Obama going to war with ISIS

Obama is asking Congress for approval to go to war against ISIS. This is the second time after the fabricated invasion of Iraq by George Bush that the USA would be put on a war footing. I must say that this ISIS is more real than the Saddam Hussein’s WMD thing. So we can see the world’s Number One super power going to take on an insurgency that wants to be world Number One as well. Who will win? On paper the Americans could erase the ISIS by carpet bombing like they did in Vietnam and Laos. So, what is the problem?
 
The problem is that the Americans would not do it. They just want a war outside of the US, a war they can be manage from a distance and get everyone involved for a long long time. And the American war industry will be laughing all the way to the banks. War is very important to the Americans. They must always created tensions all over the world, get the people agitated and raise the tension, limited warfare, and buy more arms.
Would this fight against the ISIS be different? Would the Americans go in, bash around and then withdraw, leaving a big mess behind but not solving anything? Syria, watch it, it is coming. Can the Americans clean up the ISIS insurgents given their war arsenal and the number of troops available? Or is this just another operation to get the rest of the world on an arms buying spree?
 
If the Americans cannot deal with ISIS, what else would it be able to do? I think a better solution will be to invite the Japanese to do the cleaning job as Abe is so eager to do so. Then Congress need not have to send any American boys and girls to the makers. Congress should just tell Obama to support the Japanese to send in the Japanese Imperial troops to avenge the beheading of two Japanese. It would be cleaner, faster and cheaper, and knowing the expertise of the Japanese, they would do a good job at beheading the ISIS fighters. Would that not be nice?
 
Or would it not lead to more deals for the American war merchants? That is not a problem surely. The Americans can offer all the arms they want to expend and the Japanese contribute the troops. Just a humble win win suggestion.
 
Howdy Obama? The American peasant pa and ma would love you for not sending their children to another war. And the war merchants too would be grateful for the money rolling in for their weapons sold. There is no need to bring in the expired Empire of Britain or Nato forces. You will have a very willing Japanese Imperial Army to do the job and the war merchants happily offering all their weapons for sale. And all the American boys and girls would be safe at home watching telly.

GE 2015/16 – A new political gambit

In the western version of politics called democracy, the winner is the party that won the most votes. Historically, the opposing parties would be out there canvassing for votes, for the hearts and minds of the voters. The more voters they can convince to their sides, the better the chance of winning an election.
 
Political parties thus often go all out with all kinds of strategies to win votes. Pork barrel politics is a famous and seldom failed tactic. Throw money to the voters to buy their votes. The other is fear. Frighten the voters so that they have no choice but to vote in your favour. How to frighten the voters and strike fear in them? A third method is to discredit or fix the enemies. Run down the enemies, find faults with them, show off their mistakes and blunders to the voters, but do not in the process expose your own mistakes or the dirty tricks one is using. It can backfire. The voters today are not daft. They are watching with a cynical smile.
 
Today, we are seeing a new strategy evolving, initially unintended, but starting to gain a foothold among the political parties. In this strategy, it is about making the least mistakes to the point of doing nothing. Not losing votes is wining if the other parties are well known for shooting their own feet. The more they shoot themselves, the more votes they will lose. And not only that, these votes could go to the opposing parties.
 
The game is on. Do less to preserve and protect one’s position and votes. Let the enemy happily make mistakes after mistakes to do themselves in. Such a strategy is easier to apply for the opposition parties and has a negative bias for the ruling political party. The opposition parties not in govt can disappear or be invisible when issues crop up. The ruling party must deal with the problems and if handed badly, would lose votes for sure, especially when the election is around the corner. The opposition parties may at worst be disregarded for non involvement and they could fall back on not being able to do anything as they are not the govt. They could also remain reticent completely and let the ruling party foul it up completely.
 
It looks like this strategy is working and very cost effective for the opposition parties when the ruling party has a penchant to trip on everything they stepped on. And the opposition parties are happily counting the number of trippings and the number of votes flying their way.
 
Looks like in this GE the ruling party is working very hard trying to win votes and working very hard unintentionally to lose votes. Think Brampton bikes, Aim, hawker centre roofs, AHPEC TC accounts, rats, Hong Lim heckling, PME jobs, population, CPF, Medishield Life, and the latest, Thaipusam. This is another very hot potato to handle with extreme care.
 
Who will be losing votes and who will be picking up votes? It is tough time for the ruling party. They have to work carefully hard this time, to win votes and not to lose votes. The opposition parties only need to play it safe, consolidate their positions and hold the ground, and picking up the loose votes sent flying their way.
 
The game is on.

PS: Kopi almost dried up.

Hard choices on healthcare?

We are so rich today, probably with trillions in our reserves. No one outside the govt really knows how much is there. Only a very privilege few would have this access. President Ong asked for it but did not get the answer. And after so many years have passed, the answer is still not forthcoming. And the Govt is so proud to declare that only 1.6% of our GDP was spent on healthcare.
 
When the country was poor, barely anything in the reserves, we were able to provide free healthcare to our citizens, rich or poor did not matter. I have weekly dental treatments at the Institute of Health all for free in the late 50s and early 60s. My God how did they do it? They even sent a big and comfortable coach to fetch the students for medical treatments, extraction, fillings and fixing dentures. All free! The Govt was poor but caring, with priorities in the health of the citizens. Who would not vote for such a Govt? The Govt had good solid support from the people for at least 30 years. Today some fools were chastising the pioneers for voting the PAP then.
 
Today we have a better healthcare system that is more like Frankenstein. You don’t want to be treated. You can’t afford to be treated and be given a deadly bill that may kill you instantly. It is right for Hsien Loong to remind the people, ‘But every dollar spent on healthcare is a dollar “taken from taxpayers, and one dollar less to be spent somewhere else, whether it’s on education , on healthcare, on housing, on defence or on the personal needs of our people.’
 
Fully agree. A very wise and prudent statement. I would like to add, every dollar spent on foreign students, or $2 billion dollars on last count, is money taken from our taxpayers that should rightly be spent on the children of taxpayers. Tiok boh? And if $2b and still going up, if this could be cut off from funding foreign students, maybe the choice for healthcare need not be so hard. And if we stop spending on the extravagance, parties, education trips, ego trips, helping countries that don’t need our help, I think our health choices could even be easy, or at least easier. No one is asking for a return to the good old days and the good old PAP days when health care is practically free. 

If we save a few dollars here and there instead of wasting on monuments, vanity projects and building monuments for other countries, I think things would be very different. We need wise leaders to spend our taxpayers’ money wisely. Knowing prudence and to talk about prudence is the beginning to wisdom. Get the priorities right! Stop spending OPM like a rich man's son.
 
What do you think?

‘Fabrication from political conspiracy to end my career’

The judiciary is independent. The victim said no. The victim is accusing the judiciary for conspiracy to end his political career. ‘I maintain my innocence…This, to me, is a political conspiracy to stop my political career. I will walk again for the third time into prison, but rest assured that I will walk in with my head held high.’ This was what Anwar said after the Malaysian High Court upheld his conviction.
 
Many of his followers and many Malaysians watching the saga could not help but to nod in agreement with Anwar. The Govt and the judiciary were out to get him. Are they wronged to form this conclusion? They may be wrong, but they will be right when they vote out the Govt that used the judiciary to fix its political opponents.
 
Anwar’s daughter Nurul Izzah said this would not be the end. The Malaysian politicians are made of harder stuff and would fight political injustice that blatantly flout the judiciary system to spite the people. They would take down the Govt and the judiciary along with it in the next GE. That is something to watch.
 
Silencing the political opponents will not be taken lightly. The Malaysian public is not daft. UMNO would pay a heavy price for it. It is cutting the Malay votes right in the middle and kicking the non Malay votes to the opposition in the process. It would have to face the moment of truth in the next GE. A ruling party is on its way out by committing abuses against the country and people. Too long in power that they cannot see what they are doing is unacceptable to the voters.

Temasek rated as high risk by S&P

Temasek is now at war with S&P rating agency for grouping it together with countries like Greece and Jamaica. These two names, Greece and Jamaica, send shivers down the spine of any organisation or country when they are seen as like them. How can Temasek be like Greece and Jamaica? Sure Temasek cannot tahan and must respond, to get out of this bad neighbourhood. If only our govt could get out of the 3rd world neighbourhood and stop stuff more 3rd worlds into this island. You cannot be 1st world filled with 3rd world bodies, like you cannot be AAA when in the company of Greece and Jamaica.

Why would S&P make such a drastic move, is it motivated by some sinister agenda? Even a layman would be wondering how come Temasek is down there right at the bottom of the pile of shit. The reason is logical. It is the criteria used in the assessment, or selective use of data. Some people used data selectively to search their agenda. I will write about this latter. In this case it is unlikely that S&P is targeting Temasek or Hongkong by this move though highly possible given the western agenda.

According to our Singaporean foreign talent, Chris K, an executive director in the finance industry but not wanted here, probably not good enough in the local context but good enough to be in London and Toyko, the rating is based on Standalone Rating and Asset Liquidity. His full article on this subject is posted in TRE.

Standalone Rating means rating the agency as a separate entity, divorced from its association with its mother organisation, like assessing the son on his own merit and not be affected by the halo of his father, or in Temasek’s case, not to be affected the Singapore as a country. With Singapore as a backing, like the trumpet they were blowing, there is no risk. What is losing a few hundred billions? We can sell power stations, hotels, banks, airlines, and even the whole island if needed be. See how safe Temasek is?

The second point is Asset Liquidity. Temasek is big, very big, and owners of very big assets. This can be a plus or negative depending on the situation. Big assets are not readily and easily disposable at short notice unless selling at a discount. Big assets are not easily bought as the buyer needs big and deep pockets. So buying big assets should be cheaper right, like bulk purchasing. Only fools will buy big assets and pay a premium for it when there are no other buyers with the same deep pockets. There is a story that some big banks and funds have been aggregating assets to make them big, like a monster, to dupe the fools with deep pockets to pay for them with OPM. Anyway that is just a story.

Chris K also added that some organisations with AAA rating are tempted to take unnecessary risk, as they think they are too big to fall. With their huge financial bankings, they act and behave like a monster, stomping around and grabbing anything they could lay their hands on, with OPM in their pockets. Such risky behaviour is implicit, like a philandering son out on a rampage to show how much money he has.

So, does Temasek has a case against S&P for being shafted into the wrong hole with the wrong company? Or should Temasek’s rating be AAA as it is owned by the Singapore Govt and has the whole island and the Govt assets, and the CPF also, a source of cheap fund, to fall back on? A prodigal son is AAA because his father is a tycoon.