REPORT: RUSSIAN HACK ON PENTAGON THE ‘MOST SOPHISTICATED’ IN MILITARY HISTORY

The Pentagon took down the Joint Staff unclassified email system after Russian hackers attacked the emails of 4,000 military and civilian personnel. The email has been offline for the past 11 days.

US officials called the hack the “‘most sophisticated’ cyberbreach in U.S. military history.” In fact, the level of sophistication is so high the officials did not rule out is a “state entity” took part in the hack.

They also told The Daily Beast they are “creating mock hacking scenarios” before the personnel can access the system. The hackers used a “spear phishing attack” to obtain personal information on numerous users.

The attack occurred on July 25, only 16 days after Marine General Joe Dunford, a nominee to be the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Armed Services that Russia is the greatest threat to American national security. Dunford placed Russia above China, North Korea, and the Islamic State because of its “rapidly expanding military.”

“My assessment today, senator, is that Russia presents the greatest threat to our national security,” he declared.

Relations between Russia and the West soured immensely after Moscow invaded Ukraine in March 2014, annexed Crimea, and issued threats against other former Soviet republics. The European Union and America passed numerous sanctions against Russian companies and oligarchs while NATO added more security to Eastern Europe nations who fear they might be Russia’s next target.

US State Department spokesman Mark Toner fired back that Secretary of State John Kerry does not agree.

“The secretary doesn’t agree with the assessment that Russia is an existential threat to the United States, nor China, quite frankly,” retorted Toner. “You know, these are major powers with whom we engage and cooperate on a number of issues, despite any disagreements we may have with them. Certainly we have disagreements with Russia and its activities within the region, but we don’t view it as an existential threat.”

Kerry has also made similar claims, despite working close with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in the past 16 months. Kerry denied many times that Russian soldiers are stationed in east Ukraine until February, even though he constantly faced a mountain of evidence. He added more pain to American allies when he admitted Russian propaganda worked on him.

“The question asked earlier about… how they present things and the lies about their presence in Ukraine and the training, I mean, you know, it’s stunning but it has an impact in places where it isn’t countered,” he said. “Propaganda works.”

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....

All the way with LBJ and Obama

Count on it: When it comes to foreign policy, two-term presidents -- and even most one-term presidents -- will change course along the way. Since 1933, only two have not: Lyndon Johnson, who rode the Vietnam War all the way down, and Barack Obama. That's not a good sign.

Consider the record. When Franklin Roosevelt entered the White House in 1933, he began by torpedoing the World Economic Conference and accepting neutrality legislation. But over the 1930s, he moved from isolationism to leading the United States into the Second World War.

At first, Harry Truman drew down U.S. military strength rapidly after 1945, especially in Europe. But as the Cold War began to take shape, he reversed course and brought the U.S. into NATO.

Dwight Eisenhower moved from rejecting summits with Soviet leaders and opposing Western intervention in the Middle East, to holding summits and intervening himself. Jimmy Carter couldn't accept the Soviet Union was a problem, until it invaded Afghanistan.

Ronald Reagan confronted the Evil Empire, but after 1983, decided the time was right to negotiate with it. George W. Bush entered office saying that the U.S. military should be doing less in the world, but 9/11 changed many minds, including his.

The only real exception to the rule is Johnson, who hated the Vietnam War, but who got us into it and was never willing to get us out. True, the changes don't happen for the same reason. Sometimes, presidents are wrong and recognize it, like Carter.

Other times, presidents, like John F. Kennedy, deliberately reverse the policies of their predecessor, only to find out after a few years that the previous guy wasn't entirely wrong. At times, as with 9/11, the world changes, and the president changes as a result.

And sometimes, as with Reagan, their initial policies work, which allows them to move on to a new part of their strategy. But in most cases, change isn't a sign of failure. It's a sign of success, of adaptation, or at least of learning.

Nor is it a sign that presidents are giving up on their goals or their core beliefs. With the exception of genuinely clueless presidents like Carter, most changes are about means, not ends.

That's because it's not reasonable to expect presidents to change who they are. If they were so easily changed, they wouldn't have become president. But it is reasonable to expect them to look at how they're doing, at the world around them, and adjust accordingly.

Obama stands out because he is the same man we first elected in 2008 -- which is fair enough -- with the same foreign policy. Unlike almost all of his predecessors, he's not changed significantly. Unfortunately, that's a lot less reasonable.

Yes, there have been tactical adjustments. Obama talks less about the United Nations now than he did in 2009. But the first thing he did when he came into office was to reach out to Iran; over six years later, we're still riding that train.

Obama wanted to "reset" relations with Russia. He still hankers after the same thing, as evidenced by his comments about Vladimir Putin after the Iran deal. He wanted to reduce U.S. involvement in the Middle East, and reach out to adversarial regimes like Cuba's diplomatically, so that he could focus more on domestic policy. No change there, either.

I don't agree with these policies. But what is remarkable to me is the consistency with which Obama has pursued them. Obama has a perfect right to have his values. But precedent suggests that presidents who don't adapt how they apply their values are regarded by history as failures.

 - Ted R. Bromund is a senior research fellow in Anglo-American Relations in The Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation.

Originally appeared in Newsday

Via: Heritage Foundation

Continue Reading....

Charlie Daniels: ‘America Is in Decline’; Obama ‘Not Up to the Task or Simply Doesn’t Care’ By Charlie Daniels

One of two things is obvious about Barack Obama.

He is either a weak and incompetent man who hides from the truth and is afraid of confrontation or he is as naive as Neville Chamberlain.

His refusal to even identify the enemy America is fighting all over the world, his politically correct approach to rooting out the terrorists who walk among us, his abject failure to show any backbone in dealing with Vladimir Putin, his evident ignorance of a growing threat from China, his dismissal of our most experienced and battle-hardened military officers, his disrespect for the only ally we have in the Middle East, his imaginary red lines, and his total mishandling of the War in Iraq is evidence of a man totally out of his depth or a man who is and never was interested in being president for the right reasons.

I know that Obama did not start the war in Iraq. He inherited it, but his childish finger pointing and petulant attitude does not negate the fact that, in his rush to placate the left leaning voters, he pulled out too many American troops way too fast and created a perfect power vacuum for ISIS to move into.

Now, as ISIS continues to grow exponentially in numbers, territory and ruthlessness, capturing American war equipment left behind by the Iraqi army who ran away, Obama wants to leave the job of defeating them to a bunch of ragtag, poorly lead, unmotivated and terrified Iraqi soldiers who refuse to stand and fight despite their superior numbers and weapons. 

An able and pragmatic leader realizes when a policy is not working and quickly moves on until he finds one that does. Obama evidently refuses to face the fact that the Iraqi army is not up to the task of destroying ISIS and that other measures need to be taken now while the situation is still manageable.

It only takes a couple of minutes of watching the “valley girl” State Department spokesperson to realize the caliber of personnel who have been placed in sensitive positions in this administration. Obama has surrounded himself with inexperienced ideologues and political appointees.

The ramifications of this incompetence and its trickledown effect has made itself manifest in the

complete mess at the Internal Revenue Service, the fast and furious debacle Eric Holder left behind, the glaring mistakes the state department made in Benghazi, and the list goes on.

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Russia Invades Ukraine As Obama Declares Happy Hour

Minutes after issuing a stern warning to Russia and saying there will be a price to pay if it interferes militarily in Ukraine, President Obama headed to a “happy hour” with fellow Democrats.

Speaking at a fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee, Mr. Obama struck a very different tone than he had less than 30 minutes earlier, when he appeared with little warning in the White House press briefing room and issued a vague threat to Moscow.

“Well, it’s Friday. It’s after 5 o’clock. So, this is now officially happy hour with the Democratic party,” the president told his cohorts. “I can do that. It is an executive action. I have the authority.”

Russian troops moved into Crimea Friday, U.S. officials told Fox News, prompting Ukraine to accuse Russia of an "armed invasion."

At the White House, President Obama said the U.S. government is "deeply concerned" by reports of Russian "military movements" and warned any violation of Ukraine's sovereignty would be "deeply destabilizing."

"There will be costs" for any military intervention, he said, without specifying what those costs might be.

U.S. officials told Fox News they see “evidence of air and maritime movement into and out of Crimea by Russian forces” although the Pentagon declined to officially "characterize" the movement.

Agence France Press quoted a top Ukranian official as saying Russian aircraft carrying nearly 2,000 suspected troops have landed at a military air base near the regional capital of the restive Crimean peninsula.

"Thirteen Russian aircraft landed at the airport of Gvardeyskoye (near Simferopol) with 150 people in each one," Sergiy Kunitsyn, the Ukrainian president's special representative in Crimea, told the local ATR television channel, according to AFP. He accused Russia of an "armed invasion."

The new developments prompted Ukraine to accuse Russia of a "military invasion and occupation" -- a claim that brought an alarming new dimension to the crisis.

Russia kept silent on claims of military intervention, even as it maintained its hard-line stance on protecting ethnic Russians in Crimea, a peninsula of Ukraine on the northern coast of the Black Sea.

A spokesman for the Ukrainian border service said eight Russian transport planes have landed in Crimea with unknown cargo.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading....

Palin Mocked In 2008 For Warning Putin May Invade Ukraine If Obama Elected

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin warned that if Senator Barack Obama were elected president, his "indecision" and "moral equivalence" may encourage Russia's Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.

After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama's reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia's Putin to invade Ukraine Next.

Sarah Palin discussed the issue with Fox New's Todd Starnes: I just finished chatting with Sarah Palin. Here's a comment she asked me to share exclusively with you folks:

"Back in 2008, I accurately predicted the possibility of Putin feeling emboldened to invade Ukraine because I could see what kind of leader Barack Obama would be. The bullies of the world are always emboldened by indecision and moral equivalence. We can expect more of this sort of thing in a world where America is gutting its military and 'leading from behind.'"

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading.....

McCain: Bob Costas ‘Doesn’t Know What the Hell He’s Talking About’

During an appearance on Fox News with Neil Cavuto Friday afternoon, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) weighed in on what he, and other critics, viewed as a too-friendly report on Russian president Vladimir Putin that NBC’s Bob Costasdelivered during last night’s Olympics coverage. “Bob Costas ought to stick to sports,” McCain said, “because he obviously didn’t know what the hell he was talking about.”

After Cavuto confirmed McCain knew he was being recorded, the senator continued with his analysis. “Mr. Costas giving him this kind of credit borders on the ludicrous,” McCain said.

RELATED: Garry Kasparov: NBC Acting Like ‘Cheerleaders’ for Putin ‘Propaganda’

Costas’ report touched on many aspects of Putin’s political career in Russia, giving him some level of credit for helping to prevent U.S. air strikes in Syria and getting Iran to the negotiating table on the issue of nuclear development.

“I have admired Bob Costas’ knowledge of sports and his in-depth analysis from time to time. I watch his program quite often,” McCain said. “But on this one, Bob, stick to the hockey games, will you?”

VIA: Mediate

Continue Reading....

Putin topples Obama in Forbes power ranking

New York (United States) — Having outfoxed him on Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin has pipped Barack Obama to the title of the world's most powerful leader as ranked by Forbes on Wednesday.

It was the first time in three years that the US president has dropped to second place on the magazine's list and came as US-Russia relations slid to a new low.

Putin, who has enjoyed 13 years of dominant rule over Russia, was again elected president in March 2012.

Obama, on the other hand, has just emerged scathed from an embarrassing 16-day US government shutdown caused by a budget and debt crisis in Washington.

"Putin has solidified his control over Russia, while Obama's lame duck period has seemingly set in earlier than usual for a two-term president -- latest example: the government shutdown mess," wrote Forbes.

In August, Russia granted asylum to former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, wanted in the United States over a mammoth intelligence leak.

A month later, Putin played the trump card again by averting Obama's threatened missile strikes on Syria with a plan for Damascus to hand over chemical weapons.

"Anyone watching this year?s chess match over Syria and NSA leaks has a clear idea of the shifting individual power dynamics," Forbes wrote.

The 2013 list of 72 powerbrokers was chosen to reflect one for every 100 million lesser mortals on Earth.

Third prize went to Chinese President Xi Jinping, who is expected to rule for a decade in which China is set to eclipse the US as the world's largest economy.

Pope Francis made his debut at number four and German Chancellor Angela Merkel rounded out the top five.

Among 13 newcomers were Samsung Chairman Lee Kun-Hee at number 41 and Nigerian billionaire Aliko Dangote, the richest man in Africa, in at number 64.

There were 17 heads of state who run nations with a combined GDP of $48 trillion and 27 CEOs and chairs who control over $3 trillion in annual revenues.

Only nine women made the cut despite representing half the world's population.

Via: Google

Continue Reading....

Putin Didn't Save Obama, He Beat Him

With the Russian proposal on Syrian chemical weapons, the United States is being escorted out of the Middle East.

Maybe Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin really did discuss the idea of putting Syrian chemical weapons under international control last week on the sidelines of the G20 conference. Putin sure doesn’t care that Obama’s taking credit for the proposal, or that the administration is posturing like a Mob enforcer.  “The only reason why we are seeing this proposal,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney, “is because of the U.S. threat of military action.”

Right, Putin is laughing to himself. Whatever. If Obama wants to sell it like a Christmas miracle on Pennsylvania Avenue that’s fine with Putin, because Putin won.

Reset with Russia was originally a strategic priority for the Obama administration because it saw Moscow as the key to getting Iran to come to the negotiating table. Putin, from the White House’s perspective, was destined for the role of junior partner. Now Putin has turned “Reset” upside down. By helping Obama out of a jam with Syria, Putin has made himself the senior partner to whom the White House is now beholden. Accordingly, when Putin proposes the same sort of deal with Iran, with Russia having established its bona fides as an interlocutor for Syria, Obama is almost certain to jump at it.

What’s unclear is whether Obama understands that his foreign policy legacy will be to have ruined the American position in the Middle East, our patrimony of the last seven decades. If the 1979 takeover of the U.S. embassy in Tehran signaled weakness, the Russian deal screams surrender. The real surprise is that it’s not Iran kicking the United States out of the region under Obama’s watch, but Putin.

Via: Weekly Standard

Continue Reading....