Obama Tries Out the Clinton Two-Step
I only make predictions that are easy. That’s why they come true. I have no formula.
You can do it, too. Just apply appropriate historical precedent, context and logic.
Prediction: Syria will keep the vast majority of their chemical weapons and Iran will have nuclear bombs.
The timeline for Syria is easier than that for Iran, as Israel will likely do all they can to stop Iran with or without back-up from the U.S. Geiger counters still click over parts of Syria where Israel slowed Iran’s supply of nuclear development gear.
Put on your muck boots & let’s take a slog through the History of the Contemporary Democratic Party’s De-Nuclearization of Tyrants.
When it became apparent North Korea was developing a nuclear weapon, Bill Clinton talked tough and sent Jimmy Carter to come up with a plan that would make it look like the U.S. was doing something.
Mr. Carter, whose reputation as a peacemaker came from his role in a deal wherein Egypt and Israel had already agreed on general terms and were looking for a middleman with deep pockets to formalize it, came home with a terrific deal for the North Koreans. The U.S. would give North Korea two light water nuclear reactors and half a million metric tons of oil every year if North Korea would promise to pretend not to build any nuclear weapons.
North Korea played relatively nicely and didn’t engage in any truly belligerent behavior for a good four years.
Then they launched a missile over northern Japan.
Clinton responded as he always did. He talked tough and gave Pyongyang $15 million.
Right now, Obama is talking tough on Syria while Bashar al-Assad is writing him the bill for $1.4 billion to “remove” the chemical weapons.
It was about this time, 1998, when Democratic Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was told North Korea was engaged in suspicious underground construction projects and long-range missile programs.
Not to worry. Albright told the world that she and Clinton had stopped North Korea’s nuclear weapons program and the major media went right along with it.
Ain’t diplomacy grand?
Who was surprised in 2002 when Albright went: on Sunday: talk shows to respond to Pyongyang admitting they had been building nukes since 1994?
Apparently Madeleine Albright was the only one.
This is the same Madeleine Albright who returned from a couple of days of “hard meetings” with Kim Jong Il and said he was a decent man, “pragmatic… not hostile.”
She really said that about one of the world’s most hostile tyrants who tortured his own people, starved an estimated 3 million of his citizens to death while building the largest collection of Hennessy cognac in the world and staged two terrorist attacks against South Korea as the U.S. gave him millions of tons of food.
Yes, Madam Secretary, he’s very charming and pragmatic, not hostile.
These dangerously foolish games had no deleterious effect on President Clinton’s re-election.
That’s the game they play and you can watch the same moves being made with Syria and Iran right now with President Obama.
President Obama is talking tough and sending John Kerry to talk with Russia about Syria.
President Obama is talking tough and swooning to the new President of Iran’s sweet talk.
It’s the Clinton two-step all over again.
The only uncertainties are the time frames in which the Syrian government admits they only gave up a small percentage of their chemical weapons to Obama and how soon Iran announces they have a nuclear bomb.
Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are remembered as being extraordinarily incompetent with North Korea.
How will President Obama be remembered on the day Iran, a regime that pays radicals to blow themselves up in pizza restaurants filled with children, declares they have nuclear weapons?
Welcome to the 6th annual 20 hottest conservative new media list Men of 2014 edition. I gave the judges one rule: Set personality aside and pick the men who you...Read More
The world usually turns out to work differently from what American presidents expected when they were campaigning. Franklin Roosevelt campaigned
Many people may be voting for Mitt Romney because of the view in some quarters that he is the inevitable
I’ve got to admit that it has been a barrel of fun watching the political left get its “Je suis