December 21, 2015

Another Recognizes White House Tries To Destroy American Culture

[From article]
Shortly after taking office (and not long after his “fundamental transformation” speech) Obama flew to Cairo to deliver an apology and a loving outreach to Islam -- going so far as to suggest that Islam has deep roots in the USA. As recent events have made clear, there is no question that they are buried deep in the soil of the Obama administration. One very stark example is the Muslim Brotherhood, mother of all Islamic terrorist organizations; it is banned in Egypt, its birthplace, but welcome in the White House.
[. . .]
preposterous is the order of the day when it comes to Obama’s foreign policy -- you know, leading from behind, strategic patience, soft imprint, all slogans to cover up for not leading at all.
[. . .]
The greatest American recruiting tool ISIS has is our feckless leader, Obama -- because weakness is the greatest recruiting tool an enemy can have, and no group of people is more aware of this than the Arabs, who firmly believe in a “strong horse” approach to violent confrontation. Weakness emboldens one’s enemies, and draws possible recruits to their ranks, and it is hard to imagine a weaker leader than we now have, in the person of Obama. For an excellent elaboration of this point, I strongly recommend a book by Lee Smith, The Strong Horse -- Power, Politics, And The Clash of Arab Civilizations.
[. . .]
America is the preeminent world leader, and when it steps back from its natural leadership role, it creates a vacuum, one that the world’s most dangerous and corrupt elements are only too willing to fill. Witness what has happened in Libya, Egypt immediately after Mubarak was deposed, Syria, Yemen, and, on a larger scale, Russia’s moves on the Crimea and Ukraine, China and the South China Sea, etc.
[. . .]
contrary to Krauthammer’s more generous assessment of Obama’s actions as “disengaged” or “delusional,” he is doing exactly what he set out to do -- destroy America.

December 20, 2015
Obama -- Disengaged, Delusional, or Diabolical?
By Ken Eliasberg

No comments: