The Left’s Suicidal Anti-American Impulses On Foreign Policy

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

The Left’s Suicidal Anti-American Impulses On Foreign Policy

Written By : John Hawkins

“While the form of treachery varies slightly from case to case, liberals always manage to take the position that most undermines American security.” — Ann Coulter

When it comes to foreign policy, liberals are like sheep who have a desperate need to find a wolf and bare their throat to him. You can see a great example of this in Honduras, where Barack Obama is essentially trying to engineer a Soviet style coup to replace a friendly democracy with a socialist dictator who’ll be implacably hostile to the United States.

Now, in his own mind, is Barack Obama trying to harm or betray the United States? I sincerely doubt it. However, when it comes to foreign policy, it’s amazing how often liberals take exactly the same positions as the people who would like to see us all dead. Just to name one more example, if Osama Bin Laden had been able to vote in the US Congress from 2005 – 2008, I suspect his vote would have been identical to that of Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and John Kerry on at least 80% of the national security and foreign policy issues that they weighed in on.

Personally, I think that’s because the Left’s hatred of Bush, silly little rules of foreign policy, and passive aggressive anger against their own country make them act like fools, but that doesn’t change the fact that if their goal were to harm their own country, they wouldn’t act significantly differently.

Speaking of which, we’ve had a rather amazing last few days on the liberal foreign policy suicide watch front.

For example, there was this story about Jimmy Carter:

The United States knew about an abortive coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in 2002, and may even have taken part, former US president Jimmy Carter has told a Colombian newspaper.

“I think there is no doubt that in 2002, the United States had at the very least full knowledge about the coup, and could even have been directly involved,” Carter said in an interview with El Tiempo published Sunday.

The former US leader said it is understandable that Chavez continues to blame the United States for the failed overthrow attempt.

The Venezuelan president, considered a bulwark of leftism in Latin America, was overthrown by a civilian-military junta for about 48 hours in April 2002, before returning to power.

Then-president George W. Bush denied any US involvement in the abortive coup and called on Chavez, a fierce US critic, to “learn a lesson” from the attempted overthrow.

How could even Jimmy Carter be so stupid as to tell a foreign paper that we must have known about a coup and that we may have been involved in it? Even if that were true — and there is no indication Jimmy Carter has any special knowledge that it was — a former President shouldn’t be undercutting his own country like that. What possible good can come of Jimmy Carter telling the world that the United States may have been trying to overthrow the government of Venezuela?

Then there’s Zbigniew Brzezinski actually suggesting that we SHOOT DOWN Israeli jets if they try to cross Iraqi air space to hit Iran:

If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse.

Let me see if I have this straight: We’re supposed to shoot down the jets of our best ally in the Middle East in an effort to prevent them from bombing nuclear sites in the world’s premier terrorist nation? A nation that not only has threatened to wipe them out of existence multiple times, but one that hates America? In other words, he’s suggesting that we should be willing to fight Israel to protect Iran’s right to have nuclear weapons? What sort of alternate dimension do these morons come from and is the word “stupid” part of the dimensional name?

Then, courtesy of Power Line, there’s this from Madeline Albright:

Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright spoke at a forum in Omsk, Siberia. Pravda reported that her speech “surprised the audience.” No wonder. The Russians in attendance must have wondered how they managed to lose the cold war:

Madeleine Albright said during the meeting that America no longer had the intention of being the first nation of the world.

Ms. Albright started her speech in Russian. “Hello and thank you! It’s a pleasure for me to be here,” she said in Russian. Albright wrote in her autobiography that she was trying to learn some Russian during the 1960s.

The former US Secretary of State surprised the audience with her speech. She particularly said that democracy was not the perfect system. “It can be contradictory, corrupt and may have security problems,” Albright said.

America has been having hard times recently, Albright said.

“We have been talking about our exceptionalism during the recent eight years. Now, an average American wants to stay at home – they do not need any overseas adventures. We do not need new enemies,” Albright said adding that Beijing, London and Delhi became a serious competition for Washington and New York.

“My generation has made many mistakes. We give the future into the hands of the young. Your prime goal is to overcome the gap between the poor and the rich,’ the former head of the US foreign political department said.

There you have it. And Albright was Secretary of State during the relatively moderate Clinton administration. I’m afraid she speaks for most Democratic foreign policy “experts.” Promoting American weakness: it’s not a bug, it’s a feature.

When it comes to foreign policy, the Left is like one of those suicidal lunatics waving a gun around in public. He’s pointing the gun at himself, he’s pointing it at the cops, he’s screaming that he wants to die and conservatives have to play the role of the police officers, trying to keep the crazy person from killing himself or anybody else while he’s out of his mind.

http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

"You can see a great example of this in Honduras, where Barack Obama is essentially trying to engineer a Soviet style coup to replace a friendly democracy with a socialist dictator who'll be implacably hostile to the United States."

You mean hostile to the United States as it was pre-Obama and still, for the most part, exists now. By the time the Obamessiah is done tearing down the country and rebuilding it into the world's largest Socialist banana republic, his fellow travelers on the far Left won't be hostile to us at all.
Mike_M

"We give the future into the hands of the young."

If only. The liberals can't stop bashing America and fighting for every last bit of power and influence in a race against the grave.

Carter and Clinton do nothing but fly around the world apologizing and interfering to try and burnish their shabby legacies. Albright has been a crusader for American weakness and mediocrity her entire career. I half expected the Brothers Kennedy to appear as blue ghosts nodding in approval at the Obama Health Care speech like Obi-Wan, Annakin, and Yoda at the end of Return of the Jedi.

If they would shut up and get out of the way we would be a lot better off.
whats_up

Sure because the conservative view of foreign policy has worked so well in recent years.
Mike_M

"Sure because the conservative view of foreign policy has worked so well in recent years."

Right. Because Bush only got rid of two of the most violent and oppressive dictatorships in the world, expanded NATO, got the world's largest Muslim country Pakistan on our side in the War on Terror, and did more for Africa than any previous US President. What a loser.

Obama has supported the overthrow of a democracy in Honduras, said and did nothing as Iran blew people's heads off in the streets, gave Hamas $1 billion to rebuild their rocket launchpads in Gaza, shipped Gitmo terrorists off to British soil without their consent, and severely damaged our relationship with Eastern Europe, all in eight months. But he had a conniption fit when some Jews built houses, just to prove how tough he was.
http://www.superdickery.com mightysamurai

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-21 12:28:34

To sum up, yes Whats_up, you small stupid child, conservative foreign policy has been very successful in recent years. You are an idiot.
whats_up

To sum up, yes Whats_up, you small stupid child, conservative foreign policy has been very successful in recent years. You are an idiot.

Posted by mightysamurai

2009-09-21 12:31:32

No actually it hasnt. You can try and rewrite history any way you want to, doesnt mean the rest of us have to agree Mighty. Iran certianly is more powerful now than they were in 2001. Russia is certianly more powerful now than they were in 2001. Our dependance on China is greater now than it was in 2001. Bush's foreign policy was a failure in most aspects. Iraq wasnt a threat to America, they havent been since the Gulf war, and they added a natural check to Iran, since both those countries were competing to see who would dominate the Middle East. However since we took out Iran's competetion we have made it much easier for them.
http://Good_Ol_Boy Good_Ol_Boy

Posted by Mike_M

2009-09-21 12:28:34

*Golf clap* Exemplary post, sir; kudos to you.

Outstanding article as well, Mr. Hawkins.
http://Good_Ol_Boy Good_Ol_Boy

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-21 12:57:04

LOL. And what, pray tell, would the Dems have done to check the resurgance of Russia? Or to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions? Or alter the trade/financial arrangements with China?

Those are all rhetorical questions, of course, because we both know that the Democrats wouldn't have done a d@mn thing.
Mike_M

"Iraq wasnt a threat to America, they havent been since the Gulf war, and they added a natural check to Iran, since both those countries were competing to see who would dominate the Middle East."

So a nuclear arms race between Iraq and Iran would have been better than dealing with Iran alone?

At least Bush left the world with one less dictator for Obama to appease. Is there any doubt that Obama would be pleading with the UN to lift sanctions on Hussein (Saddam) and bring him back into the global community after years of being unfairly punished by Bush I and II?
Realpolitik

At least Bush left the world with one less dictator

Posted by Mike_M

The sum TOTAL of Bush's war aggression.
http://www.superdickery.com mightysamurai

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-21 12:57:04

Notice how Whats_up doesn't even try to address the points made by Mike_M and simply rattles off a list of left-wing talking points. Predictable to the end, these liberals.
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

Iran certianly is more powerful now than they were in 2001. Russia is certianly more powerful now than they were in 2001. Our dependance on China is greater now than it was in 2001.

But aren't they all our friends, and shouldn't they have just as much wealth and power as we do? Obama's just "spreading the power" along with the wealth, right? You should be happy for China, Russia and Iran!
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

Iraq wasnt a threat to America

That's not what every politician on both sides of the aisle, all our combined intelligence services, and the governments and intelligence services of most of the world were saying in 2003.
Realpolitik

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-21 13:23:56

LOL

a) re-writing history BIG time

b) not disagreeing with statement.
http://Kingfisher Kingfisher

No actually it hasnt. You can try and rewrite history any way you want to, doesnt mean the rest of us have to agree Mighty.

We know you'll disagree because you only care about politics.

Iran certianly is more powerful now than they were in 2001.

Obama's apology made them more powerful?

Russia is certianly more powerful now than they were in 2001.

Obama's apology made them more powerful?

Our dependance on China is greater now than it was in 2001.

Because of Obama's deficit. Thank you for your admission.
Mike_M

"The sum TOTAL of Bush's war aggression."

And all the Democrats that voted to remove Hussein (Saddam) from power.

But Obama didn't vote in favor of the Iraq War. He didn't vote on it at all since his Senate career didn't even begin until 2005. He was bravely voting "present" in the Illinois State Legislature during that debate.

But once in the Senate he had no problem voting four times to fund the Iraq War to the tune of $300 billion. Sure, Obama will raise taxes on the middle class with Cap and Trade and justify his health care spending by comparing it to Iraq War spending…which he voted for. What a screaming hypocrite.
http://Kingfisher Kingfisher

"The sum TOTAL of Bush's war aggression."

Shouldn't Clinton be included as well? After all, he dropped bombs on Iraq for the very same reasons. See "Operation Desert Fox" for more information.

The only difference is that Bush succeeded.
http://TheNixonTape.Com Dick_Nixon

Guys, whats_up and realpolitik are the same person. Best ignore them, before they taint you with their gay nazi self.
Realpolitik

Posted by Dick_Nixon

2009-09-21 14:33:20

dixon,dixon – put on those jackbooks and come out of the closet already. Or at least come.
CoolCzech

All I know is, I'm sick and tired of the way Czechs are Liberal Appeaser's favorite nation to betray.

Here is where is why the full measure of Obama's move is more important than any particular technical aspect of missile defense: Obama has now set the precedent that Russia has veto power over the Czech's and Pole's security arrangements, even though they are now NATO members. In essense, Obama has begun the process of consigning them back to Moscow's sphere of influence.

I suppose American liberals will say the Czechs are a small, far away country about which we know little. How did that work out for you last time around, Neville Obama?

No wonder it was reported the Polish President wouldn't even take Obama's phone call to here first hand of the betrayal. Nice timing, Bambi, to do this thing on the 70th anniversary of the Russian invasion of Poland!
whats_up

Posted by CoolCzech

2009-09-21 15:10:10

The majority of the population in the Czech Republic didnt want the missles there in the first place. Also has you have pointed out both the Czech Republic and Poland are members of NATO, so I doubt highly that Russia has veto power over their security.
CoolCzech

They just vetoed the Czech's anti-missile defense. That's a bad precedent anyway you spin it, what's_up.

I'm not sure where you get your info that most Czech's didn't want the radar installation on their territory… I do know that both Poland and Czech Republic were keen on having US Troops on their territory, for the same reason South Korean governments over the years always wanted them, even if there have been tensions between average Koreans on the street and American troops. Talk and paper treaties are cheap – what matters are live bodies on the ground that will die in the event of enemy invasion.

But let's assume you're right:

Don't you think it makes the government of the Czech Republic feel doubly screwed over, when they stuck their necks on the line to irritate Russia AND their own people for the sake of the United States government… only to have the rug pulled out from under them by Obama?

But I don't think most Poles and Czechs really felt that way. The popular press over there featured headlines with one word: "Betrayal!" All over eastern Europe right now, people are wondering what America intends to do if Moscow exerts its muscle. Apparantly: not much.
whats_up

All over eastern Europe right now, people are wondering what America intends to do if Moscow exerts its muscle. Apparantly: not much.

Posted by CoolCzech

2009-09-21 15:29:06

That is a moot question when it comes to Poland and the Czech Republic, Moscow is in no position to fight a war with Europe and NATO, thanks for the what if's though.
whats_up

They just vetoed the Czech's anti-missile defense. That's a bad precedent anyway you spin it, what's_up.

Posted by CoolCzech

2009-09-21 15:29:06

A defense that doesnt work, against a threat that is non-existant just to piss off the Russians, that might be conservatives foreign policy, thankfully its not the liberals.
CoolCzech

I'm not so sure about that "moot question," whats_up.

Can you REALLY pciture Obama going to war over Prague?

Put another way, the Koreans couldn't see it, if we didn't have 35,000 sacrificial soldiers within artillery distance of a million North Korean cannon tubes. No way Obama could avoid war with thousands of automatic American deaths, and both South and North Korea know it.

Poland and the Czechs were looking for just a few hundred American troops "on the line." Bambi just told them that they're not important enough.
whats_up

What I find ironic is that the Czech Republic hasnt even ratified the treaty that we supposedly "broke" with this announcement, polls in the Czech republic over the last three years have consistently shown that they dont want the missle defense, the right wing government that negotiated the treaty was voted out of office. And yet we have somehow betrayed them? You conservatives are really losing grasp of reality.
whats_up

Poland and the Czechs were looking for just a few hundred American troops "on the line." Bambi just told them that they're not important enough.

Posted by CoolCzech

2009-09-21 15:42:07

So we are supposed to put American soldiers in harms way so that these countries can "feel" important?
http://Kingfisher Kingfisher

So we are supposed to put American soldiers in harms way so that these countries can "feel" important?

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-21 15:48:55

That worked for Clinton.
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

Moscow is in no position to fight a war with Europe and NATO

Thanks to Obama, they don't have to!
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

polls in the Czech republic over the last three years have consistently shown that they dont want the missle defense

That's funny; when it comes to Honduras or Venezuela (or, for that matter, America) you Lefties say things like "the leader was democratically elected, the people can vote him out if they don't like what he does."
whats_up

That's funny; when it comes to Honduras or Venezuela (or, for that matter, America) you Lefties say things like "the leader was democratically elected, the people can vote him out if they don't like what he does."

Posted by CavalierX

2009-09-21 16:34:36

and in the Czech Republic they did exactly that, thanks for recognizing that Cav.
http://dailypundit.com/?p=36091 Daily Pundit » Handicapping, Kneecapping, Whatever….

[...] The Left’s Suicidal Anti-American Impulses On Foreign Policy | Right Wing News Now, in his own mind, is Barack Obama trying to harm or betray the United States? I sincerely doubt it. However, when it comes to foreign policy, it’s amazing how often liberals take exactly the same positions as the people who would like to see us all dead. Just to name one more example, if Osama Bin Laden had been able to vote in the US Congress from 2005 – 2008, I suspect his vote would have been identical to that of Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and John Kerry on at least 80% of the national security and foreign policy issues that they weighed in on. [...]
http://TheNixonTape.Com Dick_Nixon

A defense that doesnt work, against a threat that is non-existant just to piss off the Russians, that might be conservatives foreign policy, thankfully its not the liberals.

Posted by whats_up
2009-09-21 15:38:45

For it to be a liberal policy the words “appease” and “tyrants” must be present. Thanks for pointing that out.
CoolCzech

And then cool woke up and realized that he was having a dream. Your fantasy land is interesting, devoid of reality, but interesting nonetheless.

Posted by whats_up

2009-09-22 10:07:13

Denial is not a river in Egypt, whats_up.

The catastrophic wave is coming right at ya…
CoolCzech

Sure because the conservative view of foreign policy has worked so well in recent years.
Posted by whats_up
2009-09-21 11:48:42

Actually, imbecile, it worked FANTASTICALLY well. 40 million people liberated, America safe from attack, the Russians held at bay.

NOW of course the Eastern Europeans absolutely hate the piece of crap we have in the White House & feel utterly betrayed. Israel no longer considers the President of the United States an ally. Let THAT sink into your thick skull. Israel is on the verge of attacking Iran, with potentially catastrophic consequences for the world economy, all because Obama doesn’t have the nads to stop Iran from getting nukes. (Hell, he probably subscribes to the view that Iran has just as much right to nukes as America does… don’t you think so, whats_up?) The Poles and the Czechs and the Ukrainians and the Georgians are now wondering how much they have to begin to kowtow to Moscow..

And to top it all off, Obama is off on some kind of Retro-Seventies Arms Control kick and wants to disarm America. Earth to Obama: it’s almost 2010, not 1976.

Obama represents the most catastrophic implosion of American foreign policy in our collective history. What’s going to happen under his regime is that bit by bit we will feel the need to accommodate the Irans, the Russians, the Chinas, and other vile regimes of the world until it finally dawns on us: for the first time in America’s history, we will actually BE AFRAID of foreign powers. That will be your lasting legacy, Leftists. Your children will live in an impoverished world of no hope and much, much fear. I spit on you.
whats_up

The catastrophic wave is coming right at ya…

Posted by CoolCzech

2009-09-22 11:32:09

Sure, sure, the sky is falling, the sky is falling, yada yada yada.
whats_up

Posted by CoolCzech
2009-09-22 09:07:45

And then cool woke up and realized that he was having a dream. Your fantasy land is interesting, devoid of reality, but interesting nonetheless.
BIG

Israel no longer considers the President of the United States an ally. Let THAT sink into your thick skull. Israel is on the verge of attacking Iran, with potentially catastrophic consequences for the world economy, all because Obama doesn’t have the nads to stop Iran from getting nukes. (Hell, he probably subscribes to the view that Iran has just as much right to nukes as America does… don’t you think so, whats_up?)

Posted by CoolCzech

2009-09-22 09:07:45

I don't think Israel has the capabilities to do an effective bombing of Iran. I also have doubts that America wouldn't do what Brzezinski recommends and shoot down Israeli warplanes. We have their airplane codes and can track them with AWACS. At best, they may put a few covert boots on the ground to blow up some things and maybe launch a few sea based missles at them.