U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis was in Israel earlier today where he participated in a joint press conference with Israeli Defense Minister Liberman.

(more…)

No event is happening in a vacuum.  It is critical to emphasize this basic point when evaluating the foreign policy of President Trump and his administration.  There is a very well planned multidimensional construct within the sequencing of individual events which shows a policy thread weaving throughout.

The challenging aspect for most of the current U.S. electorate, and specifically those who follow politics closely, is the Trump administration’s position to not publicly espouse targeted and strategic policy objectives.

This deliberate yet not publicly promoted approach is a paradigm shift for those who reference modern diplomatic politics through the prism of past doctrines and their public advancement.  The Trump foreign policy approach is a planned, deliberate, consequential, and intentionally quiet undertaking.

That LOOK !

The Trumpian approach is becoming increasingly easier to see. However, it is not the typical approach customary amid politicians who use momentary events to elevate the appearance of their self-importance.

Quite the contrary, with the Trump team each action and participant provides visible dots, but the administration intentionally does not connect those dots for the media or the consuming public – or trumpet their importance.

The Administrations’ focus is on the ultimate outcome each individual event brings to the aggregate conclusion. ie. ‘the goal’; and not on the individual elements as they are assembled.

(more…)

During a February interview which broadcast just before the Superbowl, President Trump recalled riding with former President Barack Obama to the Inauguration on Jan. 20 when he asked Obama to list the three greatest issues America was facing.

[…] “I asked him what you think our biggest problem is and he told me,” Trump said, recalling the limousine ride to the U.S. Capitol with Obama.

“I can’t tell you,” Trump said after O’Reilly interrupted to ask about specifics. “But it’s a problem, its a military problem with a certain place. No, it’s not China. But it is – he did mention, cause I did ask him what would you say our number one, two, three problems are and the number one problem that he felt – I was a little bit surprised, but I fully understand.” (link)

Almost every mainstream political pundit and political observer believes the concerning country within that conversation was North Korea. Indeed, if you were to evaluate the comment in isolation, against the backdrop of world media headlines, N-Korea seemingly becomes a natural conclusion.

However, CTH does not believe North Korea was the country of concern. President Obama viewed and acted upon all foreign affairs through the prism of ideological belief. Every action taken by the Obama administration was in furtherance of an ideological world-view that was personal to the small circle of like-minded fellow travelers.

(more…)

A background briefing transcript from yesterday might aid in larger understanding of White House policy and strategic objectives toward Syria, Russia, North Korea and China.

[Transcript] – SENIOR ADMINISTRATON OFFICIAL:  (In progress) — on the relationship between the leaders of the United States, our President and Premier Xi, and then applying that newly formed relationship to complex problem sets from the Middle East to Northeast Asia, and then a result in the United Nations, it helps advance our mutual interests and the interests of all civilized people.

So I think it’s difficult to portray this as anything but a really great week for our citizens and the United States.

♦  Q    Thanks so much.  Japanese media is reporting that the USS Carl Vinson is in operations with the Japanese naval forces.  As you know, they have a (inaudible.)  What happens if there is a confrontation this week between North Korean forces and Japanese and U.S. forces?  And how will you prevent this from spiraling into a broader military conflict?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATON OFFICIAL:  Well, as you heard from the President many times, we’re not in the business of trying to predict with a high degree of certainty precisely what our response is going to be.

I think what we demonstrated last week was the ability of the President’s national security team to come together, convened by the National Security Council, to look at events such as those that might occur on the Korean Peninsula, quickly analyze those events, place them in context with U.S. vital interests, establish objectives that protect American citizens and advance our interests, and then develop and present the President with options.

So we have a team that is, I think, particularly adept at doing that.  And if there were to be continued destabilizing and aggressive behavior by the North Korean regime, that’s how the national security team would respond. (more…)

This speech was delivered March 21st 2016. With many people confused about President Trump and Syria, this reminder is worth the time and attention. Again, this was March 21st 2016:

[Transcript] Candidate Donald J Trump remarks to the AIPAC audience on March 21st 2016.

Good evening. I speak to you today as a lifelong supporter and true friend of Israel. I am a newcomer to politics but not to backing the Jewish state.

(more…)

On September 30th 2016 the New York Times quietly released a leaked audio recording of Secretary John Kerry meeting with multiple factions associated within Syria.

The 40-minute discussion took place on the sidelines of a United Nations General Assembly in New York. The meeting took place at the Dutch Mission to the United Nations on Sept. 22nd 2016:

[…]  Kerry’s off-record conversation was apparently with two dozen ‘Syrian civilians’, all from US backed opposition-linked NGO’s in education and medical groups supposedly working in ‘rebel-held’ (aka terrorist-held) areas in Syria.

This opposition conclave also included ‘rescue workers’ which can only be ambassadors from the White Helmets, a pseudo NGO which serves as Washington and London’s primary PR front in pursuit of a “No Fly Zone’ in Syria, and it’s being bankrolled by the US, UK, EU and other coalition states to the tune of well over $100 million (so far). (link)

When you listen to the audio recording (embedded below) it becomes immediately obvious what was going on in 2014, 2015 and 2016 as an outcome of policy from the White House.  In addition, you discover why this jaw-dropping 2016 leak/story was buried by the U.S. media and how it connects to the prior 4 years of perplexing U.S. mid-east policy.

This evidence within this single story would/should forever remove any credibility toward the U.S. foreign policy under President Obama.  It also destroys the credibility of a large number of well known republicans, and explains how the prior action has placed President Trump into a precarious position requiring a careful approach.

(more…)

Before getting to the interviews by current U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mrs. Rubio vis-à-vis Syria, it is important to reassert reference points that are being intentionally overlooked by media; reference points the MSM pundits intentionally hide.

Point One – Russia, Iran and Syria’s President Bashir Assad care primarily about one thing: keeping Bashir Assad in power.  All other influential objectives are secondary to this primary intention.  All of the actions taken by Russia, Iran and the Syrian Government are specifically focused on keeping Bashir Assad in power.

Point Two – All historic action taken by the Russian, Iranian and Syrian participants are to eliminate the opposition to Assad.  Goal #1 keep Assad in power, necessitates goal #2 eliminate Assad’s opposition.

Point Three – So long as Russia, Iran and the Syrian Regime can use the terrorism of ISIS as a foil they will continue to do so.   As long as the appearance of Assad fighting ISIS remains the cognitive reference point of the international community – it is easier to keep Assad in power.

Point Four – Therefore the continued ground action of ISIS becomes a tool, a foil, to keep pressure away from the international community focusing on Assad’s removal.

Point Five – It is currently more beneficial for the objectives of Russia and Iran for the ISIS terrorism narrative to remain in place.  The Syrian regime can survive with Assad, and accomplish the agenda of Russia and Iran,  so long as the appearance of fighting ISIS remains the international optic.

(more…)

There is a predictable disconnect amid political followers who have not paid close attention to the direct Mid-East visitors to the Donald Trump White House regarding the origin of the chemical weapons use in Syria.

Focusing on who used chemical weapons is a moot point in the larger issue of the Syrian conflict. It doesn’t matter whether ISIS “rebels” deployed them or whether Bashir Assad used them against the “rebels” when contemplating President Trump’s response to stop using them. The victims are Syrians. The regional alliance members don’t care who used them. The message is to stop.

We could make a solid argument that either interested party: Bashir Assad or “the rebels” (al-Qaeda, ISIS, al-Nusra et al) had motive and opportunity to use chemical weapons.

We’ve written for several years about the manipulative intentions of both sides, all sides, in the Syrian conflict. We’ve written about President Obama’s policies toward Syria and how his administration armed and equipped all elements; gaining nothing except a horrific death toll and chaotic civil war as an outcome.

We’ve provided lengthy and cited research on arms into Syria from Obama, Clinton and Kerry. The Benghazi Brief outlined Man-Pads and chemical weapons delivered to Syria as an outcome of the collapse within Libya.  We’ve outlined the Libyan weapons caches that became the Jihadist market/yard-sale. We’ve also documented weapons deliveries directly from the State Department using actual recorded audio admissions of Secretary Kerry to his Syrian benefactors.

Additionally, no-one questions whether Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Assad’s BFF, delivered stock piles of his own chemical weapons to Syria, because it was well documented.  Both Bashir Assad and Saddam Hussein previously used chemical weapons.   Historically Hussein used Chemical Weapons to kill up to 300,000 Kurds in Northern Iraq.

None of this is in doubt.

To argue if Assad used chemical weapons again last week is really an irrelevant issue when you stop and think about Bashir Assad’s political position in 2017. (more…)

Political commentator and extraordinarily brilliant satirist Mark Steyn was on Fox and Friends this morning to provide his perspective on President Trump’s decision to take action in Syria.

Steyn brilliantly frames the issues. [Hat Tip Stella]

.

Additionally, a point that apparently needs to be made. Idiot MSM pundits like Jake Tapper, though it’s not exclusive to Tapper, keep pointing out the 2013 tweet by President Trump warning Obama about action in Syria and framing their narrative about “what changed?” etc.

Just for clarity. Between the 2013 tweet by non candidate Trump and the 2017 action by President Trump, there was a 2014 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) voted and approved by Senate committee  permitting military action in Syria against the backdrop of chemical weapon use and terrorism.

I swear sometimes the MSM are flippin’ idiots, then I remind myself of the David Mamet principle: “In order for left-wing ideologues to keep espousing their cognitively disconnected talking points they need to pretend they don’t know things.”

Yes, indeed.  Pretending not to know things is a useful pretense.

(more…)

As the international community takes stock of the ramifications of President Donald Trump’s narrowly focused and strategic military strike against a Syrian air base, Syria’s Bashir Assad vows to fight ISIS even harder; sans chemical weapons.

“This aggression has increased Syria’s resolve to hit those terrorist agents, to continue to crush them, and to raise the pace of action to that end wherever they are.” ~ Bashir Assad

Good.

It is prudent for all interested observers to think sequentially and logically about the deliberative action taken by U.S. President Trump; and not expand or infer a larger motive than is currently evidenced within the scope of the engagement.

There are a myriad of outlying issues and exponential micro-ramifications.  However, there is every indication the current administration fully accepts the larger understanding that only two central elements are present in the Syrian conflict:  Bashir Assad -vs- Extremist Jihadists’ (al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS, et al.)

It is also prudent to remind ourselves the key principle behind the direct regional talks previously outlined (non-discussed in MSM) has been a clear understanding -between President Trump and the regional coalition they have formed- that ALL EXTREMISM must be confronted in order to achieve the desired regional result.

That said, last night, in the immediate aftermath of the strikes, Secretary of State T-Rex and National Security Advisor McMasters, outlined the reasoning, objectives and substantive considerations behind the U.S. decision.

The media is not adequately reporting on this briefing (all emphasis mine): (more…)