Two Overseas Concerns

Concern Number 1 - European Economics

Seldom does a day pass without a report of more domestic disturbances in Greece over that country's economic problems. Although both the European Commission [EC] and the International Monetary Fund [IMF] have pledged literally hundreds of billions of dollars to address this situation, economic pundits have expressed that the influx of these loans will only stall-off this crisis and that Greece, possibly joined by Portugal, Spain and Italy, could fall into a severe economic depression in less than two years.

The IMF has already extended $147 Billion to the Greek government but has required that Greece begin an austerity program which includes cutting salaries and lowering pensions. Another $560 Billion has been pledged by the EC to address economic problems being experienced by its member nations. These loans force the question, "How can these financially stressed nations, who cannot fund their own existing debts, fund newly added IMF and EC debts?" The answer is that they can't absent an economic boom. Unfortunately no one is projecting an economic boom for any of these southern European nations.

Concern Number 2 - Iraq

The frequency and number of US military casualties in Iraq has become almost non-existent and a non-issue [realizing fully that the death or wounding of any member of any branch of the American military is a sad occurrence] but the expressed intent of Commander-in-Chief Obama to have all of our forces out of Iraq by the end of 2011 may also soon become a casualty. Preliminary statements are now being aired by various White House staff members that it just may not be "practical" or "in America's best interests" to be out of Iraq by the end of 2011.

Terms like "responsible withdrawal" and "effective strategic partnership" are being used to pave the way for extending the tour of duty of the US military in Iraq. More realistic are expressions that Iraq is not yet stable; that Iraq cannot yet pull-off an election; that Iraq's new military is competent but not absolutely loyal; that Iran and Syria can't wait for the end of 2011 so to "take over" Iraq; that oil supplies are still at risk; and of course, the catch-all, that the Iraqi people deserve better.

The American role in Iraq as well as Pakistan/Afghanistan has to be defined. Are we there to defeat an enemy and then go home? or Are we there to defeat an enemy and occupy the loser just long enough to allow new native leaders to assume authority? or Are we there as occupiers and will stay for as long as we believe American goals and well being are advanced?

As is typical with Obama, no firm purpose or intent has been defined.