Obama’s Appeasement Leads to War

Barack ObamaOn the shield of the Strategic Air Command a steel mailed fist grips a lightning bolt and an olive branch. The motto of the organization that was the nightmarish obsession of every Cold War leftist was “Peace is our Profession.”

To the moviegoers who sat through Dr. Strangelove, to the earnest leftists who saw the world going up in a puff of atomic smoke because the military industrial complex was obsessed with killing people, to the pseudo-idealists who passed on atomic secrets to Moscow to avoid an American monopoly on the bomb, the SAC’s motto was a demented joke. They knew that the only way to stop war was to disarm.

After the Soviet Union collapsed in the face of relentless pressure from Ronald Reagan, against their fervent opposition, their jeering of SDI defense and their clamor for total appeasement, they did not change their minds. They are even now penning earnest essays in The Nation explaining, as they did of Hungary and Czechoslovakia, that we are the warmongers who are making threatening moves.

In the spring of 2009, Obama delivered a speech in the Czech Republic calling for an end to nuclear weapons. Rather than celebrating the patriotic dedication of Americans throughout the Cold War which had made the freedom of the Czechs possible, he dug up the hoary leftist cliché of how “generations lived with the knowledge that their world could be erased in a single flash of light.”

Obama vowed “to put an end to Cold War thinking”, eliminate nuclear weapons and guarantee the defense of our allies “including the Czech Republic”.

That fall, Obama abandoned missile defense for Poland and the Czech Republic to appease Russia.

At his inaugural address, Obama had declared, “the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve”, “as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself” and “America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.”

The new era of peace was not to come. That same spring, his Cairo speech with its abandonment of American power and alliances would devolve the Middle East into murderous civil wars fought over lines of tribe and Islamist regimes rejecting common humanity with non-Muslims and even fellow Muslims.

Throughout his campaign, Obama had assured the country that Sunnis and Shiites would come together and negotiate a working arrangement once Americans troops were out of Iraq. Instead the Shiites seized power and Al Qaeda came surging back as the murderous champion of the Sunnis.

In Iraq, as in Ukraine and Syria, the lines of tribe held and common humanity was nowhere in sight.

The Democrats had exploited the Iraq War, which they had supported, to reinvent themselves as the anti-war party. John Kerry had gone from throwing his medals over the White House fence, to running for president on his Vietnam War service to mocking American soldiers by telling students, that if they didn’t study, they too would end up stuck in Iraq.

Gore had run against Bush by promising to be harder on Iraq. Kerry had run against Bush by promising to be harder on Iran. But then the Democratic Party’s ideological shift bore fruit and Hillary Clinton was suddenly too much of a warmonger to be president. The man who knocked her out of the race had become famous for delivering a confused anti-war speech to elderly Marxists in Chicago in 2002.

The Democrats had made it their priority to freeze Bush’s second term foreign policy by making it impossible for him to do anything about the terrorists streaming into Iraq out of Syria, Russia’s invasion of Georgia or Iran’s nuclear program. Meanwhile eager champagne drinking leftists held their glasses in the air, waiting for the ascension of their candidate who would “fix the world”.

By embracing the attacks on the Iraq War, the Democratic Party had reverted its foreign policy back before Reagan to the Carter era. Peace through strength was gone. Soft power was in. America would appease and apologize its way out of any foreign policy problems and surrender its way to peace.

By the time Obama’s 2009 world tour was done, American foreign policy lay in tatters. It would take years for the full damage to reveal itself, for the forces he had set in motion to crystallize into events such as the Syrian Civil War or the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The men of the Strategic Air Command during the Cold War had understood, as the scribblers in The Nation did not, as the audiences giggling over Dr. Strangelove did not, that it wasn’t America power that would bring on war, but the elimination of that power.

They knew that they were standing against the long night. Now the night has come.

Obama deliberately abandoned American power. He threw it away with the same disdain that Kerry had tossed the medals over the White House fence. Unilateralism was over. It was a post-American world now with no more lines of tribe or border to get in the way of our uncommonly common humanity.

The message that he sent the world was that the Democratic Party’s opposition to the Iraq War had not been a temporary fluke or an opposition tactic. It was now government policy.

Obama abandoned Iraq to Iran and Afghanistan to the Taliban, snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory in both wars. Each time his foreign policy went up in flames, he rose from the ashes having learned nothing whatsoever from the experience.

Last year, Chuck Hagel’s Vision Zero group unveiled a parade of celebrities reciting Obama’s Czech speech. “I demand zero,” Matt Damon, Morgan Freeman and Whoopi Goldberg sonorously recited. They meant zero nuclear weapons, but they could have just as easily meant reducing American power to zero.

On Feb 24, Hagel unveiled a new series of drastic defense cuts that would take the US Army back to its smallest size since before the Cold War.

Three days later, Russia invaded Ukraine.

Obama and his ilk with their faith in international law and soft power had forgotten what Woodrow Wilson, that Democratic Party champion of international law, had said, “A steadfast concert for peace can never be maintained except by a partnership of democratic nations. No autocratic government could be trusted to keep faith within it or observe its covenants.”

Obama had put his faith in the submission of American power to autocrats, perverting Wilson’s already flawed vision. Distrusting American power, he had instead trusted in the willingness of Iran and Russia to meet his flexibility with friendship.

He blamed America first and put America last.

America has so far only paid the lightest price for the treason of the Democrats. The greater part of the price has been paid by the tens of thousands dead in the conflicts touched off by their foreign policy. But if the post-American foreign policy continues, then millions around the world, including Americans, will pay the price.

Every liberal today wants peace. Every diplomat wants to be a peacemaker. But their brand of peace, whether it is the negotiations with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea or Palestinian terrorists, is worthless. The only peace that counts is the one protected by the men of the Strategic Air Command who live the knowledge that the profession of peace can only be practiced with the tradecraft of war.

*

Don’t miss Daniel Greenfield on this week’s Glazov Gang. He discusses Why Lois Lerner Pleaded the Fifth, Obama’s Belief that Abbas is a Peace Angel, Obama’s Helplessness Over the Ukraine, and much, much more:

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

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

  • Naresh Krishnamoorti

    Obama’s foreign policy ramblings are just as lunatic as the man who stands atop a building and declares, “the power of gravity shall soon dissolve, and the power of humanity to take flight shall soon reveal itself.”
    After watching hundreds of people leap to their deaths, these fools still learn nothing. They still encourage people to envision a world without gravity. They refuse to live in a world where the power of gravity crushes man’s dreams of flying freely through the air.
    They refuse to acknowledge that we have to use our minds, and our resources, invent things, build things, weld parts together, expend resources, and use energy to overcome the immutable laws of nature, like the proclivity for war. They just want to wish away man’s baser nature, which is just as foolish as wishing away gravity.

    • Steve Bryant

      Brilliant! Denying gravity is the Democrat hood ornament.

      • moron republican

        Yep… I like to deny gravity… Actually… Republicans are far more religious… religious people are far more likely to disagree with science… Thus I would say republicans are the ones that are refusing to acknowledge gravity.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          For your own good, don’t watch Cosmos anymore. It’s purpose it to make people like yourself feel superior to people of faith.

          • Moron

            I have never seen Cosmos.. I have no idea what you are talking about…. I don’t watch tv though… I read.

          • A Z

            In case you did not get the memo.

            “Yale Study: Tea Party members more scientifically literate than liberals | Surprised?”

            https://www.sodahead.com/united-states/yale-study-tea-party-members-more-scientifically-literate-than-liberals-surprised/question-3998457/

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Let me guess, you’re the “rebel” in the family.

          • Moron

            By the way… I raised a Christian, I read the entire bible… Unfortunately I have this problem that I like to use my brain…

          • Daniel Greenfield

            “Unfortunately I have this problem that I like to use my brain…”

            If only you had one of those.

          • Moron

            Awesome!! Daniel your articles are terrible, biased, poorly written garbage…

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            That’s “why” he seems to bring out the worst trolls on the internet, like you. Whenever he writes an article, you can bet there will be at least 50 comments, but normally … there will be many more.

            The reason for this is that he tells the truth, with courage. Truth-telling is not popular on the Left …

          • Moron

            Why am I a troll?? Because I am lurking around the comments section like you?

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Unlike you … a self-professed great reader … I actually read the article. Trolls are called such because they lurk under the articles … like the mythological trolls lurked under bridges … and attack.

            Are you trying to impress Mr. Soros with your reasoning abilities. It’s not working.

            I understand the article. You’re a troll …

          • Moron

            He brings out the worst trolls because his articles are terrible, poorly written garbage???

          • Moron

            A “self professed great reader”???? I said “I don’t watch tv though… I read”… Typical republican though… Take my words out of context and twist them to suit your needs.

            By the way, the comment in question is only 2 comments down from this one….Kind of weird how I’m telling the truth isn’t it??

          • nomoretraitors

            You’re projecting again

          • Moron

            He brings out the worst trolls because his articles are terrible, poorly written garbage???

          • Drakken

            Derka derka derka derka, why look! A lefty regressive in conversation, how quaint and unoriginal.

          • Moron

            And telling the truth is oh so popular on the right… You guys are like pillars of humanity.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I’m so gratified to discover that you, on the left, understand this …

          • Habbgun

            Ooooooh typical left wing white trash agitprop. Your time is coming to an end pal. Obama is a failure and everyone will one day know if he didn’t have that white communist garbage as mother and grandfather he would never have been a leader for the new type of Democrat. The trojan horse only works once.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            I always like to get my reviews from people who use two exclamation marks

          • logdon

            Didn’t take long did it?

            Daniel picks up on your insufferably self regarding hubris and off it goes.

            However I’d agree entirely with the unfortunate problem part when you mention your brain.

            They do come in all shapes, sizes and levels of efficiency and it would appear by your descent into rabid insult that yours is at the wrong end of the spectrum.

            By the way an ability to read is usually a basic requirement in civilised society, not an accolade.

          • Moron

            And your insults are unoriginal… Can’t say I expected much though…

          • logdon

            Why are you here? A quite reasonable question.

          • vnamvet1969

            So far I see no truth as to the ‘brain’ declaration.

          • Habbgun

            I wasn’t raised a Christian so I am offended you automatically include my religion in your sneerings.. Offended…Offended I say. I want reparations, privileges, money will do but free airplane fare could be a substitute.

          • Drakken

            It is rather amusing to see window licking shortbus riders like you debase themselves.

          • truebearing

            You like to use your brain? Can you provide any evidence?

          • truebearing

            You raised a Christian? I suppose your bad example made your child desire truth and light all the more.

          • A Z

            You realize the Daniel Greenfield and other bloggers like him live for people like you.

            You came here and stirred up a hornet’s nest. You are just having all kinds of fun posting inane, insane and stupid things. Meanwhile Daniel is saying “Cha-Ching!”

            “Yale Study: Tea Party members more scientifically literate than liberals | Surprised?”

            https://www.sodahead.com/united-states/yale-study-tea-party-members-more-scientifically-literate-than-liberals-surprised/question-3998457/

          • reader

            You raised a Christian before or after you read the entire Bible? I wonder if you ever read ABC. Probably not – so you may have read a telephone book intend, with the same result.

          • Moron

            And I don’t need to see any show to feel superior to you morons… All I need to do is read about the creationism museum… Where T.Rex’s crack coconuts and live in peace with Adam and Eve… LOL Now I feel superior. :)

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Who said I was a Creationist?

            I’m simply able to “use my brain” enough to have read Carl Sagan’s book, by the same title, and realize that he was an atheist with a political and social agenda. To make those agendas happen, it was necessary for him to attack people of faith.

        • Gislef

          Could you point to any Republican that refuses to acknowledge gravity?

          • Moron

            I don’t have to… I know it’s hard, but maybe read the entire thread..

          • Drakken

            You are the prime example of stupidity on steroids and there is no reasoning with folks like you lefty retards, you must be shown the error of your ways the hard way. That day is coming sooner than you think.

        • fiddler

          Resorting to ad hominem when you are bested in an argument. Typical Leftist refuge of last resort.

        • vnamvet1969

          Uh, the Bible states that the earth is a sphere while man still believed that it was flat. There is a wealth of science in the Bible, perhaps you should check it out.

        • A Z
        • Steve Bryant

          OH, witty too! putz

    • Daniel Greenfield

      They’re egotistical enough to believe their ideas are stronger than reality.

      • Moron

        The same could be said of republicans…

        • truebearing

          Wrong again! I have to say, you are consistent.

          If anything, Republicans have the opposite problem. They don’t believe strongly enough in their ideas.

        • nightspore

          Liberals are the ones who never quite got their heads around the idea cause-and-effect.

          They’re good at head games though, as you’re demonstrating.

          And like good sophists everywhere, you always try to have the last word – as if that decided what was true or who was right – which demonstrates Mr. Greenfield’s point perfectly.

    • truebearing

      Well said.

      They push people off the cliff, with the promise that they will fly, then lie about the inevitable and deadly results.

      The irony of their insane attempts to “wish away man’s baser nature” is that that is the very nature they obsessively appeal to when greedily seeking power. Envy, hate, revenge, and dishonesty are the motivational engines of the Left, yet they summarily reject any notion that man is inherently flawed and tends to be naturally ruthless and self-centered.

      Human infants are essentially narcissistic, but as they go through early childhood, they begin to understand otherness, compassion, and develop a conscience. Leftists seem to regress from adulthood, losing their compassion, conscience, and ability to reason. They revert back to an ideologically induced infantilism, where the state supplies endless diapers and everyone can live in childish fantasies.

      • Naresh Krishnamoorti

        Great insight! The Left acts as if man is perfectible and can be made to live in peace, yet the very survival of the Left politically depends upon the strategy of divide and conquer — making men hate each other and fight each other on the basis of race and income.

        • truebearing

          Exactly. Irrreconcilable contradictions are inherent in everything the Left believes, says, and does. They call the Right racist, but they are racist slaveholders. They blather about equality but enforce a rigid caste system when in power. They claim to oppose violence but kill their own citizens. They babble about the environment but once in power, are the worst polluters.

          Is it any wonder they have to rely on lies, or fail every time they manage to get in power? It seems the lies take on a life of their own, like a boa constrictor, eventually choking the life out of their “utopia.”

  • truebearing

    Obama is the modern day Trojan Horse. His job is to weaken the US in every way necessary for our enemies to breach our defensive walls. He has been effective in that role. Since it is the only role he has been effective in, one can fairly assume that is the one he made his top priority.

    We have seen the enemy and he is Obama.

    • patti livernash

      My Uncle James recently got a new black
      Mazda MAZDASPEED3 Hatchback by working at home online. you can try here
      B­u­z­z­3­2­.­ℂ­o­m

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Flagged …

        • Moron

          Voted up… LOL

          • tickletik

            Flagged …

            Moderators, this is clearly a troll who is here to amuse itself. Please do everyone a favor and get rid of it.

    • Moron

      Was Obama weakening the US when he killed bin Laden???

      • Moron

        Who was he appeasing when he killed bin Laden???

        • Berceuse

          He was commander-in-chief when UBL was killed. Regardless how it happened, he gets that credit, and most on the right acknowledge it (far more so that the left acknowledges Bush’s successes in Afghanistan and Iraq).

          But Obama has excused, apologized for and embraced radical Islam and its terror brigades, including the Muslim Brootherhood. He has allowed Hamas into the White House, capitulated to Iran’s nuclear ambitions and backed the PLO’s rejection of the State of Israel.

          • DB1954

            The fact remains that Leon Panetta ordered the mission because the President dithered for days. Valerie Jarrett was surprised and enraged when she learned that Panetta had ordered it, but even more surprised to learn that the mission was successful and that Panetta had the lawful authority to issue the order on his own, precisely because Obama had NOT forbidden Panetta to initiate the mission.

        • Habbgun

          You can appease a culture while still targeting the occasional individual which is why you are on Bin Laden. Please tell me why he supports the Muslim Brotherhood when even the Egyptians hate them. You can’t have course, moron.

        • DB1954

          Again, you’re mistaken. Obama did not give the order to initiate the bin Laden mission. CIA Director, Leon Panetta did, without the President’s prior knowledge. Director Panetta had authority to launch the mission particularly because it had only a brief window of time. Since the President had repeatedly declined to make a decision, and the window was quickly closing, Panetta ordered the mission without giving advance notice to the President. Obama did not know of the mission until it was substantially complete.

          • Drakken

            I do enjoy the part where Jarret was running around shouting and screaming like a raped ape because she was left out of the loop, priceless.

          • DB1954

            I know. It’s humorous, n’est-ce pas? I wonder if Petraeus smiled or winked at her when he told her that. I figure that’s when and where Val decided she just had to get even with Petraeus.

          • Drakken

            She is well known for being a very vindictive wench.

        • DB1954

          Obama didn’t kill bin Laden. Seal Team 6 did–on the orders of the then CIA Director, Leon Panetta.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        SEALS killed Bin Laden. Obama wanted to give Bin Laden a cushy cell.

        • Moron

          Proof?? Or do you just like to bend the truth to your whims???

          • DB1954

            Still waiting for your proof that Daniel Greenfield has stated any falsehoods.

        • Moron

          Still waiting on that proof… Typical Right… Just create lies to make your story sound better

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            SEALS didn’t kill Bin Laden? Or did Obama … carrying his trust M4 … lead them into the compound?

          • Moron

            Obama didn’t give the order??? Were the SEALS acting independently??

          • truebearing

            Where is your proof Obama killed Bin Laden? The rest of this debate is irrelevant if you can’t prove it. Get it done… now!

          • DB1954

            The Director of the CIA is part of the chain of command at least insofar as dispatching special operators, special forces, and/or Seal Teams in certain circumstances. Leon Panetta gave the go order to dispatch Seal team 6. He did so without the President’s knowledge. Panetta was in operational control of the mission throughout. The Seal Team 6 members were in direct contact with Panetta or those military officers in the chain of command and at his disposal througout the mission.

          • DB1954

            No, they were acting on the orders of the Director of the CIA, Leon Panetta.

          • Moron

            Still waiting on proof other than your rhetoric….

          • truebearing

            Me too. Now where is your proof Obama killed Bin laden?

          • DB1954

            We’re waiting on your proof that we’re lying.

          • Moron

            Ok I waited 35 minutes for proof… Surprise surprise none surfaced…. You guys are full of crap.

          • tickletik

            Moderators, this is an obvious troll, can its comments be removed? They are adding nothing.

          • nomoretraitors

            How much is George Soros paying you to post here?

          • truebearing

            A Happy Meal and a bottle of Muscatel.

          • truebearing

            You’re playing a childish game. no matter what proof was offered, you would reject it. That’s what rejects do.

            I’m still waiting for your proof that Bin Laden is dead. Where is it?

          • nightspore

            All you have to do is look at that group picture of administration officials watching the operation that was publicized at the time. In the photo Obama is sitting on the side of the room. No one who didn’t know the people in the picture would realize this was our Commander-in-Chief. Look at his posture, not exactly Ramboesque.

          • DB1954

            Whatever, trollbutt.

          • nomoretraitors

            Your screen name fits you perfectly. Do you need to see proof the sun rises in the east too?

            “Typical Right… Just create lies”
            You’re projecting again. The left is expert at lying — Benghazi was a spontaneous response to an internet video, if you like you’re healthplan you can keep your healthplan etc

          • truebearing

            I have to congratulate you on your screen name. You are very self-aware.

            “Just create lies to make your story sound better”

            I guess that comment proves that Moron’s can project. Go ahead, project dishonesty all you want, but shocking though it may be, you’re wrong. Conservatives value truth and judge each other by how truthful we are. You leftist followers of Alinsky are the ones who lie like it is a bodily function and see deceptiveness as a virtue.

          • DB1954

            You’re rather aptly named.

          • Daniel Greenfield
          • sindeo

            From retired military sources, I have heard, and it keeps everyone in the chain of command covered, they were told to take Osama prisoner (for trial in NYC, I’m sure), if possible, but to “protect” themselves, at all costs. That, with a wink, means “take him out”. The word came back that he had a weapon and they had no choice.
            sindeo

        • Enrique Viruet-Alberty

          An the government kill the SEALS…mmm wear.

        • trickyblain

          And yet he still gave the written order to dispatch him two days before the raid. Are you under the impression that the SEALs go around killing folks unilaterally?

          • truebearing

            Obama dithered for 8 months before Panetta finally gave the order himself.

            Obama did nothing to get Bin Laden. The intelligence apparatus put into place by Bush tracked him down, and the military capability that Bush enhanced did the job.

            The fact is, Bin laden was likely outed by a messenger that led the CIA to Bin Laden. It may well have been done intentionally by the Al Queda leadership that saw Bin Laden as a liability and a burden.

          • trickyblain

            I’m familiar with the report with the unnamed “insider” that claimed Panetta overruled the President. Panetta overruled the President. If I write it one more time, will you begin to realize how laughable that wild claim is? Especially when posted on the internet by an a barely literate “Washington insider” whose identity is a complete mystery? The article reads like a FPM poster just sitting in the proverbial mom’s basement, typing outrandom anti-Obama fantasies.

            Outside the bubble, all reports lead to the conclusion that Obama signed the order to kill on April 29, 2011.

            “The fact is, Bin laden was likely outed by a messenger that led the CIA to Bin Laden.”

            How do you square using “(t)he fact is” together with “likely”? A fact is or is not, there’s no room for “likely.” And if this theory were true, wouldn’t mean that Bush’s “apperatus” and enhanced “military capability” were basically worthless because some messenger traded a goat for UBL’s whereabouts?

          • truebearing

            Normally, I would agree with you that overruling the president is ridiculous, but not with Obama. He is the laziest, most disconnected president in history. He jobs out his job, unless it is a particular obsession of his, like anything to do with promoting blacks and gays, or facilitating Islamists.

            Now you’ll say, “Ah Ha! You contradicted yourself. Bin Laden was an Islamist!” Yes, he was, but Obama still had to worry about reelection and he was undoubtedly reminded how killing Bin Laden would help his chances. Muslims kill Muslims all the time, even though they all do it ostensibly for the cause of Islam. And finally, we don’t have proof Obama did kill Bin Laden. All we have is the word of people under Obama’s command. They can’t tell the truth if under orders not to.

            You’ll have to forgive me if I laugh at your characterization of anyone as “barely literate” in an attempt to refute them.

            “Outside the bubble, all reports lead to the conclusion that Obama signed the order to kill on April 29, 2011.”

            Is that right? Well all reports lead to the conclusion that Benghazi was the reaction to a stupid video, and the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups was the work of “rogue” agents in Ohio, and “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” and there weren’t any death panels in Obamacare, and…

            I got sloppy on “the fact is” so I’ll concede your criticism there, but that doesn’t negate the strong possibility that Bin Laden was intentionally outed.

            Your conclusion that Bush’s intelligence apparatus and military were “worthless” because a messenger didn’t try hard to obscure the path to Bin Laden is non sequitur. First, Bush was no longer in charge of the intelligence community, and we’ve seen how Obama has misused and hobbled them. Second, Bin Laden was hiding in Muslim countries that were working diligently to hide him. Even the Mossad needs time to find people like Bin Laden, then more time to find the perfect strike window. It doesn’t follow that just because a messenger was careless, perhaps intentionally, that our intelligence or military were worthless. They are under Obama, however, because he keeps cutting the military and adding islamists to our CIA and FBI.

            If you want an example of pathetic performance from the military and intelligence communities, look at Benghazi, where Obama and his people allowed a sustained attack on US sovereign territory, resulting in the death of our ambassador to Libya, plus three other deaths. Obama has video of the event, including Predator drone video, yet still hasn’t apprehended anyone or retaliated. In fact, Obama was running weapons to Al Queda during the same period, and after.

          • DB1954

            Panetta didn’t overrule Obama. Panetta and Petraeus couldn’t get him to make up his mind. Panetta ordered it on his own authority without the President’s knowledge. The mission was complete before Obama even knew of it.

          • DB1954

            Panetta did NOT overrule Obama. Obama wouldn’t make up his mind one way or the other. Panetta had told him multiple times that the window of opportunity would close soon, but Obama dithered. After his last visit to the WH, to again seek authorization for the mission, Panetta, acting entirely on his own initiative, but through Gen. David Petraeus, gave the order to launch the mission. After the mission was launched and past the point of no return, Panetta informed the other cabinet secretaries saying that the President had not said “no” to the mission, and so, he told them, he ordered it himself without the President’s knowledge.

          • DB1954

            This is absolutely, 100% true. We know this because after the cabinet got word that the mission was successful and complete, everyone assembled in the WH to congratulate Panetta, all but Valerie Jarrett, who came in screaming about “the chain of command.” To which, Panetta’s co-conspirator in launching the mission, General David Petraeus replied, “You’re not in the chain of command.”

          • DB1954

            No, actually Obama never gave that order. On the other hand, he never said don’t do it. Which is why Leon Panetta ordered it while the President was literally on the links. Obama didn’t even know about the mission until it was almost complete.

          • trickyblain

            Obama authorized Panetta to execute the timing of the raid. He knew about it while he was “on the links” maintaining a seemingly normal routine. And he was in the SitRoom before the Helos left Bagram (2PM EST).

          • DB1954

            Wrong.

        • Texas Patriot

          I’m surprised that you of all people can’t see the educational value of putting Bin Laden on trial. At this point most non-Muslims still believe Presidents Bush and Obama who say that Islam is a “religion of peace”. Like every other jihadist who has been put on trial for their crimes against humanity, there is no doubt that Bin Laden would have maintained that his actions were precisely in accord with the teachings and life example of Muhammad and his followers and were therefore beyond criticism or reproach. Keeping him alive for that purpose would have been well worth the cost of a “cushy” cell.

          • Drakken

            The only good jihadist, is a dead jihadist, end of story. You never let these savages live to fight another day or be used as a bargaining chip. There is no educational value with a live jihadist, folks who want to take the path of least resistance where these savages are concerned are living in lala land.

      • nomoretraitors

        It was due to the enhanced interrogation techniques instituted under the Bush administration that got us the intelligence that enabled Obama to “kill” Bin Laden. He promptly outlawed them upon taking office

      • truebearing

        Can you prove Obama actually killed Osama?

        Obama didn’t want to kill Bin Laden. Bin Laden’s whereabouts were known for months before Panetta, among others, badgered Obama into making the decision to take him out.

        Obama weakened the US after killed OK’d the killing of Bin laden by claiming Al Queda was on the ropes. A theme he continued expanding upon right up to the attack in Benghazi, where Al Queda affiliates killed four Americans, including our ambassador to Libya. Then we find out Obama whats to arm the Syrian rebels, many of whom are Al Queda! That hurt America, as has everything Obama has ever done.

      • Schmitty

        I guess Putin missed the memo telling him to be impressed.

        • logdon

          :-)

      • DB1954

        He didn’t kill Osama bin Laden. He didn’t even know about it. The CIA Director, Leon Panetta ordered the mission after several attempts by the Director to explain to the President that the window of opportunity was closing. Obama never gave his assent to that mission. Panetta ordered it because Obama didn’t tell him not to. Thankfully it was successful, but the thanks goes to the military–not to 0bama.

    • Enrique Viruet-Alberty

      Well said !!

    • DB1954

      Zero isn’t proud of being a traitor, because he doesn’t think he’s a traitor. He sees his duty as owing to humanity not to his country. He thinks that what he has done is set the world to rights. He thinks he’s a godlike visionary for peace, “social justice,” and “equality” (of material outcome). But of course, he’s none of those things. There’s only one superlative that fits him, the greatest and most successful political fraud in American history.

  • Bamaguje

    “Soviet Union collapsed in the face of relentless pressure from Ronald Reagan” – Daniel Greenfield.

    Really??
    I know Republicans love to kid themselves that Reagan brought down the USSR, but truth is that Reagan had nothing to do with it.

    Gorbachev and his ilk who wanted to reform the irreformable communism ended up inadvertently triggering the collapse of Soviet Union.
    Communism was incompatible with the Western style openess (Glasnost) and economic restructuring (Perestroika) that Gorbachev tried to implement… so the Soviet empire came crashing down.
    If the USSR had had another Brezhnev or Khrushchev in the 1990s instead of a Gorbachev, we might have still had Soviet communism.

    After all tyrannical commies are still power in North Korea, Cuba and China. Why wasn’t the all powerful Reagan able bring them down? Cuba and North Korea are much less powerful and their economies far less robust than the defunct Soviet Union, so I again I ask why wasn’t the mighty Reagan able to dethrone them?

    Nope, the Soviet Union collapsed on its own, because of the internal contradictions provoked by Gorbachev reforms. Reagan had nothing to do with it.

    As for the US invasion of Iraq on the false pretext of non-existent WMDs, it was the dumbest move of American foreign policy in recent decades.
    It made it impossible for Bush Jr to deal with the real WMD threat in the region – Iran. Lest America be open to charges on waging war on another Muslim country.

    What more, U.S. invasion of Iraq enthroned pro-Iran Shias, and endangered Iraq’s robust Christian population, who were protected by Saddam’s secular dictatorship that kept Islamists at bay.
    Iraq’s Christian population has since been halved by combination of massacres and forced migration.

    • Steve Bryant

      “After all tyrannical commies are still power in North Korea, Cuba and China. Why wasn’t the heroic Reagan able bring them down?”

      Daniel just explained it. It’s because misguided pseudo intellects like Bamaguje fought him all the way.

      The Soviet Union collapsed precisely because gravity will not be denied. Ronald Reagan let the air out of their balloon.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      Ah! The Left’s favorite interpretation … Gorbie brought his own government down. Reagan, Pope John Paul II, and a certain Polish Union leader had nothing to do with it.

      Perestroika and Glasnost were desperate measures on the part of a diehard Communist to save his system. The only “internal contradictions” in communist states is communism, itself. China survives because because it has morphed into a corporate/fascist slave state. North Korea survives because of the power of fear, and sheer brutality. Cuba will die with its aging dictators.

      Gorbachev’s attempts to salvage the USSR didn’t work, thanks be to God …

      • macktoid

        Margaret Thatcher played a significant role also; some say bigger than Reagan’s.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      China embraced capitalism. North Korea stuck with Stalinist terror. Cuba will probably fall within the decade.

      The main antagonist was the USSR and American pressure helped push it over the edge diminishing its reasons for maintaining Communism.

      • Bamaguje

        If Reagan’s policies had anything to do with the collapse of Soviet communism, it should also have brought down the much smaller, more vulnerable communist tyrannies.
        America can’t even get rid of the much more brutal Castro commie tyranny on its doorstep, but Republicans want us to believe superhero Reagan crushed the USSR.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Not really. The USSR and the US were in an extended confrontation and the former was trying to maintain an empire.

          The US had deliberately courted China. North Korea kept going through sheer brute force.

      • T800

        The USSR was also responsible for most of the strife and destabilization around the world. Now Islam has taken over their role in that arena.

    • CowboyUp

      That’s the DNC party line, and it’s Bravo Sierra.
      The soviet union collapsed because it went broke. It depended on its’ fossil exports for hard currency, and when Reagan got the Saudis to open the spigots the price of oil dropped below what would keep them afloat. They couldn’t increase their capacity fast enough to go economy of scale, and again Reagan was instrumental in seeing that they didn’t. Gorby’s reforms were a belated and desperate attempt to generate economic activity and garner Western aid, but they were too little, and too late. The internal contradictions were there all along, as they are in any marxist prison state. Gorby just could no longer afford to pay the guards.
      Reagan correctly identified their weaknesses and exploited them, often over the objections of his advisors. He was the only one who accurately predicted their collapse, not even his fellow conservatives saw it coming. The Western Left were wrong about the soviets and their intentions right down the line (and the soviets’ own archives proved it). Their hindsight isn’t any better.

      • Bamaguje

        “Soviet union collapsed because it went broke…” – CowboyUp.

        Right!! Soviet Union collapsed because it went broke, but Cuba whose economy was in far worse shape, and depended on Soviet subsidies survives till this day.
        Starving North Korea barely has an economy, but its tyranny remains.

        • CowboyUp

          Cuba is a tropical island that can grow food year round, and the Norks just let their people starve until their corpses choke the Yalu, while the military gets fed. Cuba is also being propped up with foreign credit and Venezuelan oil. The Norks, in addition to getting chicom support, are the biggest currency counterfeiters in the world. Both have been able keep enough soldiers on payroll to keep their populations subdued.

          • Bamaguje

            Venezuela support for Cuba is relatively recent… certainly not at time USSR broke up.
            My point is, if Gorbachev was a Cuba’s Castro or North Korea’s Kim type tyrant, USSR would still be around… Reagan or no Reagan.

          • therealpm

            The USSR was trying to maintain an enormous military establishment, far beyond its economic capacity to sustain, and also retain control over the potentially rebellious populations of Eastern Europe. By the early eighties it was apparent that the eastern bloc’s economies were headed for a crisis, but by no means certain how it would unfold.

            Gorbachev tried to avert the crisis by opening up the Soviet economy and relinquishing control over its satellites, but the rot had gone too deep and his actions came too late. I don’t think anyone could have foreseen just how quickly the whole rotten edifice came crashing down from 1989 onwards.

            We were very lucky to have had such leaders as Reagan, Thatcher and Gorbachev around at the time, leaders who projected resolution and determination but with a willingness to do business. Countries undergoing economic collapse are often tempted to indulge in foreign adventures. Imagine if Obama and Putin had been in power. It just doesn’t bear thinking about.

          • CowboyUp

            This seemed to be your point:

            “Republicans love to kid themselves that Reagan brought down the USSR, but truth is that Reagan had nothing to do with it.”

            “Nope, the Soviet Union collapsed on its own, because of the internal contradictions provoked by Gorbachev reforms. Reagan had nothing to do with it.”

             

            My point is, the soviet union’s economic collapse and subsequent demise was the result of Reagan’s policies. Their own records and politburo minutes reflected it. It wasn’t just the oil, Reagan hemmed them economically, politically, and militarily, but their loss of fossil fuel revenue was the chief reason. The soviets were still expanding when Reagan was elected, and they were on the ropes by the time he retired. No Reagan policies, no collapse.

        • T800

          Cuba is starving it’s people,slowly. They can’t buy food and other essentials because they make few products that other nations want to buy,not because the US doesn’t trade with them.

          • Bamaguje

            You are attacking a straw man.
            I’m not supporting Castro’s Cuba, neither do I blame U.S. sanctions for Cuba’s failing economy.

  • Servo1969

    Weakness invites Aggression, Strength discourages Aggression.

    Obama and his fellow teachers-lounge intellectuals believe the exact opposite; ‘Wherever there have been wars there have been armies. So, Strength must invite Aggression. That means Weakness will discourage Aggression!’ They know this because of their circular reasoning: ‘We thought of it and we’re really smart so it must be true. We don’t need history or experience to tell us how right we are. You’re welcome, world.’

    • moron

      Who the fuck are you talking about that believes this nonsense??? How the fuck do you have any clue what these people think you judgmental fucking moron??

      • Servo1969

        It seems that your ‘?’ key is sticking.
        Have you tried turning your keyboard upside down and shaking it?
        Perhaps you could get one of those cans of air and blow under it?

    • Moron

      Who believes this nonsense??? How the fuck do you have any clue what these people that you obviously don’t like believe??? That is the stupidest post I have ever read… Congratulations.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        It’s so sad that you are incapable of understanding what Daniel said. Are you sarcasm-impaired?

        • Moron

          it’s so sad that you are incapable of following conversations… I was not responding to Daniel.. I was responding to the comment that I responded to.. That sounds stupid because it is… Obviously I was not talking to Daniel… Learn to follow a conversation Wolf…

          • Drakken

            Ohhh a tad testy aren’t you shortbus.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      If we confiscate the guns, people will no longer be shot. If we mandate that everyone should have a job, everyone will be well off.

      • Moron

        So you are saying to distribute guns freely??? To everyone! Fisher Price my first AK-47

        • UCSPanther

          I wouldn’t trust you with any weapon.
          Too many left-wing lunatics shooting up public areas these days…

          • Drakken

            The dumbazz would probably save us the trouble and off himself.

        • Drakken

          Actually Darwin would love a less than useless regressive like you. I say you should meet him up close and tell him we said hi.

  • TheOrdinaryMan

    You can’t maintain a “partnership of Democratic nations” by abandoning commitments, as Obama has repeatedly done. Wilson understood that, but he didn’t get the second part of it–be prepared for war. Thus in April 1917, when he asked Congress for a declaration of war, America wasn’t prepared for war; by a country mile. The result was that U.S. troops didn’t get to the battlefield until June 1918, and American participation in the war lasted a scant five months. And Wilson and his idealism had little impact on the flawed peace that was made. A century later, we shall have war again…it’s coming.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Wilson and reality ran on separate tracks

  • DogmaelJones1

    “To the moviegoers who sat through Dr. Strangelove, to the earnest leftists who saw the world going up in a puff of atomic smoke….” Coincidentally, I re-watched “Dr. Strangelove” last night on Netflix, because the last time I saw it was in 1964, when it was released, on an Air Force Base in Washington State. And I saw it under the most unusual circumstances: I was in the Air Police, charged with guarding the base and its B52 bombers and KC135 tankers and U2 spy planes. After a regular 8-hour shift on the flight line, I was one of about 10 other air cops sleected to serve on a backup or reserve team. That meant that we could sack out in the reserve team’s quarters, or go as a group, armed with our carbines and sidearms, to some other diversion. On my first night on the team it was decided to go to the base movie theater, to which we were admitted free. “Dr. Strangelove” was playing. As we sat in a back row behind all the other movie goers, the movie thoroughly confused me. That was my introduction to how the Left depicted the country and America. It was the beginning of an intellectual journey to investigate and report on what was so wrong with the country that its artists and novelists and filmmakers count paint it in such disparaging and malicious colors with impunity.

    • Moron Republican

      Yes… The world and the parties have not changed at all since the 60s… You keep on using that 50 year old movie to judge current events… Moron.

      • 11bravo

        The underlying ideology of the progressive leftist, socialist liberals hasn’t changed one bit. Commies good, America BAD!!

        • Moron

          Are you really stupid enough to believe that???

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Shouldn’t you be commenting on YouTube videos?

          • Moron

            Is that even an insult??? Shouldn’t you be writing more biased garbage???

          • UCSPanther

            I know a partisan hack when I see one.

          • Moron

            Yes I should be commenting on YouTube videos… But your articles are currently at the same level of garbage as YouTube… lol

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            On target, Daniel!

          • Moron

            Yes I should be commenting on YouTube videos… But your articles are currently at the same level of garbage as YouTube… lol

          • Joe Schmoe

            You should have directed that to the militaristic uneducated fatheads like 11Bravo. “Commies”, sheesh, you people are stuck in a time warp.

          • Drakken

            Sounds like as a leftist regressive, you didn’t serve in the military, and to that I say, you aren’t fit for purpose much less fit to lick our boots.

          • 11bravo

            It is what it is…The truth!

      • DogmaelJones1

        Moron? Was that your signature? I have news for you, sir. Ideas govern politics, and if Hollywood was governed by leftist ideas 50 years ago or even 70 years ago, those ideas haven’t changed a whit. Today’s leftist movies just have different focuses and CGI. Next time, drop the name-calling, unless that was your actual signature.

        • Moron

          For this site… It is my real signature… I’m trying to fit in with you guys… lol ;)

          • nomoretraitors

            If you truly wanted to fit in, you’d be on the National Memo, MSNBC and the Daily Kos with the rest of the libturds

        • Moron

          Ideas like marijuana??? Views of that certainly haven’t changed since the 70′s… No wait…

        • Moron

          Ideas like segregation and racism??? That hasn’t changed either since the 70s

          • Daniel Greenfield

            So you’re saying the left has changed its position on segregation and racism since the 70s?

            Was it originally for it?

          • Moron

            No that’s not what I’m saying at all… But thanks for more evidence of your stupidity…

          • truebearing

            Maybe people would understand you better if you weren’t a Moron…but I guess your incomprehensible stupidity is all part of being a Moron, isn’t it?

            I’m sorry. I was being insensitive to your lack of coherence and intelligence. Babble on, my friend.

          • CowboyUp

            Don’t argue with a moron Daniel, it’ll just make you one too.

          • T800

            Mr.Greenfield,I don;’t see where this “moron” poster has contributed ANYTHING to this debate,so why are you leaving his insulting posts up?

          • logdon

            It’s a form of a lesson.

          • Drakken

            There it is, I was wondering when a good little leftard like you were going to throw out the race card, how predictable.

        • Moron

          Ideas like technology??? Technology certainly has no impact on ideas, and has changed relatively little since the 70′s… Should I keep going???

          • Servo1969

            My goodness. Your keyboard seems to be sticking even worse now. Have you tried using a Q-tip and some alcohol to clean it?

      • UCSPanther

        I see another partisan hack…

        • Joe Schmoe

          “I see another partisan hack…’
          You looked in the mirror? LOL, FPM is the biggest load of partisan hacks

          • truebearing

            Joe “the yellow menace” Schmoe, you are as clever as a trapdoor in a rowboat. Why don’t you take your pet Moron and run along before you embarrass yourself any further.

  • AdinaF

    To be sure, it is impossible not to connect the dots; those which underline the path from appeasement to war.

    Herein belies the poisonous fruits of appeasement – http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/03/22/the-poisonous-fruits-of-appeasement-iran-crosses-the-red-line-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/

  • Stupid Republican

    Wow…. How stupid can you people possibly be?? Obama’s Appeasement Lead’s to War… That’s like saying Gun caused man to kill another man… It has nothing to do with Vladamir Putin… It’s ALL OBAMA’S FAULT!!! LOL you fucking morons.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      It’s like saying if you shut down law enforcement, the rise in rapes and murders are your fault.

      • Joe Schmoe

        Please explain why and how we need to take on another guardian angel role, in Russia’s backyard no less? Any first year military high school cadet would warn against getting involved there.

        • CowboyUp

          Because we signed agreements and made public promises to do so. We got them to give up their nukes on that promise, and now the dp leaves them twisting in the breeze, like they do to anyone who allies themselves with us.

          • Joe Schmoe

            We have no treaties or alliances with the Ukraine

          • Drakken

            The EU does and NATO, which we are part of has agreements with Ukraine. Dolt.

          • CowboyUp

            That’s a weasel reply. I said agreements and public promises, and likened it to the dp’s consistent betrayal of our allies. All true. I guess we know better than to believe anything you say either.

          • Joe Schmoe

            Wrong, the Ukraine was not an ally or in our sphere of influence. That is all the US needs now, to be the god father to some semi-fascist troublemaking country in old Russia. Don’t we already have enough god children: South Korea, Taiwan, Israel, NATO etc.

          • CowboyUp

            I see you’re stuck on pretending I said something I didn’t. Either you’re stupid, or you can’t argue against what I did say. I’m seeing that a lot out of the left these days.

    • fiddler

      We must be getting to you. Your repetitive use of profanity shows you are coming unglued. Who is irrational? Who is ranting? Who is making it personal?

    • UCSPanther

      That’s right: Keep becoming unglued and cussing at us while your “dear leader” is digging himself and your beloved party into a hole that they will not be able to get out of for a long time.

      Partisan hack.

  • Stupid Republican

    Obama KILLED OSAMA BIN LADEN!!! Are you people delusional???

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The SEALS killed Osama. Obama told Vanity Fair he wanted to take him alive and give him a civilian trial.

  • George of the Jungle

    It has been ever thus… the left’s response to aggression by those on
    their approved list is to advise the victim, “Bend over, and oh by the
    way, smile because that assures you of a moral high position.”
    (/sarc on) It kind of makes you wonder if they have a hidden agenda. (/sarc off)

    • Moron

      And the Right tells it’s citizens to Bend Over… You ain’t getting health insurance or going to college boi!

      • UCSPanther

        If you are a product of post-secondary education, then maybe society is better off without it…

  • Lanna

    Crimea is gone, Putin invaded Ukraine which is an Independent State. Obama made Russia part of the Peace Process, and then look how Russia does not seek peace. Many people didn’t recognize when World War II had started either, thanks to stupidity and bad leadership, World War III may be on the horizon, headed toward the New World Disorder.

  • rbla

    OK Putin is bad, Russia is bad, acknowledged. But to all of the members of the anti-Russian coalition, the old cold warriors e.g. McCain and the newly minted hawks from the old antiwar movement, e.g. Kerry; guess what – we’re going to lose in the long-run unless we stop the current destruction of the U.S. and the West. And this destruction is due to the replacement of the current population with masses of third worlders and Muslims and by the relentless anti-Western Civilization propaganda pushed by the universities. So guys if you really want to beat the bad old Russians we have to end the influx and stop subsidizing the increasingly useless colleges. This is not directed toward Daniel who fully understands these issues.

  • 2wotvet

    Iraq was in Iranian hands the moment the Saddam and his Sunni regime were overthrown, and Afghanistan was in the hands of the Taliban the moment Bush gave millions of dollars of aid money to Pakistan and the military turned its back on Afghanistan to attack Iraq.

    Negotiation and appeasement might be a sign of ‘weakness’, but attempting to use military action in delicate situations such as the Ukraine crisis is sign of insanity. The ripple effects of threatening military action against countries like Russia or China would be devastating to the world economy and could result in direct military conflict with another nuclear-armed nation. Iran is one of the last Muslim-majority Middle Eastern nations with anything resembling stability. Military action against Iran could destabilize it and create a seething ocean of Islamist-fueled chaos from Pakistan to Israel that will make the current unrest in the region seem like nothing.

  • mtnhikerdude

    The tragedy isn’t that we have a president who hates America . The tragedy is
    the people who voted him in for a second term .People like the Moron.

  • mtnhikerdude

    Appeasers believe throwing tigers another streak will turn them into vegetarians .
    Michael Ladeed

    • Joe Schmoe

      Yeah, we need to get involved in the Ukraine really badly. After all, that is the frontline.

  • Andrew

    The ultimate fallacy of Leftist foreign policy is that under the millennia worth of national or regional culture, each and every person no matter where they were born and raised is a progressive world citizen just waiting to be “enlightened” by the western ivory tower elite. Which is why they’re so willing to put their “faith” in the “power” of international organizations and diplomacy alone to solve America’s ills with the world.

  • Joe Schmoe

    LOL, Wilson campaigned in 1916 as the man who kept the USA out of the Great War in Europe. As well as does anyone think that threatening nuclear war over the Ukraine, a place we have no ties or treaties with is a good idea, or even conventional military intervention is a sound idea? Really, so according to these pansy hawks the US should be meddling in Russia’s backyard too?

    • Drakken

      Obviously your a product of our current re-education system, hence dumber than a bag of hammers and has reading comprehension problems. Nobody here is advocating military intervention you dumbazz. Your hero Obummer has FUBARed any type of meaningful response and is left sucking his thumb in the firm belief that everyone respects him. I blame useful idiots like you who voted for him.

      • UCSPanther

        I suspect Putin found out how weak Obama’s resolve truly was with Syria, and he is pressing his advantage.

        Putin is reaping major dividends from Ukraine. The people of Crimea see him as a liberator, the Russians view him as a hero and meanwhile, he is practically laughing at Obama and the EU in the diplomatic arena.

        • Drakken

          Putin had Obummers number the day Obummer took office.

          • T800

            I suspect Putin also has copies of Comrade Obama’s real birth cert,his college records and papers,all of his different SSNs,everything Comrade pResident has worked SO hard to keep concealed.
            It’s a shame Snowden didn’t leak all that to the media,I’m sure the NSA had copies too. then I might consider him a real patriot.

          • Joe Schmoe

            Another birthfoon chimes in with the same old mindless trash

      • Joe Schmoe

        A low class white trash con like you is the last person to comment on mine or anyone else’s education, ok. As well as if we aren’t going use a credible military threat against Putin, there isn’t much any president can do. What did Ike, a 4 star general in his time, do in 1956 when the USSR invaded Hungary? Even less than Obama.
        Finally you simple minded crank, his name is Obama and I didn’t vote for him,

        • Drakken

          I will guarantee that I probably make more in a month than you make in year, I am a Marine Combat Vet and your lack of reading comprehensive skills is on full display. I will repeat myself for your benefit, nobody here is advocating military intervention but Obummers response is like a little kid sucking his thumb with nowhere to go. Do you honestly think the Russians would have invaded the Crimea with a sitting repub like Bush the 1st or Reagan at the helm? So take your low information insults and shove them were the sun don’t shine Sparky, your not fit to lick my dusty boots.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      ” As well as does anyone think that threatening nuclear war over the Ukraine”

      Did anyone propose your strawman?

      • Joe Schmoe

        Short of going to war, what can the USA do to stop Putin? Sneak some guns to separatist factions who are prolly just as bad as Putin and create a big diplomatic flare up and in the end stop no one? What did Ike do in 1956 over Hungary, in a country far more accessible and western than the Ukraine?

  • Joe Schmoe

    Really, Since when was the Ukraine a security commitment or an ally? Please enlighten me.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYRtmMxB5yw CrossWinds

    No wonder Americans don’t want to give up their guns.

  • bob e

    good stuff mr. g ..

  • GSR

    This is what left-liberals do and Obama of course, goes even father than most American liberals. Since Day One, he has wanted to “cut the USA down to size” and the armed forces and NASA are integral parts of that strategy. It is truly a shame he was re-elected. But hey, we now know he used the IRS to inhibit the organizing activities of his political opponents. Some Messiah, huh? ;-)

  • Texas Patriot

    Daniel, my guess is that Obama is way ahead of you. Think of Obama’s presidency as a basketball game. Obama came into office as the Michael Jordan “Miracle Boy” of American politics leading a “Dream Team” of players including seasoned veteran Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and All Star Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. And during the first half of the game, Obama and the Dream Team got slammed dunked by the forces of Islamic jihad, which had not only fooled him, but had fooled everyone else in Washington as well.

    The low point came on September 11, 2012 when the rebels whom Obama helped to overthrow Gaddafi turned on America and assassinated our diplomats in Benghazi to the worldwide chants of “Obama, Obama, We’re All Osama”. Despite this debacle, the American people in their wisdom saw fit to return Obama to office. Now he has a whole new team, in some respects perhaps stronger and in others perhaps not as strong, but there is no question that Obama’s administration was on the defensive as it started the second half of the game. So what now? Will he continue with the same false assumptions that characterized the first half? Will he continue to characterize Islam as a “religion of peace”?

    My guess is that Obama will not continue with the misconceptions, false assumptions, and failed policies of the first half of the game, but rather will come up with a revised game plan that fits the reality of the situation much better than the false worldview he brought with him into office. Whether Obama can rally America and the rest of the civilized world with a new game plan and finish the second half of the game with a winning edge remains to be seen. But if I’m right and he’s cut a deal with Putin to allow Russia to re-annex the Ukraine in exchange for standing aside in the event we have to destroy the Iranian nuclear weapons complex, things could look much better three years from now than they do today. We shall see.

    • Drakken

      Your wishful thinking is absolutely stunning in its naivety, the problem with your theory is Obummer doesn’t have a game plan, and thinks that with his mere presence that he will win the game. Your hero Obummer isn’t going to do a goddamn thing about Iran except to continue to appease them. Maybe those unicorns and rainbows might actually come true, keep wishing to find out.

      • Texas Patriot

        I think he’ll probably do it, not only because it’s a moral imperative for the preservation of all civilized nations everywhere, but also because it would make all his critics look like idiots. The first reason is enough by itself. The second would just make it fun.

  • DB1954

    There’s a great deal of truth to that, but still, Obama must be removed like a cancer.

  • T800

    “once is accidental,twice is coincidence,three times is enemy action.”
    Comrade Obama blocked nuclear power by closing Yucca Mountain,is going after coal via EPA,has blocked Gulf and ANWR oil drilling,and is now going after fracking,doing everything possible to block US oil production. He killed the Keystone XL pipeline. Coal,oil,and nuclear is over 70% of US energy sources.
    See a pattern here? there’s a concerted effort by Comrade Obama to reduce US energy supplies,which DIRECTLY diminishes the US economy.
    Then there’s the LOST treaty and it’s “redistribution of wealth”.
    It’s all part of his efforts to weaken the US economically,politically,and militarily.

    He’s already insulted our allies and aided our enemies,blocked military equipment such as fighter jets,downsizing the military,and qu eered up the military.
    And now he wants to cut our nuclear inventory to 300-400 warheads,after shutting down most anti-ballistic missile defense,leaving us vulnerable to a first strike. Unilateral action,not getting ANY matching cuts from Russia and China. Comrade Hussein signed New START that cuts our nuclear weaponry,but allows Russia to build UP to the limits,and doesn’t affect China at all.
    Comrade Obama IS the muslim Manchurian Candidate.
    There’s a reason why,post-college,Comrade Hussein traveled to Pakistan,of all places. it’s not because he was a Christian. There’s a reason why Comrade Hussein was aided in getting into college by Saudi money and influence.

  • T800

    it’s a fallacy and strawman that the US has to either employ direct military action in the Ukraine,or allow Russia it’s way unopposed. there’s plenty of things that can be done short of direct military action. Economic actions like shipping US LNG to Western Europe,US drilling and production of oil that lowers world prices even if we don’t ship it overseas,political actions such as reinstating our plan to install purely defensive anti-ballistic-missile defense in Poland and it’s radars in Czech Republic.

  • Ellman48

    “Obama had put his faith in the submission of American power to
    autocrats, perverting Wilson’s already flawed vision. Distrusting
    American power, he had instead trusted in the willingness of Iran and
    Russia to meet his flexibility with friendship.”

    If you want to defeat your enemy then you must understand him. Thinking that the US can win the ‘friendship’ of Russia and Iran is the height of self-deception and ignorance.

    Putin is a Russian patriot but Obama is NOT an American patriot. It is in this distinction that the ultimate resolution of our conflict with Russia will be decided. Putin loves Russia. Obama hates America. Advantage USSR!

  • stephencarter

    Excellent interview, Jamie! I’ve watched Daniel Greenfield in other interviews and his rapid, brief replies pack so much information that the format doesn’t work. This is the first time I’ve truly enjoyed an interview with him — his articles are uncannily precise. So thanks for your excellent, equally rapid questioning that gave Daniel a chance to keep fleshing out his picture of the world. You seem to understand his style and adjusted yourself to that. Well done!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Interesting. Hadn’t seen it from that perspective.

  • Nan

    Great article. Daniel’s writing not only gives political insight, but historical education at the same time. Love reading this man.

  • sindeo

    “…America has so far only paid the lightest price for the treason of the Democrats…” What price should we be paying? Why, to prevent the deaths of thousands of Europeans or Muslims? No, I don’t think so. We’ve paid enough in blood and treasure, for Europe, where we might have some interest, but we rescued them once, and protected them from the Soviets for a generation, and allowed them forget how to defend themselves.
    Morons elected and re-elected Obama, and the Zero has put our war-hawks in a position to justify sacrificing more of our young men, and our borrowed wealth, to mow Europe’s back yard.
    Let the Muslim nations defend themselves from their own religious monsters, or watch as sect kills sect, in god’s name. Let Europe face Putin, make their survival deals, or surrender without the USA.
    We should make it clear we will defend Israel, who will fight their own battles, but Europe should understand our interests do not include dying for them, again.
    sinedo

    • nopeacenow

      Well said. We need more people thinking like that.