RC Pirate Forums
We Surround Rochester
Aug 28, 2010, Washington DC
By Guy Benson
TownHall.com
There’s never been a better time to be an enemy of the United States of America. Whether you’re a trained jihadist in US custody, a diminutive cult leader starving his own people while developing nukes, or part of a ruthless regime that murders dissidents in broad daylight, you can rest assured that the United States government is unlikely to act—or perhaps even speak—in a manner likely to disrupt your daily routine. While invoking “our values,” hailing the importance of American humility, and rejecting the “failed policies of the past,” the current administration is projecting a dangerous image to the world. This approach may be extolled as cautious pragmatism on the Beltway cocktail party circuit, but it’s most assuredly perceived as something entirely different by America’s current and emerging adversaries around the globe: Weakness.
Within days of assuming office, President Obama ostentatiously announced his intention to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility within one year. That his administration had no workable plan to do so was beside the point; details were not about to obstruct the path to Hopenchange. Obama has since been thrashed by former Vice President Cheney in a public debate on this matter, and public opinion polls are trending decisively against his rushed and irresponsible decision.
Nevertheless, to avoid allowing a campaign promise to go by the wayside—while (quietly) adopting yet another staple of the previous administration’s supposed failures—Obama has been working hard to relocate Gitmo detainees. He first floated the idea of releasing some of the supposedly least threatening blokes, Chinese Uighurs, onto US soil, where they’d be supported with welfare checks. His own party was so receptive to that lead balloon that they voted down funding to close the prison altogether. Obama then went knocking at the collective door of the same “international community” that had decried the facility’s very existence for years. Strangely, none of those nations were especially keen on welcoming radical Islamists onto their streets. After being rebuffed more than 100 times, the president finally identified two takers; the island paradises of Bermuda and Palau.
After training with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the Uighers were caught on the battlefield (the terrorist Miranda warning policy wasn’t in effect at the time—a grave injustice) and transferred to Guantanamo Bay, where they were afforded soccer, television, and pizza privileges. Their TV viewing got a bit dicey at times, as they reportedly destroyed a television set after being subjected to the obscene image of a woman’s bare arms. Aside from picayune details like that, they’re generally regarded as a pretty reasonable, well-adjusted bunch. They’re now arriving in exotic vacation destinations, along with millions of US tax dollars in aid—making themselves at home on pristine tropical islands. Islands, mind you, that most law-abiding, tax-paying, non-terrorist American citizens couldn’t afford to visit right now, given the current economy. Wage war against the West, and you too might end up catching rays in Bermuda! What a deal.
Meanwhile, the plump, aging woman who rules North Korea has been conspicuously misbehaving for months. The White House has been attempting to determine a productive way forward that—needless to say—bears no resemblance to those failed policies of the past. Remember, the era of US hubris, in which America “punishes” outlaw regimes by refusing to legitimize them, is over. So when Kim Jong Il’s military test fired a missile in April, the Pentagon was instructed not to deploy its most sophisticated missile-tracking technology to, well, track a missile launched illegally by an enemy regime. Why? As the Washington Times’ Bill Gertz reported at the time, officials were concerned that employing our superior technology simply to gather data on North Korea’s test would “provoke” the North Koreans.
The North Koreans, in turn, have exhibited their appreciation for the administration’s non-provocative, humble, “smart power” approach by conducting multiple additional proscribed weapons tests, and pledging to lob a ballistic missile toward US soil on July 4th. So it’s back to the ever-useful bargaining table, it would seem.
Speaking of July 4th, guess who’s coming to dinner at US embassies across the globe? Despite fomenting historic internal unrest by shamelessly rigging an election, denouncing and taunting the aforementioned international community, callously beating and slaying its own reform-minded citizens in the streets, and unilaterally declaring all nuclear negotiations permanently “closed,” envoys of the profoundly evil Iranian regime are invited to Independence Day barbeques hosted by top American diplomats. As State Department spokesman Ian Kelly blithely explained, “We have made a strategic decision to engage on a number of fronts with Iran.”
“Therefore,” he might has well have continued, “literally no level of Iranian barbarity will dissuade us from the undeniable wisdom of inviting to Iranian representatives to our parties, and we just can’t wait to start a dialogue.”
President Obama has insisted for days that America must not “meddle” in Iran’s business, despite demonstrators’ pleas for Western support, and in the face of much stronger statements from European leaders. In fairness, Obama has finally begun playing rhetorical catch-up with John McCain and Nicholas Sarkozy. Still, in his public statements, Iran’s unapologetic meddling in our business (funding terrorism, killing American soldiers in Iraq) goes unmentioned, as does his own administration’s overt meddling in Israel’s internal affairs.
A primary reason for Obama’s rhetorical reticence is his stubborn commitment to the campaign-promise-turned-inoperable-fantasy that he might actually manage to strike a historic accord with the regime in Tehran through direct, unconditional negotiations. In light of recent developments, this notion is more absurd than ever, yet Obama cannot let it go. Consequently, he’s hedging, taking pains to avoid inflaming the Ahmadinejad/Khameini unholy alliance by siding with pro-freedom demonstrators (which they’ve accused him of anyway) in the hopes of eventually inducing them into rational and honest negotiations.
Even if one fully endorses Obama’s no-meddling policy, how can the July 4th barbeque invitation decision possibly be justified? Not only is Obama assuring these theocrat thugs that he won’t lift a finger to stop their violent suppression of millions yearning for freedom, his State Department is taking this posture a step further by reaffirming Iranian emissaries’ friendly invitations to American-hosted parties. Parties held on a day that celebrates freedom from tyranny, no less. He’s not simply refraining from undue interference. He’s actually rewarding coercive despotism. It’s a shameful low point in this young administration’s history.
Enemies of America, this is your moment. This is your time. Considering joining the jihad? If captured, you’ll be read your rights, spared any and all harsh interrogation methods, and might even win an all-expenses-paid trip to a hot vacation spot. Hankering for some illicit WMDs? We’ll bend over backwards to avoid appearing provocative. Want to attend a fun summer BBQ? Just mercilessly quash a reformist uprising in your country, slaughter some unarmed young women, vow to wipe Israel off the face of the planet, and relentlessly pursue nuclear weapons. The State Department’s e-vite to DeathtoAmerica1979@gmail.com should be arriving any minute.
Copyright © 2009 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
All POW-MIA
8 responses so far ↓
1 MakingSense // Jun 24, 2009 at 11:09 am
What a silly article. What is the writer suggesting we do differently? Seems to me that the saber rattling against NK has done no good. It didn’t work for Bush and isn’t working for Obama. And for us to move militarily against NK we would risk repercussions from China.
As for Iran, it was Bush’s hard line and “axis of evil” talk that got Ahmadinejad (sp?) elected over the pro western reformist to begin with. The writers claim that we shouldn’t engage in dialog with Iran due to their human rights abuses etc seems kind of hypocritical since we do plenty of business with China and the Saudi’s, both of whom have similar, if not worse, records on human rights and political reform than Iran does, yet they elicit no complaints from people like this fellow here who is just oh so concerned, when it suits him and when he thinks he can use it to slam the president.
Obama is doing a far better job on the foreign policy front than Bush ever did. Of course not one of these so-called “conservatives” who supposedly didn’t like Bush either NEVER complained when Bush was f*cking everything up for 8 years. But 5 months into Obama’s term and Obama has of course done everything wrong.
What a joke.
2 phantomlord // Jun 24, 2009 at 11:23 am
Actually, plenty of us did complain about Bush… but, pot, meet kettle. You’re going to continue dumping on the last administration while defending Obama’s foreign affairs screw ups like the Russia reset button, bowing before the Saudi King, inviting Iranian diplomats to Fourth of July parties at US embassies, the whole closing Gitmo thing, pissing off Sarkozy and Merkel, allowing Chavez to use him for propaganda, etc. And that’s after a mere 5 months…
Ahmadinejad’s 2005 election slogan? “It’s doable and we can do it.” Sounds kinda familiar, doesn’t it? You may forget that he dumped on the entire UN and played populist too, pandering to the strict Islam crowd and promising to put the oil profits on the tables of the poor.
As for North Korea, what two Presidents were involved in giving them a nuclear reactor again? Oh yeah, Carter (acting as his own ambassador without Clinton administration approval) and Clinton… but sure, blame Bush because its all you know how to do. /yawn
3 MakingSense // Jun 24, 2009 at 11:40 am
Pot meet kettle. All you do is dump criticism on Obama and yet you offer no suggestions on what he should do differently that would change anything.
Not inviting Iran to the picnic won’t change anything. We need a dialog with them. The tough talk doesn’t work. We tried for 8 years. Didn’t work.
And once again you fail to mention why we should talk and do business with regimes like those of China and Saudi Arabia and not Iran. SA supports terrorists (9/11 anyone?) and oppresses their people. And we don’t need to get into China’s human rights issues do we?
As for the other so-called “foreign policy screw ups”, the bowing before the Saudi king wasn’t exactly earth shattering. After all, Bush made out and held hands with the guy. (and you never complained then)
Btw…Ahmadinajad did put give the poor money. That is why his support lies in the outlying country areas of Iran.
But Iran will be fine on their own. They have a young, educated population that wants reform and they will eventually get it They do not want or need us occupying them.
4 phantomlord // Jun 24, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Who said anything about invading Iran? Projecting your bias much? Maybe you didn’t see my post a couple days ago where I specifically said we shouldn’t invade Iran, but we should offer humanitarian assistance to the people. Obama is more interested in kissing Ahmadinejad’s ass than in seeing a stable, peaceful Iran which is why he continues to pretty much vote present on the situation going on there.
You tell me which is more likely to lead to long term peaceful relations with Iran, partying with a tyrant and turning our back on the people, or announcing diplomatic and humanitarian support for the Irani people being able to choose their own government. Sooner or later, the Iranians will overthrow their despots and they’ll remember who stood with them and who stood by and did nothing.
I love how you deflect the foreign policy screwups. Can you bring yourself to criticize the Obama administration on any of them?
We need to do business with Saudi Arabia for the oil factor. Let us build a bunch of nuclear plants and we can do away with a good portion of our oil use with alternative energy cars (whether using the electricity directly, separating hydrogen, etc). We need to do business with China because we foolishly exported a good portion of our manufacturing to them.
The existing Iran? Eh, we don’t really need them for anything, which is why we shouldn’t give Iran MFN status. We should also stand against nuclear proliferation entirely. But let me guess, you’re one of those people that goes “the US has nukes and is the only country in the world that has ever used them on another nation, so we should let anyone have nukes…”
For the record, every time I’ve dumped criticism on Obama, I’ve offered my alternative solution.
5 MakingSense // Jun 24, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Humanitarian assistance? Like what? Medicine? Their hospitals are functioning fine. Food? They aren’t refugees, they aren’t starving to death. So other than offering verbal support and condemning the actions of their gov’t, (which we have done) there isn’t a whole lot more we can do without undermining the efforts of these people by making them look like “puppets of the west”.
And do you think the people who see our support of oppressive regimes like China and SA think OUR business interests in those countries justifies our support of them? Or do you think they just think we are hypocrites? (I’ll give you a hint, they think we are hypocrites)
There is plenty that I think Obama could have done better so far. But the so-called “foreign policy blunders” you mention aren’t among them.
6 phantomlord // Jun 24, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Food prices have gone up 20% i the last week and the government will try to use food supplies as a means of putting down the dissent. So, while food isn’t critical yet, in a prolonged revolt, it will become moreso.
As for our government condemning then, Congress has come out and doneso. Obama wants to vote present “oh, they should respect the wishes of the people, but I’m not going to get involved in anything more than that…” Way to take a stand Prez.
As for the revolutionaries being the puppets of the west, they’ve already been accused of it even though we haven’t done anything. So, what does it hurt to actually take a stand? Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Reagan certainly didn’t sit idly by because some tyrant would get mad at them. That’s the difference between a leader and someone that just shows up to work.
So, enumerate your list of what Obama could do better… all you’ve ever done here is defend him. What do YOU think he’s done wrong?
7 MakingSense // Jun 25, 2009 at 10:29 am
This isn’t a prolonged revolt. The revolt is essentially over….for now. Only a few thousand people are still protesting. The gov’t has successfully squashed the revolt. This time.
But the anger of the Iranian people is real and this is just another step in them inching toward the revolution that they need to free themselves from their gov’t. Thus, “humanitarian aid” is unnecessary. As for Obama taking a stand, again I ask, what else can he do? He has condemned the gov’ts actions. What else is there to do? What “stronger stand” can he take that won’t push the Iranian gov’t away from the table? The reality is we still need some dialog with this country despite the recent actions of the gov’t. Using stronger language to condemn these actions won’t achieve anything. Apparently some people never learn. Meddling in Iranian gov’t affairs has not worked out so well in the past for us.
As for things Obama has done I do not approve of,
I don’t like that he has continued Bush era policies like warrentless wiretapping.
The transparency in gov’t he spoke of is hogwash.
I am not a fan of cap and trade policies for CO2 emissions.
I do not support the bail outs (which were started under Bush)
Should I go on or is that sufficient?
Where is your list of things you didn’t approve of under Bush? I have never seen you do anything but claim you didn’t like him but yet all you do is defend him.
So what do YOU think he did wrong?
8 phantomlord // Jun 27, 2009 at 1:48 am
Some things I disagree with GWB on
Overspending
Medicare D
No Child Left Behind
Not having a plan to rebuild Iraq
Not working out a plan for Iraq to repay us
How lax he was on immigration and port security
Expanding SCHIP
TARP and the other bailouts
Harriet Myers
Creation of DHS
Federalization of TSA
McCain-Feingold
Sarbanes-Oxley
HAVA
Astroturfing with Armstrong Williams
I could go on, but that’s a pretty good start to show I’m no Bush puppet
Leave a Comment