JFK vs LBJ

Well, here we are...in a quagmire of sorts with this thing called; "the Afghan War." Oh! The Afghan War to fight terrorism. For those of you history buffs, the Obama Administration has decided to 'drop' the to fight terrorism portion and call it simply, a war.

Where this thing gets tricky is that there are brave men and women (America's Finest) are the ones doing the fighting, securing and dying over there. The commanding general for the U.S. forces in Afghanistan (Gen. McCrystal) has requested several thousand more 'additional' troops to get the job done. Its been weeks and our 'pride and joy,' 'illustrious,' bright young President still has yet to make a decision on whether to approve or disapprove. He's had several options and of late he has gathered his 'meeting of the minds' of a National Security Council and most senior military advisers and directed them to come up with so-called 'revised' options. Now, today while he's in Japan (on the first leg of his Asian trip) he wants to include a plan of "how to get out of Afghanistan." Its LBJ all over again! He's running this war from the White House. President George H.W. Bush (during Desert Storm) let his military commanders run the show and keep him advised and updated. Look how well that worked out! He (President Obama) blames Bush '43' for leaving this war as he put it; "on his doorstep." He's in to one-year of his Presidency...its now HIS war and his alone. He needs to 'fess up' and make some substantive decisions (he needs to lead and act).

ANALYSIS: "President Obama, give your commanders on the ground in Afghanistan what they need to get the job done! Stop running this war from the White House! Every time you have to make a decision like this, don't call a meeting of your advisers (again and again) to the Situation Room for frank discussions and requesting more options. Make a decision! The longer you wait, the more time you take...it just adds that much more stress, pressure (not to mention) danger in harm's way for our troops. YOU SIR have no idea whatsoever of what its like to serve in the military. YOU NEED TO LISTEN and DECIDE! 

What we have is a scenario of "JFK vs. LBJ." On the one hand, as described above, President Obama is reminiscent of the decision-making to LBJ. I suspect all the while (he) President Obama wants to be like JFK and the Vietnam Conflict. He sends advisers but does not get too involved. He stated just before his assassination that in Vietnam; "It's their war. They're gonna have to fight it. Its' up to them whether they win it or lose it." It has been alleged that the Karzai Government in Afghanistan is corrupt. This has been stated so on more than one occasion. So why Mr. President, why are we there?

One final thought; Mr. President. I am nearing my fifty-first year in this life time. I have seen a great deal. Seen things most generations won't ever see or witness... ever! Society has changed, this much is true. So has our government and its way of doing business. Our government officials and  most senior advisers there in your White House are too soft. You're too worried about what others might think!  You're too wrapped up in party politics! Some of you, need to grow a spine and 'get tough' with the Afghanis, the Iraqis, the Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians, the Japanese, the North Koreans and so on. President Obama, you need to show the world that we're the United States of America.

"Mr. President, I remember Jack Kennedy. I recall how he and his senior staff worked to making tough choices expeditiously. Jack Kennedy was tough (when needed). He made sound decisions on the spot and not weeks at a time before he decided. President Obama...you're no Jack Kennedy."

WD

P.S. "I can't help but think the real reason why President Obama wants out of Afghanistan and Iraq is the economy. The U.S. economy is slow in recovery...we spend way too much (at tax-payers expense) on Afghanistan and Iraq. He wants to get it off the books. Its pulling his numbers (over-all job approval rating) down."

CIA: 1 - Intel Czar: 0 and 'turf' warfare

Recently, the CIA has won a long-standing battle of "intelligence turf warfare" against the Director of National Intelligence or Intelligence Czar. In a published article (Newsweek.com, 11/12/09, by Mark Hosenball); "In every country where U.S. intelligence agencies operate, the CIA's station chief will continue to be the most senior U.S. intelligence officer." This was according to a White House ruling.

It was understood, that as a result of the investigation of the 9/11 Commission the establishment of a 'National Director' for Intelligence was suppose to eliminate any and all confusions as it pertains to so-called 'turf warfare,' sharing of intelligence and information amongst the various agencies. NOW, comes the subject matter of "who's in charge" as top U.S. intelligence representatives in foreign countries. Did the 9/11 Commission miss this? Was this subject for analysis ever discussed? Apparently not, this has been such a long-standing feud of sorts between the CIA, its' Director and the Director for National Intelligence that it first began to take root during the Bush Administration. Was this not the same administration who claimed to have, "taken care of all that?" NOT! Apparently, this time, President Obama and his advisers can say in all honesty that it was left on their doorstep when he (they) took office. The previous CIA Director (Michael Hayden) argued that CIA station chiefs should remain "paramount" everywhere they operate. The new Intel Czar (Dennis Blair) locked horns with the new CIA Director (Leon Panetta) for a resolution in this matter. They could not reach a mutual settlement on this issue. It was then sent to National Security Adviser Jim Jones. He could not broker a solution and the matter was then referred to Vice President Biden. Biden indicated that; "The status quo should remain...that CIA station chiefs should always be the top U.S. spies overseas." Again, according to the article; "One consolation for the intelligence czar; CIA station chiefs will be encouraged to bill themselves as "DNI representatives."

More and more we hear about how the 9/11 Commission with all its' analysis and investigations found serious flaws in intelligence system and community. The creation of the position as DNI was to remedy all matters as it related to the discovery of, gathering, processing, compiling and formulation of intelligence (along with the sharing of info amongst various agencies) so as to not create any further problems for the U.S. The Director of National Intelligence was overruled in favor of the CIA Director on who's turf is the 'top spy' as station chief, a 'single point-of-contact' (intel rep) for our ambassadors in foreign countries.

ANALYSIS: A new commission ought to be sanctioned by the President for reinvestigation and provide recommendations on how the worthiness, relevance and importance of need for the position of Director of National Intelligence. The Director of the CIA has always been (and should always be) the 'chief intel' officer and 'national director.' A dual role which also would include the responsibility to brief the President on intelligence. Whatever department or apparatus the DNI has, this bureaucracy ought to be eliminated.The DCI ought to be the 'chief overseer' of all intelligence gathered (regardless of department or agency). The DCI must once again assume this role. Cohesion IS the answer in resolving these kinds of situations; continuity.

WD

On this Veteran’s Day

"To my fellow veterans past and present; I wish to extend my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to all of you, my brethren. On this day, (I believe) the American people do honor and appreciate our service to this country. No where in the world is there a nation quite like ours. We owe everything we have to our veterans. “Always faithful, true and service to country” are the parables in the carrying out of orders be each veteran serving. On this Veteran’s Day, November 11th shall always be THE day dedicated to the brave men and women of our armed forces."

President Barack Obama

Recently, it has been reported in certain circles that President Obama wants to ‘combine’ September 11th (or Patriot’s Day) with Veteran’s Day and rename it; “National Service Day.” If this is true, this veteran says; “ABSOLUTELY NOT!” November 11th is OUR DAY and ought to stay as such. When (if) this should ever make it to Congress, I HIGHLY DOUBT that it will pass. The American People would be so incensed that Congress (regardless of party) would take heed. Email the President or any member of his cabinet and let your opinion count! Click on the White House link below:

Tell the President...tell the Cabinet

“With the greatest of sincerity and admiration for my fellow veterans, we can and must do more. Veterans are owed an enormous amount of gratitude, one of which might never can be repaid. Sacrifice, duty, honor, service to country are the hallmarks of what it means to be a veteran…God Bless my fellow veterans…thank you!'”

WD

The Two Koreas

Recently, (Tuesday morning, Korean Peninsula) the two navies of North and South Korea went head-to-head along the disputed western sea border. Why? A South Korean warship shot at a North Korean navy ship that crossed the disputed western sea border to which the North shot back. A South Korean officer (under condition of anonymity) states that there were no casualties but it remains unclear if the North had sustained any at all. However, there was 'considerable' damage to the North Korean ship.

Is it not interesting that these kinds of 'naval chess games' have been going on since the end of their 1950-53 civil war which ended in an armistice with no peace treaty? Why? South Korea realizes that there are some nearly one-million plus North Korean soldiers poised at a moments notice which could come charging across the border and DMZ (Demilitarized Zone). As an ally of the South, American forces have never left and are  on constant guard. Due to an armistice treaty, we are obliged to 'aid' and 'assist' our ally (South Korea) should any skirmish ever break out. Northwest by north to the northeast along the North Korean border sits one very long border of another country which concerns the United States; China. We must proceed with absolute caution and our U.S. intelligence community, as well as our Joint Chiefs, Secretary of Defense need to follow, monitor this tense state of affairs very closely. Why? Should the situation between these two implode, it could possibly draw in the entire region into an armed conflict, one of which might have catastrophic repercussions for generations to come. I don't believe the United States would let this happen, let alone allow itself to be drawn into some sort of 'cat and mouse' game perpetuated by the North.

ANALYSIS: "I strongly believe that on part of the military regime (with the blessing by the so-called; 'Dear Leader'), a plan was formulated and put into action  by the North as a 'show of force' to see what the South might do. The South responded. The North goes back to its homeland and will widely publicize a campaign of 'provocation' by the South Korean navy. Of course, the media in the North is pure propaganda as propaganda can be. They (the North) will cry wolf once more to try and entice the United States into direct 'one-on-one' talks regarding its' nuclear weapons (if any at all) and program. The last thing the North wants is 'six-party' talks, for them, this is a waste of time. After all, the North wants what the U.S. has; resources, food and restore normal relations. Hence, at the United Nations sanctions would be lifted and being listed as a nation of 'state-sponsored' terrorism would be revoked. My advice; I say we 'wait and see' and do nothing for the moment. Lets' see if the North propagates itself once more in the western sea border or some other contrived act of desperation to get the attention it wants. All in all, the North is saying nothing more than that of a child; "Hey! What about me? Don't I count too?"

WD

Introduction to "The Political Beat"

Hello one and all! Welcome! Today, here and now is the first publication, an introduction to all of you regarding my 'blog' entitled; "The Political Beat." I decided to create and publish The Political Beat for a variety of reasons;

(1) To publicly critique and analyze (in an open forum) what it is our 'so-called' elected officials AND appointees are doing in Washington, my home State of Ohio and the world in general

(2) Theorize; to theorize the actions or expound on the thoughts and comments of those in officialdom

(3) Create an 'open forum' of discussion regarding the mass media in general (i.e., Syndicated television, media publications, cable news shows, etc)

(4) Critique, analyze, theorize exact moments or decisions in history that helped shape this world, a country for good or ill (World Politics, Comparative Politics, American Politics, National Security and Intelligence are also subject to 'analyzes' too (and anything else I might think of)

(5) Last but not least, it has been said; "controversy is the 'spice' of life." There is nothing more truer than this. There will be times that the comments or analyzes I will make, at some point or another will undoubtedly furrow someone's feathers, figuratively-speaking. Regardless of their rank, status or class in society; I will use life's old adage; "I calls 'em as I sees 'em" (a baseball metaphor). By the way, no subject matter, current event or historical perspective/theory is off limits. "No holds barred here." However, 'professional courtesy' will always be the order of the day

Nonetheless, I decided to create this blog to 'air the clear' (No, that's not backwards but correct). You see, I am nearing my 51st year (Lord willing and the creek don't rise, many more years on Mother Earth). At my young age, I've taken a many of trips around the barn of sorts. My personal experiences, stations of assignment and travels around this vast world have seen various cultures and traditions in other countries, not like the United States. Moreover, I've been witness to 'certain' places in history (and practices) which no one will see the likes of ever again, this largely has to do with society and politics. I served a number of years in the U.S. Armed forces, United States Army, active duty for nearly eight years. I was on a career track of making the military my life, then I got hurt. During my time-in-service was where I bared witnessed to a 'few' historical moments and places.

I AM a disabled war veteran (Desert Shield/Storm, 1st Gulf War) one who sees things in a different light of sorts; street smarts, maybe, old school, or the "School of Hard Knocks, absolutely! My age (50 years young), decided to return to college and complete my educational pursuits and set a 'good example' for my children. I get around with the use of wearing knee braces on a daily basis and with a cane. Please don't feel sorry or sympathetic for me. I did my duty, it was my job. It's the price one pays, I guess. When ya come right down to it; I feel I have something to contribute, a unique perspective on the world and everything else in general, that's why I'm 'blogging.'

I hope that for those of you who read this blog will find it interesting and sometimes insightful. If you agree, fine. If you (or we) disagree, lets debate like elder statesmen and debate some more. The exchange of one's ideas and beliefs can be a uplifting experience for all. Anyway; "WELCOME!"

WD