Epstein Secrets

ds with the Obama administration. Top Saudi officials were angered by a previous U.S. decision to cancel a planned strike against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime, as well as what they perceived as Washington's hostile attitude toward the governments in Egypt and Bahrain. In response to these disagreem

eeblement, lest it re-emerge as the region's most EFTA00707114 powerful actor. They point to Tehran's support for Hizbollah and for the murderous Assad regime in Syria. The interests of almost everyone else are otherwise. Not to be tricked by smooth talking into making it easier for Iran to acquire

line Obama has little interest in world leadership Victor Davis Hanson Article 7. The Washington Post Why liberals are panicked about Obamacare Charles Krauthammer Arncic 1 The National Interest Has Iran Outfoxed Netanyahu? Rajan Menon November 15, 2013 -- The much-anticipated breakthrough in the negotiatio

nterviews with Syrians I met in Jordan or who talked with me from inside Syria by phone. My Syrian contacts described a bitter stalemate: President Bashar al-Assad holds on to power, but he has lost control of major parts of the country. The rebels fight bravely, but they lack the organization and heavy weapon

al-Qaeda extremists fester in the shadows. The opposition remains so fragmented that some rebels frankly admit they aren't ready to govern, even if Assad should fall. EFTA00718098 "We still need to find a leader," conceded one rebel commander. "We are headless inside the country." Rebel fighters s

wi Article 3. The Washington Post On Syria, reality-check time David Ignatius Article 4. The Washington Post Obama's foreign policy of denial Charles Krauthammer Article 5. The National Interest Thucydides Trap 2.0: Superpower Suicide? Patrick Porter' Article 6. The Washington Post Why the United States

Spring has plunged Syria into a bloody civil war. Now, with allegations flying that the Russians are supplying helicopters to the odious regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, a familiar debate is underway. Should we intervene? There can be no morally credible argument against intervention—by someone. Leaving S

nt conflict, such as the Homs and Hama regions. The bases are said to be guarded by elite forces, but whether they would stay at their posts if the Assad regime collapses cannot be predicted." An additional concern is the manner in which the different kinds of chemical weapons are stored. EFTA006718

ly. There's no doubt the recession and tepid recovery have sapped U.S. resources and confidence, but economic decline is not inevitable. It is, as Charles Krauthammer put it in 2009, "a choice." America can choose to stay on its current path toward a slow-growth entitlement society that spends its patrimony on do

is achieved we will seek at Geneva ways of better dealing with the terrible internal humanitarian situation. International aid goes to the needy in Assad controlled areas where the population is greater and apparently lesser amounts to the non-Assad controlled areas where the need is probably greater

orst conflict so far this century. Meanwhile, the international community has been disastrously divided. Since the fighting began, Syrian President Bashar Assad has had Russia's explicit international support. But while Russia's strategy, from the outset, has been coherent and well- defined, the West's has n

l president since Truman." A Boston Globe editorial in 1998 described Bill Clinton as "the most pro-Israel president since Harry Truman." In 2009, Charles Krauthammer described George W. Bush as "the most pro-Israel president since Harry Truman." And Vice President Joseph Biden declared in 2012 that "no president

autocrats foster instability and economic stagnation—=ot stability—in the Middle East. =/p> Syria: 2013 will be viewed as the yea= that President Bashar al-Assad turned the tide in the war in Syria. As Adam Entous and =iobhan Gorman detailed in a Wall Street Journal story this week, "all-in" military support

ria. As Adam Entous and =iobhan Gorman detailed in a Wall Street Journal story this week, "all-in" military support from Iran and Hezbollah allowed Assad to retake crucial territory. The Obama administration, however, blinked. Obama had vowed to punish Assad for any chemical weapons attacks. Yet the p

Qaeda," as if that was the same as an actual relationship with co=e al Qaeda's remaining leaders. Fox News commentator and Washingt=n Post columnist Charles Krauthammer dismissed the story as an effort "to protect Hillary [Clinton]." Fox News terrorism analys= Walid Phares absurdly argued that Kirkpatrick was "know

ty to get in the way of "this narrative" by arguing that external intervention would be disastrous, are roundly condemned as complicit in President Assad's crimes against humanity. This school of journalism - the Guardian and Channel Four are good examples of this "I-was-there" reporting - that empha

f Terje Rod-Larsen Subject: March 9 update Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:16:29 +0000 9 March, 2012 Article 1. The Washington Post Obama vs. Israel Charles Krauthammer Article 2. Real-Clear-Science Three Scientific Problems for Iran's Nuke Program Tom Hartsfield Article 3. New York Post 'One State' — for suck