16 Nov

THE OBAMA DOCTRINE: Helpful Foreign Policy Cheat Sheet

Doug Ross:

A quick review — and a reminder that elections have consequences.

• Libya is supplying Hamas with the most advanced weaponry it’s ever had

• Iran’s Green Revolution was crushed by the Mullahs with the tacit approval of Barack Obama

• Egypt — an ostensible ally of the U.S. and Israel — was thrown under the bus by Barack Obama, ceding control of the country to the erstwhile Nazi-aligned Muslim Brotherhood

• Algeria and Tunisia are likewise aligning with Al Qaeda

• Jordan, Israel’s last regional ally — is also about to fall

• And Turkey, once a secular and stabilizing force in the Middle East, is now succumbing to a radical brand of Islamism. Even better: it’s a member of NATO

Read more

       

About Curt

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.

6 Responses to THE OBAMA DOCTRINE: Helpful Foreign Policy Cheat Sheet

  1. Mully says: 1

    Recall these words from Obama in 2007…
    “The day I’m inaugurated, not only the country looks at itself differently, but the world looks at America differently … If I’m reaching out to the Muslim world they understand that I’ve lived in a Muslim country and I may be a Christian, but I also understand their point of view … My sister is half-Indonesian. I traveled there all the way through my college years. And so I’m intimately concerned with what happens in these countries and the cultures and perspective these folks have. And those are powerful tools for us to be able to reach out to the world … then I think the world will have confidence that I am listening to them and that our future and our security is tied up with our ability to work with other countries in the world that will ultimately makes us safer.”

    ReplyReply
  2. FAITH7 says: 2

    @Mully#1 – Well, those words really ring clear in this climate don’t they??… Can we be tittering on perhaps WWIII?

    Well, I think Israel feels “safer” in the world…I know I certainly do…[sarc]

    ReplyReply
  3. johngalt says: 3

    @Mully:

    Yeah, I imagine those four Americans felt a whole lot safer because of Obama’s “understanding” of the Muslim world.

    ReplyReply
  4. Liberal1 (Objectivity) says: 4

    You make such a big deal out of four people dying, but how about the thousands of service people who died during the Iraq was in the pursuit of oil—you don’t really care about those four people who died in Benghazi, do you?

    It’s just a ploy to attempt to discredit Obama. Well, Obama won—you lost—so you better get used to it for the next four years—or I guess you can just be pissed off all the time. Maybe you like that—it’s a style of living—being pissed off all the time.

    Were you just as vocal about your outrage when Bush and another woman named Rice had lied about Iraq’s atomic weapons quest, just to get us into that war?

    ReplyReply
  5. retire05 says: 5

    @Liberal1 (Objectivity):

    but how about the thousands of service people who died during the Iraq was[r] in the persuit of oil

    You know, Lib1, you left wingers really do need to get some new material.

    Saturday, Dec. 19, 2009

    Those who claim that the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 to get control of the country’s giant oil reserves will be left scratching their heads by the results of last weekend’s auction of Iraqi oil contracts: Not a single U.S. company secured a deal in the auction of contracts that will shape the Iraqi oil industry for the next couple of decades. Two of the most lucrative of the multi-billion-dollar oil contraccts went to two contries which bitterlhy opposed the U.S. invasion – Russian and China – while even Total Oil of Ferance, which led the charge to deny international approval for the war at the U.N. Security Council in 2003, won a bigger stake than the Americans in the most recent auction.

    http://www.time.com

    So you cling to the same, tired, worn out pablum that you on the left have been spewing for almost a decade.

    But wait, wasn’t Obama president in Dec., 2009? Why didn’t he secure U.S. interests in Iraqi oil considering the price paid by this nation to give the Iraqis control over their own destiny? Could it be that Obama failed to act in the best interest of the U.S.? It is a question worth asking, considering our blood secure the Iraqis right to have control over their own oil resources.

    Stop proving what a fool you are, Lib1.

    ReplyReply
  6. Nan G says: 6

    It is odd, isn’t it, Lib1?
    On June 13, 2012, the CBS Evening News devoted a story by David Martin to the Afghanistan death count reaching 2,000, as Martin interviewed a mother of a fallen Marine. CBS was alone. Obama’s name was not mentioned.
    There was no story that week on the Afghanistan death “milestone” on ABC, NBC, the PBS NewsHour – or even on the MSNBC programs found in Nexis.
    Not one.

    When the 2,000 mark arrived in Iraq on October 25, 2005, however, the Big Three networks devoted 14 morning and evening news stories to the death toll from October 24 through the end of October, and another 24 anchor briefs or mentions. They used the number to spell “disaster for this White House.”

    CBS offered five reports and ten additional briefs or mentions of the 2,000 figure.

    Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/06/21/unlike-2000-death-count-iraq-abc-nbc-pbs-msnbc-skip-2000-marker-afghanis#ixzz2CWF6uzvI
    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/06/21/unlike-2000-death-count-iraq-abc-nbc-pbs-msnbc-skip-2000-marker-afghanis#ixzz2CWEsip9N

    On 9-11-2001 almost 3,000 unarmed, unsuspecting CIVILIANS were murdered by TERRORISTS.
    Since then, in both Afghanistan and Iraq our TROOPS, armed and prepared, have engaged an enemy.
    On 9-11-2012 an unarmed Ambassador and his technical specialist, Sean Smith (also unarmed) were murdered by TERRORISTS while doing the job Obama sent them to do.
    Later that night two more men, armed but certainly not given any back-up were killed in a five hour gun battle.

    Obama claims he said to ”do whatever you need to do to make them safe,” but nothing was done.
    IF he REALLY gave that order they need to pay for ignoring orders.
    IF Obama didn’t give the order, he needs to pay.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>