Middle East and Syria: Obama has forgotten lessons of the recent past

September 7, 2013, 6:23 pm
  


 



by Gary Gerofsky

The Obama administration lies, feigns horror, ignores history (especially recent history), and purposely chooses to make the wrong conclusions. Obama panders to Islamists, nationally and internationally. Mistakes are piling up on other previous mistakes, quickly forgotten, and then repeated with reckless abandon. The theatre of the absurd is taking place before our eyes with implications that have far reaching impact on America for the worse. The Libya and Tunisia debacles have led to Egypt which led to Benghazi which has led to Syria. The common thread is a doctrine that the U.S. president is following to empower Islamists who promise America “democracy” and non-violence. But “Islamist democracy” and “Islamist non-violence” are oxymorons. Obama buys into these contradictions as if they were real possibilities. Following the dictates of Syrian “rebels” and having them direct American policy is like taking advice at face value from those who sent our airliners into the World Trade Center on 9/11. Selective indignation and political correctness have amounted to a complete political and military debacle in the U.S. which also involves and endangers other stakeholders. Every attempt is being made to isolate one act of chemical warfare after a series of chemical attacks in a country (and region) where they have experienced the same for many decades under the Assad family dictatorship — without much objection from the world community or the U.N. Questions need to be asked. There are too many contradictions, inconsistencies, befuddled thinking and lies to enumerate, but here are a few:

Contradictions and inconsistencies:

Story continues below…
      

1) Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were spirited out of Iraq during the second Gulf war to Syria after they were used by Saddam to gas the Kurds and yet the political community and the media (then and now) still deny that Saddam had WMD. The same deniers of WMD are now jumping up and down in horror about Assad’s genocide but they were blind to the gassing of the Kurds and the gassing of Syrians (prior to this recent event). These same deniers were critical of Israel when it dealt blows to some small part of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza and proto-nuclear facilities in Iraq and Syria.

2) The President has stated that he does not want war, does not want to involve soldiers on the ground, does not want regime change, does not want to strike chemical arsenals and does not want to hurt the hair on one human head. Yet Obama tells us that if we do not go ahead with his mission that the vital security interests of the U.S. are at risk. How does an expensive staged fireworks display accomplish his mission? Why is it necessary for a mission that will give terrorists an advantage as he gave terrorists an advantage in Egypt and Libya? Look at the results.

3) The Obama administration is suddenly using the defense and security of Israel (and Jordan and Turkey) as one of its reasons to take action and reminding us that if Syria is not slapped on the wrist that Iran and North Korea will not take America seriously. When has Obama once been concerned for Israel’s security and about Iran’s buildup of nuclear capabilities? How will a staged missile launch strike fear into maniacs, Islamists and sociopaths?

4) The war in Syria has been going on for 2 years and yet the President does not want to end the war nor wants to degrade either side — he merely wants to make sure that Assad will not use WMD. Won’t a strike that leaves everyone unscathed and all the present pieces in place embolden the dictator?

5) The President is willing to put the decision into the hands of Congress but then says he will carry out his plan and do what he pleases with or without their approval.

6) Obama says that he is against conflict, he campaigned twice on a platform to get out of Middle East conflicts and yet Obama is eager to invest U.S. treasure once again into conflicts that side with Islamists who are under pressure from dictators.

We need answers to the following questions:

1) Why do politicians on both sides of the isle want to believe that there is a secular, democratic alternative to a despotic regime in Syria when the most violent players always come out on top in Middle East skirmishes — and they are usually Islamists, as witnessed in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, Afghanistan, etc.?

2) Why are the recent experiences and lessons learned with Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia not part of this discussion?

3) Why is America once again wanting to get into a war that belongs to Arab countries? Why is the U.S. being used as a proxy army for Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Turkey? The Saudis, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Turkey, Egypt and others have billions worth of armaments, troops and expensive American and Russian military systems to protect their own people and effect change in a place like Syria, which is dripping in blood as a result of their collective ideology of hate. Is the American armed forces a branch of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and under its command and influence?

4) If Obama really wanted to stop Syria and all the other tyrants, then why is he trying so hard to shrink Israel into an indefensible position in an attempt to pander to Islamists by endangering the Jewish State? Has Israel not been fighting an existential war for 70+ years against people who would do to Israelis much worse than they are currently doing to themselves in Syria?

5) If both sides of this conflict are wicked then why would anyone bother to step into the fray unless an ally is being targeted? Why has Obama not warned that a strike against its allies (which presumably includes Israel) would be like a strike against America? Why has Obama informed Syria exactly what he will be doing (or not doing) to Syria in advance of military action? A country is either serious about pounding the enemy and winning or it should stay out altogether.

6) Are there any good guys to support in the Middle East — besides America’s closest ally, Israel? Do we really care about people who do not care about themselves or us? Why do so many in the West always want to win the hearts and minds of terrorists who, given the chance, would tear out and eat our hearts with knives and blow up our minds with bombs?

Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey, Senator John McCain and many government officials looked like fools on the first day of Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on possible Syria intervention. The only hard questions came from Senator Rand Paul. The rest of the assembled leaders presented very few facts and withheld information from the public, but partook in a lot of political grandstanding and sucking up, spewed plenty of platitudes, and engaged in chest-beating with very little conviction or substance. It was a pathetic display of support for the President, right or wrong.

Question: What will make Syria, Iran and North Korea quake in their boots? Answer: An America with leadership that stops treating Islamists like good citizens; which is proud of its past and its great accomplishments in an otherwise barbaric and irrational world; that works with allies, is supportive of their accomplishments and helps to improve their growing economies and influence rather that shrinking them to satisfy terrorists; and that recognizes its vital interests, does what it says it will do and only gets into conflicts which directly impact America. Obama, his supporters and even some of his opponents have forgotten the lessons of the recent past. His political opposition has been fractured and has not consistently held his administration responsible for its blunders and its new ideology — a philosophy that is one man’s personal quest to reconnect with his Islamic roots by dragging America to war, intervening in Middle East politics and supporting radical Islamists.



Related: Africa, Appeasement, Arab Spring, Arab/Muslim World, Bigotry and Bias, Civil War, Dictator Watch, Egypt, Extremists, Foreign Policy, Hatred, History, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Israel, Military Tactics, Obama, Political Correctness, Pure Politics, Syria, Terrorist Groups, United Nations (UN), United States, WMD


One Response to “Middle East and Syria: Obama has forgotten lessons of the recent past”

  1. Dean Says:

    Obama is now using the jargon of the left like “proportional response.” There is no such thing as “proportional” when a stronger force is up against terrorists. Israel is often accused of dis-proportionality by the left but what response is proper to missiles raining down on civilians and terrorists waiting to do to Jews what the so-called “rebels” (another weasel word) are now doing to the Christians in Maaloula, Syria, an ancient Christian community now decimated by those whom the Obami want to assist. Obama also is ignoring the plight of Christians and non-Muslims throughout the region as if Muslims were his only concern. I am very suspicious of his entire administration and think that an attack on a barbarous regime will only help the Iranians and Russians. It might lead to real war as Obama high-tails it out of there. The “rebels” are no better and perhaps worse bloodsuckers than the Assad-ist family. If Assad falls, the bloodshed will be many-fold worse if that can be imagined. And why have all the images on youtube of beheading, stoning, terror, and slaughter by Muslims throughout the Islamic world not been as prominently displayed on CNN and elsewhere as this one horrific attack (carried out by either “rebels” or the Assadists or both) has been broadcast repeatedly ?

Leave a Reply

By posting a comment, you agree to our Terms of Service and Usage.