SHOULD THE NOBEL COMMITTEE REVOKE OBAMA'S NOBEL PRIZE?

Photo courtesy BBC.com/news

Awarding President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 was a grave mistake, the Nobel Committee Secretary admits now. The President had not accomplished anything at that time for world peace, so the prize was a euphoric rush to judgment following President Obama's historic election victory.

All the excitement and hope that President Obama brought to the Oval office dissipated over time as he continued most of President Bush's policies. That dreaded Guantanamo Bay prison (where over 400 innocent people were tortured then released without charge) is still open. Wars continue in Iraq & Afghanistan, But worse President Obama started war in Libya under the guise of no-fly zone and in gross violation of UN Charter. Libya is now a fractured country ruled by varying a different groups of terrorists.

Libya (Picture courtesy usatoday.com)

President Obama's biggest failure is war in Syria. In order to illegally remove President Asad (no doubt a dictator), Obama funded groups who turned out to be components of ISIS and various rag tag bunch of terrorists. The country has been fractured, hundreds of thousands have died, millions have become refugees, all for what?

The Nobel Committee MUST revoke President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize, instead of achieving peace, he has caused more war, more bloodshed, more loss of human life and more misery to millions of people. He is certainly not deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize.

State of Homs now ( picture courtesy NBC news)

HAS PUTIN CHECKMATED OBAMA IN SYRIA OR IS HE OFFERING A FACE SAVING FOR THE U.S.?

CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS: Article 2
'The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. 

4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations'.

U.S., Canada & Europe's interference in Syria runs contrary to the U.N. Charter. Nowhere in the Charter, members are permitted 'regime changes' in other countries.  President Assad's brutal regime is not the business of United States or its allies. It is a problem for the Syrian people.

President Putin's actions by default may offer a way out to the U.S. from the mess it created in Syria. Instead of protesting, it may be better to let him destroy ISIS and and anti Assad rebels, so this unholy civil war comes to an end. Ultimately, it is for the Syrian people not the United States to decide if a regime change is required.

This is not the first time U.S. has violated the U.N. charter. It invaded Iraq illegally, overthrew Qaddafi in Libya under the guise of 'no fly zone' and helped overthrow an elected Government in Egypt.  Some say U.S. did all this on Israel's behest. True or not, the outcome of these actions have been disastrous. The entire Middle East has been destabilized. Iraq is fractured probably beyond repair, Egypt has a draconian dictator who has sent thousands of protesters to the gallows, Libya is run by a bunch of terrorists and Syria is in turmoil.

Over ten years since U.S. started its actions in the Middle East, hundreds of thousands of civilians have been killed in Iraq, Syria & Libya, many times more than the tyrants rulers of those countries killed over forty years. Iraq alone caused five million refugees and a third of Syrian population is refugee now.  

U.S. accomplishments to date are:
A fractured Iraq:

Picture courtesy aljazeera.com

A Libya controlled by a bunch of terrorists:

Picture courtesy morrocotomorrow.org

A Syria destroyed causing massive refugee crisis.

picture courtesy vocfm.co.za

A splintered Afghanistan after 12 year occupation & tragedies like the Kunduz Hospital bombing.
picture courtesy denverpost.com

Surely, this is not  the outcome U.S. had in mind before launching these wars. Still it begs the question, why have they learned no lessons and why do they keep making the same mistakes over and over?

War Makes Strange Bedfellows

Photo Courtesy www.telegraph.co.uk. Photo source: AFP/Getty Images/EPA


Only a few months ago some American politicians were singing 'Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran' and now the same politicians are likely to be singing Iran's praises.


The capture of second largest Iraqi city, Mosul by ISIS, Saddam Husain's home town - Tikrit and some smaller cities has not only alarmed the U.S. and the inept Al-Maliki regime in Iraq, but also sent collective shivers down the spines of Iranian Ayatollahs and Jordanian & Saudi Kings. The avowed aim of ISIS or ISIL is to establish an Islamic State in all of the region including Iran. 


U.S. Secretary of State Kerry met with the Iranian Foreign Minister June 16 to discuss cooperation against ISIS. Only a few months ago U.S. was issuing all kinds of threats against Iran and now they are asking their help.  War makes strange bedfellows indeed. The saying 'my enemy's enemy is my friend' seems to be operative here.


Iran has offered help to the Iraqi regime, they would not like to see their puppet regime crumble at the hands of ISIS. They already have some presence in Iraq through the revolutionary guards serving as Al-Maliki's security guards. But if Iran sends in soldiers, the bloodshed will only multiply and ISIS will be able to recruit many more volunteers. Their coffers are full, according to some reports, they have close to $2 billion in assets, especially after robbing Mosul Central Bank Branch, .


Apart from causing a blast here and there, ISIS will probably not be able to cause much damage to Iran. An attack on Iran could prove fatal for ISIS as it did for Saddam in the 80s. If ISIS captures Baghdad, it will be emboldened to move on to Jordan and Saudi Arabia, where they are likely to find support from a portion of the population unhappy with their rulers.


The situation is beyond dangerous and it could set fire to the entire Middle East. All this has been caused by George W. Bush and Co. for setting off events in motion with Iraq's invasion.

OUTCOME OF U. S. ILLEGAL INVASION OF IRAQ - A FRACTURED COUNTRY ABOUT TO FALL INTO THE HANDS OF EXTREMIST JIHADIS.

                                      THIS

                                     BEGETS THIS

The American Jihadis (the neo-conservatives) pursuing Israeli agenda egged President George W. Bush on to invade and occupy Iraq and he stupidly followed their advice. His father, George H. Bush had shown maturity and political acumen by resisting such advice during his tenure even though he was in a legitimate war with Iraq after Saddam's illegal occupation of Kuwait. However, Bush Junior, could not resist those who brought him to power - the likes of Dick Cheney, Wolfowitz (a dual Israeli/US citizen), Rumsfeld, & others.

The final outcome is a fractured Iraq with local & foreign Sunni Jihadists about to capture a major chunk of the country and wreak havoc on Iraqi citizens as if the American invasion had not done enough damage on the hapless people of Iraq with half a million killed and six million made refugees.

The invasion was nothing short of a criminal enterprise, which the International Criminal Court (ICC) should have taken up immediately and issued arrest warrants for Bush & his cohorts.  However, the ICC is a gutless, sissy organization and its judges have no courage to stand up against tyranny inflicted by a major nation. The excuse that U.S. is not a signatory to ICC is a lame one and it should not have stopped them from issuing indictments of Bush & Co. ICC is only capable of issuing arrest warrants for third world dictators. This is a massive failure on the part of ICC, which should either be abolished completely or all its judges removed and new courageous judges appointed, who can stand up to anyone.

Saddam Husain was a tyrant, a dictator and an ego maniac, but his rule is almost beginning to look like a saner option than what has been bestowed on Iraq. During Saddam's time there was never a Shia-Sunni-Christian problem. Baghdad, Mosul & Basra were thriving cities with free education, health care for all and no electricity shortages. In Noori Al-Maliki, U.S. anointed a Shia hard liner who has suppressed the 30% Iraqi Sunni population.  He sits in the lap of Iranian Ayatollahs and takes instruction from them, whose personal security is provided allegedly by Iranian revolutionary guards. Instead of consolidating the country, Maliki's failure to share power with Sunnis has brought Iraq to its knees.

Extremist Sunni fighters having captured Mosul, Dohuk, Tikrit and now Baquba (a suburb of Baghdad) are knocking at the doors of Baghdad. They have not only found support amongst the Sunni civilian population, but also amongst the military, where soldiers and generals have switched sides in droves. Highly sophisticated American weapons are now in the hands of these extremists. An all new and a massive 850,000 U.S. trained Iraqi Army seems to be melting away. Maliki is asking for U.S. help and air power, the question is, why is his Army and Air Force not fighting?

Amongst the main causes of Iraq's fracture at the hands of U.S. was disbanding its multi-ethnic Armed Forces at the outset of the war and destroying civil structures. These incomprehensible acts by Bush & Co. have caused a body blow to Iraq, from which it has never recovered.

U.S. air raids now as advised by Senator McCain will be utterly insane. It will embolden Jihadis even more and swell their ranks with more Iraqi and other Sunnis joining to fight the 'devil'.

The best solution for Iraq at this time is for Maliki to dissolve the parliament, resign immediately followed by a unity Government independent of Iran's influence, representing Shias, Sunnis, Kurds & Christians. This Government should start a dialogue with major groups, come up with suggestions to amend the constitution to give everyone a fair share and hold fresh elections in about a year, so that wounds heal and Iraq stays one country, prosperous once again.

 Conspiracy theorists in Muslim World have long held the view that Iraqi invasion was engineered by Israel and inspired and backed by the Taliban of Christianity - Evangelical Christians (George W. Bush is  considered to be a follower of that crazy faith), to divide and destroy the Muslim World. They also say that continued war and occupation of Afghanistan, its alleged involvement in Rafik Hariri's murder, ouster of Gaddafi in Libya under the cover of 'no fly zones', engineered Military coup against an elected President in Egypt and attempts to overthrow Asad of Syria are all links in the chain. Each and every affected country, being a Muslim country!

Conspiracy theorists can say what they like, but U.S. actions from hereon will decide whether there is steam in those theories. If it pressurizes Maliki to quit and help form a fair and representative Government that keeps Iraq intact or does it succumb to the hardliners and bomb Iraq and fracture the country for good. Hopefully, President Obama will opt for the diplomatic option and ignore the call to war by McCains of this world.

SOME AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY SUCCESSES UNDER BUSH & OBAMA

• INSTIGATED ANTI RUSSIAN RIOTS IN GEORGIA - LOST ABKHAZIA TO RUSSIA

• LOST IRAQ WAR - AN UNJUSTIFIED WAR, DELIVERED IRAQ INTO THE LAP OF IRANIANS - LOST THOUSANDS OF U.S. SOLDIERS AND HALF A MILLION IRAQIS, SPENT WELL OVER $3 TRILLION (SEVERAL BILLIONS CASH WENT MISSING).
• LOST AFGHANISTAN WAR, A JUSTIFIED WAR THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN WRAPPED UP IN THREE MONTHS. 13 YEARS LATER, SEVERAL THOUSAND U.S. SOLDIERS STILL IN AFGHANISTAN, THOUGH WINDING DOWN. $1 TRILLION SPENT WITHOUT ANY RESULTS, WITH SEVERAL THOUSAND US & AFGHANS DEAD.
• STAGED AN UPRISING IN LIBYA, OVERTHROWING QADDAFI, HIS PUBLIC BEATING AND MURDER, SOON AFTER PUBLIC BEATING AND MURDER OF US AMBASSADOR IN LIBYA,. DELIVERING LIBYA TO SEVERAL PRO AL-QAEDA GROUPS WITH ENSUING CHAOS.
• MANIPULATED A MILITARY COUP IN EGYPT, DEPOSING AN ELECTED PRESIDENT DEALING A GEAT BLOW TO DEMOCRACY. THE CORRUPT AND THUGGISH MILITARY GENERALS ARE IN THE PROCESS OF CONQUERING THEIR OWN PEOPLE - YET ONCE AGAIN
• INSTIGATED RIOTS IN UKRAINE, RUNNING OFF YET ANOTHER ELECTED PRESIDENT FROM OFFICE (SECOND WITHIN 12 MONTHS) - DELIVERING CRIMEA IN  RUSSIA'S LAP.

SOME FOREIGN POLICY SUCCESSES INDEED!

Al-Awlaki killing: Can President Obama, Admiral Mullen, Leon Panetta and General Petraeus be charged with murder?

There was much celebration in Washing DC and the rest of US today on the killing of Al-Awlaki and probably rightly so, for he was a terrorist and planned and encouraged attacks on innocent civilians.

However, he was a US citizen and the cowboy behavior that US has adopted in Iraq and Afghanistan of midnight raids and cold blooded executions of supposed enemies, does not hold water in the US. The Administration, the Pentagon and CIA do not have the legal right to execute an American citizen who is suspected of acts of terror.

There is a legal process and there are courts for it. Will Al-Awalaki's father or any other US citizen stand up in a court of law in the US and demand that President Obama, Admiral Mullem, Leon Panetta and General Petraeus be charged with murder for not following the legal process?

It could make for quite a legal situation!

Al-Maliki's Visit to Iran, US May Have Unknowingly Handed Iraq on a Platter to Iran

Nouri Al-Maliki's visit to Iran is supposedly an effort to shore up support to form a Government in Iraq. But, there seems a great deal more than meets the eye.

The more moderate and secular Ayad Allawi has a slight lead in the Iraqi elections and he should form a Government, but Al-Maliki has gone to pledge his unflinching loyalty to the Ayatollahs in Iran. If he is successful in forming a Government, the Iranians will have an enormous influence over Iraq.

After his recent triumphant visit to Lebanon, someone said that Ahmedinajad has the game, set, but not quite the match, but with these developments, he may even have the match. The rousing reception he received in Lebanon not just from Hezbollah, but also from the Lebanese people, their President and Prime Minister speaks volumes of U.S. policy failure in Lebanon. The Bush Administration played a dangerous game in Lebanon. Blaming Syria for Rafik Hariri's murder was a clever ploy and for a while it played well with the Lebanese people and it even got Syrian troops out of Lebanon. But now that the U.N. inquiry commission appears to have exonerated Syria, the U.S. intentions are viewed rather suspiciously in Lebanon.

It appears that U.S. has been played again and again in The Middle East by Israel. First in Iraq by providing it bogus intelligence on WMDs and egging it on to invade Iraq and then in Lebanon by falsely framing Syrians for Hariri's murder.

The net result of it all is that today, Iran has a huge influence in Lebanon and it will also end up with enormous influence over Iraq. This is exactly what Iran wanted and the U.S. may have unknowingly handed Iraq on a platter to Iran.

IRAQ - CHEMICAL ALI'S HANGING

The hanging of Ali Hassan al-Majid better known as 'Chemical Ali' was uneventful. He was equally barbaric and cruel as his cousin Saddam Hussain. He put down a Kurdish uprising in Halabja, Northern Iraq by gassing thousands of innocent people to death. A method not very different from the one deployed by Nazis against the Jews.

This should be a lesson to future dictators in Iraq and elsewhere that when you occupy the seat of power, you don't own it. It is the people who own it and one day you will have to pay for your crimes and excesses.

One aspect of this whole sordid affair that should have been discussed openly and has not been by the US and Western media is, how did Iraq get hold of these chemical weapons? There are allegations that in the eighties, Donald Rumsfeld and the US Government of the time provided these to Iraq for use in the Iran/Iraq war. That was the time when on a visit to Baghdad Donald Rumsfeld parised Saddam Hussain as "a Great Leader". If it is true that Rumsfeld supplied chemical weapons to Iraq, then is he not also complicit as a co-conspirator in war crimes and should he not be tried?

Unlike the British, who are holding an open and an independent inquiry into legality of Iraq War, the US Congress does not have the courage or the willpower to hold an open and a fair enquiry to determine whether Rumsfeld is guilty of these crimes.

Would Mr. Rumsfeld like to voluntarily submit to International Court of Justice to clear his name?

Withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq - NOW

Britain and Australia are withdrawing their troops from Iraq. I guess they have finally realized the futility of this mission. The U.S. on the other hand is increasing its troop strength. There was a time when increased troops could have helped and that was immediately after the occupation of Baghdad, but now it is way too late.

The continued occupation and presence of U.S. troops is strengthening the hands of insurgents by providing them a rallying cry. It also helps them recruit angry young Iraqis who have lost a father, brother, sister or mother to this war.

Many politicians argue that withdrawal will result in chaos in Iraq. Well isn't there chaos in Iraq now? Similar concerns were expressed before withdrawing from Vietnam, but look at Vietnam now. It is a progressive country with a booming economy. In Iraq most probably things will deteriorate before getting better, but ultimately things will work out and Iraqis need to resolve their own problems. There are many a sensible people amongst the Shias, Sunnis & Kurds who will in the end prevail in bringing together a coalition government which respects the rights of all.

It is futile to expect Congress to take a lead on this. After enthusiastically supporting the war, Republicans do not know where to look now and the Democrats are guilty of doublespeak and no one really knows where they stand.

This is President Bush's war and the sooner he realizes that there is nothing he can do for Iraq, the better.

Mr. President bring the troops home from Iraq - NOW.

Should Bush be Impeached?

Consider this hypothetically. President Bush's surge in Iraq does not work and fatalities rise. Democratic & some Republican politicians make a lot of noise and impeach Bush. Then what?

Dick Cheney takes over as President, but isn't he the guy who promised rose petals for American soldiers in Iraq, so the Congress impeaches him too. Then what?

The next in line, Speaker of the House - Nancy Polosi takes over as President and America has a woman President after all. Then what? After a year or so in the job, she says she likes it and decides to run for President in 2008.

The question is, do Senators Clinton, Obama and Biden on the Democratic side and Hagel, Brownback & McCain on the Republican side want to coronate Nancy Polosi as President, only to taker her on in 2008? I think not. President Bush has nothing to fear.