Disrupting the Narrative of the New Left, its allies in Academia, Hollywood and the Establishment Media, and examining with honesty the goals of cultural Marxism and the dangers of reactionary and abusive political correctness.
THE NARRATIVE AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
“Threats to freedom of speech, writing and action, though often trivial in isolation, are cumulative in their effect and, unless checked, lead to a general disrespect for the rights of the citizen.”-George Orwell
Bing West is exactly right that the administration's decision to send a carrier battle group to Yemen and then broadcast that it's just there for show is "feckless." Even worse - given that Iranians are now buzzing U.S. ships - and engaging in other provocative acts, I fear that we're inviting ever-closer encounters - encounters that carry inherent risk of confrontation since they depend not just on American discipline but Iranian discipline as well. Under conventional rules of engagement, every American ship possesses an inherent right of self-defense, and decisions whether to exercise that right are being made with decreasing margins for error the closer Iranian forces get.
To be sure, going back to the Cold War, the American Navy has demonstrated that it can exercise extreme degrees of discipline - as did their Soviet rivals. But do we trust the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to be as disciplined? Critically, do our own sailors trust Iranian discipline as much as they trusted the discipline of their Great Power rival?
We're sending sailors into close proximity of a shooting war, Iran is sending its own assets into the same area, and we're telling the world that we're not serious about our presence. Years of experience in the Middle East teaches us that our enemies always test the limits, consistently going up to and beyond danger zone. Unless the message the American forces are sending locally is substantially different than the message being sent internationally, we're playing games with an aircraft carrier, and that is perilous indeed.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said Wednesday that if he's elected president, on his first day in office he'll reject any deal the White House strikes with Iran over its nuclear program if it continues to allow the country to enrich uranium.
In an interview on Hugh Hewitt's radio show, the host asked Walker whether he would "disown" any agreement between the U.S. and Iran that allows for uranium enrichment if he wins the presidency in 2016.
"Absolutely," Walker said. "On day one."
"The concept of a nuclear Iran is not only problematic for Iran, and certainly for Israel, but it opens the doors," Walker continued. "I mean, the Saudis are next. You're going to have plenty of others in the region … going to want to have a nuclear weapon if the Iranians have a nuclear weapon."
Walker's remarks come as negotiations between a U.S.-led coalition and Iran resume Thursday over the country's nuclear program. Administration officials have said the emerging deal could lift some sanctions on Iran if the country reduces its nuclear centrifuges from 10,000 to 6,000.
"This is something that just escalates right before our eyes," Walker said. "And the fact that this administration began these discussions essentially conceding that they're going to allow enrichment to go forward with the Iranians just shows you that they don't have the same level of concern that I think I and Senator [Marco] Rubio and many others out there have, that a nuclear Iran is a problem for the entire world, not just for Israel."
Today marks the fifth anniversary of the Battle of Kamdesh, the bloodiest day of 2009 for American forces in Afghanistan. CNN's Jake Tapper, who has written a book about the battle, did an amazing summary and tribute to the men who fought and died that day, 140 characters at a time. My small contribution is to provide the perfect background music. Please be sure and play the video while reading Tapper's tribute. Trust me...
