Thomas Friedman, "From Putin, a Blessing in Disguise": Was Hitler's Annexation of the Sudetenland Also a Godsend?

Does Putin's annexation of Crimea have a silver lining? Thomas Friedman seems to think this is the case.

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "From Putin, a Blessing in Disguise" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/19/opinion/friedman-from-putin-a-blessing-in-disguise.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0), Friedman says that if there is to be "a new cold war," he wants to see an "earth race," as opposed to a "space race," which will bring about a new American energy policy. Tom Terrific writes:

"I want America to lead in developing an energy policy that will weaken the oil-and-gas-autocracy of Russian President Vladimir Putin, and, as a byproduct, produce the technologies that will mitigate climate change, make America a global technology and moral leader and ensure that the next generation can thrive here on Earth."

His conclusion:

"I would hate to see Obama spend the next two and half years just counting healthcare.gov sign-ups. He needs to recognize that Putin’s Crimea adventure has created the opportunity for a legacy project of moving America into a clean energy future — a move that would make us stronger, Putin weaker and the world safer."

Whoa! Less than a month ago, Friedman told us that the Cold War was forever over (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/opinion/friedman-dont-just-do-something-sit-there.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0):

"The Cold War was a unique event that pitted two global ideologies, two global superpowers, each with globe-spanning nuclear arsenals and broad alliances behind them. Indeed, the world was divided into a chessboard of red and black, and who controlled each square mattered to each side’s sense of security, well-being and power. It was also a zero-sum game, in which every gain for the Soviet Union and its allies was a loss for the West and NATO, and vice versa.

That game is over. We won."

Well, even Tom now seems to recognize that the "game" is not over, and in fact Putin has Obama caught in a devastating pincer movement, given Obama's dependence upon Russian goodwill involving the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons arsenal and Iran's nuclear weapons development program.

Regarding Friedman's call for "an energy policy that will weaken the oil-and-gas-autocracy of Russian President Vladimir Putin," there is of course no mention by Tom of Solyndra or the US national debt, which Obama has taken to an unsustainable $17.5 trillion.

All of which is not to say that Obama cannot pressure Putin. As I observed in a previous blog entry (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2014/03/thomas-friedman-three-faces-of.html), freeing Europe from dependency upon Russian gas need not take much time at all. If Friedman were to spend a few minutes reading a Commentary article entitled "Will Israel Be the Next Energy Superpower?" (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/will-israel-be-the-next-energy-superpower/) by Arthur Herman, he would quickly realize that salvation is to be found in Israel's enormous gas discoveries off its Mediterranean coast.

However, channeling Israeli gas to Europe might also demand that Obama put an end to his ideological war with Netanyahu, and this might be too much to demand of a president who has made the weakening of America's alliance with Israel a keystone of his foreign policy. Note Obama's luncheon with Palestinian Authority President Abbas, during which Obama called for "a state that allows for the dignity and sovereignty of the Palestinian people," but refused to acknowledge the necessity of a neighboring nation which safeguards the existence of the Jewish people (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2014/03/obama-sucks-up-to-abbas-no-state-for.html).

Interestingly enough, even Friedman in this op-ed seems to understand that the Affordable Care Act is headed for disaster and will not provide Obama with the legacy that he is so desperately seeking.

But I digress from the thesis of Tom's opinion piece, i.e. Putin's annexation of Crimea is "a blessing in disguise." I can only wonder, if we were back in 1938, whether Friedman would also regard Hitler's annexation of the Sudetenland as a godsend . . .

Thomas Friedman, "The Three Faces of President Obama": Or Is Obama Merely Two-Faced?

Obama apologist Thomas Friedman is back with us today to explain away his beloved president's procrastination and cowardice. In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The Three Faces of President Obama" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/opinion/sunday/friedman-the-three-faces-of-president-obama.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0), Friedman tells us that Obama is simultaneously facing accusations of being a "Pollyanna, John Wayne and Henry Kissinger all at once," and would thus have us believe that if such is the case, none of these accusations could possibly hold water.

Or is it possible that all three characterizations are correct?

A Pollyanna? How about a mere simpleton? One need only recollect Obama's open microphone request that Medvedev convey to Putin his promise of "flexibility" during his second term.

John Wayne? Friedman directs us to Obama's targeted killing of terrorists by means of drones. But Friedman fails to mention the president's approval of the "surge" in Afghanistan, which needlessly prolonged American ground involvement in that war at a horrifying cost of lives and capital.

Henry ("Let them bleed a little") Kissinger? Do you recall Obama's March 2011 declaration:

“Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different.”

Well, Obama subsequently proved himself every bit as cynical as Kissinger, watching from the sidelines as Syrian madman Bashar al-Assad unleashed countless horrors against a captive civilian population.

Friedman's solution for reining in Putin?:

"The way the United States and European Union help, which will take time, is by forging new energy policies that will diminish Europe’s dependency on Russian gas — the mother’s milk of Putinism."

Unbeknownst to Tom Terrific, freeing Europe from dependency upon Russian gas need not take much time at all. If Friedman were to take a few minutes to read a Commentary article entitled "Will Israel Be the Next Energy Superpower?" (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/will-israel-be-the-next-energy-superpower/) by Arthur Herman, he would quickly realize that salvation is to be found in Israel's enormous gas discoveries off its Mediterranean coast.

But heck, channeling Israeli gas to Europe might also demand that Obama put an end to his petty ideological war with Netanyahu, and this might be too much to demand of a president who has made the weakening of America's alliance with Israel a keystone of his foreign policy.

"The three faces of President Obama"? I think it is known to all that the man who once promised, "If you like your plan, you can keep it," is merely two-faced.