WHY AMERICA MUST REGAIN ITS MILITARY STRENGTH

AM C article on KEEPING AMERICA SAFE: by Gene Barrett

“WITHOUT A RESPECTABLE NAVY, ALAS AMERICA!” Captain John Paul Jones, 17 Oct. 1776

The Earth is covered with 196.9 square miles of water, so why would a tiny strait of water matter much to anyone? Because that little stretch of water is knows as the “Strait of Hormuz” and is one of the most strategically important waterways in the world today.

The Strait of Hormuz is extremely important geographically because it is considered one of the world’s foremost chokepoints. A chokepoint is a narrow channel (in this case a strait) that is used as a sea route for the shipment of goods. The main type of good passing through the Strait of Hormuz is oil from the Middle East and, as a result, is one of the world’s most important chokepoints. It is the only sea route where oil from Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, and much of the United Arab Emirates can be transported. The majority of the world’s oil reserves today resides in the Arabian Gulf region, with few options for exporting this oil out of the region besides the straits.

Iran and Iraq’s anti-western regimes oppose the United States presence within the Persian Gulf and the security that the US provides for many of the Gulf States, 15% of the world’s commerce is routed through Hormuz. Should war break out in this region, any aggression by Iran or any other nation would disrupt a large portion of the world’s economy.

Two countries lay claim to the territorial waters in the strait, Oman and Iran. While Oman has been a relatively benign landlord, Iran has on several occasions threatened to shut the strait down with a naval blockade.

The U.S. Navy has been protecting trade and commerce as early as 1801, when U.S. leaders decided to take action against Barbary pirates who constantly kidnapped the crew of American ships and held them from ransom in the Mediterranean.

A strong U.S. Navy is just as important today as it was when Thomas Jefferson took on the Barbary Coast Pirates. SADLY, OVER THE LAST EIGHT YEARS UNDER THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, OUR NAVAL FORCES have been dramatically reduced. TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THIS PERCEIVED WEAKNESS, IRAN was emboldened to seize a U.S.Naval vessel and hold 10 American sailors captive. Meanwhile China continues to build a military base on an artificial island in the South China Sea.

THE FOLLOWING IS A BREAKDOWN OF NAVAL STRENGTHS BY COUNTRY:

NORTH KOREA: 967;  CHINA: 714; UNITED STATES: 415; IRAN: 398; RUSSIA: 352

These are the top five Navies in the world as of 2016, although sheer numbers don’t always tell the tale of the tape, as the U.S. still possesses an advantage in war technology.

Despite that, a Chinese warship recently seized an underwater drone deployed by a U.S. oceanographic vessel in the South China Sea.

U.S. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus cited a “growing China” as one of the reasons that the Navy needed to expand its fleet to 355 ships, including 12 carriers, 104 large surface combatants, 38 amphibious ships and 66 submarines. The seizure of our underwater drone added to concerns about China’s increased military presence and aggressive posture in the disputed South China Sea, including its militarization of maritime outposts.

One of Ronald Reagan’s campaign platforms was to re-build our Navy into a 600 ship Navy. It peaked in 1987 at 594 ships before a sharp and steady decline into our 415 ships currently active today. Having a strong Navy will always be a strategic necessity of the United States. This is the only way to ensure a strong presence overseas, which provides the ability to forward deploy combat ready troops, aircraft  and armor  that can be ready to act, if needed.

IN ORDER FOR AMERICA TO REGAIN ITS MILITARY STRENGTH, PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP will have to find potentially tens of billions of dollars a year for new ships, amid falling federal revenues, something Trump and his political allies in Congress agree on.

Strategic chokepoints around the globe must be able to be kept open fy force, if needed. We conduct forward naval operations both to ensure unimpeded use of the seas and to project American influence and power into the littoral areas of the world. We must have a strong Navy to be able to continue those operations.

SEQUESTRATION IS HARMING OUR MILITARY, from the CHIFR BRIAN DUFFY, VFW, MAGAZINES.

This articles was about what the 114th Congress approved for the VA and how much they approved for the VA.  But it was also about what is happening to our Military because of the BUDGET CONTROL ACT OF 2011 WHICH calls for a $487 billion reduction in Pentagon spending over a 10 yeaar period. Sequestration doubles that amount. The Dept. of Defense, which accounts for nearly half of the federal budget’s discretionary funding, has not been so fortunate.

The nation’s military has taken the brunt of sequestration’s withering cuts. The Air Force, for example, is experiencing a pilot shortage of between 700 and 1,000. News reports last year estimated that the service also was short 4,00 airmen-along with spare parts-to maintain its fleet.

Overall, since the end of 1991’s Persian Gulf War, the Air Force has 30 percent fewer airmen, 40 percent fewer aircraft and 60 percent fewer fighter squadrons. In 1991, the force had 134 fighter squadrons; today, only 55.

IT’S NO DIFFERENT FOR THE OTHER SERVICES. “For the Army, our No. 1 readiness risk is sequestration.” Gen. Daniel B. Allyn, the Army’s vice chief of staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last March.

______________________________

According to the VFW, Ending sequestration is a top VFW objective.

This shows exactly what Pres. Trump has been saying all along. Hopefully we will back him 100% when he does what necessary to protect this country. THIS IS THE GOVERNMENTS NO.1 JOB.  A strong military sends a message to the world:  WE ARE PREPARED, SO DON’T TREAD ON US.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S.SPENDS MILLIONS ON ELECTRIC BUSES AND BIKE HIGHWAY IN MEXICO AND COLUMBIA

I am sure there is an excuse for this, but why would the Obama Admin. spend Millions on another Country’s road when they tell us our (INFRASTRUCTURE (roads and bridges) are falling apart? According to : JUDICIAL WATCH’S VERDICT, January, 2017 this is what happened:

SURPRISE, SURPRISE, THE UNITED STATES IS THE FIRST NATION TO DONATE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO YET ANOTHER GLOBAL WARMING EXPERIMENT—run by the famously corrupt UNITED NATIONS–that aims to forge “climate resilient infrastructure” in third world countries. The money will help build a bicycle highway in Columbia and bring electric buses and a “green-bus corridor” to Mexico.

It is part of an initiative called C$) Cities Finance Facility, launched at the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris, 2015. The global warming powwow in France already has cost American taxpayers a chunk of change, and Judicial Watch made the numbers public last summer after obtaining records from the U. S. Secret Service and the Department of the Air Force. The documents offer a detailed breakdown of the cost and total expenditure to have President Obama attend the Paris shindig, an eye-popping, $4,165,0681. Judicial Watch had to file a lawsuit to get the information because the administration refused to provide it under the Freedom of Information Act  which was enacted to ensure government transparency in exactly these kinds of situations.

The first two million dollars doled out in October 2015 by the United States will fund two urban pilot projects in Latin America that are predicted to bring “climate-change adaptation and mitigation benefits.” The first project is a 25 kilometer bicycle highway in Bogota, Colombia that will connect citizens from low, middle and high-income neighborhoods to work, education and recreation opportunities. An announcement published by the U.S. Government calls the project a “first-of-its-kind,” traversing the Colombian city from south to north. The rest of the money will buy a fleet of at least 100 electric buses for Mexico City and install a “green-bus corridor” along one of its major thoroughfares. It’s expected to serve and estimated 133,400 Mexicans daily, providing connections to metro lines. This is an important investment for the United States, a government official claims in the announcement, because the impacts of climate change are impeding cities from delivering reliable services. “especially to the poorest” (my thought, will this help the poor living in the dumps and trash piles?)

Years ago, the Obama administration determined that the poor will feel the brunt of climate change, and it has cost American taxpayers MONSTROUS sums. In the last few years, the U.S. Government has funded a number of programs, both domestic and international, to prepare those Communities for the impact. In 2012, in 2012, the administration asked Congress for a whopping $770 MILLION to help developing countries with climate change initiatives after it already had spent #323 MILLION on a project called Global Climate Change Initiative.

OK, THIS ARTICLE GOES ON AND ON.  I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS SPENDING OF MONEY  OVERSEAS BECAUSE: 1. WE ARE BORROWING IT ALL AND HAVE A DEFICIT OF OVER 18 TRILLION, and 2. we need our infrastructure repaired and our citizens need jobs.

PRESIDENT TRUMP, we need this money here, help us put and end to this ridiculous spending. No wonder other countries didn’t want Trump to win.

Obama’s Presidency Sputters to an End

(THIS WAS TOO GOOD AN ARTICLE TO PASS UP FOLKS.)

By Timothy H. Lee

Barack Obama’s tumultuous presidency has now come and gone, which merits assessment of his performance and likely place in history.

Eight years ago, Obama’s raison d’être was “Hope and Change.”  So how did that all turn out?  How much hope did his presidency offer?  After nearly a decade in office, what change did he bring?

According to the American public he was elected to serve, a grim response arrived this week in the form of a comprehensive Gallup public opinion survey.

As it did eight years ago as the Bush Administration concluded, Gallup asked respondents whether the nation gained ground or lost ground on nineteen separate policy domains.  In what must surely come as a jarring corrective to any Obama loyalist, Americans believe that we lost ground under Obama on fully fourteen of those nineteen measures, held steady on one and gained ground on only five.

In descending degree of severity, the American electorate believes that we’ve regressed under Obama in terms of the federal debt, crime, income inequality, race relations, the situation in Iraq, terrorism, America’s position in the world, immigration, the situation in Afghanistan, taxes, national defense, education, the situation for blacks and trade relations.  Only in the situation for gays and lesbians, energy, climate change and by a slight margin the economy do Americans believe we’ve gained ground.  Notably, we’ve treaded water on healthcare, which was Obama’s signature focus.

“At the moment,” Gallup summarized, “Americans are more negative than positive on the progress made on the majority of issues tested.”

That’s hardly the “hope and change” that Obama promised, and quantifiable realities support Americans’ negative assessment.

Perhaps most alarmingly, Obama stands alone as the worst deficit spender in U.S. history, and it’s not even close.  The man who once labeled Bush’s comparatively tiny deficits “unpatriotic” averaged deficits of approximately $900 billion during his presidency, compared to Bush’s $250 billion average.  The largest deficit in U.S. history prior to 2009 was $450 billion, but Obama oversaw four consecutive deficits over $1 trillion.  Over his eight years, Obama added as much federal debt as every one of his predecessors combined.

On that measure alone, Obama instantly enters discussion of the worst presidents in U.S. history.

And to what end?  In terms of economic performance, for the first time in American history we’ve gone an entire decade without reaching even 3% growth.  The current cyclical expansion, our 12th since World War II, is the weakest of those 12.  During that 70-year period we’ve averaged 3.3% growth each year, but Obama never even reached that mark, let alone surpassed it.

The nation’s unemployment rate also festered above 8% for the longest stretch since recordkeeping began, and median U.S. incomes actually declined several years into the cyclical recovery, which was unprecedented.

Obama and his defenders routinely credit him with ending the last recession and preventing another Great Depression, but the facts simply don’t support that claim.  The U.S. economy actually bottomed out and began its V-shaped bounceback before Obama entered office, contracting 8.2% in the fourth quarter of 2008 before improving to 5.4% contraction in the first quarter of 2009 and 0.5% contraction in the second quarter of that year.  By June of 2009, just four months after Obama entered office and long before any of his economic policies took effect, the recession had already officially ended.

Thus, it’s simply not true that Obama ended the last recession.  What Obama did do was preside over the most sluggish cyclical recovery in U.S. history.

In terms of notable legislation, ObamaCare will stand alone as Obama’s signature act.  Years later, 27 million Americans remain uninsured, premiums continue to skyrocket and the law has remained unpopular with the American public.  Indeed, Obama’s false promise that, “If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan” will go down as his most notable rhetorical moment.

In foreign policy, there is not a single significant theater of the world where America stands stronger today than it did on January 20, 2009.  In 2008, Obama labeled himself a “citizen of the world” before a Berlin audience, but today Brexit and other nationalist tendencies have spread like wildfire in rejecting the sort of globalism that Obama holds dear.  His most notable foreign policy pronouncement came when he declared a “red line” against chemical weapon use in Syria, only to abandon it a short time later while hundreds of thousands were slaughtered.  A Russia to whom Obama promised “flexibility” on an open microphone in 2012 continues to openly mock his impotence.  Appeasement of enemies like Iran and Cuba bore no fruit, but maltreatment of allies like Israel and Poland undermined our global standing.

Politically, Obama promised unity but brought record levels of polarization.  He became the first president to win reelection with fewer popular and electoral votes than his initial election.  Whereas Obama openly hoped to “make government cool again” when he entered office, trust in government proceeded to reach record lows while distrust in the federal government reached record highs.

Most humiliatingly and symbolically, Obama’s mismanagement led to record Republican success at the federal, state and local levels.  Today, the GOP holds more federal and state legislative seats than any time since the 1920s.

Indeed, no reality better summarizes Obama’s presidency than the fact that his despised antithesis will take the oath of office to succeed him.  As commentator Larry Elder observed, “Obama’s legacy is Donald Trump.”

From: Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF)article.

WHAT PRES. OBAMA BELIEVES..CONT’D

On at least five occasions, President Obama omitted God when misquoting AMERICA’S DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.

President Obama has repeatedly failed to mention God in his official Thanksgiving messages.

President Obama mocked Congress for reaffirming America’s trust in God through a Congressional resolution and argued it was a waste of time.

“Which passages of scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is an abomination? Or we could go with Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith?” Obama’s actual words.

MR. PRESIDENT, what is the matter with following the 10 commandments as the founding father’s did? Of course that would mean an end to abortion since abortion is murder, is it not?