I Want You To Be The Judge

Published: Fri, 03/22/13

Home   |    About Dick Young  | 
 
In This Issue:
The Most Important Person In America You May Never Have Have Heard Of Part II By Richard C. Young
Fred Kaplan at Cato The Editors
Is Anyone Paying Attention Here? By E.J. Smith
I Want You To Be The Judge By Richard C. Young
VIDEO: The Invasion of Iraq – Ten Years Later The Editors
AT4 CS – Light Armour Weapon The Editors
VIDEO: King Curtis & The Kingpins Live “Memphis Soul Stew” By Richard C. Young
Rand Paul and The Cato Institute Trump Bush/Gingrich The Editors 

Young Investments Client Letter: Sign up to get the letter mailed directly to you by clicking here .
New February Client Letter: Dividends and the Bull Market
Dividends are a vital component of long-term-investment returns. This isn’t a recent phenomenon. Contrary to what many investors believe, dividends and the reinvestment of dividends have always played a leading role in common-stock returns. During bull markets, including that of 2012, dividends may seem like an afterthought, but over the last seven decades, dividends have accounted for an average of 60% of each decade’s stock market returns.—Read more by clicking here 
 
 
  
    Are you having trouble viewing or printing this email? Click here.

 
The Most Important Person In America You May Never Have Heard Of
Part II
 

What is the best book you can read on the safety and freedom of America? Well right off the bat you know that, despite the howls, it will not be coming out of AEI. If you instead are thinking The Cato Institute, you are right on track. The name of the book is The Power Problem: How American Military Dominance Makes Us Less Safe, Less Prosperous, and Less Free, by my friend Christopher A. Preble, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at The Cato Institute.

powerproblem From inside the dust jacket: “In Preble’s estimate, if the policy makers in Washington have at their disposal immense military might, they will constantly be tempted to overreach, and to redefine ever more broadly the ‘national interest.’ Preble holds that the core national interest—preserving American security—is easily defined and largely immutable. Possessing vast military power in order to further other objectives is, he asserts, illicit and to be resisted. Preble views military power as purely instrumental: If it advances U.S. security, then it is fulfilling its essential role. If it does not—if it undermines our security, imposes unnecessary costs, and forces all Americas to incur additional risks—then our military power is a problem, one that only we can solve. As it stands today, Washington’s eagerness to maintain and use an enormous and expensive military is corrosive to contemporary American democracy.”

Chris’s book came out in 2009, but today it’s more relevant than ever due to, in some measure, the sequestration flap. Potential cut backs in offense (sorry, defense) always bring out the true colors of politicians, lobbyists, and the scads of policy think tanks and influence peddlers that blanket the American political landscape. As for the media, you just can’t get a good shake. I rate the big three networks, as well as Fox, CNN and the hysterical MSNBC (do Americans really watch this stuff?) as counterproductive to the interests of Americans who believe in the constitutionally strong federal republic form of government envisioned by our Founders.

Chris discusses fulfilling an essential role while not undermining our security and not imposing unnecessary costs and risks. In this regard, let’s look at the Weinberger/Powell Doctrine, which Chris deals with in his book. I would like you to read the article Weinberger/Powell Doctrine R.I.P., penned by Chris in 2011, in which he writes, “Actually, it isn’t a question. It’s a statement: the doctrine that sought to prevent the United States from engaging in risky and counterproductive missions that had nothing to do with protecting U.S. vital interests (e.g., Lebanon, 1983; Somalia, 1991; and Kosovo, 1999) is dead. Shovel dirt on it “

Chris explains that the doctrine’s essential elements boil down to five key questions. (1) Is there a compelling national interest at stake? (2) Have the costs and consequences of intervention been considered? (3) Have we exhausted all available options for resolving the problem, i.e. is force a last resort? (4) Is there a clear and achievable military mission, and therefore a well-defined end state? (5) Is there strong public support-both domestic and international support-for the operation?

The Libyan foray is exhibit number one. Chris quickly concludes, in short, that there was no compelling U.S. national interest at stake. The costs and consequences were not considered or debated, the mission was not clearly defined, and we did not have a clear understanding of an end state. ”It goes too far to claim that the Libyan intervention killed the Weinberger/Powell doctrine. It was already dead, or at least very sick. But I (Chris) see President Obama’s decision as a clear indication that the relative wisdom and prudence of the Reagan/Bush I years is but a distant memory.”

In May 2009, Chris authored a series of articles appearing in The Globalist . Among the conclusions outlined (each from The Power Problem) are the following: “(1) For too long, we have defined our strength as a nation by our capacity for waging war. (2) We have come to believe, erroneously, that military power keeps us safe, and that more power will keep us safer. (3) But the true strength of the United States, the true source of U.S. power, is its people. Our spirit, our generosity and our ingenuity are expressed in countless ways, most of which have nothing to do with our military prowess. (4) By reducing the size of our military to a level more consistent with our own needs, and by encouraging others to become more reliant, we can make space for the other forms of human interaction that facilitate security and prosperity over the long haul.”

Next Monday at richardcyoung.com, I will conclude my three part series on Cato Institute’s Chris Preble and The Power Problem. I will also include a review of Chris’s “Was Counterinsurgency Worth It?” Finally, I’ll give you some of the highlights of Chris’s recent look at “Costs and Benefits of 2013’s Foreign Policy Initiatives.” You’ll not want to miss this pivotal posting on the security of America.

In preparation for part two of The Power Problem, Chris emailed me a few thoughts that I want to share with you here. You can expand on each in The Power Problem . Chris writes, “Powell (Colin) isn’t perfect, not by a long stretch, but I think his instincts when it comes to using the military are spot on. And the fact that he was opposed so strenuously by a liberal Democrat and the neocons tells you a lot about both groups—they are the same! Look at what Paul Wolfowitz said about Albright, or what Bill Kristol said about Susan Rice. These people aren’t partisans the way they are portrayed. They care more about being involved all over the world than they do about electing Republicans. Which is why they have been a disaster for the GOP. Why can’t the party figure this out? Anyway, there are two parties: the evil party, and the stupid party. And they’re both wrong on foreign policy.”

What we are looking at here is the appropriate defense (as opposed to offense) policy to make America safer, more prosperous, and more free for us all. I know of no better organization than the Cato Institute to bring the safety and freedom message to all Americans. And as you can see, I view Chris Preble to be a Cato standard-bearer.

Related Posts:


>> read more
 
Fred Kaplan at Cato
 

insurgentsBe sure to tune into Cato Live today at 12:30 to see author Fred Kaplan discuss his book, The Insurgents: David Petraeus and the Plot to Change the American Way of War with comments by Spencer Ackerman, National Security Correspondent, WIRED; and Janine Davidson, George Mason University; moderated by Christopher Preble, Vice President, Defense and Foreign Policy Studies, Cato Institute.

View it by clicking here www.cato.org/live





Related Posts:


>> read more
 
Is Anyone Paying Attention Here?
 

It turns out the state of Illinois misled municipal bond investors by not disclosing its unfunded pension liability. Here we are in 2013, and the scolding from the SEC is about bond disclosures going back to 2005 and 2009. What’s the rush?

If you’ve been a regular visitor to Richardcyoung.com, then the unfunded pension liability is not news to you. We’ve been talking about this for years. I’m not sure what’s more distressing, the fact that the SEC is so late to the party or the fact that $2.2 billion of the stuff was snapped up by buyers. As usual, investors seem to be OK with piling on the risk just as long as they don’t lose any money. Stay tuned.

magical-moneyIt’s shameful that the state of Illinois treats its pension like an afterthought. It has only 40 cents of assets for every dollar it owes. Who’s voting for these politicians anyway, the teachers? The money isn’t going to magically appear.

What’s concerning is that local politicians like Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel want to make their problem your problem by having the federal government pick up the tab. Mr. Emanuel wants Chicago’s retiree health benefits to be federally funded through an Obamacare state exchange. Are you ready to start paying for Illinois state workers’ health care? No? Too bad, it’s coming. At the end of the day, this move by the SEC is pathetic. It’s criminal that pension obligations are not met by proper fiduciaries. But no one is held accountable, as we can see in a case like this—when the SEC, an arm of the federal government, administers Illinois nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

Related Posts:


>> read more
 
I Want You To Be The Judge
 

Your family’s financial, personal and health security is my daily priority on your behalf. I have linked two articles for you. Red-Meat Risk Factors for Heart Disease in Women and Let Them Eat Fat. Read each with care. One should never have seen the light of day. The other is… well, you tell me. Next Wednesday I am going to dig into both articles for you with some conclusions that will perhaps come as a bit of a surprise.

Related Posts:


>> read more
 
VIDEO: The Invasion of Iraq – Ten Years Later
 

>> read more
 
AT4 CS – Light Armour Weapon
 

Dismounted soldiers are vulnerable. Especially in urban terrain and close combat. The AT4 CS combines a highly effective warhead with a unique launch system, providing the gunner with the tactical advantage of being able to fire the weapon from concealed spaces and fully utilise the terrain for cover and concealment.

Confined space capability Firepower from inside building – especially suited for the tight confines of urban warfare

Combat Proven - AT4CS HP is a combat-proven system currently in service with a large number of armies worldwide.



Watch the AT4 in action here.

Features:

The AT4 CS is available in two versions, HP and RS. The two versions differ mainly in the warheads being optimised for maximum penetration in HP and the utilisation of the unique warhead design of the AT4 HEAT, with its high kill probability, in the RS version.

  • Fire from a Confined Space capability
  • Range 20-300 m
  • Easy to operate
  • Disposable when fired

 

TECHNICAL DATA

Calibre 84 mm
Weight 7.8 kg
Length 1.04 m
Armour penetration > 500 mm
Muzzle velocity 220 m/s

TRANSPORT BOX

L x W x H 1090 x 795 x 250 mm
Weight (4 pcs) 49 kg
Unit load (16 pcs) 210 kg

Source: Saab – Defence and Security

Related Posts:


>> read more
 
VIDEO: King Curtis & The Kingpins Live “Memphis Soul Stew”
 

>> read more
 
Rand Paul and The Cato Institute Trump Bush/Gingrich
 

nullOn Monday, the RNC released its plan for rebuilding the Republican Party. The Washington Post called the party “struggling” and MSNBC called Republicans “dead men talking.” But the main media narrative is that the GOP is in soul searching mode, split between two visions of the party that are incompatible with one another: an inclusive vision that moves left to garner support from independents and Democrats on the fence, and a defensive vision that moves right to fire up the base.

In reality these visions aren’t exclusive of one another, unless you misunderstand the Constitution and how government is meant to work. An inclusive vision would have the GOP appealing more to Hispanics, homosexuals, African-Americans, young people and women. That’s necessary in that these groups make up a substantial portion of the electorate. Let’s call these the Jeb Bush Republicans. The defensive position says that in order to win elections the base must be energized. The theory is that the base didn’t show up for the establishment moderate Mitt Romney, which cost the Republican Party the election. That’s also demonstrably true. Let’s call this group the Newt Gingrich Republicans.

Both parties, as outlined by the arbitrary spokesmen we’ve chosen, have faults. The Jeb Bush crowd seems to want to win new constituencies with the same tactics used by Democrats: namely appealing to them as sub-groups of Americans, determining what they want, and giving it to them, the Constitution be damned. Meanwhile the Gingrich crowd seeks to win without building a coalition. Newt chooses to feed red-meat sound bites to the base without a consistent message.

The ultimate goals of broadening the party’s base and increasing its activity level are desirable and necessary. But are these two paths exclusive of one another and, if not, what is the unifying philosophy that can achieve both goals simultaneously? The answer lies with the libertarian philosophy outlined by the Cato Institute and championed by politicians like Sen. Rand Paul.

On issues like gay marriage, immigration, education reform, and drugs, the Cato Institute provides middle ground without compromising the principles of Madison and Jefferson. And on spending and the budget, there is no other outfit in Washington more thorough in the assessment of waste and abuse than is Cato. Join Cato’s efforts by becoming a sponsor and supporting the best effort in Washington for rational, small government with solutions that are logical and workable.

Related Posts:


>> read more

Follow richardcyoung.com 
on Twitter
    
 

Our Strategy Reports
 
 

 

 
This Week's Featured Videos
 

VIDEO: Fred Kaplan at Cato.

 

 

Contributors   |   Media   |   Archives


Copyright 2011. All Rights Reserved.