtar, currently in detention somewhere as a guest of U.S. intelligence assets. KSM is a member of al Qaeda, but this was not always so. As Mukhtar, he is described as the real mastermind behind the 09/11 attacks, as well as a number of the now well documented al Qaeda attacks throughout the '90's. He was captured 03/01/03 in Pakistan. The link-up with al Qaeda seems to have occurred when Osama bin Laden fled to Afghanistan from the Sudan, as a matter of mutual interests. To more fully understand the significance and importance of KSM, it is necessary to reach back before the al Qaeda link. KSM is a tribal product of Baluchistan, a non existent nation much in the mold of Kurdistan, more familiar to the West as a challenge looming over the horizon. While there is reason to believe we could do business with a Kurdistan, such is not the case with a Baluchistan. To make a long story short, a very extended tribal family of whom KSM is a part, was responsible for the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, some of whom are now in jail. There is much, much more to all of this, but I'll get to it later. Meanwhile, for your information, Baluchistan touches Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and it is the Iranian connection that arouses interest because of some apparent cooperation between the Baluchistani's and Saddam Hussein during the Iraqi-Iranian war. Much more to follow, including the real objectives and motives of what we have come to know as IslamicFacism. JES

10/19/06 Irrespective of the outcome of the American elections in November, a major war, most likely involving nuclear exchange, is on the way. I have no desire to sound hyperbolic, nor do I grandstand. I am simply connecting the dots of objective reality, and it is not pleasant. JES

10/09/06 On Iraq, and the therapeutic war. I was disturbed when 30 days in, the uniformed resistance melted away without our side seeming to recognize the Sunni strategy of guerrilla resistance from the beginning. Meanwhile, domestic American opposition, afraid of unkind words not to mention war as a policy, fixated on the WMD issue, distorting the good news that we able to verify more exactly what years of United Nations "inspections" had been unable to do. Like the rookie football wide receiver who tries to run with the ball before he has caught it, we then proceeded to get too caught up in democratization schemes before we had crushed all opposition. Fear of victory, it seems, is as sign of the times.

When we found Saddam Hussein in the rat hole and did not plug him on the spot, I was uneasy. Now there are signs that Iraqi assets, having gone through the ritual of a trial, what passes as a jury of "judges" is freezing up on the political implications of doing what needs to be done, apparent from the beginning.

Our fundamental error in Iraq was the failure to go in and conduct a genuine "shock and awe" campaign, on the ground as well as from the air. As with Germany and Japan, Iraq needed to be totally purged of effective resistance on the part of anyone. Totally humbled. The President relied too much on the advice of his Generals, a military generation perhaps to much traumatized by Vietnam memories and 8 years of OJ Billyboy politically correct civilian therapeutic management style. What has been missing has been a General McArthur advising a President who understood that in the end he had to take responsibility; not blaming a new age General Staff for their advice.

The Administration's subsequent efforts to enable Iraqi democracy have been noble, meeting with many successes, only to be torpedoed by the original strategic military failures. It was not an error, as the Presidents domestic political opposition contends, for us to invade Iraq. Saddam Hussein needed to be removed from power as a prerequisite to eventual conversion of the Middle East to 21sr Century sanity essential to our own long term national security. The President's vision, in this regard, has been long and forward thinking, and correct. He has been betrayed by an ignorant and self-serving opposition, too much the product of post historical intellectual and moral relativism, and he has been betrayed by his own natural inclination of kindness to his political enemies, foreign and domestic.

Opposition within Iraq is fed by Iranian subterfuge among Iraqi Shia, setting up a tug of war between the commonality of Shia and the divisions between Arab and Persian cultures. IslamicFascist al Qaida remains an effective influence among the secular Sunni, because, you see, the theological divisions are not what it's really all about, and never have been. Our own domestic hate America political opposition led by the New York Times and their cronies, print and electronic, in the traditional mainstream press, have played directly into the manipulative hands of IslamicFascists everywhere, again, foreign and domestic. IslamicFascists think they will do better against us with appease prone Democrats in office, and they are right. Finally, the general cultural history of Mesopotamia does not look kindly on the artificial British colonial experiment known as Iraq. (For the trail of thinking by the Mountain Observer on this whole matter go to FOREIGN AFFAIRS- IRAQ)

What to do? Tough policy decisions need to be made, and "cut and run" is not an option. It would appear that we might want to encourage a more federated arrangement between the three major groups in Iraq. Such an approach is not without its own set of dangers. For example, it would probably tend to fuel the dream among Kurds of an independent Kurdistan, to the consternation of Turkey, setting up a serious conflict between them which is not in our interest. Otherwise, a truly Federated Iraq might be easier to manage in the future by virtue of a lessened danger of a Hussein style international threat. Maybe so maybe not. The original (current) Administration plan is the most desirable from our point of view, but we must be studying options, because it may not work. The Mountain Observer advises great policy change caution, and patience, not historically among our national virtues. With all the problems, there is a hell of a lot that is going right. In the wake of 09/11, the President accepted an enormous challenge by forces determined to destroy us, and warned from the beginning that it would be a long hard battle. He was right. "Cut and run" appeasement is not an option. JES

09/27/06 For the last few days I have stood by and witnessed in wonderment at the absurdity of the most recent attempt on the part of cut and run appeasers to undermine and subvert the real American Project against IslamicFascism, aka the War on Terror. Again, subversives from somewhere within the sprawling Intelligence Community selectively leak portions of the recently updated National Intelligence Estimate, properly classified for national security reasons, to the New York Times, the national flagship of anti-Americanism and the semi-official mouth piece of those with a far Left, or otherwise fortress America, agenda. The President, caught in the midst of a highly divided and partisan political season, concludes, for political reasons, that he has no choice but to declassify the entire document, enabling the IslamicFascist world insights, knowledge of which iare detrimental to our national security and the safety of our own forces, raising again the true motives of those who clamor so for the blood of our President (They continue to recommend impeachment and/or assassination). The central focus, or "revelation", has to do with claims in the report that our policies, especially relating to Iraq, have been counterproductive by creating hatred and new waves of jihadists that did not previously exist.

Perhaps, and perhaps not. Given the twisted mental conditions of Islamic fantasizers, how does one actually measure, or differentiate, between those previously and consciously committed from those consciously or sub-consciously ripe for the call? The difficulties we have encountered in Iraq have only elevated the wisdom of the original effort by drawing out into the open the full dimensions of the worldwide problem for the West of IslamicFascism. As the IslamicFascist world has exposed itself, we have removed some of their key players. The President correctly stated after 09/11 that we faced a long tough pull against forces that we admittedly did not well understand. It took the West 70 years to defeat the threat posed by the USSR, a battle arguably still not closed. Against an asymmetrical challenge posed by non-statist proxies of an extreme fascist ideology dressed up as a religion, we have yet to recognize that there is no political solution, and that attempts to speak and act otherwise are only read as weakness and cause for encouragement.

After 09/11, to have avoided the inevitable confrontation with Saddam Hussein, consistent with the foreign policy constructs of the previous administration, would only have continued to add fuel to this fire. Afghanistan was not enough, nor is Afghanistan and Iraq. Many of our current problems arise directly from the existence of our own domestic dispute, demonstrably encouraging to the jihadists. There is a portion of the Constitution that is cogent, but we have had patience, aka compassionate conservatism, and would prefer to defer to a diagnosis of Left wing idiocy.

So, for the sake of discussion, let us stipulate as accurate the premise and conclusions of the National Intelligence Estimate, that our policies have created jihadists that would not otherwise exist. My response to this is "So What". Our choice is to continue to cave before thuds and bullies, or to say "enough is enough". "Nuanced" responses are a cave-in, fooling only ourselves, and feeding the crocodile one fish at a time. Objections that we committing ourselves to a project for which we do not have the resources to sustain only invite the question as to how seriously do we take our own survival. The United States, real Americans, are not interested in empire; we just want to live alone in peace. That requires that sometimes it is necessary to dust off the guns. Those who hate cowboys need to get out of the way, or move to France. The existential reality is that it is High Noon at the OK corral. JES

09/01/06 Well folks, 08/31 has come and gone, and Iran has dug in its heels. From their point of view, the West has no credibility, and perhaps they are right. What they understand, and too few people in the West understand, is that there is no political solution to this problem. The problem is religious, and non negotiable. From the Islamic perspective Christians, Jews, and Secularists are all infidels and subject to destruction. It is Allah's will, and martyrdom in Allah's name is blessed. There is no room here for negotiation. This is a form of theocratic fascism completely out of control. We, of course, could simply let them twist in the wind, except for the nukes, and the suicide bombers, all very portable. Islamic believers, not simply content with their opinions, but invested with the self-righteousness of the active destruction of all non-believers, are the functional equivalent of rabid dogs, a fact not anticipated by western multiculturalists and the high priests of moral equivalence. Perhaps something to keep in mind when you go to vote this Fall. Meanwhile, the folks at Ellsworth AFB and on Diego Garcia hopefully are in a preparation mode. High noon at the OK corral is fast approaching. JES

08/27/06 Reality is fast approaching, and Iran has made its position very clear on its nuclear intentions. The West is blinded by self denial, liberal guilt, moral cowardice and intellectual obfuscation of the real world choices confronting the future of civilization. There is a choice to be made, and not much time left. President George W. Bush, you are the only person left on the planet in a position to make that choice. It is high noon at the OK corral. I believe you know that. Which way is it going to be? JES.

08/11/06 In accepting a UN ceasefire proposal, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert screws up. Where is Benjamin Netanyahu? Absolutely unbelievable. It's not clear here whether this was the direction Bush actually intended things to go. Need more details. JES

08/09/06 Back to Lebanon. Folks, I would propose that right now the most serious question before the world is whether or not President George W. Bush is caving in to the "international community" on the issue of a "cease fire", or whether he is engaged in a strategy of "rope-a-dope", with or without Israeli complicity. Given the public record, either case could be made. Arguing the "rope-a-dope" scenario, August 22 looms large (see 08/08/06 below). Israel is in the midst of adjustments in its strategy, folding toward an ever more aggressive pursuit in Lebanon of its Hezbollah (Iranian) tormentors. No predictions here, either way; the public record is yet too murky. Either way, we are coming upon some dangerous moments that could heavily define the Century before us. The decision points that matter are Washington, Jerusalem, Tehran, Moscow and Beijing. The rest is a side show. JES

05/10/06 Exactly what and who are we fighting in the "War on Terror"? Over the months, the Mountain Observer has consistently maintained that our problem is with a form of fascism arising out of extreme interpretations of Islam, i.e., IslamicFascism. (I choose not to get bogged down in finding petty semantic distinctions between IslamicFascism v. IslamoFascism.) At a glance, it would seem that every IslamicFascist is a muslim, which begs the question: who qualifies, or thinks they qualify, as a muslim? We are not dealing here with black and white matters. It might be more accurate to state that an IslamicFascist is one who personally considers him/herself an inspired Muslim, while recognizing the fact that in reality this may not be the case. Are there peaceful muslims; can muslims live in peace in a pluralistic society? The premise of our policies in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and elsewhere in the Middle East, is that yes, this can be the case. Such policies can make sense even if one rejects the sort of off-the-wall contention that "Islam is a religion of peace", a claim about which there is reasonable dispute. Again, we are not dealing with black and white matters. As with all cultures and human groupings, we are dealing with a broad spectrum of ideas and perspectives. What we do know is that young middle eastern males should be of greater concern than elderly white grandmothers.

As Americans, our concern is our own national security, and in confronting terrorist threats there is great public confusion about the nature of the threats and how to deal with them. We are paying a very heavy price for a decades old failure of our own education system, and our own ability to teach our emerging generations anything about the world they live in; indeed, how to think at all. Logic and reason have collapsed in the face of deconstructionist absurdities and political correctness. So it is that broad sections of the public are woefully unprepared to engage in understanding the subtleties of the threats before us. Americans instinctively, and correctly, perceive the fact of genuine threats against us, without necessarily understanding the details of the threats. However, borders are easy to understand, and strong public reaction to our problems at the border, and at ports-of-entry are signs no politician should miss. As for the problems of dealing with IslamicFascism abroad, it gets more complicated. I have dealt, and will continue to deal, with the details of those matters elsewhere. However, the one point I wish to make here is that we cannot cut and run from the problems beyond our shores. We cannot just "carpet bomb whole societies back into the stone age", or "kill them all and let God sort it out", and leave. That is 60's trash talk, not the framework of useful policy in a truly dangerous age. As Conservatives, we need to demand analysis framed on informed objective reality, and action based on securing our future, not fear. JES

04/24/06 The Mountain Observer could not care less about what Francis Fukuyama has to say about the current state of American foreign policy. This was the same man who in 1989 declared the arrival of "the end of history". He is a wacko, and his current speculations on the state of "Wilsonianism", what ever that means these days, and internationalism, that isn't quite, reflects the intellectual ramblings of a chickenhawk that isn't. There; get it? Neither do I. JES

03/05/06 The time has come to make some adjustments to the War on IslamicFascism. We are in the midst of a domestic political collapse for the President's strategies, to date, that at times have been confusing, inconsistent, and poorly presented. At the core of these policy concerns is Iraq. On the Bush side of the ledger the problem has been a mission creep, both forced by events on the ground, but also, and I would argue primarily, by unrelenting domestic political stabs in the back. Simply put, al Qaeda has been successful in mining the politics of the American Left to subvert our efforts in Iraq. There were also problems with our original assessment as planned, (intelligence corrupted, partially by a longstanding internal policy war with ideological overtones) of the task to be faced post Saddam, whom, I must point out, is still a player. The President's original assessment of the need to take out Saddam Hussein preemptively was correct in the opinion of the Mountain Observer. Today, there is no reversal on my part in the wisdom of that decision. I must also remind readers that the WMD problem remains to this day, not that WMD did not exist, but where did it go. That remains an open issue. (Elsewhere for more detailed discussion). Moreover the original list of justifications for our pre-emptive action was much larger, and most significantly included the now well established fact that the Saddam regime was very well hooked up with al Qaeda in a common goal to subvert the West in general, and the United States in particular irrespective of their mutual differences. (Elsewhere for more detailed discussion). It is on this basis, as a direct threat to our national security, that this American Nationalist Conservative has always supported this President, not the grander goals of neo-conservatives more exercised with nation building in a Western image. (e.g. Go to Letter 241 05-07 then go to 09/25/05.) I have never objected to the idea of building republican democracy in Iraq in principle, except that my residual skepticism has been muted by a priority of supporting a President in the face of outlandish, and I believe actionably subversive speech and activity on the part of the American Left. Selling freedom is not a bad idea, within the practical limits of the moment, and unfortunately for our side those practical limits have been defined by domestic political duplicity and ignorance, willful or otherwise, and otherwise subject to the Patty Hearst Syndrome of falling for your would be captors.

So it is in the opinion of this writer, that two issues have arisen at the moment that give immediate pause concerning the Presidents current strategy which has come to lean too much on carrots which IslamicFascists regard as weakness, and incomprehensible in their world view of God's call for jihad against the West without compromise. Weakness, real or imagined, is provocative to the thug mentality with which we are at war.

The first has to do with the Dubai Ports World deal, which in my judgment, at this point, may or may not be the right thing to do, but in the apparent political untenability of a very poorly presented proposal, incoherent opposition has been aroused. (Elsewhere for more detailed discussion). The second issue has to do with the rapidly approaching need to attack Iranian nuclear war waging capacity. There is not much time left, and in the opinion of the Mountain Observer, all other options have been exhausted. There is no issue with our own military capacity for the job; our military is entirely capable of taking on the assignment right now, save for the fact that our bunker busting bomb technology is not quite as far along as it could have been had Congress acted on additional Bush funding requests in this area in 2002. Now we are faced with the reality of the need to act, not only to neuter Iranian capability and pretense, but to re-establish internationally American seriousness about defeating the greater theater of IslamicFascism as a threat to ourselves.

No small part of the President's political problem has been the accumulation over time of a series of matters, exaggerated, distorted and pushed to the political limits by an arguably subversive MSP (main stream press, also arguably no longer mainstream in the red states). Specifically this includes, at a minimum, The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CNN, and their children about the country. The matters of grave concern to the Leftist ideologs include "domestic spying" (the President is on very firm legal and Constitutional ground), Guantanamo Bay, where our only error has been to be too nice and not beat the crap out of people, and the "mis-handling" of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, blown all out of proportion. Of graver concern to most of the political spectrum has been the lack of seriousness about correcting our own border problems, held hostage, in part, by the perceived priority for cheap labor. The President has also hurt his cause by a failure to think twice about the issue of profiling, a necessary tool of intelligence and security administration. All of this, justified or not, has built to such a level of distraction from our real priorities that rational dialog among ourselves is in a near terminal state.

I am with the President on the War on IslamicFascism, however, I think we need to review policies and make some adjustments that re-prioritize our own national security and curtail the impulses of coddling that can only be misinterpreted as weakness by our enemies and invite dependency by our friends. JES

08/22/05 The Mountain Observer awaits some informed comment from the inside on how Condoleezza Rice is making out with the reformation of the stripped pants crowd at the State Department, a task surely more challenging than managing France. She can only make things better. JES

08/13/05 The President steps up to the plate and categorically states the obvious: that the United States has a military option with regard to the issue of Iran's nuclear future. Unlike a certain recent Presidency, when a decision to exercise the obvious would not have been so obvious, this President has found it necessary, given the ambiguous signals of his predecessor, to further state that which ought to be obvious, which is that he will exercise the military option if left with no other choice. His statement accomplishes two things at once. Immediately, he is goosing the diplomatic process for a solution, which everyone would prefer. He is also taking the United States off the table of those who believe that diplomacy can be effective if the primary trump card is removed. Had the military option always and unambiguously been on the table, diplomacy perhaps could have already produced a meaningful result. That, of course, has not happened, nor will it. The belief by the Left that diplomacy can function in the absence of credible military force, which includes a willingness to use that force, prolonged the Cold War, and could be fatal in the face of Islamic Fascism. The tragedy here is that Islamic Fascist leadership has been mis-led for so long by western left-wing kumbaya diplomacy, provoking Islamic notions of weakness that does not exist except in the hearts of Democrats, that the world may have to learn this lesson the hard way. It is the prediction of this writer that, sadly, that is the way it will be. JES

08/06/05 In our inventory of international relations needing to be healed, nothing quite equals our relationship with Vietnam. Hurt and trauma continue to abound 30 years later. We are in the process of concluding a military training program agreement with them now, perhaps the toe in the water of a future relationship that could prove very useful in the years to come in the building struggle to counter Chinese expansionism in Asia. There is a long history of conflict between Vietnam and China; they actually had a brief war after we pulled out in 1975. Currently, the Vietnamese are coming to us, not China, seeking a mentor for the solution to their enormous problems. We should engage in measured response. JES

05/01/05 Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Mountain Observer has maintained that the greatest international threat to the United States, going forward into the new century, is China. I now believe that the nature of that threat has evolved into what may be more accurately described as a challenge, rather than a threat. At the same time, it is now clear that the actual direct threats are multiple, having in common an actual lawless terrorist quality that is forcing a severe readjustment of our military and intelligence configurations. The real direct threats today seem to have in common the "ideology" of IslamoFascism born of Wahabism, supported by certain states not quite willing to consider civilized behavior, and frequently encouraged by others generally outside the Anglosphere orbit. However, I digress from the focus of my point here, which is China.

Shortly after the September 11 attacks, I expressed concern in these letters that the properly prioritized distraction of issues in the Middle East would compete with our necessary attention to China, and mischief would ensue. Actual events have proven the correctness of that concern, and the mischief is manifest is the straits of Taiwan. The buildup on the mainland side of the straits is accelerating, and China's naval capacities continue to grow, with Russia's help, including a submarine based missile capacity capable of hitting our country directly. The Chinese strategy with respect to Taiwan, is to intimidate the ROC (Taiwan) into surrender, and the military component, to be credible, includes the need to neutralize the capacity of the American fleet and political will to directly accept the military threat. While their ability to neutralize the American fleet any time in the near future is dubious, their ability to erect the credible threat of direct attack upon our cities is real, and with it the political willingness of Americans to defend Taiwan. An additional part of the strategy is wearing down the Taiwanese themselves. There is a growing political constituency on the island that seems tempted to exchange freedom for trade. We, ourselves, have enabled the Chinese buildup by tolerating a trade deficit for many years that has funded the weapons. There is a positive to the trade issue, however, and that is the growing dependency of the Chinese on American engineering standards and practices. However, they have a larger problem, which is the fact that political freedom is non-existent, and time is running against those who will not let go. So it is that the Chinese themselves are hung up on the horns of a dilemma as to choosing between the benefits to themselves of trade, or going to war, and furthermore, at what point North Korea becomes more of a liability than an asset. It is not clear how all of this will eventually play out, except that it is clear that the United States need not display "provocative weakness" only to invite ill-advised temptation and adventure on the part of mis-informed Chinese generals. JES.

03/24/05 After the Iraqi elections in January, the Mountain Observer has noticed a disturbing trend in the literature by neo-conservatives in their analysis of the American political scene. While it is obvious to objective observers that Democrats have their problems, it is apparently less obvious to neo-cons that they do not own the discussion on the Right. I have written before on a number of occasions concerning the fractures to be found just below the surface of the American Right. At this point in time, a number of policy issues are on the table and unfolding that contain the ingredients of a "perfect storm" and collapse of GOP/Conservative "unity". Neo-cons need to cool their jets and back off an implied assumption that they are completely in charge of anything.

The Bush foreign policy program is generally moving ahead in the right direction, except for Mexico. The domestic situation is a very different story. The heart and soul of the country is torn, at the bottom, by the secularist vision of man's self-directed "reason" vs. those who recognize the existence of a Higher Authority, and neo-cons are not always on the right side of that discussion, or the discussion about our borders. JES

FMOWEB 110-044 FOREIGN AFFAIRS- AMERICAN POLICY