Obama’s Fantasyland: The ‘Tranquil’ Global Community

Ari Lieberman is an attorney and former prosecutor.


98306894-1D6F-4746-8C06-78AC1C8FA5CF_mw1024_s_nOn July 14, White House press secretary Josh Earnest made a laughable and absurd statement at his daily news briefing. Unfortunately, the statement wasn’t meant to amuse but rather highlighted how divorced from reality and steeped in fantasy President Obama has become.

Earnest noted the following; “I think that there have been a number of situations in which you’ve seen this administration intervene in a meaningful way, that has substantially furthered American interests and substantially improved the, uh, you know, the – the tranquility of the global community.” So according to Obama’s shill, the president has substantially improved the tranquility of the global community. It is as though a clueless Earnest had just emerged from an alternate reality where night is day and up is down. The statement was surreal and if the stakes weren’t so serious, it would actually be comical.

A brief check of the state of the world today and one quickly realizes that all is far from well. From Ukraine to the South China Sea, Venezuela to the Mideast, the world is in disorder and teetering on the brink. Some of these regional problems predate the age of Obama yet he is to blame for the leadership void that exacerbated existing problems and created others.

Take for example Iran, a country recognized as the world’s premiere state sponsor of terrorism. The Islamic Republic has quite easily duped the ostrich-like administration into believing that it is serious on rolling back its nuclear weapons program. It succeeded in getting the administration to reverse crippling sanctions that took years to formulate which in turn has provided the mullahs with badly needed cash to fuel their overseas operations and subversive activities.

While a clueless Obama negotiates with those who have mastered the art of negotiation, it becomes quite evident that the president is completely out of his league. Moreover, the mullahs watched and drew appropriate conclusions as Obama drew and then withdrew his now laughable red line in the sand vis-à-vis Syria. In the meantime, the nuclear clock keeps ticking as the Iranians continue their determined march toward acquiring an atom bomb. Unless Israel intervenes, which seems likely given the administration’s impotence, it is a virtual certainty that the Iranians will acquire a nuclear weapon on Obama’s watch.

The president likes to tout his claimed dismantling of Assad’s chemical weapon stockpiles as a victory of sorts but here too he failed miserably. While some inventory was destroyed, Assad still maintains the means of production despite assurances that they too would be destroyed. Twelve Syrian chemical weapon production facilities slated for destruction are still operational and Assad does not appear to be in any mood to give them up. And why should he be afraid of repercussions? America’s deterrent capability was tossed out the window when Obama balked after Assad stomped over his imaginary red line. Indeed, Assad had the temerity to use poison gas against his own people while he was ostensibly dismantling his CW program. What’s more, the CW dismantling deal required Assad’s cooperation which instantly transformed him from international pariah to a responsible statesman whose cooperation was critical to effectuating Obama’s pipe dreams.

The president’s vacillation in Syria, foot dragging on providing arms to moderate Syrian opposition groups and failure to follow through on promised military action in response to war crimes committed by Assad, directly and negatively impacted the course of the fighting there and marginalized the moderate opposition to the point where it has been overtaken by al-Nusra, ISIS and other extremist organizations. Obama squandered an opportunity just as he did in 2009 when pro-democracy Iranians took to the streets to demand free and fair elections, only to be crushed by the regime’s brutal police forces and Basij thugs while the administration stood by in contemptible silence.

The same story unfolded in Venezuela, a country led by a tyrant who has allowed the Iranians to turn his country into a base of operations for narco-terror and other subversive activities. In early 2014, pro-democracy protestors fed up with government corruption, lack of freedom and an anemic economy took to the streets to demand change. Nicolás Maduro borrowed chapter and verse from his mullah pals and unleashed his goons armed with guns, clubs and chains to beat the opposition into submission as the administration remained stoic.

Venezuela is not some far-flung, backwater but sits in our own backyard and possesses one of the world’s largest oil and uranium deposits. But it appears that Obama is more concerned about a lone Palestinian provocateur than the cries of 30,000,000 Venezuelans who demand freedom. The grim result of the administration’s stoicism in the face of Maduro’s brutality is that tyranny was allowed to prevail over freedom.

In Iraq, the administration dropped the ball and did not fully become cognizant of the ISIS threat until the Iraqi army unraveled and Iraq was effectively split into three. Iran now pulls the strings in eastern and southern Iraq while ISIS controls the western portion. The only good byproduct of Obama’s negligence was the enlargement and strengthening of the Kurdish enclave in northern Iraq but here too, the administration has managed to foul things up. Instead of giving the Kurds – loyal American allies – the political and military backing they so desperately need to stave off ISIS and other threats, Obama kowtowed to pressures from his thuggish Islamist buddy, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, to forestall Kurdish moves toward independence.

In the South and East China Seas, America has allowed the Chinese to engage in creeping annexation of large swaths of areas believed to contain lucrative gas deposits and fishing grounds, abandoning our Japanese and Pilipino allies. As Charles Krauthammer points out, our actions in that region have left our allies stunned and hanging. Obama’s pusillanimous policies have only encouraged the Chinese to adopt a more aggressive posture in asserting their maritime claims which will invariably lead to more friction and instability.

And then of course there is Israel where Obama has acted in a shamefully perfidious manner against a longtime ally. As I detailed here and here, never in the history of international relations has an American ally been treated so shabbily. As Israel is under relentless bombardment from genocidal enemies, a ranking Obama official publicly blasted the Jewish State for perceived wrongs. As world leaders from Canada, Australia, Germany, England and France – FRANCE! – called Prime Minister Netanyahu to express their support for Israel’s defensive measures, Obama dragged his heels and reluctantly called his nemesis to express faux support. Of course, the president’s nauseatingly fake expressions of support were qualified and accompanied by the perfunctory and sickening calls for “restraint.”  Life in Israel has grinded to a virtual halt, summer camps have been called off and neonatal wards have been moved into bomb shelters and Obama has the nerve to call for restraint.

The president likes to tout the fact that he’s a strong supporter of funding for Israel’s marvelous Iron Dome and Arrow missile defense systems to bolster his bogus pro-Israel credentials. What the president fails to note is that there is overwhelming bipartisan congressional support for development and funding of such systems and it would be political suicide for the president to halt funding for such projects. Moreover, the president is keenly aware that but for Iron Dome, Israel would by now have launched an all-out ground offensive to root out the sources of rocket fire and that the system is enabling Israel (for now) to maintain a defensive posture which is precisely what Obama wants but is not necessarily in Israel’s best interest.

What Obama won’t say is that this latest round of fighting was facilitated by his perfidious treatment of Israel. His relentless criticism of Israel, the Mideast’s only democracy, has only served to undermine an ally and harden the maximalist goals of Israel’s enemies. In essence, Obama torpedoed his own peace initiative.

Moreover, the president failed to condemn a so-called “national unity” government that witnessed a partnership forged between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Even after rockets began falling on Israel in early June, the State Department disingenuously insisted that the PA’s Abbas had no control over Hamas’s activities. That assertion was false as some reporters intimated during a State Department briefing in early June. Even after the rocket fire intensified in July, the State Department’s automaton, Jen Psaki, continued to cling to this regurgitated prepackaged nonsense to the utter disbelief of seasoned reporters.

The world looks to the United States for leadership and moral clarity, both of which are sorely lacking in this administration. With his inept leadership and feckless foreign policy, Obama has allowed rogue states and terrorist entities to gain the upper hand and exert influence in regions previously thought to be secure. The world today is a much scarier and less tranquil place precisely because of Obama and his inability to adapt and veer from convoluted, preconceived notions ingrained into his mind by his early mentors and friends, Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi and Rev. Jeremiah Wright. As for Josh Earnest’s statement, I don’t know what’s more frightening, Obama’s global foreign policy failures or the fact that he actually believes his own hype.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Conniption Fitz

    When people turn from God, from the laws and precepts of God, they develop moral vertigo and soon cannot tell truth from lies and they begin to call good evil and evil good.

    This is the condition of the entire Obama administration and the Democrats and many Republicans like McCain, McConnell, et al.

    • Doc

      My brother you have nailed it I’ll attach a photo were the admit they use satan to win I put the stars on it to draw attention to the statement nothing else has been changed

  • I_Am_Me

    Why does the left directly attack Christianity, indirectly attack Judaism, but then give Islam a free pass considering that the left’s real goal is to replace theism with atheistic statism or an unrealistic utopia under some other guise? Is it a calculated series of events, knowing that Judaism is still off the table because of the Holocaust, so might as well bury Christianity and deal with Judaism and Islam later?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      It’s not about religion per se but about opposition. The communists have coopted some churches to use against churches that oppose them. They’re trying to manipulate everyone to do their fighting for them because the idea of a “worker’s revolution” has been completely discredited.

      It’s a lot like calls to allow the Islamic factions fight each other. It’s not that they want any Islamic faction to win but all factions get weaker from fighting each other rather than fighting “the good guys.”

      The communists see themselves as the good guys and the underdogs that are going to deliver “social justice” and that the “greater good” requires them to use any means necessary.

      • I_Am_Me

        What do you think their end game is? One world communist government? Real communism or totalitarian? Logan’s Run?

        • objectivefactsmatter

          Who is they? Most of the people that started this are now dead. We’re dealing with the zombies. Although there are probably some who do have an endgame of introducing some international sovereign, handing some kind of sovereignty to the UN, or something along those lines.

          For the most part they do not have an end game strategy. Most of them simply perceive that it’s in their best interests to argue for “social justice” for the exact same reasons that trial lawyers put together class action lawsuits whether or not they have compelling evidence on their side. It just works for them as far as they can tell.

          • I_Am_Me

            What do you mean it just works for them? And if these are the zombies, are they just trying to get money, power or fame out of their “social justice” efforts?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            It varies by individual. Just take a look at any and do a case study or two. Ask them what social justice is. By the time they finish, they’ll have to admit that they don’t believe equality before the law is good enough. It’s not enough to have our constitution. They need something more “active” to make sure people have “equality” as defined by delusional Utopian dreamers.

            Stick around and follow some of these tools trying to defend themselves. It’s often funny and sad at the same time.

            But if you read the Communist Manifesto before you hear their arguments you’ll often understand the philosophy behind their petitions much more clearly than they do. It all boils down to “private capital (property) is theft.” Personal property (what you need to sustain yourself) is OK. Usually.

            But if you want an example of “works for them,” take the unions that use Marxist arguments because there is no demand for evidence that the employer is being “unfair.” If you use Marxist arguments, they’re unfair because they have capital. It’s just assumed that they always are stealing from workers. When unions do settle, they never say “well that’s fair” they just agree to settle for now until they have more power to call a strike or otherwise get more. They’re not really interested in fairness short of communism. That’s how they define fair. Which means the workers should own everything.

            The original idea of socialism was basically about fears that new technologies would enable established rich and powerful poeple to exploit everyone else even more than before. And that did happen in a few cases. But technology and capital also enabled competent hardworking people to overcome people that gained power and wealth only through politics.

            Lots of landed families lost their wealth because they were incompetent. So “capitalism” is an equalizer. Or rather, it favors competence, hard work and patience over political connections unless the politicians are able to interfere with the competent capitalists. That’s why the most democratic forms of government favor equality in the markets and before the law. That’s what “free markets’ means. It doesn’t mean free from constraints. It means free from political interventions that favor some party or parties over the others. Just as freedom does not mean anarchy. It means essentially you’re free until you break the law and protected from unreasonable restraints.

          • I_Am_Me

            Thank you for that excellent comment. I’ve come to a similar conclusion myself that on one half there are people who believe in private property and freedom as you describe it, and others who believe in various collective forms with the ultimate one being a global collective. Put another way, on a sliding size scale of individual, family, tribe, nation, globe, you have some people who favor the smaller units, and others who favor the larger ones. And to enforce the favoring of the larger groups, you have to suppress individual freedoms for the sake of the so-called larger good. The interesting thing is you can favor the individual and allow the group to accrue some of the benefits.

            Speaking of the Communist Manifesto, I read it about 20 years ago. Gonna have to read through it again since I’ve forgotten a good chunk of it. I’ve also got the Main Currents of Marxism tome staring at me.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Put another way, on a sliding size scale of individual, family, tribe, nation, globe, you have some people who favor the smaller units, and others who favor the larger ones. ”

            Right. But they’re rarely challenged to justify how we as a society decide where that sliding scale belongs. That’s why we have this endless tug of war because the Marxists and dupes demand “social justice” without clearly defining what that it. Well, Marx basically said that social justice means the worker keeps the profits and nobody should gain merely because they put the scheme together (capital and intellectual property).

            So I think we’d have more people on our side if we challenge them to come up with some objective way to decide how we distinguish between “social justice” and equality before the law as individuals. And if you put it that way, they can only really argue for free markets or for communism. Force them to take a clear stand and a lot of people will suddenly wake up to the implications of the ideas they espouse.

            “And to enforce the favoring of the larger groups, you have to suppress individual freedoms for the sake of the so-called larger good. The interesting thing is you can favor the individual and allow the group to accrue some of the benefits.”

            Exactly. That’s why “social justice” is usually an Orwellian term in a society that already has equality before the law.

  • UCSPanther

    Any Lefty who tells you that progressive ideology will reign supreme and that the world is getting more civilized is one that has no connection with reality.

    The more their ideology fails, the more delusional they get. The White House’s claims are a symptom of that effect.

  • SoCalMike

    This guy is smoking peyote.
    Invariably parasites in power addicted to the money of others have a way of not seeing what’s right in front of their eyes and seeing with perfect “clarity” and certainty that which does not exist.

  • vnamvet1969

    We have nothing as far as leadership from this Administration. Obama is not qualified to lead anyone. We have lost the World influence we once had, and it will take many bold steps to get it back, if we have a qualified President elected in 2016. We are no longer trustworthy, we have escalated the unrest in the Middle East with this so called “Arab Spring”, and there is turmoil all over the world. If Clinton or Warren become President our Nation will implode. Nowhere does it state that we will exist until the coming of Christ.

  • imsteph

    Ecclesiastes 10 New International Version (NIV)

    10 As dead flies give perfume a bad smell,
    so a little folly outweighs wisdom and honor.
    2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right,
    but the heart of the fool to the left.
    3 Even as fools walk along the road,
    they lack sense
    and show everyone how stupid they are.
    4 If a ruler’s anger rises against you,
    do not leave your post;
    calmness can lay great offenses to rest.

    5 There is an evil I have seen under the sun,
    the sort of error that arises from a ruler:
    6 Fools are put in many high positions,
    while the rich occupy the low ones.
    7 I have seen slaves on horseback,
    while princes go on foot like slaves.