Sunday, October 24, 2010
A Question No Liberal Reporter Will Ask Obama
A question (one of many) that no liberal reporter will ever ask Barack Obama:
Mr. President, in the years leading up to World War II, the leaders of Britain and France made the fatal error of appeasing Nazi Germany. They foolishly accepted Hitler's assurances that Germany was only interested in limited territorial concessions instead of world conquest. Instead of preserving the peace in Europe, appeasement of a dictatorship bent on overthrowing the status quo made war with Germany inevitable--on Germany's terms.
Knowing this history, presumably, you have inexplicably persisted in making engagement of nuclear-arming, Islamist Iran a foundation of your foreign policy. After nearly two years in office, however, Iran is more belligerent than ever and closer than ever to developing nuclear weapons. And Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, unlike the German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler, has boldly declared that he aims to overthrow the world order.
Given the above, Mr. President, how can you cling to a policy of engagement--a term that many observers interpret as appeasement of and actual attempted alignment with Iran? The prewar leaders of Britain and France appeased but never tried to align with Germany.
Obama's Iran Cuts Off Thief's Hand, Cracks Down on Teaching Philosophy, Law, Psychology, Sociology
More medieval news--here and here--from the nuclear-arming, monstrous mullahocracy that America's appeaser-in-chief is still bent on engaging (Obama code for actually aligning with as well as appeasing).
N. Korea Flaunting 'Treasured Nuclear Sword'
As reported here, North Korea appears to be moving ahead with plans for another nuclear test.
China Confidential expects Pyongyang to again provoke the international community by detonating an atomic device on or about November 11, in order to mar the Veterans Day holiday in the United States. If the test is delayed for technical reasons, it could take place on or about Thursday, November 25, in order to overshadow the nation's long, Thanksgiving holiday weekend.
The secretive, Stalinist/Kimist/criminal state has a history of staging its provocations on U.S. holidays. The North's first nuclear test took place on Columbus Day; its second test, on Memorial Day; and its menacing missile test, on July 4 (Independence Day).
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Chavez Following Iran, N. Korean Nuke Model
Obama Counting on Iran's Cooperation for 2012
Countdown to catastrophe.
For his reelection bid, America's appeaser-in-chief appears to be counting on Iran's maniac-in-chief. More specifically, U.S. President Barack Obama is hoping that Iran, which is closer than ever to developing nuclear weapons, will neither declare itself a nuclear weapons state nor detonate an atomic device prior to November 2012.
Obama, who has built an utterly failed foreign policy around idiotic Iran engagement (Obama code for appeasement of and attempts to actually align with the monstrous mullahocracy) and "Muslim world" outreach, knows that he will surely be blamed if his adversary formally crosses the nuclear line the way its Stalinist/Kimist partner in nuclear and missile crimes, North Korea, did after the international community failed to stop its atomic advance. But Obama believes that Iran, which brazenly proclaims that it intends to overthrow the world order, will tacitly support his administration in order to prevent a Republican from coming to power.
Obama could effectively also be counting on Al Qaeda's cooperation for 2012. A significant terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland would instantly ruin Obama's chances for a second term; and while the Islamist terror group is expected to strike Europe--specifically, France, Germany, and the UK--any day now, Bin Laden and Co., like Ahmadinejad and his mad mullahs and atomic ayataollah, may elect to keep Al Qaeda's powder dry with respect to the "Great Satan" in order to facilitate a further U.S. downgrading of the War on Terror.
True, Obama's relentless drone attacks have hurt AQ and the Taliban in Pakistan. But the enemy, taking the long view, probably prefers to keep America's party of appeasement in power. Moreover, in addition to giving Obama a respite (Democrats will argue that appeasement preserves the peace in American cities) temporarily confining Islamist swarming assaults and suicide and vehicular bombings to Europe will provide Al Qaeda and associated groups with useful experience and knowledge ahead of launching a U.S. terror offensive.
On the other hand, the leaders of Al Qaeda (unlike Obama's adoring, American media flunkies) understand that they are in a kind of competition with the Muslim-born President--whom millions of Muslims regard as one of their own in spite of his Christian identification--for leadership of the so-called Muslim world. So the terrorists may seek to step up efforts to slaughter innocent Americans in the name of Islam with the aim of triggering a huge anti-Muslim backlash. Historically speaking, radicals typically try to make matters worse for their own people in order to radicalize them.
Will the terrorists give Obama a break? Nobody knows the answer to that question, except, perhaps, the terrorist chiefs. I say perhaps because it is quite possible, if not highly probable, that radical Islam's mass murdering masterminds are themselves still debating strategy and tactics regarding the U.S.
This much is certain: as shown by 9/11, those who plot and plan America's doom must be stopped--meaning, hunted down and killed--before they can execute their evil plans.
The world is a safer place when it is the terrorists--and their state sponsors--instead of their intended victims, who live in constant fear of being obliterated.
Posts
