w11.zetaboards.com Webutation
Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

- NATIONS

Domestic News: | International News: P | Military News: | Financial News: | Other News: |
Add Reply
The New York Times
Topic Started: Sep 17 2014, 11:52 PM (757 Views)
Jos1311
Member Avatar
Head Admin
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jos1311
Member Avatar
Head Admin
Republicans pull ahead again in battle for Senate
Polls indicate many voters still unsure

Posted Image

NEW YORK | United States (September 2014) -- If the polls of early September were a reminder that the Democratic path to 50 seats remains open, then the last two weeks were a reminder of how quickly that path could close.

Recent polls in Iowa, Colorado and Alaska have offered better news for Republicans. As a result, the Republicans are again slight favorites to retake the Senate, according to Leo, The Upshot’s Senate model. They have a 61 percent chance of retaking the chamber, up from 50 percent in the middle of last week.

The shift toward the Republicans is not necessarily significant. The national race is so close that moving a key state by one or two points in either direction can produce a seemingly large shift in the overall Senate picture. Nonetheless, the last week or so of one- or two-point shifts have made the Republican path to 51 seats look easier.

The Republicans are clear favorites to win at least 49 seats, including five seats currently held by Democrats: South Dakota, Montana, West Virginia, Arkansas and Louisiana. Republicans aren’t assured to win in Louisiana or Arkansas — where a Suffolk poll recently gave Senator Mark Pryor his first lead in a while — but the public data leaves few serious questions about which candidate has the advantage.
_____

Source
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jos1311
Member Avatar
Head Admin
Democrats retain majority in Senate
Situation in the House of Representatives remains unchanged as well

Posted Image

NEW YORK | United States (November 2014) -- Republicans were seeking to win the six seats necessary to take control of the Senate, while Democrats hoped to retain the Senate for the final two years of President Barack Obama's second and last term.

In the previous months polls swung in favor of the Democrats to the Republicans, and according to many political journalists there was a significant risk that the Democrats would lose their majority in the Senate.

Despite initial polls suggesting that the Republicans would win in Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, and West Virginia all four seats remained in the hands of the Democrats. Meaning that although Iowa, Colorado, South Dakota, and Montana, fell to the Republicans. As a result the required number of six additional seats was not reached, and the Democrats, under Harry Reid, will retain a majority.

In the Senate the Democrats will now have the smallest possible majority with a total of 51 seats, while the Republicans, under Mitch McConnell, will have a total of 49 seats.

The situation in the House of Representatives will remain unchanged as well, with all 435 seats being up for elections, the Democrats managed to gain some additional seats, however with a total number of 205 seats, the majority will remain in the hands of the Republicans, who managed to win a total of 230 seats. "While a small loss, the situation will thus remain the same as it has been, namely with the Democrats controlling the Senate and the Republicans controlling the House," one analysts concluded.

The outcome of the elections will mean that for the remainder of his term President Obama will have to reach across party lines and work effectively to help the country forward. Something that he has been unable or unwilling to do in the past period, "however the first signs of chance in attitude have already been witnessed," several experts state. Adding that they believe he is able to take on the role of a unifier.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jos1311
Member Avatar
Head Admin
US Navy to deploy armed, robotic patrol boats
Analysts say that technology could change how US Navy operates

Posted Image

WASHINGTON D.C. | United States (April 2015) --The US Navy says it will soon use armed, robotic patrol boats with no sailors on board to escort and defend warships moving through sensitive sea lanes.

The technology, adapted from NASA’s rovers on Mars, will transform how the American navy operates and is sure to raise fresh questions and concerns about the widening role of robots in warfare. The Office of Naval Research on Sunday released the results of what it called an unprecedented demonstration involving 13 robotic patrol craft escorting a ship along the James River in Virginia.

In a simulated scenario, five of the robotic patrol boats guarded a larger ship, while eight others were ordered to investigate a suspicious vessel.

The unmanned patrol boats then encircled and swarmed the “target,” enabling the mother ship to move safely through the area.

The demonstration, conducted over two weeks, was designed to “replicate a transit through a strait,” naval research chief Rear Admiral Matthew Klunder told reporters in a recent briefing. “It could be the straits of Malacca, it could be the straits of Hormuz.”

The demonstration was a “breakthrough” that goes far beyond any previous experiment, he said, adding that similar robotic patrol craft likely will be escorting US naval ships within a year.

The patrol craft, 11-meter (yard) long vessels known in the military as rigid hulled inflatable boats, are usually operated by three or four sailors. But outfitted with the robotic system, a single sailor could oversee up to 20 of the vessels.

Source
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jos1311
Member Avatar
Head Admin
U.S. still searching for credible allies in Syria
Analysts warn off potentially serious flaw in the U.S. strategy to defeat Islamic State

Posted Image

WASHINGTON D.C. | United States (May 2015) -- Despite years of diplomacy and a CIA operation to vet and train moderate rebels, the U.S. finds itself without a credible partner on the ground in Syria as it is preparing to bomb Islamic State (IS) here. Various analysts have already warned that there is a potentially serious flaw in the U.S. strategy to ultimately defeat the militants.

Obama administration officials have long conceded that airstrikes alone won't drive IS from its strongholds across Syria and Iraq, but it also has ruled out the use of American ground troops. The U.S. strategy to crush IS rests on the use of local proxy forces, and hinges on plans to use vague plans with Saudi Arabia to build an army of moderate Syrian rebels.

The ground force component has always been seen as a challenge in Syria, but the difficulty has become clearer in recent days. Officials acknowledge that the any potential U.S. air operation over SYria will be presented with a major obstacle, as Washington doesn't trust any Syrian rebel groups enough to coordinate on the air campaign, despite attempts by some pro-Western fighters to pass along intelligence about IS positions.

According to some source the CIA has secretly trained and is paying undetermined numbers of moderates to help achieve the administration's stated objective of overthrowing Syrian president Bashar Assad.

These fighters have been gaining ground against Assad in southern Syria and in some places are fighting IS, said Robert Ford, a former U.S. ambassador to Syria. The CIA-funded fighters have proven reliable and have made modest gains, said a congressional aide who has been briefed on the matter. The aide spoke only on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence.

But some analysts have questioned the fighters' loyalty and competence. Either way, it's clear their impact has not been decisive.

"Most of these groups have worked closely with Jabat al Nusra at some point in the last year or so," said Joshua Landis, the Arabic-speaking director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, referring to the head of Syria's al-Qaida spinoff. "Some of them have worked hand in glove with IS. For Americans to call a sit-down and say 'We will bomb these positions, in order to undermine IS' doesn't make any sense. We don't trust these guys."

American officials don't go that far in public remarks, but they have been fairly blunt. "We don't have a willing, capable, effective partner on the ground inside Syria right now," Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon spokesman, said last week. "That is a fact." Adding that as a result of this the decision to start aerial operations over Syria is a difficult decision as a result of this lack of support on the ground.

John Allen, the retired Marine general in charge of coordinating the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State group, told reporters that "at this point, there is not formal coordination with" the U.S.-backed moderate rebels known as the Free Syrian Army.

That approach has infuriated rebels, fueling mistrust on both sides. The commander of a moderate rebel brigade in the northern Aleppo province, who goes by the name Abu Thabet, called the potential U.S.-led airstrikes "pointless and self-serving."

According to many analysts if Americans start to bomb IS positions in the country, Syrian government forces will most likely gain the most. A conclusion that is said by Abu Thabet. Moderate factions like his will most likely be trapped between IS fighters on one side and government forces on another, placing his men directly in the firing lines of U.S. aircraft.

Abu Thabet said rebels have tried to pass along information about IS positions to the U.S. military, but have received no response. "The Americans are kidding themselves," he said. He then praised the Nusra Front, underscoring the exact sort of concerns that bedevil U.S. policymakers.

"I am surprised at how fractious and disunified the Syrian opposition has been," said Michael O'Hanlon, a military strategy expert at the Brookings Institution. "They just haven't managed to find a charismatic leader or a single rallying point." Part of the explanation, he and others said, rests with the decision by the Obama administration not to fund and equip the moderates three years ago, before Nusra and IS grew in strength.

Allen said the U.S.-led coalition intends "to build a coherence to the Free Syrian Army elements that will give it the capacity and the credibility over time to be able to make its weight felt in the battlefield against IS. It's going to require a build phase. It's going to require a training and equipping phase."

Critics question whether the current plans and their perceived scope will be sufficient to ensure that the goals will be achieved. "I do not understand how 10,000 men, perhaps more, are going to hold the eastern half of Syria," said Ford, the former ambassador. "It looks woefully inadequate to me."

O'Hanlon, the analyst, added that the numbers however are unclear and perhaps the Obama strategy is "far more serious." He added that the U.S. has been extremely quiet when it comes to providing numbers and figures, and that most sources are often not based close to the highest echelons of command.

Rep. Mike Pompeo, a Kansas Republican and former Army officer who serves on the House intelligence committee, said he heard during a just-concluded trip to Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey a widespread "fear that the Americans' stated objectives aren't consistent with our actions to date."

Pompeo, Ford, O'Hanlon and many other observers believe that the Obama administration ultimately will have to take tougher action against the Assad government, perhaps including a no-fly zone, to induce Syrian Sunni Arabs to fight IS. Carl Levin, the Michigan democrat who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, called for a no-fly zone and a buffer zone to protect civilians. The Syrian foreign ministry responded shortly after that it was "ferociously opposed" to any such measures.

Source
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lordofthechris

White House: do not expect full or immediate sanction relief for Russia
Russia provocations continue, despite promises

Washington - An anonymous source within the White House revealed that the administration is strongly considering keeping the bulk of sanctions against Russia in place due to Moscow's continued provocations in Europe and the Middle East. The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak on the subject, stated that the administration views Russia's continued occupation of Crimea as well as the unilateral military intervention in Syria as "alarming signals" about Russia's aggressive ambitions abroad. Although the United States had appealed to the European Union to consider sanction relief, the operation in Syria seems to have cemented the White House's position that the sanctions still remain necessary.

"The general feeling is that the Russians have taken advantage of American good will," stated the source. "It appears that they're exploiting U.S. good will in Europe to stoke conflict abroad."

Although the White House has been largely silent on Syria since Russian intervention, it is known that the action, launched without warning, has seriously offended senior advisers in the White House, leading to the idea that the sanctions should be maintained. The general consensus, according to the source, is that the administration is particularly unhappy with the timing and manner of the Russian intervention. "The intervention by the Russians has no doubt seriously escalated the situation, which we have seen in recent news," the source confirmed. "It makes it very difficult for the White House to consider Moscow as credible partner, given that it still occupies Crimea."

The sanctions have been particularly damaging to Russia's economy, which is expected to enter into recession as a result. The slowed economic growth, combined with depressed oil prices, has put a serious strain on Russia's economic stability. It is not clear if the European Union will maintain or withdraw the sanctions.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lordofthechris

Senator McCain to White House: "Enlarge NATO"
Republican leadership pressures White House to support NATO expansion

WASHINGTON — Two influential Senate Republicans are urging the White House to flex America’s muscles in Russia’s backyard in the wake of Moscow’s unilateral intervention in Syria.

GOP Senate Armed Services Committee members John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina urged the Obama administration to embrace states aspiring for NATO membership.

“Given our lack of progress on issues such as missile defense and arms control, Crimea, and Syria, and human rights and civil society in the last 12 months, we believe it is important that the U.S. seeks to strengthen the NATO alliance that defends a free and prosperous Europe," the two senators stated in a joint statement.

Russia recently inked the Minsk Treaty with Ukraine, ending open fighting within the country.

That’s not enough, said the senators, who served up a typically muscular list of proposed steps.

“But now we must move beyond symbolic acts and take the steps necessary to establish a more realistic approach to our relations with Russia,” McCain and Graham said. “That means demonstrating to the Russian government that there will be consequences for its continued actions that undermine American national interests.”

The steps envisioned by two-thirds of the Senate’s hawkish “Three Amigos” faction include moving forward with “completion of all phases of our missile defense programs in Europe.”

What’s more, McCain and Graham are urging Obama to set in motion a new expansion of NATO, the post-World War II alliance establish to guard Europe against Russian aggression.

In recent years, former members of the Warsaw Pact — Russia’s answer to NATO, composed almost entirely of its satellite states — have broken free of Moscow and joined the Western group.

Since 1999, Eastern European nations on that list include Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania and Croatia.

Now, McCain and Graham — who both met for two hours with Obama on national security matters — say the president should “move expeditiously on another round of NATO expansion, including the Republic of Georgia.”

Such a move likely would rile Putin.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lordofthechris

Cuba's problem is lack of human rights, not embargo
Editorial

The Cuban government made a splash today at the United Nations with a stern, and some say undiplomatic, admonishment of the U.S. embargo of the country, prompting the U.S. ambassador to walk out.

In his speech, the Cuban ambassador made several lofty claims about his government's desire to reform. But the same Cuban dictatorship that is supposedly changing is the one responsible for taking many lives and imprisoning many members of the political opposition.

How can anyone know what “the overwhelming majority” of Cubans agree on if we have no access to mass media on the island and no citizen under the age of 80 has ever voted in free and pluralistic elections? Cubans deserve and have asked for a plebiscite to change the law, so that they can choose a legitimate government and hold it accountable.

Lifting the US embargo is not the solution, because it is not the cause of our lack of political and economic rights. We are in favor of coherent communication, but engagement and dialogue should not be a reward for the military elite from Havana that imposes its monologic agenda on the Cuban people while fostering intolerance and hostility with absolute impunity.

Let’s not speak for the Cubans but support the right of Cubans to have a voice in Cuba.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lordofthechris

Presidential jockeying begins one year out from 2016 elections
Clear front-runners will not appear for some time

Washington - With the 2016 presidential elections a little more than a year from now, presidential hopefuls are busy posturing for the election race. Although there are no clear party favorites this early, several aspiring candidates have already made the headlines.

In New Jersey, Governor Chris Christie offended audiences when, while speaking backstage after a major policy speech, an open mike caught him proclaiming "I wish [rape victims] would shut the hell up already." Christie was apparently referring to Samantha Klein, who has badgered the governor this week over the state's lack of action regarding sexual assault on its college campuses. A public affairs person with Christie's office stated in an e-mail that the Governor's comments were "taken out of context" and that Christie "firmly supports the work of victim advocates".

Also in the Republican camp, senators Tom Cotton and Rand Paul sparred about the future of American foreign polic on this week's State of the Union. Although both agreed that the Obama administration "failed the American people," they staked out very different visions of national security. Cotton asserted that the U.S. must exercise a "muscular response" to international threats and advocated introducing troops on the ground in Syria. Paul, in response, cited the "troops on the ground in Iraq" as the cause of the problems in the region in the first place.

Other potential Republican candidates include senator Ted Cruz and Lousiana governor Bobby Jindal while no clear indication has been seen as to whether Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney will attempt another run at the White House.

In the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton has emerged as the clear early favorite among party faithful. However, the Clintons have appeared careful in riding the wave of excitement out of concern of a repeat of 2008 when a young, articulate senator Obama upset Clinton's campaign. Other potential candidates include Elizabeth Warren, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Joe Biden.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lordofthechris

Big changes coming to Democratic Party's platform
Democratic National Committee expected to release agenda in the near future

Washington - In a reflection of the country's changing demographics and recent experiences with multiple wars and recession, the Democratic National Commitee is expected to release a new party platform with substantial changes to the program. The platform is expected to target the young, minorities, and poor, all traditional Democratic constituencies but also those hardest hit by the last decade's tumult.

Although no specifics are yet available, insiders have confirmed that the agenda will "re-look" the Democratic Party's position on nearly every issue, including immigration, defense, welfare, education, and infrastructure. One anonymous source commented that this is the "most ambitious idea since the New Deal". Even President Obama's signature legislative achievement, the Affordable Healthcare Act, will be under scrutiny, but this time from the political left.

"There are considerable discussions about promoting a public, universal option for healthcare," stated the source.

As the country becomes more diverse and urban (90% of the country's population growth has been in urban areas and coastal cities), seismic changes are expected in the political landscape. "I foresee a decisive shift to the left," stated political analyst Dr. Jerome Mustard. "As the elderly, white vote becomes less decisive, the political parties will move leftward to address the expectations of the urban, minority, and youth populations."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Round 5 · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Skin created by tiptopolive