The Disappearance of US Will

Caroline Glick is the Director of the David Horowitz Freedom Center's Israel Security Project and the Senior Contributing Editor of The Jerusalem Post. For more information on Ms. Glick's work, visit carolineglick.com


obama-foreign-policy-policy-second-term-john-bolton-620x396Originally published at the Jerusalem Post

The most terrifying aspect of the collapse of US power worldwide is the US’s indifferent response to it.

In Europe, in Asia, in the Middle East and beyond, America’s most dangerous foes are engaging in aggression and brinkmanship unseen in decades.

As Gordon Chang noted at a symposium in Los Angeles last month hosted by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, since President Barack Obama entered office in 2009, the Chinese have responded to his overtures of goodwill and appeasement with intensified aggression against the US’s Asian allies and against US warships.

In 2012, China seized the Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines. Washington shrugged its shoulders despite its mutual defense treaty with the Philippines. And so Beijing is striking again, threatening the Second Thomas Shoal, another Philippine possession.

In a similar fashion, Beijing is challenging Japan’s control over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea and even making territorial claims on Okinawa.

As Chang explained, China’s recent application of its Air-Defense Identification Zone to include Japanese and South Korean airspace is a hostile act not only against those countries but also against the principle of freedom of maritime navigation, which, Chang noted, “Americans have been defending for more than two centuries.”

The US has responded to Chinese aggression with ever-escalating attempts to placate Beijing.

And China has responded to these US overtures by demonstrating contempt for US power.

Last week, the Chinese humiliated Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel during his visit to China’s National Defense University. He was harangued by a student questioner for the US’s support for the Philippines and Japan, and for opposition to Chinese unilateral seizure of island chains and assertions of rights over other states’ airspace and international waterways.

As he stood next to Hagel in a joint press conference, China’s Defense Chief Chang Wanquan demanded that the US restrain Japan and the Philippines.

In addition to its flaccid responses to Chinese aggression against its allies and its own naval craft, in 2012 the US averred from publicly criticizing China for its sale to North Korea of mobile missile launchers capable of serving Pyongyang’s KN-08 intercontinental ballistic missiles. With these easily concealed launchers, North Korea significantly upgraded its ability to attack the US with nuclear weapons.

As for Europe, the Obama administration’s responses to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and to its acts of aggression against Ukraine bespeak a lack of seriousness and dangerous indifference to the fate of the US alliance structure in Eastern Europe.

Rather than send NATO forces to the NATO member Baltic states, and arm Ukrainian forces with defensive weapons, as Russian forces began penetrating Ukraine, the US sent food to Ukraine and an unarmed warship to the Black Sea.

Clearly not impressed by the US moves, the Russians overflew and shadowed the US naval ship. As Charles Krauthammer noted on Fox News on Monday, the Russian action was not a provocation. It was “a show of contempt.”

As Krauthammer explained, it could have only been viewed as a provocation if Russia had believed the US was likely to respond to its shadowing of the warship. Since Moscow correctly assessed that the US would not respond to its aggression, by buzzing and following the warship, the Russians demonstrated to Ukraine and other US allies that they cannot trust the US to protect them from Russia.

In the Middle East, it is not only the US’s obsessive approach to the Palestinian conflict with Israel that lies in shambles. The entire US alliance system and the Obama administration’s other signature initiatives have also collapsed.

After entering office, Obama implemented an aggressive policy in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere of killing al-Qaida operatives with unmanned drones. The strategy was based on the notion that such a campaign, that involves no US boots on the ground, can bring about a rout of the terrorist force at minimal human cost to the US and at minimal political cost to President Barack Obama.

The strategy has brought about the demise of a significant number of al-Qaida terrorists over the years. And due to the support Obama enjoys from the US media, the Obama administration paid very little in terms of political capital for implementing it.

But despite the program’s relative success, according to The Washington Post, the administration suspended drone attacks in December 2013 after it endured modest criticism when one in Yemen inadvertently hit a wedding party.

No doubt al-Qaida noticed the program’s suspension. And now the terror group is flaunting its immunity from US attack.

This week, jihadist websites featured an al-Qaida video showing hundreds of al-Qaida terrorists in Yemen meeting openly with the group’s second in command, Nasir al-Wuhayshi.

In the video, Wuhayshi threatened the US directly saying, “We must eliminate the cross,” and explaining that “the bearer of the cross is America.”

Then there is Iran.

The administration has staked its reputation on its radical policy of engaging Iran on its nuclear weapons program. The administration claims that by permitting Iran to undertake some nuclear activities it can convince the mullahs to shelve their plan to develop nuclear weapons.

This week brought further evidence of the policy’s complete failure. It also brought further proof that the administration is unperturbed by evidence of failure.

In a televised interview Sunday, Iran’s nuclear chief Ali Akhbar Salehi insisted that Iran has the right to enrich uranium to 90 percent. In other words, he said that Iran is building nuclear bombs.

And thanks to the US and its interim nuclear deal with Iran, the Iranian economy is on the mend.

The interim nuclear deal the Obama administration signed with Iran last November was supposed to limit its oil exports to a million barrels a day. But according to the International Energy Agency, in February, Iran’s daily oil exports rose to 1.65 million barrels a day, the highest level since June 2012.

Rather than accept that its efforts have failed, the Obama administration is redefining what success means.

As Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz noted, in recent months US officials claimed the goal of the nuclear talks was to ensure that Iran would remain years away from acquiring nuclear weapons. In recent remarks, Secretary of State John Kerry said that the US would suffice with a situation in which Iran is but six months away from acquiring nuclear weapons.

In other words, the US has now defined failure as success.

Then there is Syria.

Last September, the US claimed it made history when, together with Russia it convinced dictator Bashar Assad to surrender his chemical weapons arsenal. Six months later, not only is Syria well behind schedule for abiding by the agreement, it is reportedly continuing to use chemical weapons against opposition forces and civilians. The most recent attack reportedly occurred on April 12 when residents of Kafr Zita were attacked with chlorine gas.

The growing worldwide contempt for US power and authority would be bad enough in and of itself. The newfound confidence of aggressors imperils international security and threatens the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

What makes the situation worse is the US response to what is happening. The Obama administration is responding to the ever-multiplying crises by pretending that there is nothing to worry about and insisting that failures are successes.

And the problem is not limited to Obama and his advisers or even to the political Left. Their delusional view that the US will suffer no consequences for its consistent record of failure and defeat is shared by a growing chorus of conservatives.

Some, like the anti-Semitic conservative pundit Patrick Buchanan, laud Putin as a cultural hero. Others, like Sen. Rand Paul, who is increasingly presenting himself as the man to beat in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries, indicate that the US has no business interfering with Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.

Iran as well is a country the US should be less concerned about, in Paul’s opinion.

Leaders like Sen. Ted Cruz who call for a US foreign policy based on standing by allies and opposing foes in order to ensure US leadership and US national security are being drowned out in a chorus of “Who cares?” Six years into Obama’s presidency, the US public as a whole is largely opposed to taking any action on behalf of Ukraine or the Baltic states, regardless of what inaction, or worse, feckless action means for the US’s ability to protect its interests and national security.

And the generation coming of age today is similarly uninterested in US global leadership.

During the Cold War and in the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the predominant view among American university students studying international affairs was that US world leadership is essential to ensure global stability and US national interests and values.

Today this is no longer the case.

Much of the Obama administration’s shuttle diplomacy in recent years has involved sending senior officials, including Obama, on overseas trips with the goal of reassuring jittery allies that they can continue to trust US security guarantees.

These protestations convince fewer and fewer people today.

It is because of this that US allies like Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia, that lack nuclear weapons, are considering their options on the nuclear front.

It is because of this that Israeli officials are openly stating for the first time that the US cannot be depended on to either secure Israel’s eastern frontier in the event that an accord is reached with the Palestinians, or to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

It is because of this that the world is more likely than it has been since 1939 to experience a world war of catastrophic proportions.

There is a direct correlation between the US elite’s preoccupation with social issues running the narrow and solipsistic gamut from gay marriage to transgender bathrooms to a phony war against women, and America’s inability to recognize the growing threats to the global order or understand why Americans should care about the world at all.

And there is a similarly direct correlation between the growing aggression of US foes and Obama’s decision to slash defense spending while allowing the US nuclear arsenal to become all but obsolete.

America’s spurned allies will take the actions they need to take to protect themselves. Some will persevere, others will likely be overrun.

But with Americans across the ideological spectrum pretending that failure is success and defeat is victory, while turning their backs on the growing storm, how will America protect itself?

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

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

  • Texas Patriot

    CG: The most terrifying aspect of the collapse of US power worldwide is the US’s indifferent response to it.

    There’s nothing to be afraid of. The United States still has the most powerful and sophisticated military arsenal on earth, and that is not likely to change anytime soon. What you are seeing in America today is a tactical retreat from the irrational and impossible role of “global policeman” toward a more fitting leadership role as the premier champion of individual freedom, human rights, and constitutional democracy in which we coordinate with the Russians, the Chinese, and our other allies on a regional basis to counter the growing worldwide threat of Islamic jihad.

    • Jeff Ludwig

      Where’s the coordination? Also, it seems we are also retreating from the “worldwide threat of Islamic jihad” in dealings with Syria, Libya, Iran, Nigeria, Mali, Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, Saudi Arabia (Wahhabism), France, Great Britain, Spain, the Netherlands Norway, etc. There has been NO dealing with the threat of jihad but it’s treated as just another internal criminal activity.

      • Texas Patriot

        JL: Where’s the coordination? Also, it seems we are also retreating from the “worldwide threat of Islamic jihad” in dealings with Syria, Libya, Iran, Nigeria, Mali, Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, Saudi Arabia (Wahhabism), France, Great Britain, Spain, the Netherlands Norway, etc. There has been NO dealing with the threat of jihad but it’s treated as just another internal criminal activity.

        My take is that the “coordination”, in its very earliest stages, is at the level of the heads of state of Russia, China, Great Britain, France, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Japan, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, with Russia and China being our most important points of contact during this phase of things. The level of coordination in responding to the threat is likely to increase as the level of threat recognition increases, and the first early test will be whether or not Iran is permitted to go forward with the development of nuclear weapons. Whether it will be possible to prevent the raging fire of Islamic jihad from sweeping over Africa remains to be seen. Mali was a good example of how the West intervened to stop Islamic insurgents there, but there is no certainty whatsoever regarding Nigeria and many other African states. At this point, our focus needs to be on saving Western Europe, Russia, China, India, Japan, and Israel, and in this environment it can be expected that many smaller and marginal states will fall. This is truly a situation where winning the overall war will be much more important than winning smaller and more localized regional conflicts, and we must keep that overall goal uppermost in our minds as we go forward into the extremely perilous years lying immediately ahead of us.

        • 58Trojan23

          Naivete knows no bounds

          • Texas Patriot

            58T23: Naivete knows no bounds

            Wake up. There’s a war to be won and a civilization to be saved, and we can no longer afford to wallow in the myopic self-delusion that the United States can save the world by itself. The truth is that American ideals of individual freedom, human rights, and constitutional democracy belong to the entirety of humanity, and it will take the entirety of humanity working together to effectively counter the global onslaught of Islamic jihad.

          • Harry_the_Horrible

            Problem is, most folks wan’t individual freedom, human rights and constitutional democracy. They want “free stuff.”

          • Lea

            Muslim unholy jihadists are renowned for hiring the young employed to carry out their mission of destabilising countries.

          • Harry_the_Horrible

            Young folks are stupid.
            And in Moslem society, they are at the bottom of pyramid when it comes to getting a wife.
            Makes ‘em easy targets.

          • reader

            What is it in the human history gives you an idea that individual freedom, human rights and constitutional democracy belong to “the entirety of humanity”? And when was it in the human history that “the entirety of humanity” worked together to effectively counter anything at all?

          • Texas Patriot

            reader: What is it in the human history gives you an idea that individual freedom, human rights and constitutional democracy belong to “the entirety of humanity”?

            One need look no further back in human history than July 4, 1776 to see the dawning of awareness in the minds of men that individual freedom, human rights, and constitutional democracy are God-given rights which belong equally to all the people of the world:

            We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

          • reader

            You’re reciting the Declaration of Independence – the key word here being Independence. This is what American Founding Fathers articultated to much dismay of most souvereigns around the world. The “entirety of humanity” never joined in even in spirit. In fact, your beloved dear leader never joined in either, for we all heard him promise to fundamentally transform THIS COUNTRY – the country where the Declaration of Independence had been conceived, written signed and fought for.

          • Texas Patriot

            reader: You’re reciting the Declaration of Independence – the key word here being Independence. This is what American Founding Fathers articultated to much dismay of most souvereigns around the world. The “entirety of humanity” never joined in even in spirit.

            The Founding Fathers were revolutionaries, and their ideas have never been universally understood, much less universally accepted, anywhere, which is what makes being an American so interesting… and exceptional!

          • reader

            Well – and… I find it curious that you contradict yourself with such an ease. Yes, being an American is exceptional. And being an American is not at all the same as being part of the “entirety of humanity” – whatever that means. I don’t belong to the same “entirety” where muslim brothers belong, for example.

          • Texas Patriot

            reader: And being an American is not at all the same as being part of the “entirety of humanity” – whatever that means.

            We’re essentially all the same, and that’s what the Founding Fathers understood. From a genetic standpoint, the Human Genome Project has revealed that we all descend from the same woman who lived maybe 200,000 years ago, and from a spiritual standpoint, we’re all created in the image of God. The differences between us are much more superficial and changeable and depend on environmental and ideological factors. Think of the genetics and spirituality as hardware and ideology as software, and you’ll get the picture. What the Founding Fathers were saying, basically, is that we are all born with essentially the same hardware, and I think that premise is increasingly provable from both a scientific and a theological standpoint.

          • reader

            The Founding Fathers said nothing about any hardware. They said what they said – that is that everyone is born with inalienable rights, essentially meaning that no bureaucrat creates, nor defines, nor takes away these rights. “The entirety of humanity” never shared this concept with the Founding Fathers. Hence, the American exceptionalism. And, of course, Obama does not share this exceptionalism with Founding Fathers. He said that himself, while his sidekicks steadfastly smear the very Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the Judeo-Christian values, etc, etc, i.e., everything that defines the Anerican Founding.

          • Texas Patriot

            I’m not interested in your comments regarding the President of the United States of America. But I will respond to your defective understanding of the Declaration of Independence.

            reader: The Founding Fathers said nothing about any hardware.

            The Founding Fathers did not have the benefit of the Human Genome Project, but they did have an intuitive understanding of the equality of all men and said so, unanimously in the Declaration of Independence, which was the founding document of the United States of America. Although the Constitution of the United States can be amended by the will of the American People, nothing can change the words of the Declaration of Independence.

            reader: They said what they said – that is that everyone is born with inalienable rights, essentially meaning that no bureaucrat creates, nor defines, nor takes away these rights.

            They did say what they said, but you must have some really serious short term memory problems. I just quoted the relevant text of the Declaration of Independence above. But I’ll do it again, because I think you have some work to do:

            We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

            Here’s the key phrase: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. What about the idea that “all men are created equal” don’t you understand? The Founding Fathers considered it to be “self-evident”. Why can’t you see it?

            reader: “The entirety of humanity” never shared this concept with the Founding Fathers. Hence, the American exceptionalism.

            Thus, American Exceptionalism based on the Equality of Man is embedded in our national identity by the one document that cannot be changed, the Declaration of Independence, which marked the founding of our Republic and the ideological DNA of all Americans for all time. There has never been another nation in history that was founded on that idea, and to that extent America is unique among all the nations. Of course the entirety of humanity never shared this idea, but it was meant to apply to the entirety of humanity and as such it represents the heritage of all mankind.

            Sorry you’re having such a hard time with this. Most American Fourth Graders understand this concept very well. Were you raised in some other school system?

          • reader

            This is so incoherent. I won’t bother going line by line. Just two distinct points. First about my “slander” of your dear leader. I’m not conflating anything here. I’m inferring his position from what he says and what he does. Your constant indignation about it is an indication of one thing: intellectual bankruptcy of a marxist, which is who you are. This is not slander either, it’s a fact based on what you wrote here. Secondly, your entire point was the cooperation of “the entirety of humanity.” For a logical person, someone who acknowledge that the American concept was never shared by that “entirety” would not count on this “entirety” to cooperate. In fact, the history clearly demonstrate that there were never any cooperation on anything at all. All it is is a statist straw man, a utopian drum beat of radical egalitarians to distract the Americans and to hoodwink them away from their roots. In fact, the entire educational system is aimed at dumbing the population down with this sort of incoherent nonsense.

          • Texas Patriot

            I think several propositions are beginning to emerge with greater clarity from our conversation: (1) you were not born in America; (2) you were not educated in America; (3) English is not your native language; (4) you are not an American citizen; and (5) you do not share the American ideal that “all men are created equal”. Which of course explains why you are so adamant about the idea that the “entirety of humanity” does not share American values or American ideals. Fine. The beauty of America is that we believe that every individual has a right to make his or her own choices, and you have obviously made yours.

          • reader

            Everybody here knows that I’m not born in the US, ’cause I told so repeatedly. The rest of it is a pure mix of falsehood and red herring, as usual. Two observations: I know the US Constitution better than you do, and I know Marxism better than you do likewise. I’m certainly better educated – and I certainly have better critical thinking ability. Not because I am exceptionally good. It’s because you’re a bush league wannaby run of the mill marxist. Not slick enough even by today’s standards – right about the floor trim height. Just follow your statements here:

            first, you claim that the only way to manage foreign policy is through the entirety of humanity cooperating

            then you acknowledge that the enirety of humanity never shared the American Founding values,

            and you finished with the statement that an individual has his or her choices and I made mine and that’s why I’m adamant about the entirety of humanity not sharing those values. Really? Are you well – I mean, mentally?

          • Texas Patriot

            reader: I know the US Constitution better than you do, and I know Marxism better than you do likewise. I’m certainly better educated – and I certainly have better critical thinking ability. Not because I am exceptionally good. It’s because you’re a bush league wannaby run of the mill marxist.

            I have no doubt that you know Marxism better than I do, because I don’t know it at all. And what’s more, I don’t want to know it. If there has ever been a failed ideology, that’s it. Even Vladimir Putin says that socialism has failed wherever it has been tried, and who could disagree with that.

            If you must know, what I am, philosophically, is an advocate of all American Industrialism as envisioned by Adam Smith in his classic Wealth of Nations published in 1776; All-American Human Rights as envisioned by Thomas Jefferson in his classic Declaration of Independence also published in 1776; All-American Conservatism as envisioned by Barry Goldwater in his classic The Conscience of a Conservative published in 1960; and All-American Defense as envisioned by General George Patton in his classic statement, “I don’t want you to die for your country; I want you to help the other guy die for his country.” You will no doubt appreciate that except for the work of Adam Smith, all of my philosophical influences are genuine, home-grown American.

            I can’t imagine where you are coming from. Probably some Third World intellectual backwater operating under an inferior and outdated form ideological and theological tyranny. Wherever it is, you have my sympathies and condolences. It’s just oo bad you weren’t born in America. But least you’re headed in the right direction. Hang in there. Someday you too may get it right!

          • reader

            I think there’s a healthy dose of scizophrenia at play here. You’re constantly indignant about criticism of Obama, who is a marxist – by upbringing, by words and by actions. In fact, you’re indignant that he’s being called out as a marxist in the first place. Then, you wrote that marxism is an essential part of the western civilization. Now you claim that you don’t know marxism at all. I can safely say that you either did not read Smith, Jefferson and Goldwater, or you’re too dumb to understand it – judging from your incoherent rants about the “entirety of humanity.” And it did not go unnoticed that yhou never once answered my pointed questions about your idiotic statements. Instead, you’re trying to conflate my place of birth (which is unknown to you too) with being qualified to participate in this discussion. You’re pathetic. But, the bell rang at hello: you see, if “texas patriot” talks the “entirety of humanity” talk and then insults “dam’ furiners” – it reeks of scizophrenia through and through.

          • Texas Patriot

            It’s fairly obvious that you have a profound problem with reading comprehension, at a very minimum. I’ve never mentioned Marxism in my posts because I regard it as a totally discredited ideology that has failed everywhere it has been tried. You are the one who is constantly bringing it up, not me.

            What I resent about your constant personal attacks against Barack Obama has nothing to do with his political philosophy, but rather the fact that he is the President of the United States of America, duly elected twice by the American people, and as such he is entitled to the respect that the Office itself confers.

            Otherwise, you completely misunderstand the Declaration of Independence. All men are created equal, but by their ideologies and habits, they distinguish themselves,and in your case, the change has not been positive.

          • Lea

            You could start by taking out the Muslims in your government and intelligence and military.

          • MLCBLOG

            Still, I detect a certain naivete, too.

        • Drakken

          Your lack of understand of how the real world works, your stunning naivety, Obummer messiah complex and wrong conclusions really do say it all.

          • E Plobnista

            I don’t think he’s glorifying Obama. He’s trying to be realistic about who needs to take action. It would be a dream come true if Ron Paul was in the White House instead of Obama, but he’s not. You go to war with the army you have and the president you have not the army and president you wish you had…

          • Drakken

            Ron Paul is another useless idiot, just like his father, if this is the best us conservatives can put up to run, we are truly fu**ed. TP is one of those wishful thinkers who actually believes what Comrade Obummer says, and actually believes that Obummer will do something about Iranian nukes, it is this completely naïve and wishful thinking that makes wars much worse than they need to be.

          • E Plobnista

            If either Paul was president right now the US would not have these problems and would not be broke

        • Jeff Ludwig

          I share your view that we need to pick our fights, but do not think that has been done wisely during the past few years. As for Iran, it has become pretty clear that the Administration’s policy is one of containment, that is, allow Iran to get nuclear weapons, but to only attack if and when we perceive any deployment of said weapons, much as the U.S. “contained” the Soviet Union during the Cold War. This is unwise, however, because the Iranians have a different mindset than even the communists of the Soviet Union had. They believe the Twelfth Imam is coming, and that it is their job to invite him by annihilating Israel. All the best. Good people can agree to disagree.

          • Texas Patriot

            JL: As for Iran, it has become pretty clear that the Administration’s policy is one of containment, that is, allow Iran to get nuclear weapons, but to only attack if and when we perceive any deployment of said weapons, much as the U.S. “contained” the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

            My friend Drakken constantly gives me a hard time about it, but I don’t think so. Obama has been totally consistent since the 2008 campaign that Iran should not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, and for obvious reasons. He has also said that all options are on the table for making sure it never happens, and his VP Joe Biden has assured the world that Obama is not bluffing about that.

            But how would he do it? Is a ground war against Iran politically or economically feasible at this point? I don’t think so. Would conventional bunker-busting technology be sufficient to take out the deeply-buried Iranian facilities? Perhaps not. That leaves the possibility of using specially designed bunker-busting technology equipped with tactical nuclear warheads. There is no doubt that approach could be made to work, at least to effectively seal off the Iranian nuclear facilities so that they could never be opened again But what about the Russians and Chinese? Wouldn’t it set the hardliners in both countries into a fit of hysterics if we used nuclear weapons against one of their client states? Ordinarily, yes, but in this instance, there is a realistic possibility that we can persuade the Russians and Chinese to stand aside in the event Iran fails to produce the necessary evidence to verify the peaceful nature of their nuclear program, and I think so for several reasons:

            First, there is nothing at all stable or predictable about the Islamic Revolutionary Party of Iran, and the Russians and the Chinese know very well that Iranian nuclear warheads, once produced, could be easily transferred to terrorists and secretly located for detonation at a time and place of terrorists’ choosing in any city in the world, including cities in Russia and China. Thus, the Russians and Chinese are in this instance just as motivated as we are to prevent the Iranians from acquiring nuclear warheads.

            Second, the Russians and Chinese are also targets of Islamic extremism, and as such, have just as much interest as we do in minimizing the threat of terrorist attacks in their respective regional spheres of influence. Allowing the Russians and Chinese to shore up regional security without interference from the United States is also part of the equation here, and that subtle shift in policy probably goes farther than most people think in explaining our acquiescence to recent Russian moves to annex and protect the historically Russian areas of the Ukraine.

            Third, after the usual diplomatic protests and obligatory expressions of outrage, it is highly likely that the Russians and Chinese would be in line to rebuild the destroyed nuclear facilities, and therefore could actually make more money if we destroy them than if we don’t.

            Therefore, under all of the above and foregoing circumstances, my view is that Obama will take the necessary action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons so that containment will never be an issue.

          • Jeff Ludwig

            The bunker buster bombs ought to be sufficient. No need to nuke them….yet…..

          • Lea

            And this may well be the very pretext for the provocation of war between Russia and the West again, with Iran and Turkey and the instigators. Perhaps this is not just about assets but about ideology, the pagan death cult ideology of Islam, which began as a militant political movement in its expansion.

    • Lea

      It is true that America should stop playing the global policeman in particular with regard to the fact that it is now almost owned by China, indebted greatly. It would be wise to rather stop spending money on other countries problems and fix up their own. What does not make sense is that money is not being used to secure America’s borders etc. Also that illegal immigration and even legal immigration is too high in particular with the immigration of person from the Islamic countries. Then there is the islamisation of the military, having a pro muslim as a president and even muslims in the top administration, even as the head of the CIA. This is a very dangerous thing to be happening, this infiltration of American democratic institutions and governance as well. Awful for America and the rest of the world because we all still need America’s protection and rescue from the Muslim Mason Marxist axis of evil that is threatening humanity at present.

      • Texas Patriot

        It’s a precarious moment, and I agree with almost everything you say. The one thing I might disagree with is that Obama is “pro-Muslim”. It’s a fine line to walk, but I think it is possible for Obama to be pro-human rights, for all the people of the world, including Muslims, without necessarily being pro-Islam, much less pro-Islamic jihad. From my perspective, Obama’s wake up call came on September 11, 2012 when the Islamic radicals we had helped to overthrow Gaddafi turned on America and assassinated our diplomats in Benghazi to the worldwide accompaniment of Muslim demonstrators chanting “Obama, Obama, We’re All Osama.” At that point in time it is impossible to imagine that Obama’s formerly idealistic worldview did not collapse in a pile of broken glass.

        • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

          You bring an interesting perceptive to this venue. I don’t agree with everything you say. While Islam is the greatest threat to civilization, Russia and China while not enemies are definitely rivals. They aren’t pro-freedom but pro-power.

          Sadly we are losing our liberty at home while some gain a modicum of liberty abroad. Our ability to foster liberty abroad is limited. But supporting long-standing allies who share our values are still important. We should be selective.

          • Lea

            You are losing your liberty because you are allowing your government to bring in an influx of muslim immigrants who are opposed to democracy and are waging an unholy jihad on the American people. The Marxist Masonic government is using this as a pretext to invade your privacy and control you. The solution is to curb the muslims and this will take a great deal of courage. But if Americans do not do this now, using peaceful measure, like deportation, revoking citizenship, closing down mosques and Islamic schools, banning religious garb in public, then later on, you will find yourselves fighting for your very survival. The very people who are pro-gun control are involved in weapon smuggling and trade. Surely, this must tell you something?

          • ricpic

            The muslims will not be curbed. Later on, most likely within the next ten years, we will be slaves in a marxist-muslim state. Yes, some will fight on for their survival. But make no mistake, the overwhelming majority will be easily cowed into submission.

          • MLCBLOG

            They were “curbed” once before when the entire of Europe rose up and waged warfare to beat them back. This was the so-called Crusades. This is history. It happened then and it could happen now.

          • Lea

            I cannot believe that Americans are being as submissive as the Swedes, suffering from Conflitophobia. Honestly how can you not make every effort to fight for your loved ones and country and take it away from the Obama’s. It means better discernment and the demand of regular referendums on government decisions. It can be done. You just cannot give up so easily. Cowards quake under the false accusations of islamophobia and racist speak. The evidence is overwhelming. The US, in the light of 9/11, should already have declared Islam a crime against humanity and sharia a violation of human rights, but because you vote for the wrong people and then tolerate their “mistakes” and crimes, the exact opposite is happening. The politicians are selling you out, get up and do something about it before you have to fight a war in your own country. The rest of the world needs the real America back.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I think that pre-9/11, most Americans thought of Islam in the context of picturesque nomads. We knew nothing about Islam, about Sharia, about female genital mutilation, or anything else.

            I have a suspicion that, had we known, 9/11 would never have taken place. Or if it did, it wouldn’t be a War on Terror, but a War on Islam.

            Now, we know. We have no excuses for the choices we make at the voter’s booth. It’s us or them, and for the sake of humanity, it had better be us who survives this clash of civilizations.

          • Lea

            You realise that if you change things drastically and stop immigration and subdue the muslims by banning their mosques and schools, religious garb etc under the provision that muslims feel oppressed under a democracy, in the same vein as Saudi Arabia treats non muslims, you could push them back, because Muslims are like the proverbial school yard bully, the more you do to appease them the more aggressive they get. This can be done without a war. But for such a radical change in policy you would have to vote in neither the Republic or democratic party, but Americans are stuck with just these two parties who are in fact only one party. Vote for the little scrawny guy who looks square and nerdy instead for the good looking charming one.

          • E Plobnista

            Because Americans have been castrated by PC and corporate fascism.

        • Lea

          Why is it then that it appears that Obama is still supporting the Islamic jihad muslim genocide on the Syrian population? Why is it then that the US Obama administration gives money to criminal jihadist muslims in the Gaza and West Bank, pour millions upon millions into muslim countries? Do you think he does not know that the muslims see the americans as occupiers of their land and that they reject democracy and the enforcement of western values upon them, and that this has the opposite effect to what is desired by Americans? Making Americans the muslim target?

          Why is it then that Obama is pro Muslim Brotherhood by assisting them in Libya and Egypt? Pro-human rights? If he were pro-human rights then he would accept the fact that islam sharia is a violation of human rights and would declare it to be so since the phenomenon of islamist militant muslim criminals is pervasive at present.
          Can you Americans not see what the Egyptians, who are a majority muslim country, think of America who is seen to be supporting these muslim criminals? And this is due to the Obama administration making decisions without the consent of the Americans. It does look like America is now a part of the terror problem, not a solution or even a protector of human freedom and democracy.
          http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/04/17/still-enraged-about-the-overthrow-of-mohamed-morsi-barack-hussein-obama-turkey-qatar-the-muslim-brotherhood-are-backing-new-jihadist-army-to-violently-destroy-egypts-government/

        • Drakken

          And if we all wish Obummer and his minions to do the right thing it will actually happen, Jesus H Christ are you naïve.

        • MLCBLOG

          I’ll explain it to you. Denial. Denial is the best friend of all lefties. They do not see what they see with their own eyes, or they’d have to change their precious thinking.

          Denial, excuses, and explanations.

          • Lea

            I think it may be something more deliberate than denial. A part of social programming to be certain but there is a definite pattern perceivable and it therefore is an agenda coming from the top with Europe and America in agreement to enforce “multiculturism” and demand “tolerance” even when it is evident that when it comes to the muslim Marxists there can be no assimilation and they are hostile to western culture and peoples. This has everything to do with engineering towards a one world government. The policy is that eventually, even if it takes war, the field will equalise and humans will then have one religion, one culture, one government.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        The trouble is that without the United States, there are no policemen, Lea. There’s only aggressors … China and Russia, in particular … and victims.

        We’re not alone, be we have to lead. We are leading … leading the retreat from global responsibility, and the foxes are in the chicken-coop. As you note, one of the foxes is in the White House, and he’s never seen a Muslim king, president, or prime minister he doesn’t want to bow to.

        If America doesn’t lead, there’s no other country on earth that will.

        • Lea

          Before you go and fight a war with Russia and China, perhaps you can get your president impeached since he is now escalating the assistance for these muslim psychopaths: http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/04/20/egypt-update-on-the-move-by-obama-turkey-and-qatar-to-overthrow-the-egyptian-government-and-reinstate-the-muslim-brotherhood/
          I hope Americans realise that the Muslims will fight against you and not help you in this war that you guys want with Russia and China.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Lea, I don’t want a war with Russia and China. I would like Cold War II. We squandered the opportunities presented with the Fall of the USSR, and the West’s victory in Cold War I.

            I have no illusions about the Muslims. At this point in time, I know who they are and what they are. But we can’t take this struggle to them with Russian and Chinese aggression threatening what few actual and potential allies we have, in the world.

    • 58Trojan23

      Wow! What la, la land are you living in?

      • Texas Patriot

        58T23: Wow! What la, la land are you living in?

        It’s called reality. Try it. You’ll probably like it much more than in the paranoid, lie, and hate-filled world of partisan delusion that usually passes for reality in pseudo-conservative chatrooms.

        • Drakken

          Son, your reality does not understand how the real world works and it shows. You naively believe that Obummer really does have the US interests at heart, when it is as plain as the nose on your face that he is weak and stupid. Our enemies and allies alike see this as well. Putin has had your heros number from day one and has played him like the amateur Obummer is. This is not paranoia, this is goddamn brutal reality, and you keep believing in stupid sh*t that just ain’t so. So who is the deluded one?

          • Texas Patriot

            Hey Drak. Happy Good Friday!

          • Drakken

            Good Friday to you as well, no meat for you, fish only ;)

          • E Plobnista

            Ironic you of all people saying someone doesn’t understand how the world works, given that you’re a Don Quijote and a white supremacist.

          • Drakken

            Unlike you, I understand and know history, leftist and enablers of this road back to the dark ages, like you are about to learn those brutal nasty lessons the hard way. As for your charge of being a white supremacist, nice effing try leftard, Our western civilization is worth fighting for and preserving, because if you and others of your ilk drag us to your utopian 3rd world view, we will become the 3rd world, tough sh*t for you and yours if folks like me object. When it comes right down too it, not all cultures, people and religions are all equal, and if you had studied any history, you would know this.

    • Harry_the_Horrible

      Maybe we have finally figured out that we’re not being allowed to win wars any more.
      Maybe we have realized that the damn foreigners are not worth the expenditure of American blood and treasure any more.
      I used to be a Hawk – big time. I served in the military and though that picking a fight with the US should be an extinction event for the country that did so.
      When the Afghanistan fight started, an armed drone located a vehicle convoy containing bin Laden’s wives and kids escorted by Al Qaeda bodyguards. Vehicles and bodyguards were legal targets – his wives and kids just a delicious helping of “collateral damage.”
      Instead of calling in more air support and wiping out the convoy the operator called a lawyer – who told him to do nothing. When I heard that news, at that instant I knew that Afghanistan and the “war on terror” was hopeless. We would not do what was required to put an end to threat.
      If we are not going worry about US troops and US interests more than the enemy (and EVERYBODY in Afghanistan is the enemy to some extent), if we are no going to fight for a victory, if “the rules” don’t allow us to win, we need to stay home.

      • Texas Patriot

        The war we’re in truly is a war of civilizations based on totally diametric ideologies. Western civilization is based on the ideals of individual freedom, human rights, and constitutional democracy, and Islam is based on the ideal of submission to Islam and sharia with no individual freedom, no human rights, and no constitutional democracy. As Rudyard Kilpling said so long ago, “East is east and west is west, and never the twain shall meet.”

        Under these circumstances sending in a Western army into a Muslim-majority nation to teach the Muslims a lesson has about as much chance of accomplishing lasting change as sending a Muslim army into the West to teach us a lesson. The only way to win this war in the long run is to demonstrate that our way of life tends to elevate the condition of mankind more than the alternative

        In the meantime, we need to make sure we survive so we can have the opportunity of demonstrating that our way is better, and that means eradicating completely any possibility that the forces of Islamic jihad will acquire nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them against non-Muslim targets.

        • Lea

          The fact is that Western pandering to muslims just makes them bolder and they begin to bully us even more. It makes no difference how well we treat them and this is a proven fact, they will always be opposed to democracy since their koranic beliefs demand that they wage unholy jihad on their non muslim neighbours and host countries. And the fact is that they are doing exactly that. Yet, Americans are incapable of rising to this occasion and continue to stubbornly side with these psychopaths of islam in disguise.

        • Harry_the_Horrible

          Personally, I think the entire Pashtun tribe disappearing into the ash heap of history would have a lot more effect than demonstrating “that our way of life tends to elevate the condition of mankind more than any other alternative, including Islam.”

          Ditto for anyone else giving significant backing the Taliban or Al Qaeda.

          As the Muzzies point out, people back the strong horse.

        • Drakken

          The only way you win a war with islam is killem all and let allah sortem out, anything less doesn’t work. Your unicorns and rainbows approach never has worked ad never will work with islam period, but you keep on singing that kumbaya and see how that works out for you.

    • Drakken

      Your faith in your messiah and hero Obummer is absolutely stunning in its stupidity.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      What you have described is very much like the Sheriff drawing a line in the sand, and saying, “Don’t cross this line”, to the bad guys. This, as the bad guys note that the Sheriff’s gun has a trigger lock, on it.

      The Russians and the Chinese are not allies to be coordinated with. They are enemies to be opposed. Our “other allies” will get a spine when we do …

      • Texas Patriot

        WTKA: What you have described is very much like the Sheriff drawing a line in the sand, and saying, “Don’t cross this line”, to the bad guys. This, as the bad guys note that the Sheriff’s gun has a trigger lock, on it.

        There’s never been a “trigger-lock” on the arsenal of the United States of America, we just haven’t had a Sheriff willing to pull the trigger since August 6th and 9th, 1945. Instead, we’ve had a series of presidents who would much rather sacrifice American “blood and treasure” than to act decisively to defend the vital interests of United States of America and the Free World. With the Russians and the Chinese allied with us against the forces of Islamic jihad, as they most certainly are or will be, there is no longer any impediment to using our best weaponry to neutralize strategic threats to the civilized world as and when they arise. The first test of this new reality will undoubtedly materialize as the Islamic Revolutionary Party of Iran draws nearer and nearer to the production of nuclear weapons.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          And what will be the price of an alliance with Russia and China?

          The sacrifice of blood and treasure you mentioned was part of the Third World War … one that ended in the bankruptcy of the Soviet Union, and its fall.

          In 1975, Russia’s economy was already on the ropes, as South Vietnam fell. I suspect that had the United States honored the Paris Peace Accord, the USSR would have plunged into the abyss much sooner than it did.

          Russia and China are aggressor nations … they are wolves, and they smell blood. American strength and leadership are what is needed, and is not on display under Barack Hussein Obama.

          • Texas Patriot

            Calm down, big guy. I’ve read your posts and I know where you are coming from. But it’s a new day. The days of Mao Tse Tung and Nikita Khrushchev are over. At this point in time, China’s economy is probably more dynamic and competitive than ours, and Russia is probably more of a Christian nation than we are; and they are both in the bullseye of Islamic jihad just as we are.

            The truth is that nothing ever stays the same, and the key to survival in an ever-changing world is the ability to adapt in a positive way to radical change as and when it arises, and whether you are fully aware of it or not, the real WWIII is already underway, and it has been since the attack by Islamic jihadists on the Munich Olympics in 1972. There is no question that America, Russia, and China have been and will be rivals with respect to global economic dominance going forward, but we are potentially allies to the extent of our resistance to Islamic jihad.

            The keys to American survival and dominance in the 21st Century and beyond are to lock-down our borders, to rebuild our industrial base, to make sure our global surveillance and interdiction technologies are second to none, and to do what Americans do best and that is enjoy out-innovating and out-working everyone else on the planet to the end of creating the most amazing technological and industrial nation of Free Men and Women in the history of the world. And in this regard, I have no doubt that Barry Goldwater would agree with me 100%.

  • http://www.apollospeaks.com/ ApolloSpeaks

    US/RUSSIA REACH DEAL ON UKRAINE ON BAY OF PIGS’ ANNIVERSARY

    What could it portend for US/Russian relations?

    Click http://www.apollospeaks.com for the answer.

  • kevinstroup

    People all over the world have taken peace for granted. Think of what is coming as a teachable moment.

    • Ray Zacek

      Unfortunately, the teachable moment may occur amid blood and ruin.

      • Danny

        When has it not?

    • Drakken

      What is coming will separate the weak from the strong, a culling is a coming.

  • Schmitty

    Those Syrian negotiations touted by the Obama administration look now like the spot where the Ukraine crisis started. Obviously the Russian went home and told Putin of the weakness and naivety demonstrated by the Americans. The wheels got rolling in Vlad’s head. Remember how this started after the Olympics? Putin put his troops on the border and assured us that it was a simple exercise. Then he took Crimea. The West’s response was laughable so Vlad moves on. The left has pretended strength is undesirable for so long they have no idea how to effectively deal with this. The hippy utopia can only exist in their fog filled heads. As they pretend America was the cause for all aggression in the World the evidence suggests something else. Letting Democrats to pretend like this is dangerous to everyone! The consequences of this might not allow us the luxury of waiting for a recovery.

    • MLCBLOG

      Excellent!!

    • American1969

      ***APPLAUSE!***

  • theoprinse

    The situation in Syria today is the outcome by European political elites that the alternative would even be worse and the Saudi monarchy has understood in time that their Al Qaeda fighters in Syria was after them as well.

    2. Al Sisi has changed the situation in Egypt with regards to Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood as well. The Saudies supported Al Sisi by replacing the US billions and prohibit the Muslim Brotherhood and even Cameron is now investigating the MB that fled to Austria.. Still the MB is in control of the US White House and under Muslim John Brennan the CIA as well. German Nazi’s infiltrated the CIA from 1950 in MKULTRA and NASA and Richard Helms connected their evil aspirations with those tens of thousands of Nazi’s who fled to Egypt, Syria, Iraq

    3. It was interesting to read some author pointing that it was the Pakistani secret service that is in control and not the government of Sharif. Also interesting but rejectable is John Bolton’s proposal to have a three state solution for the alleged Palestinians.

    4. Europe of Saxe Coburg Gotha, Maurice Lippens, Etienne Davignon, industrialist Boel, frm prime minister Guy Verhofstadt the latter provoking a civil war in the Ukraine with support of Zbigniew Brzezinski through CNN merely for electoral opportunism in his coming election on the 22nd of may to replace Barosso.

    The royal group around the Belgian Saxe Coburg Gotha is controlling 30 % of the Belgian economy and they support the so called Palestinians and support boycotting Israel.

    5. Caroline Glick supports Netanyahu’s demand for the front group of the Organization for the Islamic Conference – the so called Palestinians – to accept the Jewish religious character of the state of Israel. Of course Islam and its verses in their Quran being the core of the O.I.C is not able to comply to accept the Jewish religious character anywhere in the world.

    This demand by Netanyahu therefor leads inevitably to a ideological stale mate distracting from a war against the heinous doctrine of Islam in their caverns and caves worldwide .

    B. The Israeli atheist have thus been ignored, set aside and forced into the camp of the Islamist.

    C. Netanyahu’s demand suggests that he wants the whole non Jewish world to accept Islam as their new oppressor as long as Islam accepts the Jewish character of Israel.

    D. Netanyahu suggests that if the Palestine front group for the O.I.C (is allowed to) accept the Jewish religious nature of Israel that the whole world then is to accept the inevitable Sharia state of Palestine … Both the left and the right of the Jewish community are against republican secular states.

  • PDK

    Obama was conceived and brought into this world to fulfill the achievement of destroying our white, Founding Fathers free enterprise Republic with liberty to pursue wealth and happiness form, of the white man’s higher culture of civilization.
    -
    He was the anti-American Messiah, who furthered his destructive desires along his developing and adult years by becoming a false Christian, closet Islamic, and also furthered his inherited belief in the white man’s burden by translating the white man’s burden into his coveted black social justice.
    -
    Obama is not here to be a real American.
    -
    White liberals are disingenuous because their true agenda is liberal ideology, which among other realities want destruction to nation-states to plow the road for their new world, one world order of socialism, big government and democracy.
    -
    Removing the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution is the testament to this reality.
    -
    It is nigh on time for non-liberal, non-apostate whites, the matured and the sane, to begin talking in their own inner circles about a new White Homeland.
    -
    For our coming, beloved, white posterity.
    -
    From the Sanctuary, @ http://the-pdk.blogspot.com/
    I’m PDK: Thank you.

    • delm31_nabla@yahoo.com

      KKK

    • delm31_nabla@yahoo.com

      Archie Bunker

    • Conniption Fitz

      I disagree that a homogenous white homeland is the answer. The only real freedom and peace are in obedience to God, through faith in Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 2:14)

      Anything else is only successful as much as it follows God’s Commandments.

      The US and Israel have now passed laws that enable us to break all of God’s commandments and the US, thanks to Roe vs Wade and Obama, has some that would force us to do so.

    • American1969

      I agree with most of the post, except for the “White Homeland” stuff.

  • Christopher Riddle

    “If You Want Peace:Prepare For War”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Lea

      Americans should concentrate on getting their own country back from the ruling elite who appear to be selling them out to the muslims right now.

      • Christopher Riddle

        I HEAR YOU!We Must Start At The State Level!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        • witch00

          State and pay attention to what they are teaching our children in the schools. Remember what Hitler did to children in Russia. The children instilled with fear at early stage will be easier to control.they will never get over it be strong mentally. Dont let them put that chip in your CHILDREN . ThisIS reason for all terrior in our schools.they are already using this chip system in a school now .saying its easier to get through lunch line. anyway. they can. Parents dont realize this chip will do so many astounding things we cant even imagine. they are even putting it in our elderly saying chips. improve their memory.and quality of life! But it is much more.buyer bEWARE. OUR CHILDREN ARE OUR FUTURE!! IT CHANGES YOUR D N A

          • Christopher Riddle

            You are”Preaching To The Choir”!I don’t have children.That aspect(fatherhood)of life eluded me, but I can see what they are trying to do with”Our Children”.As Mark Levin would say,they are trying to turn them into Leftist-Drones!!!!!

  • nimbii

    I must admit in my more cynical isolationist moments, it seems so easy to say; “Pull the military from a compromised Europe and let Putin print rubles to keep the Euro afloat. They can pay him for energy with the Rubles he prints for them.”

    Sadly, we would witness the destruction of Europe for that to be realized.

    • Lea

      Europe is well on its way to a civil war mainly due to the muslim immigrant influx.

  • WeroInNM

    Obama’s Weakened America Equals…World in Chaos!
    http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/obama-s-weakened-america-equals-world-in-chaos
    “Food For Thought”
    Hello: When Are Americans Going To Wake Up?-God Bless America!
    Semper Fi!
    Jake

    • Drakken

      When is the US public going to wake up you ask? When the economy bottoms out and the SHTF, until then, they will see which Kardasian gets pimped out to the least lowest common denominator by their pimp mother.

  • MrUniteUs1

    So which of the countries mention do you feel like going to war with?
    Will you put on the uniform and serve our great nation? Would you encourage your children, nieces, and nephews to serve during war? How much more would you be willing to pay in taxes to support the war effort? How much more were willing to pay in taxes to support the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan.

    • Drakken

      You may not want to go to war, but war one way or another is going to come to you, for when we have weak, ineffectual, and feckless leaders, war always finds a way. Thank you very much for voting for Obummer. You and others like you who voted for him deserve everything that is coming.

      • Bastiat

        If you think war is always inevitable you are seriously delusional.

        • Drakken

          War is a natural condition of human nature and has been since the dawn of time, and will be for a good millennia or two. If you think man is a about peace love, rainbows and unicorns, I really think it I you who is the delusional one and in serious denial of reality. Study a little history, and you will understand.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          War is more “normal” than peace, throughout human history. War will always be inevitable. But weakness invites aggression, and makes war more probable.

      • E Plobnista

        Who do you expect to pay for your war? The US is broke.

        • Drakken

          We may be broke and that is true, but when war comes to your doorstep, money or not, you will be forced to make a decision, fight or perish.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          We’re not broke paying for wars. We’re heavily in debt thanks to leftist incentives for parasitism.

          • E Plobnista

            We would be in much better shape today if we never embarked upon any foolishness in Iraq. Not to mention the Middle East would be in better shape and radical Islam would be far weaker.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      I did put on a uniform in 1967, and served my country in Vietnam, until wounded in May of 1968.

      I would encourage my children, grandchildren, nieces, and nephews to serve their country to the best of their ability, during a war. Though I’m opposed to having women in combat, I would support their courage and love of country. I’ve lost two sons to combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I have one son who is a full colonel … a former battalion commander … who works as a military historian at the Pentagon (I’m proud of their courage and dedication to this nation).

      I would GLADLY pay more, in taxes, to support the war effort, as long as I could be sure that those taxes actually went to the services that needed them, and to the manufacture of munitions, ships, aircraft, vehicles, and everything needed to support them.

      Thousands of Americans died in Iraq and Afghanistan. I will continue to pay taxes in support of our troops in Afghanistan, as well as I did for the Iraq War. But the only acceptable goal is victory. If it takes a hundred years for the desire for democracy to take hold, so be it. Our troops have been in Germany since 1945, after all.

      Any more questions?

      • Drakken

        Proust!!!!!!! Here is to a bourbon, drinking to your health and to your sons. God Bless, Semper Fi !

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          Thanks, Drak! As we would have said in our company … GERONIMO!

      • MrUniteUs1

        Thank you for service, Sorry for the loss of you sons. Be thankful you lived long enough to raise too good men. I just lost my father to cancer. Hurts to think about it. He served in Korea. His brothers served during WWII. There are all gone now. But there memories live on. They were good men. I worked on ship and delivered supplies during Desert Storm.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          Thank you very much!

          My father was part of Patton’s push north to relieve the encircled troops at Bastogne (although as a former member of the 101st, we don’t acknowledge that we ever needed “saving”!). All of his brothers served in the Second World War, and one of them went on to serve in Korea.

          One of my sons died in Iraq, at Fallujah (he was a Marine), and my other son died in Afghanistan, in the Korengal Valley (during which I understand his commander was not able to call in an airstrike or artillery, because it might hit “friendlies” … he was a victim of ROE).

          My other son is working on a history of the Afghan conflict, while it still rages on.

          They must all be honored, lest we forget …

          • MrUniteUs1

            You’re weldome W. Thanks again to you and your family.

            More attention needs to be given to servicemen and veterans.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          I didn’t notice that you were part of Desert Storm. I’ll return the thanks to you for your service!

      • MrUniteUs1

        Good to know you would be gladly pay more in taxes to support the war effort. Bush cut taxes and went to war. That First time in American history. McCain said that was crazy. He was right. Bush inherited a budget surplus, but left a budget deficit in excess of a trillion dollars. The national debt more than doubled. Had the Clinton tax rates remained in effect the national debt today would be zero.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          Clinton inherited the Reagan and GHW Bush tax cuts, and benefited from them. Governing as a “Centrist”, he decided not to make waves. So, they really weren’t the “Clinton tax cuts”, except for the fact that he kept extant tax cuts in place.

          • MrUniteUs1

            The national debt quadrupled during the Reagan Bush Years. Clinton raised taxes, dropped unemployment to 4% and created a budget surplus.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Budget surpluses occur because taxes are too high. The surplus in the Clinton years should have been returned to the taxpayers.

            Increasing national debt was part of bringing the USSR to its knees, and Desert Storm.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      By the way, I don’t want to go to war with anyone. That’s why I want America to be strong and resolute. It won’t be with Mr. Obama …

  • SoCalMike

    American and European “hipsters” who think a declining American role in the world is a good thing are in for a rude surprise.
    And you can count on media and officialdom to blame the Jews and the Hipsters will parrot the mass media party line because they are…so…hip and mentally conformed.

  • Maynard

    I am afraid that Alfred E. Neuman’s “What, me worry”? Has become our national policy toward ANYTHING of importance.

  • delm31_nabla@yahoo.com

    The rest of the world can take care of itself.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      Somehow, I don’t have much confidence in that statement …

  • delm31_nabla@yahoo.com

    The age pf American Empire is over. Let the rest of the world fend for itself.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      So, which power do you wish to become the new global empire?

      • objectivefactsmatter

        Westerners seem to have lost interest in trying to learn anything from history that they can’t apply to some political agenda before they even look.

        If we just stop the cycle of violence everyone will relax and enjoy the world’s prosperity as we all get to know each other on facebook!

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          ” … stop the cycle of violence …”

          As the old saying goes, “It takes two to tango.” But the Facebook thing is funny …

  • antioli

    The administration does not lack the will to attack the American people.

  • Conniption Fitz

    This is not only a lack of will among conservatives, though statistics tell us most conservative voters don’t vote.

    The apparent lack of will is due to sophisticated psy-ops designed to soothe one group and arouse another.

    We also know leftist voters when aroused (i.e., the Trayvon/Zimmerman race-mongering show trial) vote multiple times and Democrats have a dozen means of corrupting the electoral process, including Soros-built voting machines.

    Still, look at Carolyn Glick’s own Jewish people, the majority of whom think and vote left.

    • Conniption Fitz

      Leviticus 26 tells us that when Israel sins against G-D, enemies that hate them will rule over them. II Chronicles 7:14 and Isaiah 31:8-9 tell us what to do to be set free. Freedom is the theme of the Passover….the only way to be free is to obey G-D. Sin is slavery.

      • kertitor

        Please tell me what you mean to obey God. Would you like to see that every Jews looked like the ultra orthodox or the N Karists !? I prefer Jabotinsky or even the Irgun.

        • E Plobnista

          Accepting Jesus?

  • Danny

    It’s tragic that a country that once sent its soldiers to war to preserve the freedom of others is now willingly giving up everyone’s security (including American security) for the price of magic beans.

  • Bastiat

    America should start worrying about its problems, and leave the rest of the world to take care of themselves. America is going bankrupt and cannot afford to protect European, Asian and Middle Eastern welfare states.

    • Guest

      Let those countries pay for their own defense.

  • Noblesse Oblige

    This about says it (except for characterizing Pat Buchanan as Anti-Semitic). The world is becoming a more dangerous place almost by the week…. yet may do not perceive it yet.

  • pfbonney

    “With these easily concealed launchers, North Korea significantly upgraded its ability to attack the US with nuclear weapons.”

    If used, these launchers could help do Obama’s dirty work of destroying the United States, and having N. Korea’s fingerprints all over it.

  • American1969

    Rhetorical Question: Would our enemies feel as emboldened as they do if we had real, strong leadership in this country?

  • pfbonney

    “… the US sent … an unarmed warship to the Black Sea.”

    Obama was hoping it would be attacked and sunk.

    While Obama destroys the US from within by himself, he sets up the US to be destroyed from without by our enemies.

  • E Plobnista

    More like the disappearance of US money. We can’t afford to be the policeman of the world anymore

  • celador2

    US Us strongest military but China grows. US was leader of free world and ran NATO as defensive alliance to stop Soviet missiles. Now NATO is compromised with Russia co partner exercises and members dependent in émigrés money they say. In other words NATO exists un name only.
    Cold war is not over but Putin sees that he has little of the opposition he did in days before Soviet union fell apart.

  • Robert Johnson

    What Caroline Glick is saying is that the American “right wing” or “conservatives” have been proven to be correct: that most of the world isn’t ready for or interested in, peaceful cooperation, that the appearance of sheer military power and aggressively defending boundaries, territories and allies is the best way to maintain peace. In other words, the liberal utopia, claiming that the world is like a pen of gentle sheep and that if only the U.S. could stop being the big bad warmonger, the whole world would enjoy peace, is WRONG. What is emerging is that the world is more like a pack of wolves, with the major players constantly wanting to expand their territory, power and to snap and growl and looking to steal the current Alpha dogs hunk of meat. In a world like that, any weakness will lead to the other wolves taking down the weakened Alpha and killing him and taking his stuff. “Peace” is only possible when the best of the Alpha’s keeps everyone on their best behavior…or else. So Obama’s academic professor utopian nonsense is now proven to be making the world a much more dangerous place and once Obama finishes de-fanging the U.S.,. he will find that instead of “peace”, you have World War Three as the new “Alpha’s” fight to claim the now vacated top spot. In addition, Obama’s leftist utopian “ideals” of feminism, gay rights, democracy, etc, all will be utterly destroyed. None of America’s rivals, China, Russia, Islam, give one whit for Obama’s cherished leftist dreams.