LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ in June 2016 points out the dangers in the U.S. president Obama not facing up to the threat in the Middle East since 2013 leading to the fall of Mosul,  and in not clearly focussing on the threat since then. This has created divisions inside Europe and the U.S. in internal politics, and is being exacerbated with the rise of far right groups in Europe and by Trump in the U.S. It points out that by not clearly identifying the threat president Obama has given "illiberal" policy a boost. It says Hillary Clinton should be careful to formulate her own position in line with policy that has been pursued since FDR.

LyrArc Article Gist
Former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates points out in this intervew with Holman Jenkins of the WSJ, that Iraq's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, who worsened Shiite-Sunni relations, was the principal cause of the unraveling that happened in Iraq during the first term of U.S. president Obama. He says President Obama failed to do what was done by president Bush to persist and obtain Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq, to maintain a U.S. foce presence in Iraq. Presence of U.S. forces would have prevented the spread of Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. U.S. force presence would have provided a more even handed treatment of Sunnis in the region, creating the conditions for peace by having Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites continue talks about the future of Iraq. Gates grew up in Kansas in the 1950's, attended the College of William and Mary for undergraduate studies, studied Russian and Soviet history in grad school at Indiana University and Georgetown University, before joining the CIA. Gates was selected by Brzezinski to work in the White House, worked under Brent Snowcroft, and as head of the CIA (1991-1993) during the elder Bush administration. He was Secretary of Defense from 2006-2011, under presidents George Bush and Barack Obama, succeeding Donald Rumsfeld. He was succeeded by Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, and Ashton Carter. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Mass demonstrations by young people including school children on March 24, 2018, in many U.S. cities called for raising the minimum age for buying a gun from 18 to 21 years of age, and prohibiting civilian ownership of semiautomatic weapons, increasing comprehensive background checks. Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says this is not enough. He calls for a repeal of the Second Amendment. Stevens points out that the the framers of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution had the concern that a national standing army could pose a threat to the security of the separate states and therefore made the Second Amendment so that " a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." This is now a relic of that period. He says for 200 years this was not interpreted to mean that gun control legislation could not be enacted, till a 2008 decision by the Supreme Court.  Stevens says the decision was wrong and repeal of the Second Amendment is needed.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Interesting and quite useful from a sociological and psychological point of view, that people believe what they want to believe. Even today writes Slackman, the Arabs and Muslims from Dubai malls to people one meets in a park in Algiers, cafes in Riyadh, and in shops and places all over Cairo, say the USA organized 9/11 so that they could attack 2 Muslim states, Iraq and Afghanistan. If we changed it a bit and said Rumsfeld and Cheney got the perfect excuse to attack Afghanistan's Taliban government from 9/11. It created the kind of fears in the US public about terrorists, individual, or state sponsored terrorism like Iraq's against the Marsh Shiites after the Kuwait war (which was a personal affront to both Rumsfeld and Cheney as they let it happen right under their eyes), then one can extend that to say Rumsfeld and Cheney felt they now had the opportunity to get Saddam out. So once you have the US even for good moral reason eager to intervene, this eagerness may not require too much of a stretch to be seen as the US administration engineering this atmosphere by organizing 9/11, or by letting it happen. This is true for an Arab public that feels humiliated and sees a loss of respect from all the setbacks they have suffered, including in Egypt where a President has maintained himself in power for thirty long years and has American support. And most of these people haven't left their surroundings, so they haven't seen the world outside. What they beleieve is only what is possible from what they can see possible from their immediate surroundings. From a -sociological and psychological perspective this is certainly possible and even realistic. When Friedman in the New York Times says its shameless that the 2 Republican candidates can speak of being change agents when Republicans have been in power for 8 years, and still the Republican faithful and some independents believe this, they have not lost their wits but may see this in terms of their gut feel and in terms of their own personal experiences and surroundings. Even when Paul Gigot of the Wall Street Journal sees little hope from either candidate when it comes to lobbyists influencing them and proof of this from lobbyists for Fannie and Freddie as their senior advisors. Then its still possible for Republican faithful, however weird it may appear to an informed observer,to see McCain and Palin as agents of change. Same is true for Obama. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ says Europe should plan for expanding its role in defense, because the U.S voters in the primaries for both political parties appear to be calling for less U.S. engagement in the world. It says Trump, Sanders, and Clinton voters are moving towards less engagement, and calling for the U.S. to spend less in overseas engagements, more at home. It points out that only Britain, Estonia, Greece, Poland and the U.S. spend the 2% of GDP on defense that is considered a requirement for NATO membership.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial is critical of the Obama administration's no-show at the march in Paris with millions of people and German chancellor Merkel alongside President Hollande, British prime minister Cameron, Spain's prime minister Rajoy, former president Sarkozy, Donald Tusk, head of the EU. With the far right parties likely to push for anti-immigration policies the European leaders are faced with a challenge to maintain the post war policies of openness and tolerance, bringing together leaders of all major European parties in a show of solidarity.

LyrArc Article Gist
This view from Udo Bauer of DW.com about the Berlin elections says the result with the CDU and the SPD each losing about 6-7% of the votes cast is more about the unpopularity of the CDU candidate Henkel and the SPD candidate Muller. He says Muller had about the charisma and appeal of a paper clip compared to the previous Berlin Mayor Klaus Wowereit who showed vision and assertive action. Other local issues were important in the election including crumbling infrastructure and dissatisfaction with services. The AfD won about 14% of the votes with its appeal to voters opposed to the refugee policy of chancellor Merkel. Yet Bauer thinks, like the Republican party in the past this could be a passing phenomenon, after voters have expressed their grievances about chancellor Merkel's "we can manage it" on the refugees. Something Merkel now says people read too much into. The SPD too has a lot to reflect on for handling local issues, says Bauer.