Barack Obama: Neoconservative crusader

While some in the media swoon over President Obama’s “plan” for the Middle East — note the Washington Post’s piece by David Ignatius — and the Israel-First fifth column prepares to teach the Democrats a lesson in 2012, the rest of us common folk can see how irrelevant we are to the foreign-policy plans of Mr. Obama and our bipartisan political elite.

In his May 19th, 2011, speech, Obama details our elite’s desire to reshape the Muslim world in its image, an image which has nothing to do with America and everything to do with a coterie of very well educated elitists issuing edicts that tell Americans and Muslims to accept behavioral instructions from their betters and then think, act, and vote accordingly. And Mr. Obama, again, demonstrated the bankruptcy of the U.S. educational system. A product of two of our most prestigious universities, Mr. Obama was arrogant, ignorant of the world, and blithely unaware that he is either.

Adopting the crazed and crusading words of Mr. Bush and the Neoconservatives, Obama began his Middle East speech by saying “we know our own future is bound to this region,” and proceeded to instruct the Islamic world that, because this is true, Muslims must become just like us — or else. From there on, Obama signals his and our political elite’s disdain for Americans and assumes a mantle of interventionism much more encompassing than anything ever worn by the lamentable Woodrow Wilson.

In his arrogance, Obama condemns “the relentless tyranny of governments that deny their citizens dignity” and argues that “[i]n too many countries, power has been concentrated in the hands of too few,” referring in each case to Arab dictators. He seems unaware that he also described a U.S. government that, under both parties, has for thirty years denied its own citizens dignity at every turn:

  • Both parties have ruined the economy so we have to hold out the begging bowl to Chinese and Arab dictators. They also have created 9-percent unemployment; made the nation hostage to foreign oil producers; put 45-plus million Americans on food stamps; and left 20-percent of American kids without enough to eat.
  • Both parties have made our military contemptible by refusing to allow U.S. forces to win wars our presidents unconstitutionally start.
  • Both parties have refused to enforce existing immigration and border-control laws so that Mexico’s impoverished population, endemic corruption, and drug-related violence are flowing into our southwestern states. The Democrats also use this festering wound they and the Republicans created to prepare the ground to abridge the 2nd Amendment.
  • And while all this goes on, both parties steal money from the pockets of U.S. citizens to give to Israel, spend on the defense of the Saudi tyranny, and fund an Egypt run by a military dictatorship.

Obama and his bipartisan colleagues do not seem to realize that tyranny can be defined not only as political and physical oppression by foreign regimes, but by the callousness, indifference, incompetence, and lawlessness of the United States government. Ought not Washington give top priority to the “dignity” of U.S. citizens, who are, after all, the ones who pay taxes and see their soldier-children die to help Bush and Obama chase the insane goal of giving dignity and U.S. wealth to foreigners?

In his ignorance of the world, the super-Wilsonian Obama then performed as an interventionist extraordinaire, detailing his diktats to the Muslim world and Israel:

  • Obama out-Bushed Bush and the Neoconservatives by a country mile, calling for U.S.-dictated (and enforced?) regime change in Libya, Syria, Bahrain, Iran, and Yemen.
  • Obama unilaterally declared Islam out and secular democracy in. He then redeclared Mrs. Clinton’s cultural/feminist war on Muslim society and Islamic culture by announcing that Washington demands the implementation of “free speech, the freedom of peaceful assembly; freedom of religion, equally for men and women under the rule of law; and the right to choose your own leaders — whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus; Sanaa or Tehran.”
  • Obama dismissed some of the age-old and lethal religious problems in Islamic civilization — Coptic Christians-vs.-Muslims, Shia-vs.-Sunni — as meaningless rivalries akin to those between Kiwanis and Rotarians. Obama never recognized that he, Mrs. Clinton, Senator Graham, and Senator McCain ensured the slaughter of more Egyptian Copts by promoting “democracy” in Egypt, and that he and Bush increased the hatred of Sunnis for Shias by making Iraq a Shia state, a move that increases the chance of regional sectarian warfare. He finishes with a goal that could not be enforced by all the military might at America’s disposal: “Coptic Christians must have the right to worship freely in Cairo, just as the Shia must never have their mosques destroyed in Bahrain.” Obama also seems to forget that he, Bush, and Petraeus got a semblance of stability in Baghdad because they allowed the Shias” sectarian cleansing of most of the city’s Sunni population.
  • Obama intervened more deeply into a Muslim-Israeli religious war that is irrelevant to U.S. national interests and security. He ordered Israel to obey his new policy on a return to the 1967 borders, thereby undermining its right to defend itself as its leaders see fit. No country has a “right to exist,” but all have an absolute right to defend themselves. Obama, in dictating to Israel, takes the fallacious right-to-exist doctrine and adds to it the caveat “as long as Barack and Hillary approve.” [1] On this issue, Obama once again proves he, his party, and the Republicans cannot get a handle on the Founders” simple definition of non-intervention, which is; do not get involved in foreign disputes and wars in which you have no interest. (NB: Some U.S. citizens who call themselves non-interventionists also misdefine non-interventionism on this issue by arguing that non-interventionism means being anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian.) The appropriate non-interventionist position is: A pox on Israel and Palestine, both are absolutely unessential to U.S. interests or security and should receive no U.S. funding or protection. [2]
  • Obama abolished the sovereignty of the nation-states he dislikes and promised to direct U.S. officials to use money and technology in an interventionist campaign across the Muslim world that will create chaos, violence, and Islamist strength, not democracy. “Our message is simple,” Obama said, in words fit for a man unfamiliar with reality, “if you take the risks reform entails, you will have the full support of the United States. — Across the region, we intend to provide assistance to civil society, including those who may not be officially sanctioned, and who speak uncomfortable truths. And we will use the technology to connect with — and listen to — the voices of the people.”

After detailing his interventionist, democracy-mongering, and probably war-producing agenda, Obama caps his crusader presentation with a monumental lie: “So we face a historic opportunity — There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity.” For Obama and our bipartisan governing elite nothing could be farther from the truth. These men and women welcome “self-determination and opportunity” only if it results in secularism and Western-style democracy, which, of course, requires the destruction of Islam.

In his May 19th speech, Obama declared war on most of the world’s Muslim population; made himself the agent through which Professor Huntington’s warning of a “clash of civilizations” will become reality; and ensured that the remembered words and deeds of Osama bin Laden will continue to inspire young Muslims to hate and fight the U.S. government for its unrelenting interventionism in the Muslim world.


  1. One can never rule out the chance that Obama cleared his remarks with Netanyahu before he spoke. By insisting that HAMAS must recognize Israel’s “right to exist,” Obama and Netanyahu may be betting that HAMAS stands by its guns — as it will when asked to surrender because of a “right” dreamed-up by the West — and thereby can be made to take the fall for another breakdown of the “peace process.”
  2. If Obama blind-sided the Israeli government, the one positive aspect of his intervention is that he might have cost himself and the Democrats the 2012 election by alienating the Israel-First fifth column of U.S. citizens, much of the media, AIPAC, and the AIPAC-suborned Congress. Electing the Republican Party as it is currently configured is no improvement, but Obama’s defeat would show Americans how deeply U.S.-citizen Israel Firsters have corrupted their political system, while simultaneously cutting Israel’s throat with their maximalist, Muslim-hating positions. With this corruption manifest, Americans might then begin to eradicate these agents of a foreign power from U.S. political life.
This entry was posted in Articles. Bookmark the permalink.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments