Monday, April 03, 2006

News roundup 04.03.2006

The (long) war in Iraq

The Christian Science Monitor:
So far, though, it seems clear that the Pentagon would prefer to keep its bases in Iraq. It has already spent $1 billion or more on them, outfitting some with underground bunkers and other characteristics of long-term bases. The $67.6 billion emergency bill to cover Iraq and Afghanistan military costs includes $348 million for further base construction.
The Los Angeles Times:
"I don't know who the prime minister is going to be and it's not our role to try and determine who the prime minister is going to be," said Rice, in response to a reporter's question. Referring to Jafari, she said, "I do know that in the time since his nomination on Feb. 11 he's not been able" to form a government.
The Times of London:
Anxious to avoid seeming to interfere, both Dr Rice and Mr Straw emphasised that it was up to the Iraqis to decide on their new leader. "It is not my responsibility to determine who is going to be the Prime Minister of Iraq," Dr Rice said. "That can only be determined by the Iraqis."
The Chicago Tribune: "`Political vacuum' strains patience"

The Washington Post: "U.S. Plan to Build Iraq Clinics Falters"


The Los Angeles Times: "Iran Tests Underwater Missile"

The A.P. via the Boston Globe: "Iran touts torpedo, claims 'superiority'"

The Washington Post: "Attacking Iran May Trigger Terrorism"


The Los Angeles Times:
WASHINGTON — Majority Leader Bill Frist said Sunday that he wanted the Senate to vote on a far-reaching immigration bill later this week, even as the fate of the legislation remained clouded by stark differences among lawmakers over how to treat up to 12 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.

Whether such immigrants may qualify for guest-worker status and, ultimately, permanent residency and citizenship "will be the fundamental question over the next six days on the floor of the Senate," Frist (R-Tenn.) said on CNN.
More on Bill Frist from the New York Times: "Frist Is Treading a Perilous Path Leading to 2008"

The Denver Post:
Latino activists in Colorado are working to steer many of the 50,000 immigration-reform protesters who marched on the State Capitol last weekend into voting booths in November.

Staff shake up

"You're going to have more change than you expect," one GOP insider said.

One change already has been announced: Chief of staff Andy Card officially will leave April 14 and is being replaced by Josh Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The New York Times: "New Top Aide Is Trying to Show the White House Can Play Well With Others"

The New York Times: "More Calls for Rumsfeld to Leave"

Indian Nukes

The Washington Post:
Beyond the invasion of Iraq, few of Bush's decisions have as much potential to shake the international order than his deal with India, supporters and opponents agree. The debate over the deal has pitted against each other two powerful national security goals -- the desire to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and the desire to counter the rise of China, in this case by accelerating New Delhi's ascent as a global power.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Iran tests underwater missile."

Something to think about, no doubt. The part about the Straits of Hormuz doubles the concern, but I hold no doubt about our armed forces being able to take control or the region where 40% of the world's oil flows through.

1:59 PM  
Anonymous 2gether said...

The current edition of Foreign Affairs has an article (actually, a few) about oil security. One of them points out that foregin reliance is a reality and went on to say that much of the oil in the world travels through choke points. Out of the Med, Caspian, Persian Gulf are a few examples of this that I can remember off the top of my head, And so, establishing safe oil routes is as important as amicable relations between buyers and sellers.

An example of closing a choke point would be the sinking a large ship to block a channel- something like that would be a nightmare to clear and make it dangerous to pass over while carrying oil.

I guess a sub from Iran could be a problem but it would a be a one shot wonder. Considering the US was able to track every boomer out of the USSR with at least one attack sub, I feel that keeping track of this sub won't be a problem. As the Hunt for Red October asked "Could you launch an ICBM sideways (through the water)"? "Yah, but why would you want to?"

Bottom line: This is actually as a good sign as it shows Iran is considering the implications of its actions beyond its own borders. The realization will come that any aggressive move will be severly countered and it can never have first strike capability- the ability to strike a target and destroy it so as to avoid retaliation. If a super/moderate power were put its mind to it that power could destroy all of Irna's offensive weapons in a single coordinated strike, or, all of Irans remaining assests in a counter attack. The reality of being taken seriously at a peace negotiation will lead to a workable resolution with Iran.

The post was a lot more clever before I started writing it. Better luck tomorrow!

2:16 PM  
Blogger mikevotes said...

Thanks for the link on the Time/Michael Ware piece from yesterday. I posted and linked.


7:41 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home