Follow by Email

Saturday, September 29, 2012

Thomas Friedman, "The World We’re Actually Living In": Obama Has Mastered the Universe

Sometimes I wonder in which world Thomas Friedman actually lives.

In Tom's latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The World We’re Actually Living In" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/opinion/sunday/friedman-the-world-were-actually-living-in.html?_r=0), he begins by telling us:

"For the first time in a long, long time, a Democrat is running for president and has the clear advantage on national security policy. That is not 'how things are supposed to be,' and Republicans sound apoplectic about it. But there is a reason President Obama is leading on national security, and it was apparent in his U.N. speech last week, which showed a president who understands that we really do live in a more complex world today — and that saying so is not a cop-out."

Obama understands the complexities of today's world? Yeah, right.

Two and a half weeks ago I stated unambiguously that the attacks on the American consulate in Benghazi and embassy in Cairo had been planned in advance (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2012/09/gail-collins-mitts-major-meltdown.html), yet the Obama administration chose to pretend that they were a "spontaneous" response to a silly excuse for a film. This past Friday, the US Director of National Intelligence finally got around to acknowledging that the attacks had indeed been "deliberate and organized" (see: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444712904578024684208469470.html).

What does this tell you about Obama's grip on national security?

Concerning the attack on the US embassy in Cairo, Egypt's new Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohamed Morsi, stated to The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/world/middleeast/egyptian-leader-mohamed-morsi-spells-out-terms-for-us-arab-ties.html?pagewanted=all):

"'We took our time' in responding to avoid an explosive backlash, he said, but then dealt 'decisively' with the small, violent element among the demonstrators.

'We can never condone this kind of violence, but we need to deal with the situation wisely,' he said, noting that the embassy employees were never in danger."

The US embassy employees were "never in danger"? Perhaps Morsi would care to have a look at the videos of the incident and inquire how embassy employees felt when the demonstrators scaled the embassy's walls and tore down and burned the American flag.

More to the point, how is the Obama administration, which "has the clear advantage on national security policy," handling this affront? Simple. Obama and friends are now seeking to provide Egypt with an emergency cash grant of $450 million.

And what about Obama's unconscionable conduct during the Green Revolution? When Iranians took to the streets in July 2009 to bring down the Ahmadinejad regime, Obama, wishing to cozy up to the mullahs, did nothing as protesters, calling out his name, were gunned down, imprisoned and tortured. What did Obama gain by turning a blind eye to these outrages? Tehran has raced ahead with its nuclear weapons development program, notwithstanding Obama's conciliatory posture throughout much of his first term, leading to the current imbroglio involving Iran and Israel.

Worse still, Iran is now threatening that "Iran’s armed forces are able to target any military base around the world" and telling us that "thirty-five U.S. military bases are within the range of Iran’s missiles" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2012/09/iran-more-threats-of-destruction.html).

Thanks, Tom, for telling us from your Maryland mansion how we can all breathe more freely with Obama in charge. Frankly, however, I'm more interested in knowing whether that thing on top of your head is alive or dead and how it accords with your perception of reality.

No comments:

Post a Comment