NATO; Cuba; Bay of Pigs; Libiya; Germany and France

 

View Hope As Repetitious Annual Deficits?

Can America Afford

to …continue …to …

Execute Effective Foreign Policy

A Strong Homeland Security

In What Was …What is …and What Will Be

…if Not 1st Prepared?

Ready For What?

Sabers Rattle More in the Face of U.S.

Weakness & Vacillation?

 

If you are not with us …you are against us? Where did I  last hear this?

I believe this is what  came  from President Bush as he led the charge to stand against Iraqi dictator  Sadman Hussein in the wake of the Iraqi  dictator’s post Kuwati invasion’s peace.

Hmm! Noble cause as the president’s charge may have been; as it were, I wonder why the president’s efforts  met with so much  international indifference and  contempt.

For a possible answer, take a look back with me a bit.

In view of the recent celebration of The Bay of Pigs 50^th Anniversary last week, I think it altogether fitting to also take a look back at a letter which I wrote around the first part of 2007 …especially since it is also the case that Barack Obama made the decision to essentially dump the Libyan mess into NATO’s lap.

Consider the following as a prefacing introduction prior to any such a look back ward …

Hey Barack! Hey NATO!

I would hope America is ready and willing to take the responsibilities needed to shoulder the burdens of the tasks in Northern Africa. If something is worth doing, it should be worth doing well, yes?

Yet, for all that …the leadership which caused Barack Obama to mount the charge into Libya is one which is also fast wilting and withering on the vine.

This does one thing well. It makes a fine example of an excuse for failing to show the conviction of such a charge’s initial courage and conviction.

In failing to finish what Barack once seemingly believed was a worthy cause sends a green-light signal to further embolden Kadafi undertaking.

In this respect, Kadafi must know something which Barack did not; namely how to call a bluff in light of a preoccupation whose obsessions may clearly be seen as a lack of revolve …one primarily which must …of necessity, turn and run and fall backward taken and ensnared with concerns over weak global economic recoveries.

In this regard, NATO countries share much the same chains which hold captivity captive …grounded to the same mutual restricted limitations which impose penalizing stark realities upon those shoulders which their stressed budgets have fallen.

I am afraid, if America is not willing to act in freedom and lead with the courage of Her convictions, then She must be made to realize the costs of the symptoms from which she has accrued by putting heavier and heavier burdens on her future generations.

If America is unwilling to lead so …understandably she much …without any other choice …step aside and relegate to others what She put off today …for future generations to deal with …NAMELY THE RESPONSIBILITY to safeguard liberty abroad as well as she has failed to do so at home ….in the homeland of LADY LIBERTY.

And this makes me sick at heart.

That’s my take,

Bill

—– Original Message —–

Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:21 PM

Subject: Re: Consider how the Germans benefited.doc

I’m glad so glad that America didn’t take an isolationist view when Hitler & Japan decided to take on the world.  I am also thankful for the manner in which the world responded in unity of purpose making for strong alliances which joined together to form worldwide cooperation which joined all together to defeat tyranny and its threats.

Was this any more ludicrous because it caused the far fetched unthinkable to become a reality in the face of strong sentiments of national isolationism?

Then, think it no more impossible, because the U.S. today …is no more an isolationist nation today than it was prior to WW II?

Wait a minute one might say today; …like Libya, we didn’t go half-heartedly …after Cuba during the Bay of Pigs?

I mean, America survived Fidel Castro well, yes?

That saved a lot of money in the America’s southern hemisphere too; didn’t it?

Not!

Forget about the cost of and a consideration of the Cuban Missile Crisis?

I mean; why go after Kadafi then?

Why not sleep? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz …sleep on it and see what that gets America.

Sleeping on Batista, and the failure of The Bay of Pigs cost more than the imagination will ever know.

Therefore, could Libya cost as much as Cuba …maybe? More important and certain is what actions today will cost in terms of how American leadership and resolve …or the lacking substance thereof will be seen in blatant spineless vacillations.

 More trust and respect to be squandered and pissed away in Africa than in Cuba? No!

Just ask any Russian about what Cuba in the 60’s did to embolden and empower the communist’s commitment to South America …then …if not Africa’s and Asia today?

How could I cause this impact …this consequence to be seen any clearer?

Hello!

Regardless, regarding Germany and Japan; I’m sure the world would have been a safe place, if …for only for a short time.

Inevitably, after a few years …given enough time …either of these two WW II super powers would have eventually   come knocking on doors once again for one or more country after another.

Economically, if America would have caved …any benefits would have been merely short-lived. This is actually what Stalin, Churchill and Rose

See the Treaty of Munich, 30 Sept 1938.

http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW2/WW2_timeline.htm

However, peace by capitulation is a weak substance soon wasted in hope’s very strongest opportunity.

I’m not sure America’s strengths and weaknesses have anything to do with how rich or how economically sound She is …as much as Her accountability speaks for how She values the courage of her core convictions.

To turn a blind eye to the core is akin to losing faith.

Lose the faith …and lose the trust.

When it becomes leadership to lead cavalierly without either …such is a sad witness which invites Katy to bar the doors.

Turning a blind eye to genocide and terrorism will have catastrophic results for our country in my opinion.

Clearly, Obama has the courage of his convictions just about as much as John F. Kennedy did regarding His betrayal of Batista at The Bay of Pigs …whose 50th anniversary just came and went …to which I say; bah! Humbug …good riddance to Fidel Castro!

It’s a shame that I can’t …with all confidence say the same thing of Omar Kadafi. I don’t know. Maybe the Barackster still has some of the same old campaign chutzpah.

I hope the president indeed has some real hope and change left in his gas tank in this regard, because; like Ronald Regan, who said; “…Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall …” maybe President Barack Obama will think to say; “…Mr. Kahdafi, leave Libya for the good of the Libyans.”

But until this happens, I am rather prone to doubt that I will be holding my breath …especially not for Mr. Obama’s sort of hope and change.

In the mean time, enjoy the following look back,

Bill

Subject: Consider how the Germans benefited.doc

Thursday, March 08, 2007

Consider how the Germans benefited by the U.S. Military presence within its borders for over half a decade.

Imagine what it meant to the Germans; …for not having to spend on a defense budget …as we did to provide for peace in Europe from the end of WW II. That is a considerable length of time …as is it also, a considerable investment in peace which benefited Germany in many ways by an equal contribution’s measure …immensely …and immeasurably …economically and socially among others.

 Then, consider the equally staggering required deferred costs associated with West Germany’s reunification with East Germany, formerly known as the DDR.

Prior to reunification, Germany’s federal budget was …for all intents and purposes, a well oiled machine; …a basically fiscally sound and balanced budget. See the SOFA agreement pertaining to the restrictions placed upon the former Axis Powers …specifically in regard to the measures which forbid running deficits.

That’s right; as a consequence of losing WW II, Germany …along with the other Axis powers were precluded from running deficit budgets.

But, this changed soon after Helmut Kohl’s conservative party took on all of the initiatives of reunification. This change was due in large part to the need to engage in borrowing practices in order to finance the reunification’s ginormous rebuilding efforts.

The Russians had stripped the land and country bare for nearly 50 years …without maintaining a thing …save themselves …in what would serve the central polit bureau.

Since 1989-1990, in regards to the commitment to reunification, the German’s have paid dearly in repatriotization efforts which have included the cost to rebuild the former East German’s devastated and vastly neglected infrastructure.

This monumental endeavor led them down a path requiring them (year after year) to barrow huge sums of money necessary to rebuild:   Air, Ground and Rail Transportation system; Energy Generation systems; Communication systems …just to name a few …obligations and commitments to restructure formerly (non-existent) social systems all not withstanding.  

Therefore, barrowing and deficits …for the first time in their relatively young post WWII federal fiscal history, was …up until this time …a foreign and an unthinkable concept which had been an all but forgotten pain …memories of a time when bread was purchased with wheel barrow loads of cash.

And, as great as reunification’s costs were; …Germany’s approach had no other choice but to embrace a great reliance upon debt.

Income taxes rose 5 and 2 per cent in the first two successive years after embarking upon this undertaking’s aggressive rebuilding path.

And as austere as these added taxation measures were, it was soon realized that these tax hikes (them selves) were not nearly adequate to meet the monumental challenges of the requirements of a complete infrastructure rebuild. The future financial challenges they were facing at the time were just too large to bridge alone via tax hikes alone.

In spite of all efforts to heat up the economy to generate increased tax revenue, they were still faced with requirements which necessitated a capitol borrowing campaign at levels which, I imagine …would make the Bush administration’s borrowing pale by comparison.

To make a long story short, the Germans voted the conservative Chancellor Helmut Kohl out of office after realizing how deeply the true costs associated with reunification (must-needs) would affect their dearly beloved pension and other entitlements.

The price of their barrowing came with a much unanticipated consequence …that in terms of which encroached upon their social pinnacle …the darling of their esteemed social system; …principally threatening their socialized retirement …their highly coveted and prized federally funded social pension program.

This threat’s strengthened fears which were ultimately realized in the form and wake of a subsequent recession.

Their debt load service costs alone forcefully required the German’s to rethink their pension retirement benefits. You might say that they had something like what is forcing Americans to face the stark consequences of a similar reality; …in dealing with the woes of their own form of a Social Security and broad-based entitlement crisis.

However, unlike in the US, most every German worker’s life revolved around their dependency upon a federal socialistic pension system; …a system in which they take/took a great deal of nationalistic pride.

For years, such a system had been a strong, stalwart of reliable dependability. The German people owned it and had paid for it.

It was owned by a people who then, naturally took a great deal of common socially conscious effort to participate actively in a form of government which had been careful to be ever respective of its moral social obligation to it’s people’s contributions from within an almost Holy and sacred measured actions which maintained a trust relation with its people out of due diligence in which it provided accountability with clock work precision …primarily because the Deutsch Mark was stable and fairly unaffected by inflation seeing they, for so long had been required to maintain a balanced budget …under the aforementioned SOFA Agreement.

 In view of this, I have a few questions:

1. After losing nearly half of their retirement benefits, is it not unrealistic to understand how that Germany and their respective bond holders – creditors, namely: France …among other European nations …might be increasing more than willing to actively resist and protest spending even more on and embark upon still further and greater barrowing …in order to join with the US in a foray in Iraq; …Especially when they have always prepared themselves …paying as they go, as it were?

 

1. Would it not be still more unrealistic (of the U.S.) to think that they (The Europeans) would expressly refuse to join in multilateral support of a war with Iran, where the costs might make their reunification costs seem (still …further more) pale by comparison than they already had become by embracing reunification?

 

1. If we were (…and still are not …) incapable of offering, giving and demonstrating  considerations which willing to apply wisdom in the better part of understandings that are supportive of reality from within a perspective which …like a vessel is capable of holding an uncompromised-leaky view toward effective international diplomacy …fiscal responsibility not withstanding, then …what and when will American leadership ever amount to …without first honoring the priority which respects what is real and honestly will lead to hope to offer change that is worth the effort, equitable and just for all?

 

1. Yet more importantly, and still closer to home; …Politically and economically, are we willing to continue to barrow and rack up still further vast sums of debt continuing to bankroll a peace effort which may, very well …foment the necessity of war? In view of our diplomatic tenacity, and military intelligence and its might, some costly solution it will be without allies, no?     “Yes we will …!” will be the indecent answer of Popeye’s Wimpy if, our reliance upon debt is anything greater than the last three years.

 

1. I only wonder what Homeland Security really means looking forward in terms of merely our debt load’s service requirement’s …an obligation which is a social threat in and of itself.

 

Q:   What do you suppose the German perspective might have been when President Bush

          approached the Europeans and said with no small lack of understanding; “…If you are

          not for us; then, you are against us ….!”?

A:   To which I could only imagine Germany replying; “Mr. Bush, will you be willing to pay

          down our debt load costs we’ve just incurred in Reunification?”

1. The future may well tell a tale that our Middle East  efforts served only, in some warped and diabolical conservative way, to destroy what shreds of a social security safety net now (for time being) remains held barely in place by a single thread.  

 

1. And on that thread, America may be hanging in the balance at the end of a time; …three generations out beyond WWII; still living with graces and blessings; sacred righteous blessings garnered and paid for …by and with the efforts of our forefathers.   Does Exodus come to mind?

 

1. The “Greatest Generation” that of my father’s has all but come and gone. In good conscience and under the great leadership of the day, they unselfishly laid in the course and set about their duties with a pride in knowing what they were building upon. And in this work, they dutifully paid the price for what they left behind.

 

1. Today, I’m not so sure that America today is as whole heartedly, like-mindedly committed and willing to pay the same prices which have paid the price for American values in quite the same manner. Yet, liberty endured and left her freedoms to raise the conscious social mentality that believes the price of entitlement is …merely an exclusive inherited right offered without consequences.

9a. I never once heard my father bitch about the challenges in the services he was asked to contribute in service performed to America. Is that a tough act to follow, or an inspiration?    

10.  Today, it seems as if we are simply hell bent on doing either one of two things. One group is aiming to eliminate our ability to support our so called social entitlements at their current levels …while the other is hell bent on trashing the principals of free market capitalism? In a reliance upon debt, it doesn’t matter which you choose. You may take your polar pick of either and arrive at the same destination in failing to realize the unavoidable consequences of debt load’s creep …especially when down turns suddenly has the opportunity to take and ensnare those least prepared to manage …even in fair weather …the least prepared suffer real and dire consequences. Opportunity const the most …especially those who are the least prepared …even if your names are Bush and Obama …regardless of which side of the isle entitlements’ responsibilities are befallen and beholden if and when such honorable vessels are sound and not cracked …as in cracked-pots.

11. Feed the poor, lift the fallen. Hem? What? Think of others ahead of yourselves?

12. Have we intentionally and conveniently for politically motivated gains placed a negative connotation upon these types of charter obligations?

13. If we have not done so in word; …then have we, as a nation not shared in this deed?

14. Wimpy was a joke of a figure in my father’s day. Popeye’s Wimpy was not willing to pay as he went, was he?

15. His line; “… I will be glad to pay you on Wednesday for a burger today.

Think of it; ….Has it not been three generations since this cartoon character’s inception?

Speaking for myself, I know I did not ask to be living in a world which is now considered to be flat only to be perceived as some cartoon character; …living on the laurels of my forefather’s righteous character.

Time has spared no one of its consequences.  

We are merely given it and to redeem it wisely.

Respectfully,

Bill Landman