Posts Tagged ‘President Obama’

LAWMAKERS AND OPINION LEADERS: RALLY AGAINST IRAN NUKE DEAL WILL BE MIGHTY SHOW

September 6, 2015

Washington Times on September 3, 2015, reported that lawmakers, conservative and Jewish leaders, security and values groups are on growing speaker’s list for a September 9 rally against the Iran nuke deal. Excerpts below:

…The upcoming rally at the U.S. Capitol against the U.S. nuclear agreement with Iran…has gained much momentum despite the fact that President Obama has secured enough support in the Senate to prevent Republican forces from blocking it. Some star power is involved in the rally, organized primarily by Sen. Ted Cruz and the Tea Party Patriots.

The speaker’s roster for the event on the afternoon of September 9 continues to grow, and now includes two presidential hopefuls — Donald Trump and Jim Gilmore. Upon announcing he’d appear at the rally, Mr. Trump called the White house accord with Iran “catastrophic.”

Lawmakers are lining up to speak in this impressive setting as well — including Mr. Cruz and Republican Reps. Trent Franks, Jim Bridenstine, Louie Gohmert, Steve King, Mark Meadows, Mike Pompeo and Ted Yolo.

Other lawmakers are wrestling with the terms of the Iran deal. Though he’s not on the speaker’s list, Sen. Ben Cardin, Maryland Democrat, revealed his opposition to the Iran deal on Friday in a Washington Post op-ed; he is a ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with considerable influence.

“Every day, more Americans are learning this deal ignores our Constitution by avoiding the treaty process and makes the world a more dangerous place by undermining both our national security and the security of our allies in the Middle East. The rally will ensure those millions of voices are heard by everyone inside the U.S. Capitol,” says Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Patriots, the Georgia-based umbrella group for multiple local and regional tea party groups.

Broadcasters and interest groups are in the mix for the rally, which Ms. Martin deems “historic.” Among them: independent media maven Glenn Beck and talk radio host Mark Levin, American Conservative Union chairman Matt Schlapp, Citizens United founder David Bossie, Zionist Organization of America president Mort Klein, Center for Security Policy founder Frank Gaffney, Congress of Racial Equality spokesman Niger Innis, Heritage Foundation scholar Genevieve Wood, American Values founder Gary Bauer, Concerned Women for America president Penny Nance and former CIA Director Jim Woolsey.

“Congressional Democrats are under enormous pressure from the White House and left-wing pressure groups to fall in line behind President Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal,” says the aforementioned Mr. Klein, whose organization is supporting the rally, along with the Center for Security Policy.

“We’ve seen Democratic opponents of the deal, like Senators Schumer and Menendez, harshly attacked and threatened for exposing the gaping flaws in this agreement — like the Iranians keeping their centrifuges, enriched uranium stocks, their apparatus of nuclear and ballistic missile research and development,” Mr. Klein continues.

“The rally is an important opportunity to make clear that this nuclear agreement makes war as well as bloodshed and destabilization across the Middle East more likely, not less likely,” he says.

Both U.S. House and Senate will vote to approve or reject the nuclear deal by Sept. 17 — though House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, said the House plans to vote on a measure of disapproval no later than Sept. 11.

There’s concern elsewhere. The Orthodox Union Advocacy Center is sending a delegation of hundreds of Orthodox Jewish rabbis and other leaders to stage their own rally and press conference outside the Senate. The group likens their event to the historic Rabbis’ March in 1943 in support of American and allied action to counter the destruction of European Jewry.

Comment: The rally will be a powerful statement against the Iran nuke deal. The already chaotic situation in the Middle East will be worsened if the deal is ratified. The strong Jewish participation in the rally is therefore important. The geostrategic implications for Israel are grave should Iran be allowed to receive billions of dollars when sanctions are lifted.

Advertisements

EUROPEAN REFUGEE CRISIS: A PROBLEM FOR HILLARY CLINTON?

September 6, 2015

Fox News on September 5, 2015, reported that the roughly 300,000 refugees from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other Middle East countries pouring into Europe this year is sparking new questions about the extent to which U.S. foreign policy under then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has contributed to the crisis. Excerpts below:

Critics of Obama administration policy while Clinton was the country’s top diplomat argue in large part that she and President Obama failed to keep U.S. troops in Iraq after December 2011, creating a void for the Islamic State to form and embark on a reign of terror that has killed and displace tens of thousands in the Middle East just over the past few years.

“That premature withdrawal was the fatal error, creating the void that ISIS moved in to fill and that Iran has exploited to the full as well,” former Florida Republican Gov. Jeb Bush, who is competing with the Democrat Clinton to become president in 2016, said in early August.

“Where was the secretary of state in all of this? In all her record-setting travels, she stopped by Iraq exactly once,” he said. “Who can seriously argue that America and our friends are safer today than in 2009, when the president and Secretary Clinton … took office?”

Nowhere is the problem worse than in Syria, where a four-year civil war has displaced an estimated 7.6 million people and forced an additional 4 million into such neighboring countries and Turkey, Hungry, Lebanon, Jordan and now Western Europe.

Critics of U.S. foreign policy say Obama has allowed Assad to stay in power by in part not providing enough U.S. military assistance to rebel forces. And they argue Obama announced in August 2012 that Syria would cross a “red line” by using or moving around chemical weapons. However, they say, the president did nothing after evidenced showed in April 2013 that such weapons were used on the Syrian people.

Clinton was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013. And she has also been criticized about her role leading up to the Sept. 11, 2012, terror attacks in Benghazi, Libya, in which U.S. Ambassador Chris Steven and three other Americans were killed.

Critics argue that Clinton’s testimony before Congress and other evidence shows that she and others in the administration failed to provide adequate security at the U.S. outpost in Benghazi and that they underestimated the terror threat in the region.

Critics also argue that Obama has underestimated ISIS,…

“This spreading anarchy derives, in substantial part, from Barack Obama’s deliberate policy of ‘leading from behind’ by reducing U.S. attention to and involvement in the region,” John Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and a Fox News contributor, recently said.

Yacoub El Hillo, the United Nations’ top humanitarian official, said in March that the impending crisis was “price of political failure,” according to The New York Times.

The United States has already taken about 1,500 Syrian refuges, and the Obama administration said earlier this week that the country will try to do more next year, by perhaps taking in thousands more.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Comment: This article is focusing on an important problem with US foreign policy 2009 – 2015. During these years the United States has retreated from its responsibility as hegemon. There has been a lack of understanding of the geostrategic and geopolitical problems of the Middle East. It would have been important for America to have negotiated treaties with Iraq and Afghanistan to leave a good sized military force to help guarantee stability after the US retreat from thos countries. Syria and Libya policy has been a disaster and no doubt both Obama and Hillary Clinton are partly to blame for the European refugee crisis in 2015. The crisis is also destabilizing Jordan and Lebanon. The Iran deal will further destabilize the whole Middle East region.

AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM

August 31, 2015

Wall Street Journal on August 28, 2015, published a commentary by Dick and Liz Cheney on the dangerous surrender of US leadership by the Obama administration. Excerpts below:

In 1983, as the U.S. confronted the threat posed by the Soviet Union, President Ronald Reagan explained America’s unique responsibility. “It is up to us in our time,” he said, “to choose, and choose wisely, between the hard but necessary task of preserving peace and freedom, and the temptation to ignore our duty and blindly hope for the best while the enemies of freedom grow stronger day by day.” It was up to us then—as it is now—because we are the exceptional nation. America has guaranteed freedom, security and peace for a larger share of humanity than any other nation in all of history.

Born of the revolutionary ideal that we are “endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights,” we were, first, an example to the world of freedom’s possibilities. During World War II, we became freedom’s defender, at the end of the Cold War, the world’s sole superpower. We did not seek the position. It is ours because of our ideals and our power, and the power of our ideals.

No other nation, international body or “community of nations” can do what we do. It isn’t just our involvement in world events that has been essential for the triumph of freedom. It is our leadership. For the better part of a century, security and freedom for millions of people around the globe have depended on America’s military, economic, political and diplomatic might.

In the 1940s American leadership was essential to victory in World War II, and the liberation of millions from the grip of fascism. In the Cold War American leadership guaranteed the survival of freedom, the liberation of Eastern Europe and the defeat of Soviet totalitarianism. In this century it will be essential for the defeat of militant Islam.

Yet despite the explosive spread of terrorist ideology and organizations, the establishment of an Islamic State caliphate in the heart of the Middle East, the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and increasing threats from Iran, China, North Korea and Russia, President Obama has departed from this 75-year, largely bipartisan tradition of ensuring America’s pre-eminence and strength.

He has abandoned Iraq, leaving a vacuum that is being tragically and ominously filled by our enemies. He is on course to forsake Afghanistan as well.

He has made dangerous cuts to America’s military.

For seven decades, both Republican and Democratic presidents have understood the importance of ensuring the supremacy of America’s nuclear arsenal. President Obama seems not to. He has advocated cutting our nuclear force in the naïve hope that this will persuade rogue regimes to do the same. He has imposed limits on our ability to modernize and maintain nuclear weapons. He has reduced the nation’s missile-defense capabilities.

Allowing the Iranians to continue to enrich uranium and agreeing to the removal of all restraints on their nuclear program in a few short years virtually guarantees that they will become a nuclear-weapons state,…

Nearly everything the president has told us about his Iranian agreement is false. He has said it will prevent the Iranians from acquiring nuclear weapons, but it will actually facilitate and legitimize an Iranian nuclear arsenal. He has said this deal will stop nuclear proliferation, but it will actually accelerate it, as nations across the Middle East work to acquire their own weapons in response to America’s unwillingness to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

The president has tried to sell this bad deal by claiming that there is no alternative, save war. In fact, this agreement makes war more, not less, likely. In addition to accelerating the spread of nuclear weapons across the Middle East, it will provide the Iranians with hundreds of billions of dollars in sanctions relief, which even the Obama administration admits likely will be used to fund terror.

A vote for the Obama nuclear deal is not a vote for peace or security. It is a vote for an agreement that facilitates Tehran’s deadly objectives with potentially catastrophic consequences for the United States and our allies.

The Obama nuclear agreement with Iran is tragically reminiscent of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s Munich agreement in 1938. Each was negotiated from a position of weakness by a leader willing to concede nearly everything to appease an ideological dictator. Hitler got Czechoslovakia. The mullahs in Tehran get billions of dollars and a pathway to a nuclear arsenal. Munich led to World War II. The Obama agreement will lead to a nuclear-armed Iran, a nuclear-arms race in the Middle East and, more than likely, the first use of a nuclear weapon since Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The U.S. Congress should reject this deal and reimpose the sanctions that brought Iran to the table in the first place. It is possible to prevent Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon, but only if the U.S. negotiates from a position of strength, refuses to concede fundamental points and recognizes that the use of military force will be required if diplomacy fails to convince Iran to abandon its quest for nuclear weapons.

As America faces a world of rising security threats, we must resolve to take action and shouldn’t lose hope. Just as one president has left a path of destruction in his wake, one president can rescue us. The right person in the Oval Office can restore America’s strength and alliances, defeat our enemies, and keep us safe. It won’t be easy. There is a path forward, but there are difficult decisions to be made and very little time.

America needs a president who recognizes that everything the nation must do requires having a U.S. military with capabilities that are second to none—on land, in the air, at sea, in space and in cyberspace. The peace and security of the world and the survival of our freedom depend on it. We must choose wisely.

As citizens, we have another obligation. We have a duty to protect our ideals and our freedoms by safeguarding our history. We must ensure that our children know the truth about who we are, what we’ve done, and why it is uniquely America’s duty to be freedom’s defender.

They should know that once there was an empire so evil and bereft of truth it had to build a wall to keep its citizens in, and that the free world, led by America, defeated it. They need to know about the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11, the courage of the first responders and the heroism of the passengers on Flight 93. They should understand what kind of world militant Islam will create if we don’t defeat it.

They should learn about great men like George C. Marshall and Dwight Eisenhower and Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan. We must teach them what it took to prevail over evil in the 20th century and what it will take in the 21st.

Our children need to know that they are citizens of the most powerful, good and honorable nation in the history of mankind—the exceptional nation. They must know that they are the inheritors of a great legacy and a great duty.

Ordinary Americans have done heroic things to guarantee freedom’s survival. Now, it is up to us. Speaking at Omaha Beach on the 40th anniversary of the D-Day landings, President Reagan put it this way, “We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will always be prepared, so we may always be free.”

Mr. Cheney, former vice president of the United States, and Ms. Cheney are the authors of “Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America,” from which this article was adapted; the book is being published Sept. 1 by Simon & Schuster’s Threshold Editions.

Comment: During the 20th century the United States inherited from the British the main responsibility for the defense of the West. Since the 15th century history has been a competition between alliances preeminent in seapower and those preeminent in landpower. During the past century air power and space power have been added to the competition between seapower and landpower. In the 21st century the world has entered a dangerous phase in which the great powers of Russia and China are challenging the West in addition to Islamism. No doubt the United States needs a president who recognizes those dangers. The allies of America need to be reassured that everything is done to safeguard their freedom. It is also in the national interest of the United States to remain strong in the rimland of Eurasia. From 2009 to 2015 the present administration in Washington DC has weakened American influence in one of the most vital parts of the rimland: the Middle East. The Iran deal is strengthening that Muslim regime’s threat to Israel and other Western allies in that part of the rimland (the area surrounding the Eurasian heartland). “Strategic restraint” is not the answer to the dangers presently threatening the West.

POLAND’S LECH WALESA CRITICAL OF OBAMA

January 4, 2014

The Washington Times on January 2, 2014, reported that the former president of Poland said President Obama is failing America and has let the nation drift in a pit of moral morass, driving down its standing with the global community. Excerpts below:

Lech Walesa, famed for his anti-communist crusade in the 1980s and as a Nobel Peace Prize winner, said in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper that “in terms of politics and morality, America no longer leads the world.”

Whatever “hope in the world” existed that “Obama would reclaim moral leadership for America” when elected in 2008 is gone, and instead the president has “failed” to bring that dream to fruition, Mr. Walesa told CNN.

“We have to do everything that we can to recreate, to reclaim America’s role, and it seems that Obama would manage that, but he didn’t accomplish that,” he said.

Mr. Obama’s failure in this area has greatly jeopardized the security of the nation, he added.

“It’s a dangerous situation, so we are awaiting a president who will understand that,” Mr. Walesa said.

Mr. Walesa helped overthrow Poland’s communist government.