EnduringSense

“The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” Plato

  • Daily Quote:

    Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

    George Orwell

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 91 other followers

  • Subscribe

Posts Tagged ‘Muslim’

Hillary: Birther Hypocrite

Posted by Steve Markowitz on September 23, 2015

At a recent town hall meeting businessman turned politician Donald Trump unartfully responded to a comment from the audience that claimed President Obama to be a Muslim.  Trump’s response highlighted some of his weaknesses that include an inability to think on his feet.

It didn’t take long for Democratic hopeful, Hillary Clinton, to attack Trump on his faux pas tweeting:

“Donald Trump not denouncing false statements about POTUS & hateful rhetoric about Muslims is disturbing, & just plain wrong.  Cut it out”.

Ms. Clinton has highly a selected view of “hateful rhetoric”.  While running against Obama in 2008 the Clinton campaign made an effort to tie Obama into the Muslim heritage of his father’s family.  This hypocrisy was brought out in the Morning Joe video below.

Hillary Clinton’s willingness to take both sides of an issue is the type of doubletalk that the American people are fed up with coming from Washington politicians.  This is not unrelated to the reasons behind the rise in outsiders Trump, Fiorina and Carson in the Republican Party, nor Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party.  Only the political elites in Washington refuse to see the connection.

 

Posted in Politics | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Howard Dean says Paris Killers “Not Muslim Terrorist”

Posted by Steve Markowitz on January 9, 2015

This week three followers of Islam attacked the satirical publication Charlie Hebdo in Paris, France murdering 12.  The attack was in retaliation for Charlie Hebdo publishing caricatures of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed.  The attack was an act of Islamic terrorism.  This did not stop Howard Dean, well-known Democratic politician and one-time presidential candidate, from incredibly claiming:

“I stopped calling these people Muslim terrorists.  They’re about as Muslim as I am.  I mean, they have no respect for anybody else’s life, that’s not what the Koran says.  Europe has an enormous radical problem. I think ISIS is a cult.  Not an Islamic cult. I think it’s a cult.”

Dean’s comments are so ludicrous that they are not worthy of rational debate.  On the other hand if they were but the comments of one loony Leftist they could be ignored.  However, they join similar comments that the Left uses in the name of political correctness to avoid the reality that there are many extremists willing to kill in the name of Islam.  Perhaps the most infamous was President Obama calling the Fort Hood massacre by Nadal Malik Hasan as merely “workplace violence”.  You can make this stuff up!

Let us compare Dean’s outrageous comments with more rational responses.  Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney more appropriately said:

Well, this is a classical radical Islamic attack, Steve [Fox News interviewer], and political correctness is killing us. …  Until we hold the Arab world and the Muslim world accountable for letting this radical Islamic ideology, which I have said before is as evil as Nazism, Fascism, and Communism, it is not a religion until we hold these people accountable.

There is a ray of light emanating from evils of radical Islam.  It is opening the eyes of a diverse group of Americans both on the Right and the Left creating a bipartisan response to the challenges.  About Leftist Bill Maher closely matched General McInerney when he Tweeted:

Bill Maher

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Radical Islam | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Egypt and the Arab World’s Devolution

Posted by Steve Markowitz on December 4, 2012

When the Arab Spring started two years ago, Progressives, the Leftist media, and the inept US State Department cheered on believing the revolutions would result in Western-style democracies.  Reality has proven they could not have been more wrong.

The Arab Spring that started in Tunisia, moved throughout the Middle East.  In Libya, with the support of NATO, Qadhafi was kicked out, but replaced by a shaky government that has led to quasi-anarchy and the killing of the US Ambassador and three other Americans.  The Civil War in Syria continues with approximately 40,000 being killed in an outcome still to be determined.  However, it is likely that the Sunni Islamists will ultimately take power.

In Egypt, where the mainstream media parked itself for weeks televising the party (revolution) in Cairo, the country has been taken over by the radical Muslim Brotherhood.  Its leader, Morsi after being democratically elected, has taken total power in the country by decree.

One country still showing signs of stability in the Middle East is Iran, America’s greatest adversary in the region.  At best, all that can be said about the Obama Administration’s Middle East policies is that they have led to no positive benefit towards American interests.  A more realistic interpretation is that the President’s foreign policy has led to increased turmoil in the Middle East and a substantial degrading of American interests.

How the crisis in the Middle East plays out will be determined within the coming months.  Certainly the signs are ominous for the West.  Within the Arab world, Egypt and to a lesser extent Syria, is ground zero.  International expert George Friedman of Strafor.com has published Egypt and the Strategic Balance.  This article, republished below with permission of Stratfor, offers great insight into the strategic struggles occurring within the Middle East.  President Obama would do well to consider an expert such as Friedman for the next Secretary of State, rather than a lifetime State Department stooge like Susan Rice.

Egypt and the Strategic Balance, George Friedman, December 4, 2012

Immediately following the declaration of a cease-fire in Gaza, Egypt was plunged into a massive domestic crisis. Mohammed Morsi, elected in the first presidential election after the fall of Hosni Mubarak, passed a decree that would essentially neuter the independent judiciary by placing his executive powers above the high court and proposed changes to the constitution that would institutionalize the Muslim Brotherhood’s power.  Following the decree, Morsi’s political opponents launched massive demonstrations that threw Egypt into domestic instability and uncertainty.

In the case of most countries, this would not be a matter of international note.  But Egypt is not just another country.  It is the largest Arab country and one that has been the traditional center of the Arab world.  Equally important, if Egypt’s domestic changes translate into shifts in its foreign policy, it could affect the regional balance of power for decades to come.

Morsi’s Challenge to the Nasserite Model

The Arab Spring was seen by some observers to be a largely secular movement aimed at establishing constitutional democracy.  The problem with this theory was that while the demonstrators might have had the strength to force an election, it was not certain that the secular constitutionalists would win it.  They didn’t.  Morsi is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, and while there were numerous claims that he was a moderate member, it was simply not understood that he was a man of conviction and honor and that his membership in the Brotherhood was not casual or frivolous.  His intention was to strengthen the role of Islam in Egypt and the control of the Muslim Brotherhood over the various arms of state.  His rhetoric, speed and degree of Islamism might have been less extreme than others, but his intent was clear.

The move on the judiciary signaled his intent to begin consolidating power.  It galvanized opponents of the Muslim Brotherhood, which included secular constitutionalists,  Copts and other groups who formed a coalition that was prepared to take to the streets to oppose his move.  What it did not include, or at least did not visibly include through this point, was the Egyptian military, which refused to be drawn in on either side.

The Egyptian military, led by a young army officer named Gamal Abdel Nasser, founded the modern Egyptian state when it overthrew the British-supported monarchy in the 1950s.  It created a state that was then secular, authoritarian and socialist.  It aligned Egypt with the Soviet Union and against the United States through the 1970s.  ,After the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, who was later assassinated by Islamists, shifted Egypt into an alliance with the United States and signed a peace treaty with Israel.

This treaty was the foundation of the regional balance of power until now. The decision to end the state of war with Israel and use Sinai as a demilitarized buffer between the two countries eliminated the threat of nation-to-nation war between Arabs and Israel.  Egypt was the most powerful Arab country and its hostility to Israel represented Israel’s greatest threat.  By withdrawing from confrontation, the threat to Israel declined dramatically.  Jordan, Syria and Lebanon did not represent a significant threat to Israel and could not launch a war that threatened Israel’s survival.

Egypt’s decision to align with the United States and make peace with Israel shaped the regional balance of power in other ways.  Syria could no longer depend on Egypt, and ultimately turned to Iran for support.  The Arab monarchies that had been under political and at times military pressure from Egypt were relieved of the threat, and the Soviets lost the Egyptian bases that had given them a foothold in the Mediterranean.

The fundamental question in Egypt is whether the election of Morsi represented the end of the regime founded by Nasser or was simply a passing event, with power still in the hands of the military.  Morsi has made a move designed to demonstrate his power and to change the way the Egyptian judiciary works.  The uprising against this move, while significant, did not seem to have the weight needed either to force Morsi to do more than modify his tactics a bit or to threaten his government.  Therefore, it all hangs on whether the military is capable of or interested in intervening.

It is ironic that the demands of the liberals in Egypt should depend on military intervention, and it is unlikely that they will get what they want from the military if it does intervene.  But what is clear is that the Muslim Brotherhood is the dominant force in Egypt, that Morsi is very much a member of the Brotherhood and while his tactics might be more deliberate and circumspect than more radical members might want, it is still headed in the same direction.

For the moment, the protesters in the streets do not appear able to force Morsi’s hand, and the military doesn’t seem likely to intervene.  If that is true, then Egypt has entered a new domestic era with a range of open foreign policy issues.  The first is the future of the treaty with Israel.  The issue is not the treaty per se, but the maintenance of Sinai as a buffer.  One of the consequences of Mubarak’s ouster has been the partial remilitarization of Sinai by Egypt, with Israel’s uneasy support.  Sinai has become a zone in which Islamist radicals are active and launch operations against Israel.  The Egyptian military has moved into Sinai to suppress them, which Israel obviously supports.  But the Egyptians have also established the principle that while Sinai may be a notional buffer zone, in practice the Egyptian military can be present in and responsible for it.  The intent might be one that Israel supports but the outcome could be a Sinai remilitarized by the Egyptians.

A remilitarized Sinai would change the strategic balance, but it would only be the beginning.  The Egyptian army uses American equipment and depends on the United States for spare parts, maintenance and training.  Its equipment is relatively old and it has not been tested in combat for nearly 40 years.  Even if the Egyptian military was in Sinai, it would not pose a significant conventional military threat to Israel in its current form.  These things can change, however.  The transformation of the Egyptian army between 1967 and 1973 was impressive.  The difference is that Egypt had a patron in the Soviet Union then that was prepared to underwrite the cost of the transformation.  Today, there is no global power, except the United States, that would be capable of dramatically and systematically upgrading the Egyptian military and financially supporting the country overall. Still, if the Morsi government succeeds in institutionalizing its power and uses that power to change the dynamic of the Sinai buffer, Israel will lose several layers of security.

A New Regional Alignment?

A look at the rest of the region shows that Egypt is by no means the only country of concern for Israel.  Syria, for example, has an uprising that, in simple terms, largely consists of Sunnis, many of which are Islamists.  That in itself represents a threat to Israel, particularly if the relationship between Syria and Egypt were revived.  There is an ideological kinship, and just as Nasserism had an evangelical dimension, wanting to spread pan-Arab ideology throughout the region, the Muslim Brotherhood has one too.  The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood is also the most organized and coherent opposition group in Syria.  As Morsi consolidates his power in Egypt, his willingness to engage in foreign adventures, or at least covert support, for like-minded insurgents and regimes could very well increase.  At a minimum Israel would have to take this seriously. Similarly, where Gaza was contained not only by Israel but also by pre-Morsi Egypt, Morsi might choose to dramatically change Egypt’s Gaza policy.

Morsi’s rise opens other possibilities as well.  Turkey’s Islamic-rooted Justice and Development Party is also engaged in a careful process of reintroducing Islam into a state that was militantly secular.  There are fundamental differences between Egypt and Turkey, but there is also much in common.  Turkey and Egypt are now engaged in parallel processes designed to create modern countries that recognize their Islamic roots. A Turkish-Egyptian relationship would both undergird the Egyptian regime and create a regional force that could shape the Eastern Mediterranean.

This would, of course, affect American strategy, which as we have said in the past, is now rapidly moving away from excessive involvement in the Middle East.  It is not clear how far Morsi would go in breaking with the United States or whether the military would or could draw a line at that point.  Egypt is barely skirting economic disaster at the moment because it is receiving a broad range of financial aid from the West. Moving away from the United States would presumably go well beyond military aid and affect these other types of economic assistance.

The fact is that as Egypt gradually evolves, its relationship with the United States might also change.  The United States’ relationship with Turkey has changed but has not broken since the Justice and Development Party came to power, with Turkey following a more independent direction.  If a similar process occurred in Egypt, the United States would find itself in a very different position in the Eastern Mediterranean, one in which its only ally was Israel, and its relationship with Israel might alienate the critical Turkey-Egypt bloc.

Prior to 1967, the United States was careful not be become overly involved in protecting Israel, leaving that to France.  Assuming that this speculation about a shift in Egypt’s strategic posture came to pass, Israel would not be in serious military danger for quite a while, and the United States could view its support to Israel as flexible.  The United States could conceivably choose to distance itself from Israel in order to maintain its relationships with Egypt and Turkey.  A strategy of selective disengagement and redefined engagement, which appears to be under way in the United States now, could alter relations with Israel.

From an Israeli point of view — it should be remembered that Israel is the dominant power in the region — a shift in Egypt would create significant uncertainty on its frontier.  It would now face uncertainty in Egypt, Syria and Lebanon, and while unlikely, the possibility of uncertainty in Jordan. Where previously it faced hostile powers with substantial military capabilities, it would now face weaker powers that are less predictable.  However, in an age when Israel’s primary concern is with terrorist actions and uprisings in Gaza and the West Bank, this band of uncertainty would be an incubator of such actions.

The worst-case scenario is the re-emergence of confrontational states on its border, armed with conventional weapons and capable of challenging the Israeli military.  That is not an inconceivable evolution but it is not a threat in the near term.  The next-worst-case scenario would be the creation of multiple states on Israel’s border prepared to sponsor or at least tolerate Islamist attacks on Israel from their territory and to underwrite uprisings among the Palestinians.  The effect would be an extended, wearying test of Israel’s ability to deal with unremitting low-intensity threats from multiple directions.

Conventional war is hard to imagine.  It is less difficult to imagine a shift in Egyptian policy that creates a sustained low-intensity conflict not only south of Israel, but also along the entire Israeli periphery as Egypt’s influence is felt.  It is fairly clear that Israel has not absorbed the significance of this change or how it will respond. It may well not have a response.  But if that were the case, then Israel’s conventional dominance would no longer define the balance of power.  And the United States is entering a period of unpredictability in its foreign policy.  The entire region becomes unpredictable.

It is not clear that any of this will come to pass.  Morsi might not be able to impose his will in the country.  He may not survive politically.  The Egyptian military might intervene directly or indirectly. There are several hurdles for Morsi to overcome before he controls the country, and his timeline might be extended for implementing changes.  But for the moment, Morsi appears in charge, he seems to be weathering the challenges and the army has not moved.  Therefore, considering the strategic consequences is appropriate, and those strategic consequences appear substantial.

Posted in Egypt, Middle East | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Muslim Terrorist Strike in Thailand

Posted by Steve Markowitz on April 3, 2012

On Saturday, Muslim terrorists struck again, this time in southern Thailand.  According to the Wall Street Journal, hundreds were injured and over 14 killed in the most recent bombings that hit three cities in Thailand.  Supposedly, this group of Muslim terrorists has a separatist bent.  Since 2004, it is estimated that more than 5,000 people have been killed in Thailand due to the related violence.

Over the years, the Left has inflicted on the world the narrative that the cause of the growing number of Muslim extremists emanated from either the “Great Satan”, the United States, or Jews with particular reference to the Israeli/Palestinian issue.  The extent and breadth of violence carried out worldwide by extremist followers of Islam has put a stake in the heart of that false narrative.  Thailand is a Buddhist country of about 68 million people and includes only about 200 Jews.  Something else is at work in Thailand, as well as other countries experiencing the violence.

People of all religions and heritages are born with a clean slate.  Neither genetics nor atmospheric conditions can be attributed to the growing use of violence within some followers of Islam.  The answer lies within the moral codes and teachings of the young.  The Progressives of the world refuse to address this reality. Making additional excuses for the violence will only lead to more violence.

Posted in Radical Islam | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

US Government Admits Errors in Koran Burning

Posted by Steve Markowitz on March 4, 2012

The New York Times reported that a US government’s investigation determined that errors were made by military and civilian employees that led to the Koran burning in Afghanistan.  These burnings then led to rioting and the death of six US soldiers recent days.

The destroyed Korans were owned by prisoners held at a US detention center in Parwan, Afghanistan.  Afghan civilian interpreters found notes written on the Korans that American officials feared were coded signals to the Taliban.  Approximately, 1,600 books of all types including a few Korans were segregated and subsequently sent to an incinerator for destruction.  An Afghan employee who saw the at stack included Korans stopped the destruction, however, four were badly damaged.

The Times reported that Afghan religious leaders demanded public identification and punishment of those involved with the Koran burning as the only acceptable remedy for the errors.  An Afghan religious leader said: “There are some crimes that cannot be forgiven, but that need to be punished.  This is not any book; this is the book of the whole Muslim nation, and if a few people are punished, America will not be destroyed.  But if that doesn’t happen, it will create animosity and enmity between America and the Muslim world.”

The unforgiving words of Afghan’s religious leader is too often the reaction within the Muslim community when it believes it has been wronged.  This call for revenge is a key cause of the violence and terrorism associated with some Muslim organizations.  It is also in conflict with any basic rule of governmental law.

The hard-line position expressed by the Afghan religious leader is also in conflict with the way the Muslim community often reacts to violence perpetrated by its community against non-Muslims.  For example, NBC has just reported that the graves in Libya of British soldiers killed in World War II have been desecrated, as well as Italian soldiers’ graves.  For this willful act of vandalism by Muslim extremists, the Libyan government offered an apology.  The West will appropriately except this apology as the Libyan people should not be held accountable for the acts of some renegades, even if those acts were willful.  Contrast this with how the Afghan religious leader responded to an error made by some American soldiers.  These opposing reactions show the disconnect between Western and Islam cultures.  This disconnect is too often ignored by Progressives like President Obama.

Posted in Afghanistan, Radical Islam | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Afghan’s Sunnis Target Shiites in Bombings

Posted by Steve Markowitz on December 7, 2011

Suicide bombers were at it on Tuesday in Afghanistan in a growing sign of increasing violence between Afghan’s Sunni and Shiite Muslims.  Simultaneous bombings went off throughout the country with the target of these attacks being the Shiite minority that makes up about 20% of Afghanistan.  Some of Afghan’s Sunni majority, as well as those in other countries, consider Shiites to be heretics.

Reuters reported that in the northern Afghan city of Mazar-e-Sharif, 60 Shiites were killed in a bombing at a religious ceremony commemorating the Ashura day of mourning, a Shiite holy day.  Other fatal blasts occurred in the southern city of Kandahar, again targeting Shiite worshipers.

The Afghan bombings are examples of what has become nearly daily occurrences in some countries worldwide with followers of the Islamic faith using violence and killings to achieve political and/or religious goals.  It demonstrates the intolerance of other religions that has become part of the Islamic culture.

Some in the West, particularly Progressives, have for chosen to ignore the reasons behind the growing violence and intolerance within the Muslim community, hiding behind the modern religion of political correctness.  The violence, intolerance and justifications for these acts are being taught to Muslim youths in madrasahs by religious teachers.  This powerful indoctrination that has made violence the chosen path for too many followers of Islam.  The West’s refusal to call the greater Islamic community on this reality has allowed that community to turn a blind eye and make excuses for the violence within their culture.

Posted in Afghanistan, Terrorism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

New York Times Clouds Terrorist Bomb Plot with Political Correctness

Posted by Steve Markowitz on October 2, 2011

A 26-year-old Massachusetts man was charged last week with plotting to use remote-controlled aircraft to bomb the Pentagon and US capital.  The suspect is an American citizen, Muslim Rezwan Ferdaus, whose goal was Jihad against the United States.

According to the FBI, Ferdaus had connections with Al Qaeda.  He earned a degree in physics from Northeastern University in Boston.  According to FBI reports, Ferdaus had been plotting against United States since 2010.  This is but the latest example of the growing danger from homegrown Muslim extremists within United States.

The issue of the dangers from homegrown terrorists in America is often ignored by the mainstream media as political incorrect.  The media often refuses to acknowledge that there is even a problem within the worldwide Muslim community with Jihad.  For example, in the case of Rezwan Ferdaus’s plans to attack the United States, the New York Times article titled Man Is Held in a Plan to Bomb Washington did not once mention the words Muslim or Islam.  This is a curious omission given Ferdaus’s comments to the FBI that indicated his desire to attack the United States was so strong that “I just can’t stop; there is no other choice for me.”

The great Chinese General Tzu once said: “If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.”  If General Tzu was alive today, he most certainly would not read the New York Times.

Posted in Political Correctness, Supply and Demand, Terrorism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Canadian Muslim Offers Profound Warning to the West

Posted by Steve Markowitz on September 19, 2011

Lee forwarded the video link below that is a must see for anyone concerned with the rise of radical Islam worldwide.  The speaker, Tarek Fatah, made the speech this past summer at Ideacity 2011 in Canada.

Fatah was born in Pakistan and also live in Saudi Arabia before emigrating to Canada.  While his college degree is in biochemistry, for most of his adult life Fatah has been a newspaper reporter and author.

Fatah founded the Muslim Canadian Congress and advocates liberal ideas including gay rights, separation of church and state, and opposes imposition of Sharia law.  While he often speaks out against against anti-Semitism, he is a supporter of Palestinian rights.

In February, 2011, Fatah vas diagnosed with a spinal tumor and underwent surgery and chemotherapy.  He is now considered cancer free.

The 18 minute video (link below) is not only a realistic warning to the West about the dangers of radical Islam, but also a condemnation Progressive Liberalism that has facilitated the rise of Islamofascism.

Tarek Fatah Talk Made at ideacity 2011

Posted in Radical Islam | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Islamists Bomb U.N. Building in Nigeria

Posted by Steve Markowitz on August 29, 2011

Last Friday a suicide bomber attacked a United Nations’ building in Abuja, Nigerian, killing 19.  A Nigerian radical Muslim group Boko Haram claimed responsibility stating that it was in response to the UN’s support for the Nigerian government.

Boko Haram seeks strict Islamic law applied throughout Nigeria.  Their name translates to “Western education is prohibited” with their goals having much in common with other radical Islamists.  In their view, the West is but infidels unworthy of life.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said of the attack: “This was an assault on those who devote their lives to helping others“.  President Barack Obama said: “I strongly condemn today’s horrific and cowardly attack on the United Nations headquarters building in Abuja, Nigeria, which killed and wounded many innocent civilians from Nigeria and around the world.”  Both comments are naive in a world that has been plagued by thousands of innocents being killed in the name of Islam in recent decades.

In recent decades the West has often turned a blind-eye towards violence perpetrated in the name of Islam.  Beginning in the 1970’s, Western Progressives bought into the false narrative that much of Islam’s rage was fanned by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  More recently, with the pro-Palestinian organizations like the UN being attack by Islamists, that dog no longer hunts.

The West’s unwillingness to speak frankly on the subject of violence and radical Islam has not lessened the violence.  Instead it has likely increased it because the violence has led to political gains.  When the PLO began blowing up innocents in the 1970’s, they were excused because their cause had merit.  While the PLO is a secular Arab movement, the radical Islamists learned from its advances.  Now the world has a much larger problem involving radicalization of Islam and their terrorists’ arms throughout the Middle East and Africa, as well as home-grown terrorists in Europe.  It is time for a new stagey for dealing with terrorists with any cause.

As it is often repeated, most followers of Islam are peaceful.  At the same time the silence from the Imams and the peaceful masses to the carnage being perpetrated in the name of their religion is deafening.

Posted in Radical Islam | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Final Shuttle Flight Emblematic of Baby Boomers’ Failings

Posted by Steve Markowitz on July 21, 2011

The final space shuttle mission ended this week when Atlantis landed at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.  This final 5 million mile mission was the 135th for the shuttle program that spanned 30 years.  Over its 26-year career, Atlantis flew 33 times for a total of 126 million miles and spent 307 days in space while circumnavigating the world nearly 5,000 times.  Remarkable!

Atlantis’s final mission included taking 8,000 pounds of supplies to the International Space Station.  America now is left without a space exploration vehicle and must hitch rides on other countries’ (mainly Russian) vehicles to fly into space.  How sad!

It is instructive for us Boomers to use the sad current state of America’s space program to critique our failings as a generation.  This example is a microcosm of the overall economic challenges America currently faces and our responsibilities for these challenges.

During the later part of the 1950’s and into early 1960’s, we were in the heat of the Cold War against the Evil Empire, the Soviet Union.  It was evident then that space would play a crucial role in that war and the Greatest Generation did not shirk its reasonability.  While expensive, that generation through its spokesman John Kennedy committed America to putting a man on the moon within ten years (video below), even though they did not then have the technical capability to do.  They also committed to paying for this program without stealing from future generations.

While not initially foreseeable, the rewards from the space program were a bonanza to society that still pay huge dividends.  Any product that uses microcircuits owes the current status of their advancement to the space program.  Lasers, GPS, digital sound, camcorders, medical devises and much more are advanced to where they are today because of the technology developed for the space program.  The fact that shuttles flew for thirty years and retired as the most advanced space vehicle available is telling.

With the retiring of the space shuttle program, the flaws of the Baby Boomer generation comes front and center.  What is America’s current vision for space exploration?  It is none existent mainly because we cannot afford one as we Boomers wasted money on self-indulgent programs.  Worse still, we stole from future generations to allow us to live and retire better than we deserve, given our overall productivity.

While told the Greatest Generation and to reach for the stars, the Boomers’ current leader, Barack Obama, harps on why we cannot achieve.  For NASA, he went so far as to include in its mission outreach to the Muslim world (see video below.).  While JFK told the world that America was exceptional and would lead, Obama apologizes for America’s past failings and commits to following.  While the Greatest Generation invested in hard programs like the space exploration with clearly defined goals, Obama wasted $800 billion on a Stimulus Program without defining goals.  Worst yet, the Stimulus money was stolen from future generations.

While the folks in Washington and the mainstream media focus on the tactical issue of the debt ceiling, more strategic issues are be conveniently avoided.  What is the real definition of “investment” when it comes to spending taxpayers’ money?  Who benefited from the huge deficits that America has a run up?  Who and how should these deficits be paid back?  While we Boomers avoid addressing these questions, sooner or later younger generations will pursue them.  That will be the start of challenging times between generations.

Posted in Baby Boomers, Space Program | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »