For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Even The Brits Notice How Weak America Is Under Obama
Written By : William Teach

Over at the UK Telegraph, Niles Gardiner does the heavy lifting in showing just how weak Obama’s foreign policy is

The débacle of Washington’s handling of the Libya issue is symbolic of a wider problem at the heart of the Obama administration’s foreign policy. The fact that it took ten days and at least a thousand dead on the streets of Libya’s cities before President Obama finally mustered the courage to call for Muammar “mad dog” Gaddafi to step down is highly embarrassing for the world’s only superpower, and emblematic of a deer-in-the-headlights approach to world leadership. Washington seems incapable of decisive decision-making on foreign policy at the moment, a far cry from the days when it swept entire regimes from power, and defeated America’s enemies with deep-seated conviction and an unshakeable drive for victory.

Just a few years ago the United States was genuinely feared on the world stage, and dictatorial regimes, strategic adversaries and state sponsors of terror trod carefully in the face of the world’s most powerful nation. Now Washington appears weak, rudderless and frequently confused in its approach. From Tehran to Tripoli, the Obama administration has been pathetically slow to lead, and afraid to condemn acts of state-sponsored repression and violence. When protesters took to the streets to demonstrate against the Islamist dictatorship in Iran in 2009, the brutal repression that greeted them was hardly a blip on Barack Obama’s teleprompter screen, barely meriting a response from a largely silent presidency.

Isn’t this why Obama picked Joe Biden to be his vice president, because of all the vast foreign policy experience? How’s that working out? So far, Obama generally seems to spend as much time as possibly demeaning our allies and working to alienate them, while either ignoring our enemies or looking for dialogue with them.

It has also become abundantly clear that the Obama team attaches little importance to human rights issues, and in contrast to the previous administration has not pursued a freedom agenda in the Middle East and elsewhere. It places far greater value upon engagement with hostile regimes, even if they are carrying out gross human rights abuses, in the mistaken belief that appeasement enhances security. This has been the case with Iran, Russia and North Korea for example. This administration has also been all too willing to sacrifice US leadership in deference to supranational institutions such as the United Nations, whose track record in standing up to dictatorships has been virtually non-existent.

That’s simply the way Obama rolls. And it highlights exactly why Joe Biden stated that being President does not lend itself to on the job training. A few years as a Senator, some time spent in the Illinois legislature, and a few years as a community organizer did not prepare him for actually being the person in charge of the most powerful nation on Earth. Now, is any president actually ready for the burden placed upon him? Of course not, but, some are more prepared than others, and have a staff that understands what to do, which is why Qaddafi’s Libya is in a much weaker position to use WMD

Senior administration officials and Pentagon planners, as they discuss sanctions and a possible no-fly zone to neutralize the Libyan air force, say that the 2003 deal removed Colonel Qaddafi’s biggest trump card: the threat of using a nuclear weapon, or even just selling nuclear material or technology, if he believed it was the only way to save his 42-year rule. While Colonel Qaddafi retains a stockpile of mustard gas, it is not clear he has any effective way to deploy it.

While it is unclear whether he might have ultimately succeeded in building nuclear weapons, as part of the deal (Qaddafi) gave up thousands of shells filled with chemical weapons.

The NY Times does everything it can to avoid giving any kudos and praise to Bush, but, this highlights the difference between Obama and Bush: one made the United States feared by most enemies, the other makes those same enemies bold, while pissing off our allies.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

0
  • http://www.facebook.com/jayhoffer Justin Hoffer

    Obama believes a lot of things. He believes he’s making America stronger. He believes he is making the world a better place. He even believes he’s black. On that last one, I’ll admit he’s half right.

  • Anonymous

    Wait a minute. Isn’t this the kind of “leadership” the Brits, and the rest of the world, were demanding from us? This only strengthens my conviction the world opinion on American policy amounts to nothing. The rest of the world are generally fickle friends at best.

    • Anonymous

      Essentially the US is wrong no matter what we do. And as international opinion is both fickle and useless we might as well act in our own best interest.

  • Anonymous

    It’s like we started out the 1930s with Churchill and then switched to Chamberlain in the in 1939.

  • Anonymous

    You really have to question what’s going on between those big ears of Obama’s. Here we have a generational event, pro-democracy uprisings in Africa, that couldn’t be a slower hanging curveball for the first black President, and he’s totally blowing it.

    Honestly I think he’s terrified to admit to himself that the United States is still THE force for good and for freedom in the world. His whole life he’s thought this country is racist, unfair, greedy, and a bully. He was told by his own family that Western involvement in Africa brought nothing but evil and despair.

    Obama uses the power of the United States to intervene for the good of the people in Africa, and his entire autobiography goes right out the window. You can practically hear the cognitive dissonance clanging in his head. Now the rest of the world is pushing him, “do something! You’re America!”

    • Anonymous

      It is a conundrum for him.

      He has a few key facts that guide him in life.
      Fact 1: the US is the most evil nation that has ever existed. Everything we do is wrong.
      Fact 2: Obama is basically God. He’s just amazing. Everything he touches turns to awesome.

      He get’s a little confused then when he has to represent the US on the foreign stage. He’s awesome so everything he does is right, but he’s acting through the US which is always wrong . . . . so . . . . . uh . . . . . hm.

      • Anonymous

        Am I the only one getting a mental image of the norman android burning out while Kirk and Spock watch.

        • Anonymous

          thats restaurant quality right there.
          /golf clap

  • Anonymous

    The whole problem is that we are the worlds only super power, like it or not. Other countries will look to us to fix regional issues time and time again. I am not suggesting we get involved in all of them, that would be crazy for we are incapable of policing the whole planet, what I am suggesting is that when we do get involved; use quick, massive, overwhelming force. This will do accomplish many things including; a reduction in the number of US casualties, a quicker end to the conflict, and in the future our military presence alone could stop whatever we would like stopped.
    Are there drawbacks to this plan? Sure there are; for one it would increase the number of civilian casualties and we would be seen as the big bad guy in the world – but we already are.
    On another note, we need to get totally out of the UN; no US funding, no US troops, they have repeatedly shown that they could care less about us and our interests plus they are incredibly slow to react. A good role for the UN or other interested countries would be the policing of the area that we just got involved in.
    Sack it, go home, let the UN or other regional / interested countries do the clean up – supervised by us naturally.

    • Anonymous

      “Never use finesses when brute force will do.”

    • Anonymous

      I’m glad americans are holding the same regard for the UN now, as they did the League of Nations back in the day.

      You pulled out of *that* one before it even came into inception. That pleased ol’ Hitler no end 20 years later.

      You propose invading countries quickly – as you did in Iraq – but fail to see that the US populace in general has no stomach for long wars (Iraq), and cannot afford really large deployments of force anywhere.

    • Anonymous

      I’m glad americans are holding the same regard for the UN now, as they did the League of Nations back in the day.

      You pulled out of *that* one before it even came into inception. That pleased ol’ Hitler no end 20 years later.

      You propose invading countries quickly – as you did in Iraq – but fail to see that the US populace in general has no stomach for long wars (Iraq), and cannot afford really large deployments of force anywhere.

  • Anonymous

    Dining with some colleagues from Germany last week, they brought up Obama’s response to the political crisis in the Middle East. I noticed a bit of disgust, but I can’t mix politics and work. Essentially they were annoyed because he kept changing what he was saying about the Egypt crisis. At least that was their perception. I definitely came away with the opinion tha these guys at least, are not impressed with Dear Leader.

  • Anonymous

    Just a few years ago the United States was genuinely feared on the world stage, and dictatorial regimes, strategic adversaries and state sponsors of terror trod carefully in the face of the world’s most powerful nation.

    Hmm, who was President “just a few years ago”? Someone remind me…

    • Anonymous

      Going by the reporting from 2001-2008 I’d say Hitler was president back then.

    • Anonymous

      It was General Grievous.

    • D-Vega

      Yeah, during that period our ally in Pakistan was ousted, the Norks made plenty more bombs, Iran got closer to the bomb, Hariri was assasinated, Hezbollah took a bigger foothold in Lebanon, Hamas took control of Gaza, sanctions were removed from Libya, Putin got stronger in Russia, and Hugo Chavz seized power.

      Yeah, they trodded real carefully. They were quaking in their boots.

      • Anonymous

        yet you leftists talk about how Hamas and Hezbollah were democratically elected. Are you now saying that was a bad thing?

        • D-Vega

          I am saying they didn’t trod carefully.

  • StanW

    Even The Brits Notice How Weak America Is Under Obama

    An alien from outer-space, with no knowledge of human interaction or governance, would be able to tell what a spineless and worthless being Obama is.

  • Anonymous

    To show how tough he is, “You Lie!” has instructed his Wet-Noodle Czar to symbolically give Gadhafi 20 lashes.

    Of course, tomorrow “You Lie!” will then profusely apologize to Gadhafi for the severity of the “beating”, blame bush for causing it to happen, and humbly ask for forgiveness from the syphilitic nut-job, who is his “friend”.

    Besides, “You Lie” doesn’t have the cojones to actually commit to any military action that is NOT a continuation of something george bush was doing.

  • D-Vega

    Maybe its time Europe stopped complaining about us and practiced some leadership of their own.

    • http://www.facebook.com/jayhoffer Justin Hoffer

      How many times do we have to tell you how bad of an idea that is?

      • D-Vega

        It’s not a bad idea at all. And that’s the way it is.

  • Anonymous

    Niles Gardiner? Really? The same guy who things that British PM has shown outstanding leadership in the Libyan crisis? The *same* British PM who only happened to be in the region at the time to sell arms to Egypt? Who authorised the sale of 190 million pounds of “crowd control” armament to Libya last year?

    NO ONE is doing anything about Libya. No one but the bloody French. The Brits and the Germans have all sorts of nice armament deals with Gaddafi, so they’re keeping it hush
    Over here, there isn’t a lot of desire *for* the US to get involved. Hawkins has posted here about the US avoiding conflict in Libya, and so have many liberal types over at huffpo, or in the forums here, for example.

    How can Obama come out strongly, when the entire country is in the very least divided so much about this issue, or more likely, against stepping into Libya? I don’t feel its fair to aim this one at his feet. He cannot take unilateral foreign policy measures. Not when this country has *so* many problems.

    It looks like the White House is trying to get *everyone* (UN wise) involved in this, which would be better. Americans are still viewed with hostility in the mid east, and viewed with grave skepticism world wide for any endeavours they take in the mid east.

Advertisement
Featured Video

Who Is Brett Kimberlin?

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info