Monday, August 31, 2009

Obama and his commitment to the war in Afghanistan

I was impressed when newly elected Barack Obama ordered 17000 new troops to fight in the Afghanistan theater, however my enthusiasm has since been displaced. I think it began when President Obama was quoted as saying, “I’m always worried about using the word ‘victory,’ because you know that invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,” when asked about victory in Afghanistan. Yes, you read that right. Obama is uncomfortable about using the word "victory."

With the prospect that U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal may ask for as many as 45,000 additional American troops in Afghanistan is fueling growing tension within President Barack Obama's administration over the U.S. commitment to the war there. Obama administration officials have acknowledged that with increasing war causalities and health care and budget debates, Vice President Biden and other officials "are increasingly anxious about how the American public would respond to sending additional troops." Mr. Biden, the American people want us to win in Afghanistan and they expect you and Mr. Obama to do what is necessary to win that war. If General McChrystal and General Petraeus request more troops, then I think it may be a good idea to send more troops.

Spending your time reading polls and trying to placate your base is not leadership. All of the Bush-Derangement-Syndrome fanatics always accused President Bush of not heading the publics will and to surrender in Iraq. Mr. Bush was not swayed by polls when it came to national security and I respect him for that. Pentagon officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to talk to the media, said Biden has argued that without sustained support from the American people, the U.S. can't make the long-term commitment that would be needed to stabilize Afghanistan and dismantle al Qaida and Biden's office declined to comment.

"I think they (the Obama administration) thought this would be more popular and easier," a senior Pentagon official said. "We are not getting a Bush-like commitment to this war." This is crazy people! According to Newsmax, Monday's Afghanistan assessment initially was to include troop recommendations, but political concerns prompted White House and Pentagon officials to agree that those recommendations would come later. Obama is letting politics get in the way of winning the war. There are more indications that this Administration is not fully committed to the Global War on Terror and victory in that war. Obama has banned the use of Global War on Terror, but has began The Holder/Obama Global War on the CIA. This Administration is more committed to prosecuting the men and women of the CIA than they are at defeating the true enemy.

According to Newsmax, Senior Military officals believe Obama now feels that McChrystal and his superior, Army Gen. David Petraeus , the head of the Central Command, are pressuring Obama to commit still more troops to Afghanistan and Obama's national security adviser told McChrystal last month not to ask for more troops. What the hell kind of leadership is that? President Obama, please get your head out of your poll driven ass and win this war. Get out of campaign mode and get into leadership mode because those American soldiers are not Republicans or Democrats, they are America's warriors.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, August 30, 2009

An assessment of Obama's Middle East Foreign Policy

President Obama came into office with the promise of changing the status quo of our diplomacy in the Middle East with an emphasis on Muslim perceptions towards America. The polling of Muslim countries since the election has confirmed a somewhat increase of trust for this new administration over previous ones, but at a cost. Some argue that having a more positive image in Muslim world will reduce the “jihad” attitude that we face among radical Muslims. The price we are paying for this new found trust comes at the expense of our most loyal ally, the Israelis. Recent polling has indicated that only 4% of Israelis believes Obama has their best interests in mind. President Bush left office with an 88% approval rating among Israelis in regards to Israeli security.

The Obama Administration has put tremendous pressure on Israel to stop “natural growth” in their settlements to garner favor with the Palestinians in particular and Muslims in general. Has this pressure had the desired affect? The simple answer at this time is no. The basis of Obama’s strategy was that by applying pressure on Israel, it would result in some normalization between Israel and Muslim countries. This strategy had been a dismal failure. Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria have publically rejected any hints of normalization with Israel until the Israelis essentially pull back to the 1967 borders. The Obama Administration fails to see what history has taught us in regards to negotiations with Muslim countries. They want all or nothing! The Palestinians have been offered 98% of their demands and have still turned a blind eye towards peace.

The Obama Administration overtures towards Iran have also been a failure at this point. The Iranians still play their cat and mouse games and stall any future sanctions from the world body. There is some consensus within the intelligence community that Iran can produce a nuclear weapon within a year and the world still sits idly by. The Obama administration and Europe remind me of that picture of the monkeys that hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil in regards to Iranian nukes. They continue to just sit on their collective hands and do nothing. Iran still allows and or finances the flow of weapons to terrorists that kill and maim our service members. Iran still allows Al Qaida and Taliban terrorists free access through their country to the battlefield of Iraq. Iran in conjunction with Syria still provides weapons to Hezbollah to attack Israelis from Lebanon. What has really changed with all of the weakness and good will Obama has shown towards the Middle East? Quite simply weakness on our part and the fact that we will throw our allies under the bus to look good in the eyes of Muslims.

There are reports that Syria continues to allow terrorists to be funneled through the border with Iraq to cause death and destruction with no response from Washington. The Long War Journal is reporting that a senior Al Qaeda leader (Sheikh Issa al Masri) that was based in Pakistan’s tribal areas has taken control of Al Qaeda in Iraq’s organization in Syria and is operation from the capital of Damascus. What have we done in response to this affront? We have sent high level State Department delegations to Syria to garner favor only to be spit in the face. The Syrians see Obama as weak and have now called off any new Turkey mediated talks with Israel with only US sponsored talks with Israel. Why do you think Syria turned down a fellow Muslim country for mediation with Israel and instead chose the United States? They see Obama as an adversary of Israel and a friend of Muslims and their cause.

I had great enthusiasm that President Obama would refocus our efforts in the Afghanistan theatre of the war with his troop surge but then I heard his comments in regards to victory. Obama stated that, “I’m always worried about using the word ‘victory,’ because you know that invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,” What in the hell does that mean? First and foremost, Emperor Hirohito did not come down and sign the surrender; I don’t know where Obama gets his history. Does this president want victory over Islamo-Fascist terrorists or not? Time will tell!

Sphere: Related Content

Obama Security Officer suppresses dissent at town hall

I just saw this disturbing video at the BoBo Files and it shows what should not be happening in America. This video was shot at Democratic Rep. Moran's town hall meeting where Moran was asking an American for an ID to ask questions and a police officer in the parking lot suppressing dissent. Folks, this is what liberals are about. Suppressing dissent and total control is the only way this socialist crap can be implemented. Where are the state controlled media on this? Can you imagine the outcry if this were an conservative issue and that cop did that to a liberal protester. My God people, this is getting scary!

UPDATE: Mr. Cheeks is not a Police Officer, but a Fairfax County school Security Officer. I have just contacted Superintendent Mr. Jack Dale and received a response to my complaint.
It reads:

Thank you for sharing your concerns with Fairfax County Public Schools. The school division takes all allegations of employee misconduct seriously and is carrying out a comprehensive investigation about the incident. Again, thanks for contacting Fairfax County Public Schools.

Jack Dale, Superintendent

Contact Mr. Dale and demand that Mr. Cheeks be fired as well. Even though Mr. Dale's employee is disgusting, please be sure to be civil in your message.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Congressional Research Service: Illegal Aliens Can Receive Benefits Under House Health Care Bill

Another liberal lie exposed! They will say anything to get this thing passed.

Read full story at this link-
Congressional Research Service: Illegal Aliens Can Receive Benefits Under House Health Care Bill

Sphere: Related Content

Rep. Jim Moran demands voter to show ID at Town Hall

Democratic Congressman Jim Moran recently demanded to see identification from an American taxpayer before he could ask Mr. Moran a question. I find it odd that Democrats generally oppose any type of voter ID laws that discourage fraud, but they will demand to see the ID of an American taxpayer before they can ask questions. Hypocrisy at it's best!

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, August 24, 2009

Military Personnel Still Face Asbestos Exposure Threat

Asbestos was widely used in various industrial products throughout the 20th century due to its heat and flame resistant qualities, it was regularly considered as a form of insulation and piping. Many countries ordered the use of asbestos in all of its military sectors, including the Navy.

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of living veterans were exposed to asbestos-containing materials during their service. Asbestos was valued so high that its use was widespread until the 1970’s, when it began to be phased out.

Asbestos-laden materials were utilized in almost every vessel built prior to World War II. Shipyard workers, sailors and tradesman aboard these ships were wrongfully exposed aboard navigation rooms, sleeping quarters and mess halls.
These shipyards were vital in efforts to build and repair ships on the west and east coasts of the country. The military also used asbestos as insulation aircraft, vehicles and buildings. Although asbestos exposure does not always lead to an illness, frequent and long term exposure will greatly raise those risks.

The danger for asbestos exposure is still present today with over $194,000 worth of asbestos imported to Iraq in 2003. Aside from daily threats from military assignments and enemy fire,
Soldiers stationed in Iraq based in the country are at risk because intense desert winds can carry asbestos dust many miles.

Asbestos exposure can cause serious illnesses such as asbestosis and malignant pleural mesothelioma, a severe lung ailment that accounts for three percent of cancer diagnoses in the United States. Asbestos-related illnesses may not appear until 20 to 50 years after exposure, which makes mesothelioma diagnosis even more difficult. Manufacturers were aware of the toxic qualities surrounding asbestos, but repressed this information from the public.

Currently, mesothelioma is not readily recognized as a service-related medical ailment. However, veterans can apply for Veteran Affairs (VA) benefits for asbestos-related illness and must provide proof that their exposure occurred at the time of their military service. It appears that until there is a vehement change in policies enforced on a federal level against the use of asbestos, it will continue to inflict damage and harm to yet another generation of innocent by standards.

Jesse Herman
Mesothelioma Cancer Center

I allowed some space to Jesse Harman to help spread this important message-Casey Brown-Myers

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, August 21, 2009

Congressman Neugebauer's response

After criticizing Representative Randy Neugebauer for taking part in a suspect international junket, I have received a letter from Mr. Neugebaurer explaining his trip. In the post, I requested that Mr. Neugebauer repay the taxpayers for his wife's expenses and it later came to my attention that he had already done so. The post must have spurned some interest because I had several hits from the US House of Representatives and the House Sergeant-at-Arms. I do understand that "some" of these CODEL's are useful and important, but they can and should be pared down. I will post my response to Mr. Neugebauer at a later time, but in fairness I will post his response now. I do appreciate Congressman Neugebauer taking the time to explain his actions.


As part of my duties as a member of both the Energy and Environment and the Research and Science Education Subcommittees of the House Science and Technology Committee, I joined several of my colleagues, including Subcommittee Chairman Brian Baird, on a working trip to observe the reported effects of global warming in Antarctica and the Oceanic region and how your tax-dollars are being spent to conduct research on global warming in these locations.

As part of our duties as United States Representatives, Members of Congress are expected to oversee programs under the jurisdiction of our Committees, and this includes participating in Congressional delegations to various points on the globe to serve in diplomatic capacities and to inspect the operations of programs that are funded with taxpayer dollars in order to gain first-hand knowledge of issues we must deal with in Congress. When Congress travels down the road of potentially spending billions of dollars on programs with questionable effectiveness, it would be irresponsible to saddle future generations with massive spending obligations without being educated about the benefits, as well as the consequences, these expenditures might have.

As you know, the House of Representatives recently passed legislation known as Cap and Trade, which I voted against. I firmly believe that by gaining first-hand knowledge of what many have been claiming about the disputed impacts of global warming only served to reinforce my position that this is unwise policy. With many in the scientific community claiming that global warming is rapidly affecting our oceans and polar ice caps, this trip enabled me to closely observe these findings for myself, rather than settle for the opinions of a hand-picked scientist chosen by proponents of this policy as an unbiased subject matter expert. As a member of the Science and Technology Committee, which has oversight responsibility for the nearly $9 billion in National Science Foundation education and research programs including $443 million for National Science Foundation U.S. Polar Research Programs, my actions in Congress help influence our country’s environmental policies, and I will continue fighting to ensure that decisions are made based on science and not popular public opinion.

Regrettably, the estimated cost of the trip described in recent news articles was not available to us at the time, nor does it take into account the fact that the trip we took to these Antarctic locations was part of a pre-scheduled supply run,on which we were able to ride along. This was not a separate Congressional trip to Antarctica as the media would lead one to believe; it would have happened whether or not Members of Congress went along. Also, several news reports implied that this trip was taken without the knowledge of taxpayers. In fact, I gave a full report of my trip in my weekly newsletter,Randy’s Roundup, upon my return in order to share my experiences with my constituents. In addition, I spoke with the news media in the 19th Congressional District about details of the trip. I encourage you to visit the Abilene Reporter News article published in January 2008.

Following my trip, I was pleased to work with the staff of the National Science Foundation who were gracious enough to loan me some of the ultra-low temperature protective gear we used, which I was able to bring with me when I visited several schools in the 19th district. I was encouraged by the interest these students had in sciences, and I firmly believe we should work to further enhance STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) education in today's schools.

Finally, because this trip took place over the New Year's holiday, my wife, Dana, accompanied me as far as New Zealand at no additional cost to the taxpayer. As is required by House rules, spouse travel is allowable (to non-hostile regions), but all expenses must be paid by me alone. In addition, all travel logs are on file with the House Clerk's office and can be viewed by the public, as they should be.

This trip was extremely informative to me. I believe that much of the push to curb global warming is politically-driven, and I appreciated the opportunity to see for myself that climate change is a natural process. I have also participated in Congressional delegations to Iraq and Afghanistan to visit our troops and witness our progress in the War on Terror. Without access to these trips, I believe Members of Congress would not be properly equipped with the knowledge they need to be efficient stewards of taxpayer dollars, which next to the security of our nation, should be our highest priority.

Thank you for contacting me.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

State controlled media pushes for Obama-Care

I grow tired of the state controlled media and their efforts to help increase support for Obama-Care. On the Today Show this morning, they discussed an NBC poll still showing opposition to socialized health care, but then they say it is because "large numbers of Americans "still" believe the "myths" about the Obama plan. What do they consider "Myths?" They say it is a myth that the plan would let the government decide what care the elderly will receive. The House bill as written will do just that. Another "myth" NBC says Americans still believe is that the bill would provide taxpayer monies to perform abortions. Under the proposed legislation, virtually every individual will be required to have health care coverage that meets “minimum benefits standards” established by the administration. Those minimum benefits will include abortion unless Congress acts to explicitly exclude abortion from any government mandated coverage or taxpayer funded health plan. The final "myth" is that illegal aliens will receive health care with taxpayer money. They get free health care now and are bankrupting cities and states because of that care. NBC then shows some numbers with the statement, "When Americans hear the "facts", they are in favor of Obama-Care." NBC tries it's best to convince Americans that most people would support Obama-Care if they just didn't listen to the Republican lies. NBC and the other state controlled media outlets are a joke. Reminds me of a Noam Chomsky quote that states, "Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media." That pretty much says it all!

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, August 11, 2009


Senate Seats up for Election:
Two Democratic incumbents Democratic incumbent Retiring Democrat Republican incumbent Retiring Republican No election

With all the socialism and record spending that is being shoved down our collective throats, the 2010 midterm elections are becoming our only real chance to blunt this effort. In this post, I will discuss the upcoming Senate seats that are up for grabs in 2010 and discuss the House seats at a later time. At present, the Senate is led by 58 Democrats with 2 independents and appears to be filibuster proof. The Republicans weigh in with a mere 40 members which includes our unreliable liberal Senators in the NE. There are at least 36 Senate seats up for grabs with many of those being safe for both parties. For the Republicans to have any real chance of stopping the Obamanation that is being forced through the Senate, we must retake 10 seats and protect all of our own. That is a tall order and won't be easy.

CQ Politics is projecting that there will be 7 toss ups in MO, IL, KY, OH, NC, NH, and CT. Lets take a look at those and see if we can detect a trend. Four-term incumbent Republican Senator Kit Bond of MO has announced that he will not seek reelection thus creating a vacancy. Republican Rep. Roy Blunt has indicated that he will run for this seat and I think Blount would be a strong candidate and should defeat former State Treasurer Sarah Steelman in the primary. On the Democratic side we have Sec. of State Robin Carnahan (daughter of former Sen. Jean Carnahan) that will lead the pack on the left. In the Illinois race, Blago appointee Roland Burris will not seek reelection which opens up the race for Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias and Chicago Urban League Pres. Cheryle Jackson to slug it out. Republican Congressman Mark Kirk from the 10th district has announced he will run on the Republican side. I predict the Dems will keep this seat at this time.

In the Kentucky race, baseball Hall of Famer Jim Bunning was narrowly reelected by 51% to 49% in 2004. After too many political blunders Sen. Bunning has decided to retire which might help save this seat for the Republicans. Sec. of State Trey Grayson and Rep. Ron Paul son, Rand Paul, have expressed interest in running in the Republican primary. Two Democrats, both of whom have won statewide elections, have announced their candidacies. Lt. Gov. Daniel Mongiardo and Atty. Gen. Jack Conway will most likely fight it out in the Democratic primary. This will probably be a tight race with whoever emerges as primary winners but I think the Republicans will retain this seat.

In Ohio, two-term Republican incumbent George Voinovich was last reelected with 64% of the vote in 2004 but has decided to retire. On the Republican side, former U.S. Representative and OMB Director Rob Portman should be a shoo in for the Republicans. On the Democratic side, Sec. of State Jennifer Brunner, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher and US Rep. Marcy Kaptur are three heavy weights that are considering a run. Barack Obama won Ohio by 51.4% to 46.8% margin over McCain, but I think the Republicans can keep this seat. Freshman Republican Richard Burr was elected with 52% of the vote in 2004 but is facing low approval ratings in North Carolina. I think the Republicans might be best served if another strong candidate challenges Burr for the nomination. There are a plethora of candidates that may vie for the Democratic nod and it could get messy unless they whittle it down to just a few strong candidates. Obama won NC with 50% of the vote but with the current tailspin of Obama policies, I think we will retain this seat.

The biggest pickoff for the Republicans could be Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd. Mr. Dodd has seen his shine fade with the revelations of the "sweetheart" loan from Country Wide and his involvement with the AIG bonus scandal. Polls are showing Dodd in real trouble against former Republican Congressman Rod Simmons and State Senator Sam Caliqiuri if the election were held today. Fortunately for Sen. Dodd, he has another year to wait which is an eternity in politics. Another satisfying pickup could be with Democrat turned Republican turned Democrat Arlen Spector in Pennsylvania. I do think his days are numbered in the Keystone State. There are many surprises that can occur between now and the midterms, but with the current trends moving towards the Republicans and against the Obama Democrats, we have a great chance to make up ground. Republicans must remain focused and unite on a positive message to have any chance in 2010.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, August 10, 2009

I need your help!

I would like the help of all of you out there that believe in fiscal responsibility. There was a story at about ten lawmakers — six Democrats and four Republicans that spent 11 days on an international junket in some of the most breathtaking spots on Earth. Then they stuck taxpayers with the $500,000-plus bill in the name of "climate change" fact finding. My Congressman, Randy Neugebauer, was one of those members that took his wife along on this taxpayer paid trip to study the dangers of climate change. I posted a respectful request on his Face Book page that he repay his and his wife's portion of the trip that was billed to taxpayers. Within minutes, that post was taken down by him or one of his staffers. I sent him a message asking for an explanation and offered him a chance to give his side of the story. His silence was deafening!

I would like you to post on his Face Book page or contact his office and ask him to repay his portion of the Junket. I was a supporter of Mr. Neugebauer until today. His actions are no different than the Pelosi's and Reed's of the world. Mr. Neugebauer claims to be a conservative; Congressman,
that is not how true conservatives react to their constituents. It is time that we demand from all of our members of Congress to stop this wasteful spending. I realize all members of Congress take these wasteful trips in the name of "fact finding," but it must stop and stop now. Contact all of these members and ask that they repay the American taxpayer for their vacations.

Other members of the "climate change" fact finding trip:
Reps. Frank Lucas, R-Okla.; Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash; Mike Ross, D-Ark.; Russ Carnahan, D-Mo.; Charlie Melancon, D-La.; John Tanner, D-Tenn.; Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas; Bob Inglis, R-S.C.; Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif.; and Adrian Smith, R-Neb. Spouses accompanied Ross, Carnahan, Melancon, Tanner, Neugebauer, and Lucas.

UPDATE: I was just informed by Chad Hasty, Lubbock TX talk show host, that he asked Rep. Neugebauer about this trip during an interview this morning. Mr. Neugebauer stated that he paid for his wifes expenses for the trip. That is good to hear, but it is not enough. These types of "fact finding" missions need to be done away with.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, August 7, 2009


The Democrats have called out union thugs to the town hall meetings to counter protesting taxpayers. The nations largest union (AFL-CIO) President Sweeney sent out a memo Thursday that stated, "The principal battleground in the campaign will be town hall meetings and other gatherings with members of Congress in their home districts." Union thug President Sweeney continued, "We want your help to organize major union participation to counter the right-wing "Tea-Party Patriots" who will try to disrupt those meetings, as they've been trying to do to meetings for the last month." After the call to arms, three members from the Service Employees International Union savagely beat a black man at Rep. Carnahan's town hall meeting for handing out "Don't Tread On Me" flags. After some racial slurs, the three union thugs beat this man for expressing the ideals of our forefathers. Chicago politics is on full display! If anyone thinks the Obama Brown-Shirts are just going to stand around and let their man lose on Health Care reform, well I think this video shows otherwise.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Senator Cornyn's letter to Obama

Dear President Obama,

I write to express my concern about a new White House program to monitor American citizens’ speech opposing your health care policies, and to seek your assurances that this program is being carried out in a manner consistent with the First Amendment and America’s tradition of free speech and public discourse.

Yesterday, in an official White House release entitled “Facts are Stubborn Things,” the White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips, asserted that there was “a lot of disinformation out there,” and encouraged citizens to report “fishy” speech opposing your health care policies to the White House. Phillips specifically targeted private, unpublished, even casual speech, writing that “rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation.” Phillips wrote “If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to”

I am not aware of any precedent for a President asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure political speech that is deemed “fishy” or otherwise inimical to the White House’s political interests.

By requesting that citizens send “fishy” emails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House. You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights.

I can only imagine the level of justifiable outrage had your predecessor asked Americans to forward emails critical of his policies to the White House. I suspect that you would have been leading the charge in condemning such a program—and I would have been at your side denouncing such heavy-handed government action.

So I urge you to cease this program immediately. At the very least, I request that you detail to Congress and the public the protocols that your White House is following to purge the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens who are reported to have engaged in “fishy” speech. And I respectfully request an answer to the following:

· How do you intend to use the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens who are reported to have engaged in “fishy” speech?

· How do you intend to notify citizens who have been reported for “fishy” speech?

· What action do you intend to take against citizens who have been reported for engaging in “fishy” speech?

· Do your own past statements qualify as “disinformation”? For example, is it “disinformation” to note that in 2003 you said: “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan”?

I look forward to your prompt response.



United States Senator

Sphere: Related Content

Organizational Chart of the House Democrats Health Plan

Can it get any more confusing than this.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, August 3, 2009

Iran is one year away from nukes-Awaiting Ayatollah's OK

It is being reported that Western intelligence services have concluded that Iran is now able to produce a nuclear weapon within one year. The controversial and much debated US National Intelligence Estimate two years ago concluded that Iran had ended its nuclear arms research program because of our invasion of Iraq. The Times is reporting that Tehran had halted the research only because it had achieved its aim of mastering the technology of detonating a warhead which could be launched on its long-range Shehab-3 missiles. The intelligence sources state that should Ayatollah Khamenei approve the building of a nuclear device, it would take six months to enrich enough uranium at the Natanz plant and another six months to assemble the warhead.

The Natanz plant consists of at least three large underground structures that house the main uranium enrichment facilities and will be high on the list of targets in the event of any preemptive strike. The Pentagon is seeking to speed deployment of an ultra-large bunker-buster bomb by July 2010, which may come too late if Iran decides to pull the trigger. It has been reported that the new non-nuclear 30K pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP)
could be put on contract within 72 hours with Boeing if Congress and President Obama decided to do so. The importance of this new weapon is really moot since Obama is still holding on to his candy-ass foreign policy in regards to halting Iran's nuclear weapons push.

President Obama has given Iran until next month to begin talks on resolving the nuclear issues, although hopes of any constructive engagement have dimmed since the regime’s crackdown on pro-reformist protesters. I do believe the Israelis are in the final stages of planning a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, but are being hampered by the Obama Administrations hostile attitude towards Israels national security. Israel has also been hampered by the rejection of their request for bunker busting bombs and F-22 Stealth aircraft late last year by the Bush Administration.

With the new intelligence that is being reported, it is high time that Obama puts away the carrots and pulls out the big bunker-busting stick. If Obama and the Europeans are afraid to stop this new Persian Hitler, then they need to step back and support and equip Israel to handle the job at hand. The Israelis know that you can't negotiate with terrorists and to continue to do so is just folly.

Sphere: Related Content