Welcome to New York

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

                There are over 600 cities, states, counties and other municipalities, not to mention the non-government organizations like churches that have declared themselves migrant sanctuaries. New York City is one of them and the State of New York is another. Did they take that declaration seriously or were their Democrat mayor and governor just virtue signaling? It’s easy enough to be a sanctuary city when the problem is largely confined to someone else’s back yard.

                A sanctuary municipality limits or denies its cooperation with the federal government in enforcing immigration law. They are not compelled by federal law to participate in immigration enforcement activities. Such activities are the responsibility of the federal government but Title 8 USC 1373 does prohibit them from obstructing enforcement of federal law. Some sanctuary policies may also violate the supremacy clause of the U. S. Constitution which states that the Constitution and federal laws shall be the supreme law of the land.

                I was under the impression that New Yorkers were proud of their status as citizens of a sanctuary city and state. However, New York City Mayor Eric Adams certainly didn’t sound very proud as he erupted during a town hall meeting recently about “a madman down in Texas deciding he wanted to bus people up to New York City.” The madman he’s referring to is properly known in polite company as the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott.

                “I don’t see an end to this. This issue will destroy New York City,” wailed the mayor who would apparently prefer that this “issue” destroy someplace else. “We’re getting 10,000 migrants a month. This city we knew we’re about to lose.” Welcome to the border crisis, Governor. We appreciate your cooperation.

                Mr. Adams boasted that he “turned this city around in 20 months” until mad man Greg started busing migrants to the Big Apple. Overall, crime In New York is down since June but America’s largest city still has a long way to go toward making its street, malls and subways safe from violent criminals. Is Adams suggesting that that immigrants fleeing violence back home and looking for a better life are going to start a new crime spree in New York?

                Does Mr. Adams think that this “issue” is a problem to be borne by the border states alone? This is a national crisis. The flood of illegal border crossers can’t all be accommodated in four border states and the federal government won’t let the states defend their own borders so someone has to do something. The last time I counted there were fifty states. Eleven of them are sanctuary states including New York, California (which has more migrants than any of the rest}, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Oregon and Colorado. Also, the District of Columbia which pretends to be a state. Seems to me that it was a pretty reasonable decision to send the migrants to a large sanctuary state where they can make a brand-new start of it in olde New York. If they can make it there, they can make it anywhere…but I digress.

                The border situation is a mess and everyone knows it. That is the fault of the Biden Administration which lost control of the southern border on day one of Biden’s term when he cancelled Trump policies without a plan of his own in place. Yet, Mr. Adams refrains from criticizing any Democrats, reserving it all for Mr. Abbott. Here’s a suggestion for Mayor Adams: Start blaming the Biden Administration for the chaos at the border. It won’t do any good, of course, until they are soundly voted out of office but it’s a start. Meanwhile, live with the problem. You’ve welcomed huddled masses before, including my ancestors. New York is a big state with other large cities and towns and surrounded by other sanctuary states, so you’re not alone in this mission. Perhaps Governor Kathy Hochul can spread the migrants around. You can do this. This issue will not destroy New York. It’s up to you, New York, New York.

September 21, 2023

Military Readiness Has a Short Shelf Life

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly. Jr.

                Most nations maintain armies to fight wars, deter them if they can and the rest of the time train in order to be ready to do these things. The training is essential because readiness is fragile and it atrophies rapidly from disuse. Unfortunately, it is a vulnerable target for force reduction efforts. Training can simulate battle conditions but only to a degree. Realism is important and nothing beats the real thing which is not to say we should start wars for the training benefit or to distract the people from government failures or domestic problems.

                World War II left the United States the most powerful superpower and largest economy in the world. This was supposed to be the war to end all wars and we could hardly wait to cash in the peace dividend. We largely decommissioned the fleet that won the Pacific War and when we were called upon to lead the United Nations effort In Korea we were sorely unprepared and the U.S. Army was reportedly drilling with wooden rifles. We suffered heavy initial casualties. That war, from June 1950 to July 1953 resulted in nearly 37,000 U.S. military fatalities and ended in a stalemate for fear of provoking China.

                The twenty-year Vietnam Conflict was fought between 1955 and 1975. About 58,288 Americans were killed in action and again we managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, partly for fear of further provoking China. There followed the two Gulf Wars, the first in response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, called Operation Desert Shield, from August 1990 to June 1991. We won this one which was limited to the single objective of freeing Kuwait, a tiny country the size of Connecticut. It was followed by the Second Gulf War, also called the Iraq War and sometimes the Unnecessary War, which began on March 20, 2002 and dragged on until 2011. By then, we were emmeshed in America’s longest war, Afghanistan, which began in 2001 and ended in 2021 with a precipitous and bungled withdrawal of U.S. troops which left 13 American service members dead and graphic images of Afghan supporters left behind, clinging to the undercarriage of a U.S. aircraft.

                Up through the Vietnam Conflict, Selective Service was the law of the land and we actually achieved some of the real benefits of diversity. Today, diversity is sometimes suggested as a replacement for merit.

                When Russia invaded Ukraine and marched on Kyiv, most observers expected an easy Russian victory and were surprised by the early sucesses of the Ukrainian defenders. Even more surprising was the poor planning, lack of leadership and general ineptitude of the young Russian troops. They were poorly trained and poorly led and instead of the swift “special operation” that Vladimir Putin envisioned in which his troops would be welcomed as brothers, the war settled down to a brutal war of attrition which favored the much larger nation, especially if restrictions on the use of U.S.- or NATO -provided weapons precluded use against targets inside Russia.

                While the Ukrainians have attacked nearby Russian cities with drones, drones alone will not be sufficient for them to prevail in a war of attrition against their much-lager neighbor. Ukraine needs large quantities of heavy artillery, missile systems and attack aircraft to carry the fight deep er into the Russian homeland. This, of course, runs the risk of provoking Putin to escalate the conflict and perhaps even use tactical nuclear weapons but that risk was always there because this is a war that Putin cannot afford to lose and stay in power. If we intend to stay in this fight for however long it takes, we can’t afford to lose either, and that means giving Ukraine the weapons they need to win.

                The poor performance of Russian troops seemed to come as a surprise to everyone. It should be remembered, however, that Mr. Putin did not mobilize for this invasion but relied heavily on mercenaries in a “special operation.” The initial assault on Kyiv may have turned out differently if he had mobilized the full force of the Russian Army. What lessons will Chinese leaders learn from this experience? How would the People’s Army perform in an invasion of Taiwan? For that matter, how would ours if we responded with armed force as Mr. Biden insists we would?

                It has been twelve years since the Second Gulf War wound down and it took us months to get ready for it. Half of our military age population can’t qualify for military service. Our defense industrial infrastructure needs rebuilding. There’s more to military readiness than combat skills. There’s intelligence, planning, analysis and logistics. Our chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan was not reassuring. Are we focused more on diversity and wokeness than merit and colorblindness?

In short, if we are called to combat, would we be ready? How would we know?

September 13, 2023

Winning Elections the Old-fashioned Way

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

                It is well-known that Democrat support groups contributed financially and otherwise to the campaigns of GOP candidates they preferred their own candidates to run against in the 2022 mid-term elections. Needless to say, they weren’t the strongest candidates on the ballot. The strategy can hardly be considered successful because the Republicans won the House anyway, albeit by a thin margin. Neither party seems to learn from its mistakes. Both parties, for example, seem determined to nominate old men that at least half of Americans don’t want to run.

                The latest Wall Street Journal Poll found that nationwide support for former president Donald Trump has now risen to 59%. Why? Has Mr. Trump become more appealing? I’ll leave that for you to judge. The answer, according to a recent Wall Street Journal editorial. might be found in the responses to a particular poll question: “Do Donald Trump’s indictments make you more or less likely to vote for him or have no impact on whether or not you vote for Donald Trump?” Among GOP primary voters, 48% said that the indictments made them more likely to vote for Mr. Trump and 36% answered that the indictments would have no effect on their vote. The indictments, apparently, are helping Mr. Trump win the nomination.

                The responses, of course, were different when the question was asked of just registered voters. Still, 24% of those respondents said they were more likely to vote for Mr. Trump because of them and 35% percent said that the indictments would have no effect on their vote. The Democrat leaders surely see what’s happening. They may be misguided but they are not stupid. Their strategy must be to keep helping Trump win the nomination and then see that he is tied up in court to prevent him from effectively campaigning, as the Wall Street Journal opines in the editorial.

                It’s a risky strategy to say the least because convictions are by no means assured and Trump may win even if convicted on all of them. The poll also indicates that Biden and Trump are currently tied at 46% to win the election which gives some indication of just how seriously much of the public takes these indictments. Mr. Biden’s chances aren’t likely to improve with age and if Democrat strategists keep trying to win his re-election in the courts instead of at the ballot box, the voting public may decide that they’ve had enough of these games and just put Mr. Trump back in office. Creating a constitutional crisis and an international embarrassment is to them a small price to pay in order to cling to power.

                Still, some Democrat leaders seem concerned that the indictments are helping Mr. Trump in the polls and making Mr. Biden look even weaker than he is. Perhaps, then, they should try to win the election the old-fashioned way, at the ballot box, not the courts. Let the people decide, not unelected judges. What a novel thought. But instead, they appear to be considering another extraordinary measure to remove him from the ballot by invoking Section 3 of the Constitution’s 14^th Amendment. They cite language that says no person who has taken an oath to support and defend the U. S. Constitution shall serve in any public office who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid and comfort to the enemies thereof.

                Insurrection? Please. The capitol riots were a disgrace and Mr. Trump’s conduct was shameful but it was hardly an insurrection. It was a relatively brief, violent interruption of the nation’s business by a bunch of mostly loonies and it failed. The nation’s business got done. People were punished.

                I am no fan of Donald Trump but Democrats are responsible for the actions which started this mess which has caused Americans to lose confidence in the integrity of our elections, in Congress and in the Justice Department and its enforcement agencies. Donald Trump wouldn’t even be a former president had not then-FBI Director James Comey interfered with the 2016 presidential election by reopening the Hillary Clinton investigation on the eve of the election. Trump narrowly won but Democrat leaders never accepted the legitimacy of his victory and engaged in bogus Russian collusion theories to impeach him. Election strategies have changed as a result and definitely not for the better.

September 8, 2023

Issues for the Candidates

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

                Campaign 2023 is upon us and it’s time for some serious discussion over where the country is headed. Another recent NBC poll found that three quarters of U. S. voters still feel that the country is headed in the wrong direction. Just one-fifth felt that it was headed in the right direction. This denotes a stunning lack of confidence in our nation’s leadership that cries out for change. How can we continue under the current leadership when it refuses to change in spite of the fact that only one out of every five voters feel that we are on the right track? What business enterprise would continue to operate under the same leadership team with those kinds of approval ratings?

                Let’s face it. The country, particularly the urban areas, is a mess. Some crime statistics are down but violence and murder are not are not decreasing. Many of our cities have become cesspools of crime, gang violence, drug addiction and homelessness. Our southern border is still out of control, leaving us exposed to drug and human trafficking and serious security issues. Millions of people of working age have dropped out of the workforce. The economy has more jobs than qualified workers willing to work them. We are experiencing a continuing crisis in parenting with millions of children being raised in homes without a father figure to model responsible male adult behavior and help with the burden of raising children.

                Disrespect for law enforcement, other forms of authority and property is widespread and tolerated, a precursor often to a breakdown in society. Smash and grab robberies take place regularly while people stand and watch. Law enforcement personnel decide which laws they will bother to enforce, and prosecutors decide which criminals they will prosecute. Police staffing is at a crisis level in some jurisdictions. Race relations have deteriorated in spite of endless programs designed to help. Why have we failed to achieve a colorblind society?

                Our focus on the climate and cultural wars has led to policies that may force transition to renewable energy long before those energy sources are reliable and affordable. We have foolishly failed to take advantage of our abundant energy resources, especially clean liquid natural gas, by building the needed pipelines and processing and port facilities in favor of feel-good measures that survive only while the government subsidies continue and which have little or no effect on net global emissions as long as most of the developing world burns coal and oil which they must for decades yet or forgo growth.

Aside from our domestic challenges which are daunting enough, we are fighting a proxy war in Ukraine against Russia for which no apparent end game exists. Constraints against attacking the Russian homeland for fear of further provoking Russia mean that Ukraine will slowly lose a lengthy and bloody war of attrition. Russia cannot be permanently forced out of Crimea, which was once part of Russia and which hosts the Russian Black Sea Fleet, without expanding the war and involving NATO, with all the dangers that this entails.

                Meanwhile, China bides its time with regard to Taiwan. The Chinese economy has stalled and unemployment among young Chinese is rising. This may prevent China from overtaking our economy any time soon but don’t think for a moment it will change its determination to surpass us as the nation with the world’s most powerful military or from occupying Taiwan. In fact, as the Chinese economy slows, the People’s Republic may well decide to move on Tawain to distract the Chinese people from their economic worries and give them something to cheer about. America will still need a substantially larger military, and especially a larger navy and air force and the defense industrial base necessary to build it rapidly enough and maintain it. The PRC will still pose a threat, regardless of the state of its economy. The PRC is ruled by Communists, not economists.

                These are some of the issues that the candidates must be prepared to discuss. They won’t have all the answers, of course. No one does. But they must have ideas. The old ones simply are not working. The last two administrations did not lead us well and there is little reason to believe that they have improved with age. New leaders must emerge from this process and voters need to make better choices than in 2016 and 2020.

September 1, 2023