theTrumpet.com

U.S. congressmen Ron Paul and Barney Frank are calling for their fellow policymakers on both sides of the political aisle to support a $1 trillion cut in U.S. military spending. The push, which comes only two weeks after Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced a plan to close the Joint Forces Command, based in Norfolk, Virginia, and to reduce the military’s top-heavy management structure, is gaining some momentum.

The U.S. Second Fleet, which trains all strike groups before deployment and employs hundreds of military personnel, contractors and civilian employees, is also likely to be closed as the Department of Defense aims to tighten its budget.

With the national debt soaring at over $13 trillion, it’s evident that all areas of government should undergo a drastic shakeup to eliminate waste and achieve more efficiency. But, so far, Gates is the only one of President Obama’s department heads to propose concrete spending cuts.

In light of the current political climates in Asia, the Middle East, Europe and elsewhere, the timing of these pushes for defense budget cuts seems counterintuitive.

Asia

In March, China announced an increase of 7.5 percent in its defense budget raising it to $78.6 billion. Beijing is notorious for a lack of transparency regarding the true magnitude of its military buildup, so the true increase is almost certainly much higher. In August, the annual report to Congress on China’s military power was released describing a massive Chinese military buildup designed primarily to push America out of the Western Pacific. The report says China is pursuing a variety of air, naval, submersible, space and cyber weapons designed specifically to destroy U.S. battle carrier groups.

The report also explains that Beijing has developed artillery that can reach across the Taiwan Strait, and is developing several nuclear aircraft carriers and submarines. Its newest Dong Feng missiles can strike targets 890 miles from the mainland. The capabilities Beijing is pursuing go well beyond defense goals. Its military expansion is designed to project China’s rising power.

Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Jiang Yu said that the Pentagon’s report “made absurd comments on China’s normal defense works and exaggerated China’s military prowess, trying to plant this notion of a ‘China threat.’”

Reassuring words.

Middle East

Iran has crossed a pivotal nuclear threshold. Like North Korea, Iran has defied U.S. attempts to reign in its military expansion and nuclear development, and, on August 21, Russian and Iranian engineers began loading radioactive uranium rods into Iran’s first nuclear power plant in the city of Bushehr. The international community is rife with concern that the facility will produce enriched nuclear materials for use with nuclear weapons. Although Tehran and Moscow deny the charge, analysts point out that Iran could use Bushehr to enhance its uranium enrichment program, headquartered 300 miles away at Natanz.

On August 22, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad attended an Iranian Ministry of Defense ceremony to celebrate the completion of Iran’s first unmanned, or drone, bomber. Iranian state tv broadcast a successful test flight of the Karrar (“Striker”) aircraft, and said that it had a range of 620 miles, and could carry two 250-pound bombs, or a 500-pound precision bomb.

After unveiling the Karrar, Ahmadinejad said, “This jet is a messenger of honor and human generosity and a savior of mankind, before being a messenger of death for enemies of mankind.”

More reassuring words.

Europe

On August 23, German Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg presented a plan to the German cabinet that would streamline the German military and significantly boost the number of troops that can be sent on missions abroad. Journalist Christian Thiel, writing on the website of the German tv news service Tagesschau, said, “This is not a reform, but in reality a revolution, planned by the defense minister” (our translation).

Back in April, Trumpet columnist Ron Fraser wrote this about Guttenberg’s military ambitions for Germany:

Guttenberg is determined to change the Bundeswehr’s image into that of a legitimate combat force with broad public acceptance. At the February Munich Security Conference, he …”spoke about the need to take action. What was important, the minister pointed out, was that progress be made regarding the long-overdue reforms of the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (nato). “We talk too much and act too little,” he said.

This was an effort to apply pressure to nato to revamp its charter by the end of the year, implicitly integrating German imperial goals with nato objectives. … Ultimately, German military elites will be eyeing either a merger with, or takeover of, the nuclear-armed nato. … The EU is empowered under the Lisbon Treaty to develop a continental military force. That this force will have nuclear potential is quietly taken as a given by certain German military and political elites.

Mr. Gates has emphasized that the budget itself will not be cut, but merely have its growth slowed. But with turmoil mounting on each of the world’s major continents, is this a good time for the U.S. to broadcast to the world that defense is what it’s most anxious to scale down? •

The U.S. economy was pummeled with more bad news this week, as the housing and finance markets performed poorly and the nation’s gross domestic product growth was reported to be “far more anemic than previously estimated,” according to the Los Angeles Times. On Tuesday, House Minority Leader John Boehner called for Barack Obama to fire his entire economic team, saying that “the writing is on the wall.”

Between April to June, the gdp growth rate was a disappointing 1.6 percent, the Commerce Department reported on Friday. Sluggishness was partly attributed to the largest increase in imports in the last 26 years. The housing market also slumped, with house sales falling to their lowest levels in a decade (as the government homebuyer tax credit expired). Spending on big manufactured items declined as well.

In July, the unemployment rate was reported as 9.5 percent nationally. With economic growth at such a slow pace, that figure is expected to rise.

The L.A. Times wrote, “[J]ust as there is widespread agreement that the economy is faltering, there is also a sense that the federal government is running out of options to rebuild momentum.”

On Friday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said the economic outlook is “inherently uncertain.” He also said that it “remains vulnerable to unexpected developments.” Just weeks ago, the Fed announced plans to resume purchase of long-term U.S. treasury bonds in an effort to keep interest rates at bay, admitting that growth was more modest than expected.

Chairman of the joint chiefs of staff Adm. Mike Mullen also expressed concerned about the burdensome national debt. Referring to the interest on the debt alone, he said, “That’s one year’s worth of defense budget.” He added that the Pentagon needed to cut more costs.

According to Bart van Ark, chief economist for the Conference Board, a business research group, “All the indicators at the moment are pointing in the wrong direction. … The risk of things turning wrong and then dropping the economy into recession is significant.”

Economics professor at Cal State Channel Islands Sung Won Sohn also offered a bleak assessment of the situation, saying that the probability of the economy going into a double-dip recession is “40 percent and going up.”

“Housing is in the tank. Confidence is going down. The stock market is going down. It’s hard to imagine how consumers will spend,” he said. “This is a harbinger of weak economic growth to come for quite some time. Right now, it’s hard to see where we will get any sort of strength.” •

Iran’s ambitious announcements this week highlighted the ineffectiveness of the West’s policy toward it. Along with plans to feed uranium into its first nuclear plant, Iran also announced its proposal to build 10 new uranium enrichment plants next year and to launch a new missile.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (iaea) reported this month that Iran is enriching uranium to higher, more dangerous levels. cia Director Michael Hayden said a military strike seemed “inexorable” to prevent Iran’s nuclear weapons program from advancing. The Washington Times wrote, “The time has come to demonstrate resolve in face of an imminent threat from Iran.”

But, as the article continued, “It’s doubtful America will take action. The State Department’s response to the latest iaea report on Iranian enrichment violations merely said, ‘We are hopeful that Iran will express a willingness to come to the table. We stand ready to have that dialogue.’ Not exactly the kind of rhetoric that instills fear of consequences.”

The article called for action from Israel, concluding that “the Free World depends on Israeli power.”

But not only is the U.S. refusing to take action itself, it has also assured Israel that there is no imminent threat from Iran. According to the New York Times, “The Obama administration, citing evidence of continued troubles inside Iran’s nuclear program, has persuaded Israel that it would take roughly a year—and perhaps longer—for Iran to complete what one senior official called a ‘dash’ for a nuclear weapon, according to American officials. Administration officials said they believe the assessment has dimmed the prospect that Israel would preemptively strike against the country’s nuclear facilities within the next year.”

As the Trumpet wrote last week, Iran has been pursuing a dangerously belligerent foreign policy for quite some time—but “despite these terrifying ambitions, and Iran’s systematic march toward acquiring the means to carry them out, the United States and much of the West still pursue a policy of negotiation and compromise!”

A recent poll revealed that the majority of Iran’s Arab neighbors now support Iran’s goal to pursue a nuclear program—double the percentage from last year. It seems clear that America’s and Israel’s enemies are uniting together in defiance of them. But they continue to put “far away the evil day” (Amos 6:3)—and as we wrote last week, sleep their way toward nuclear Armageddon. •

Russia announced on Wednesday that it had deployed an S-300 advanced missile defense system in Georgia’s Moscow-backed rebel region of Abkhazia, saying it would provide anti-aircraft defense for Abkhazia and Georgia’s other Russia-supported breakaway enclave, South Ossetia.

The move signals that Russian forces are bolstering involvement in the disputed area which was at the heart of the brief 2008 Russia-Georgia war, when Russia conquered Georgian forces after five days of battle, and subsequently recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent. So far, only Venezuela, Nicaragua and Nauru have followed Moscow’s lead in recognizing the two regions as independent.

On Thursday, Georgia said Russia had taken an “extremely dangerous provocative step” in deploying the missile system, and beseeched the international community to “take decisive measures to make Russia abandon its policy of military build-up on Georgia’s occupied territories and fully comply with its international commitments.”

Stratfor notes that “Although the system’s official purpose is to provide air defenses for Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the air defense battery’s range entails broader significance for Georgia and for Russia’s efforts to consolidate its military position in the Caucasus. … [T]his is one component of a multipronged Russian effort to consolidate its military control over the Caucasus.”

When Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry wrote, “Russia’s attack on Georgia … marks the beginning of a dangerous new era in history.”

Moscow’s effort to shore up defenses in Georgia’s breakaway regions provides evidence that the dangers of the new era are intensifying. Russia will increasingly assert itself in Georgia, the Caucasus, and elsewhere in the former Soviet Union region, as it continues its quest to resurrect the Russian sphere of influence. •

Parents no longer think that their children will have it better than they did, wrote Peggy Noonan for the Wall Street Journal on Friday. In her article “America is at risk of boiling over,” she noted the growing pessimism among American citizens amid economic and social turmoil and how it’s reshaping Americans’ view of the future. She wrote,

Our problems as a nation have been growing on us for a long time. Their future growth, and the implications of that growth, could be predicted. But there is one thing that is both new since 1994 and huge. It took hold and settled in after the crash of 2008, but its causes were not limited to the crash.

The biggest political change in my lifetime is that Americans no longer assume that their children will have it better than they did. This is a huge break with the past, with assumptions and traditions that shaped us.

… Parents now fear something has stopped. They think they lived through the great abundance, a time of historic growth in wealth and material enjoyment. They got it, and they enjoyed it, and their kids did, too: a lot of toys in that age, a lot of Xboxes and iPhones. (Who is the most self-punishing person in America right now? The person who didn’t do well during the abundance.) But they look around, follow the political stories and debates, and deep down they think their children will live in a more limited country, that jobs won’t be made at a great enough pace, that taxes—too many people in the cart, not enough pulling it—will dishearten them, that the effects of 30 years of a low, sad culture will leave the whole country messed up. And then there is the world: nuts with nukes, etc.

The Pew Research Center also released a study on July 23 about how the latest recession has affected the attitudes of Americans regarding the future. It noted:

During the past decade, Americans have grown increasingly skeptical about the standard of living of future generations—and this skepticism has deepened during this recession. Today fewer than half (45 percent) of adults believe that when their children become the age they are now, their children will enjoy a better standard of living than they have now. Even more striking, 26 percent now say their children’s standard of living will be lower. This is a “positive/negative” gap of just 19 percentage points on a question that tests the public’s faith in a core tenet of the American dream—the idea that children grow up to live better than their parents.

Although there is bad news immediately ahead for Americans and their children, in the longer term, there is good news coming, as the Trumpet has often written, after man finally realizes he cannot govern himself. To learn more about this future, request a free copy of Herbert W. Armstrong’s booklet The Wonderful World Tomorrow—What It Will Be Like. •

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the number of Americans on food stamps continues to grow—despite claims from government departments that the recession ended during the last quarter of 2009.

There are now a record 40.8 million Americans receiving food stamps, the government reported last Wednesday. Participation has set records for 18 straight months. The news came as the unemployment rate stayed uncomfortably close to a 27-year high.

Bloomberg reports that subsidies for food purchases jumped 19 percent from this time last year and increased 0.9 percent from April. If the rate of increase from April to May holds, there will be an additional 5 million people on the food dole by this time next year.

Currently, one eighth of America’s population relies on food stamps. Don’t try to tell this growing number of people that the recession is over. The reality is that it never really ended, and America is entering a more dangerous phase of the recession. •

Kremlin experts say that Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s high-profile involvement in wildfires and ownership of the recent spy scandal is designed to demonstrate to the Russian people that he is leading the country, not President Dmitry Medvedev. With the presidential election only one and a half years away, Putin is gearing up to make his leadership of Russia official once again.

While state-controlled media depict Medvedev keeping to his Kremlin office, it shows Putin traveling throughout Russia comforting fire victims, scolding local officials, and dictating to Medvedev how to handle the fires that have killed 40 people and destroyed 1.2 million acres around Moscow. Lilia Shevtsova, a Kremlin expert at the Moscow Carnegie Center, said that “Putin uses these difficult times to show the people who is the strong man in the country, who is the national leader, who is the can-do man—and who is just a Kremlin clerk.”

Putin also announced that he recently partied with the Russian spies who were discovered in the U.S. in June, and that they sang a song together from his favorite Soviet spy thriller.

More than two years ago, term limits forced Putin to surrender the presidential office and instead take the prime minister’s title. His endorsement guaranteed that Dmitry Medvedev would replace him as president, and also guaranteed that Medvedev would not actually replace Putin as Russia’s leader. Since then, the two have seemed to be in perfect lockstep, but the Trumpet has long predicted that Putin would eventually nudge Medvedev aside. In the last month, the nudging began. •

Max Boot from the Washington Post warned about the dangers of cuts to the U.S. defense budget on Friday, citing historical examples.

Although the past decade or so has seen increases in military spending, the Pentagon is being pressured to cut spending from both political and economic fronts. In addition to the burdensome deficit, analysts think support for Pentagon spending will diminish as Barack Obama withdraws more and more troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The New York Times quoted Erskine B. Bowles, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton and a co-chairman of the deficit commission, saying, “We’re going to have to take a hard look at defense if we are going to be serious about deficit reduction.” Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee Daniel Inouye said, “I’m pretty certain cuts are coming—in defense and the whole budget.” Last week, the Senate Appropriations Committee voted to cut $8 billion from the Pentagon’s request for an $18 billion budget increase.

Boot noted that America has historically diminished its military might after each major conflagration—and it has always been to ill effect. He wrote, “If there were ever evidence that it’s impossible to learn from history—or at least that it’s difficult for politicians to do so—this is it.”

The American Revolution saw a troop reduction from 35,000 to just 10,000, which weakened the nation in the wake of the Whiskey Rebellion, the quasi-war with France, the Barbary wars and the war of 1812. There was also a troop reduction after World War i, which increased vulnerabilities in the lead-up to World War ii. Boot referred to the period after the Vietnam War as the era of the “hollow army,” which was “notorious for its inadequate equipment, discipline, training and morale”—a period which further emboldened America’s enemies.

“It might still make sense to cut the defense budget—if it were bankrupting us and undermining our economic well-being. But that’s not the case,” Boot wrote. “Defense spending is less than 4 percent of gross domestic product and less than 20 percent of the federal budget. That means our armed forces are much less costly in relative terms than they were throughout much of the 20th century. Even at roughly $549 billion, our core defense budget is eminently affordable. It is, in fact, a bargain considering the historic consequences of letting our guard down.”

As other countries rise to the top in the world both economically and militarily (notably China), America and Britain demonstrate both a lack of funds and a lack of military might (as we wrote, Britain doesn’t even have enough money to protect itself against potential threats now). This leaves the Anglo-Saxon nations more vulnerable to enemies and potential threats than ever before. •

An ancient clay fragment dating back to the 14th century bce was recently discovered by a Hebrew University excavation led by Dr. Eilat Mazar. The find contains Akkadian cuneiform script, making it the oldest text ever found in Jerusalem. It appears to have once been part of a tablet.

Archeologists deciphered the words “you,” “you were,” “them,” “to do,” and “later” from the fragment.

According to Hebrew University Prof. Wayne Horowtiz, the high quality of the writing “indicates that the person responsible for creating the tablet was a first-class scribe.” Dr. Mazar believes the fragment likely came from a royal court.

Horowitz said, “In those days, you would expect to find a first-class scribe only in a large, important place.” Horowitz also explained the fragment was made from Jerusalem clay, further attesting to Jerusalem being a central city of the area at that time.

The 14th century bce predates the ancient Israelites’ entrance to the Promised Land, but Bible history reveals Jerusalem was an important city prior to King David’s rule. It was the location where Abraham paid tithes to King Melchizedek (Genesis 14:17-20), and it later became a Jebusite stronghold (1 Chronicles 11:4).

The tiny fragment is 2 cm (0.8 inch) long and 1 cm (0.4 inch) thick and was found during wet sifting two months ago. It was pulled out of fill from an area of ancient Jerusalem know as the Ophel—the area between the Old City’s southern wall and the City of David.

Dr. Mazar released the find to the press only after the piece was carefully analyzed. She called the discovery “one of the most important finds we’ve ever had.” •

The New York Times and two other newspapers on Sunday published summaries and excerpts of tens of thousands of documents relating to Afghanistan that had been leaked to the WikiLeaks website.

Despite the hype surrounding the massive intelligence leak, the documents exposed thus far reveal little new about the fundamental reality of the war in Afghanistan. As the Wall Street Journal points out (July 26),

That the war isn’t going as well as advertised is already painfully evident—last week alone, the Taliban kidnapped two American sailors and killed five soldiers. Allegations of Pakistani double-dealing—of accepting a torrent of American dollars with one hand while arming and sheltering the Taliban with the other—are hardly new. Nor are revelations that the country’s Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (isi) has apparently perfected its own version of don’t ask, don’t tell. Don’t ask your clandestine operatives too many questions about their ties with Islamist militants, and don’t tell the Americans more than the minimum required to keep the aid faucet open.

Perhaps the most critical information relates to Pakistan’s support of the Taliban. The leaked documents accuse Pakistan of providing both supplies and sanctuary for Taliban fighters. The Wall Street Journal writes that “they show how the gaggle of Islamist groups fighting nato in Afghanistan … have an advantage that more than makes up for their inferior equipment and training. The militants wage war in Afghanistan while using Pakistan as a sanctuary for rest, recuperation and recruitment” (ibid.).

The secret military field reports detail how Pakistan’s intelligence service has guided the Afghan insurgency, even while Islamabad receives more than $1 billion a year from Washington for its help fighting the Taliban.

Stratfor points out that (July 27),

Though startling, the charge that Islamabad is protecting and sustaining forces fighting and killing Americans is not a new one. When the United States halted operations in Afghanistan after the defeat of the Soviets in 1989, U.S. policy was to turn over operations in Afghanistan to Pakistan. U.S. strategy was to use Islamist militants to fight the Soviets and to use Pakistani liaisons through the isi to supply and coordinate with them. When the Soviets and Americans left Afghanistan, the isi struggled to install a government composed of its allies until the Taliban took over Kabul in 1996. The isi’s relationship with the Taliban—which in many ways are the heirs to the anti-Soviet mujahideen—is widely known. … The leaks on this score are interesting, but they will shock only those who didn’t pay attention or who want to be shocked.

It appears the WikiLeaks merely provide additional detail of a war that is not going well for the U.S., and of Pakistan’s double-dealing.

TheTrumpet.com has long pointed out the duplicity of Pakistan as a U.S. ally in the war in Afghanistan. “The fact that Washington must take the ‘friends’ and ‘allies’ it can—even if they fuel the passions (and the apparatus) of the very enemy the U.S. is fighting—demonstrates the compromised nature of America’s power on the world scene,” we wrote on Aug. 1, 2005.

And from Islamabad’s point of view, it is covering its bases, knowing that the U.S. is not in Afghanistan for the long haul. Why would it want to make an enemy of the up-and-coming power right across its border?

As for the WikiLeaks, their shock value will inevitably provide massive support for America’s early withdrawal from Afghanistan. •