I’m in Washington D.C. for our National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) Chairman’s Council. Monday, we were on Capitol Hill receiving a series of briefings from several House Committee Chairmen along with the head of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton. Monday evening the group sat enthralled listening to former Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, General Jack Keane, who gave an in-depth global security analysis from the Middle East to Europe to the Pacific. General Keane was asked several questions but only one which truly stood out — why does President Barack Obama allow all this to happen?
Of course there is the simple short answer, but General Keane explained that Obama seeks to avoid confrontation and escalation — something which our adversaries know — and something which, if you analyze President Obama’s U.N. General Assembly speech, was clearly apparent.
As reported by Fox News, “President Obama used a United Nations address Monday to both appeal for global cooperation in dealing with terrorism and other threats — and stake out his negotiating position on Syria ahead of a high-stakes meeting with Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
Speaking to the U.N. General Assembly in New York City, Obama warned of “dangerous currents” that threaten the modern world. He cited “brutal networks of terror” that have filled the vacuum in fragile states and stirred a refugee crisis on an “epic scale.” But he also urged nations against imposing order “by force.” “If we cannot work together collectively, we will all suffer the consequences,” Obama said.”
Consider this, President Obama is asking for global cooperation in dealing with terrorism, when he’s made it quite clear he’s not willing to deal with it. And who does Obama think is responsible for the vacuum being filled by “brutal networks of terror”? Last week I wrote a piece for Townhall.com about “The Purpose of a Vacuum.” Now, if you want to understand the soaring rhetoric and duplicity of Obama just check this out. Obama speaks of “dangerous currents” and “brutal networks of terror” and then urged against “imposing order by force.” So how exactly does one deal with terrorists, “dangerous currents” and such?According to President Obama, it appears we’re supposed to just talk it out – but keep in mind it’s his failed policies that have caused many to suffer the consequences of beheadings, crucifixion, displacement from their ancient homelands. If you’ve been keeping up with reports, ISIS has turned the ancient Roman amphitheater ruins in Palmyra Syria into a “little shop of horrors.” It’s now their grand stage for public executions. And President Obama has to ask himself, exactly who does he think stirred a refugee crisis on an “epic scale?” I know, blame Bush.
Obama isn’t looking to work with anyone “collectively,” be it Jordan, Egypt, the Kurds, United Arab Emirates or Israel. His modus is the art of double speak or as General Keane stated, avoidance of confrontation and escalation — hence why Russia’s Vladimir Putin has deployed to Syria and has “advisors” in Iraq and Egypt.
Obama said the U.S. is “prepared to work” with Russia and Iran to resolve the bloody Syrian civil war. Alexander the Great stated, “fortune favors the bold” and while the Russian military is not a superior military, in the world of geopolitics, optics can oft time win the day. Obama who wants “avoidance” and is more than willing to run into the arms of Vladimir Putin to save him.
Obama even displays his embrace of revisionist history, “In a clear reference to Putin’s support for the regime in Damascus, Obama said the world cannot see a “return to the pre-war status quo” in Syria. “Let’s remember how this started,” Obama said. “[Bashar] Assad reacted to peaceful protests by escalating repression and killing.” Without elaborating, Obama said “compromise” will be required to end the fighting in Syria and stomp out the Islamic State. But he said there must be a “transition” away from Assad.”
What? It all got started in Syria because of red lines. Obama’s bluster got called and his venerable red line became chartreuse — and disregarded. And it seems Obama hasn’t realized that now Russian troops are in Syria, Bashar Assad isn’t going anywhere. If Obama hadn’t been afraid of confrontation and escalation, the violation of the red line would have come with consequences. When it didn’t, the despots and dictators recognized weakness and a deliverer of empty rhetoric — long on flowery language, short on decisive action. And again, a drone is not a strategy.
So how does evil react to weakness? “Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, in his [UN] address, cast the nuclear talks as a product of the U.S. being “forced” to set aside sanctions and negotiate. Still, he called the agreement a “brilliant example of victory over war.”
Rouhani realizes Obama’s administration is trying to convey a message of war weariness. Obama and the left have said incessantly that the only alternative to the Iranian nuclear deal was war. But what happened when the great Western powers, in 1938, decided they were war weary and didn’t want to confront or escalate their tensions with Nazi Germany? I rest my case.
“Obama on Monday urged the world to choose “cooperation over conflict.” “That is not weakness, that is strength,” he said. He also acknowledged that, in Libya, the international force “should have done more” to fill the vacuum left behind after Muammar Qaddafi was deposed. “We must work more effectively in the future as an international community to build capacity for states that are in distress before they collapse,” Obama said.”
The world needs to choose cooperation over conflict…that’s how we’re supposed to stand against the “brutal networks of terror?” We all just need to hold hands and sing kumbaya and the bad man under the bed will go away, right?
Islamic terrorists don’t see strength, they see weakness in America. The unicorns and green pastures rhetoric of Obama make him feel good — but everyone else must suffer the consequences. And again, revisionist history: who was it that caused a vacuum to be created in Libya? I don’t recall the international community outsourcing its air and maritime power to a bunch of Islamic jihadists in Libya — that was Barack Obama, and no one else.
I’ve always told folks not to listen to a Barack Obama speech, get the transcript and read the words. I’ve just shared with you a few pertinent quotes from Obama’s Monday U.N. General Assembly speech. Ask yourself, if you’re Putin, Rouhani, Khamenei, Jinping, or Lil’ Kim — along with the collection of Islamic jihadists — what do you think their assessment of the speech is? After all, that’s all who matters, as the enemy has the final vote.