Tag Archives: US foreign policy

Sources: Trump regime to take trade action against China

Source: Politico

"The Trump administration is preparing to take action against China over trade as soon as this week, two administration officials familiar with the issue told POLITICO. President Donald Trump will soon call on U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to open an investigation against China under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 for violations of U.S. intellectual property rights and forced technology transfers. As POLITICO reported earlier this week, senior Trump aides held a series of high-level meetings in recent days to finalize the decision, which is the culmination of three months of regular huddles on trade." (08/01/17)


Graham's deranged desire to start a war with North Korea

Source: The American Conservative
by Daniel Larison

"This isn't the first time that Graham has blithely talked about starting a war with North Korea, and I'm sure it won't be the last. Graham has never seen a war — preventive or otherwise — that he couldn’t support, but it is a measure of how fanatical he is that he won't even shy away from what would be a major, very costly war that could potentially involve the use of nuclear weapons. Perversely, he justifies an illegal attack on North Korea as though it is an act of self-defense, which it clearly is not, but the result of such an attack would be to make the U.S. and all of our regional allies less secure." (08/01/17)


North Korea or Iran … where will President Trump attack first?

Source: Campaign For Liberty
by Ron Paul

"President Trump seems to be impatiently racing toward at least one disastrous war. Maybe two. The big question is who will be first? North Korea or Iran? Over the past several days President Trump has sent two nuclear-capable B-1 bombers over the Korean peninsula to send a clear message that he is ready to attack North Korea. … Twice in the past week the US military has fired at Iranian ships in the Persian Gulf. On Tuesday an Iranian military ship in the Persian Gulf was warned off by machine gun blasts from a US Naval vessel. Then on Friday the US Navy fired warning flares toward another Iranian ship operating in the Persian Gulf. Imagine if the US Navy had encountered Iranian warships in the Gulf of Mexico firing machine guns at them when they approached the Iranians." (07/31/17)


US flies bombers over Korean peninsula after North Korea missile test

Source: Reuters

"The United States flew two supersonic B-1B bombers over the Korean peninsula in a show of force on Sunday after Pyongyang's recent tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), the U.S. and South Korean Air Forces said. North Korea said it conducted another successful test of an ICBM on Friday that proved its ability to strike America's mainland, drawing a sharp warning from U.S. President Donald Trump. The B-1B flight was in direct response to the missile test and the previous July 3 launch of the 'Hwasong-14' rocket, the U.S. statement said." (07/30/17)


Pentagon: North Korea launches another (sic?) ICBM

Source: CBS News

"North Korea launched on Friday an intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, the Pentagon said, marking the second time this month Kim Jong Un has demonstrated a theoretical capability of striking a portion of U.S. territory. The missile was launched on a lofted, or heightened, trajectory that limited the distance it traveled, but data collected by U.S. radars, satellites and other sensors showed that it was theoretically capable of traveling at least 5,500 kilometers on a normal trajectory. That is the minimum distance to be classified by the U.S. as an ICBM. President Trump has said he will not allow North Korea to obtain an ICBM that can deliver a nuclear warhead." [editor's note: The problem here is that neither the North Korean government nor the US government can be trusted to tell the truth about what type of missile was launched; both parties have an interest in convincing us that it was capable of ICBM range whether it was or not – TLK] (07/28/17)


The real scandal: Americans don't care about Afghanistan

Source: The American Conservative
by Andrew J Bacevich

"Not least among the reasons that Afghanistan today is 'strategy free' is that Trump himself has demonstrated remarkably little interest in what goes on there. Overseeing the Afghanistan War does not number among his priorities. Worse still, members of the press share in Trump’s inclination to treat Afghanistan as an afterthought. The New York Times and the Washington Post spare no expense as they subject President Trump, the Trump administration, and the Trump family to sustained and intense scrutiny — and rightly so. Yet when it comes to setting editorial priorities, both papers choose to treat the Afghanistan War as a matter of marginal importance. Notably, neither paper maintains an active presence in Kabul. Need further proof? Compare, if you will, the media attention lavished in just the past ten days on Beyonce and her newborn twins with the attention allotted over the past year to what is the longest war in U.S. history." [editor's note: Neither Afghanistan nor Korea were legally declared wars, but Korea is the longest by far, starting in 1950 and continuing to this day – TLK] (07/26/17)


China: Regime reportedly boosts defense preparations along North Korean border


Source: CNBC

"China has ramped up its defenses along its border with North Korea to ready itself for a potential crisis on the peninsula …. Beijing has increased surveillance of the border region as well as a 'combat readiness-level big data disaster recovery center.' The military has also conducted drills and transferred units from other regions …. these measures parallel President Donald Trump's comments that he is considering military action to curb Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions and that Beijing should do more to handle the matter." (07/24/17)


Trump blasts "fabricated" Syria story, appears to confirm covert CIA program

Source: Washington Post

"President Trump lashed out at The Washington Post in a string of tweets Monday night, saying the newspaper had 'fabricated the facts' about his decision to end a covert program aiding Syrian rebels fighting the government of President Bashar al-Assad. 'The Amazon Washington Post fabricated the facts on my ending massive, dangerous, and wasteful payments to Syrian rebels fighting Assad,' Trump wrote in one tweet. Trump appeared to be referring to a Post story last week on the phasing out of a covert Obama administration program in which the CIA armed and trained moderate Syrian rebels battling forces loyal to Assad in the country’s civil war." (07/25/17)


AIPAC still our biggest foreign agent

Source: Antiwar.com
by Grant Smith

"During the course of the 1960s Senate and Justice Department investigations, it was revealed that Israel was funneling millions of dollars to unregistered foreign agents in America to lobby for foreign aid to Israel, set up think tanks, engage in Madison Avenue public relations, fund lobbying newsletters, and establish an umbrella organization called the American Zionist Council (AZC). Within the AZC was an unincorporated unit that lobbied congress called the 'American Israel Public Affairs Committee.' On November 21, 1962, the Department of Justice ordered the AZC to begin registering as an Israeli foreign agent. This touched off an intense battle between the Justice Department and the AZC which outlasted both JFK and RFK. The bloodied and bruised Justice Department hid away its files on the affair until they were finally declassified and released in 2008. The effort to register Israel’s foreign agents clearly failed. Just 42 days after the Justice Department order, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee incorporated itself in Washington and took over the AZC’s functions." (07/18/17)


Our inept Iran hawks

Source: The American Conservative
by Daniel Larison

"TAC and other antiwar conservatives and libertarians were warning about removing a bulwark to Iranian power in the region before the invasion, and we continued pointing out the gains Iran had made in the years that followed. The process of 'handing over' the country to Iran’s orbit was already happening while the U.S. was occupying Iraq with more than 150,000 troops, so it is hardly a new development and it would not have been prevented or undone by keeping 10,000 soldiers there. The prospect of Iranian power wasn’t our principal objection to the war, nor was it the most important, but opponents of the Iraq war could see very clearly before and after it happened that overthrowing Saddam Hussein would benefit Iran’s government. Supporters of the invasion deluded themselves (or lied) when they argued that toppling the Iraqi government would undermine other authoritarian regimes in the region, including Iran’s, and they failed to anticipate one of the most easily foreseeable results of the war they backed." (07/17/17)