NDFENCEOFOBAMA

In response to the Bobo files, I have had to weigh in on Bobo’s post for today.
Here’s what Bobo had to say about Obama;

http://thebobofiles.com

“Obama finally got something right.
written on April 13, 2009 · filed under A Nation at Risk, America, Israel, Mexicans, Obama, Politics, President, Socialism, Terrorists, communism Buzz up!As we all heard, Obama actually authorized the use of force to free an American tanker Captain that was captured and held hostage by pirates terrorists. I will give credit where credit is due. As soon as I heard one of our ships was attacked my first reaction was to say we need to send in the Navy and take back our ship and get all of our men home.

As I understand it, Obama actually deferred to the Captain of the Destroyer. Way to follow the lead of those men in uniform “on the ground.”

Now - it is apparent that Obama at least has the fortitude to use force when necessary. So - I have to ask - why the hell didn’t he authorize the use of force to blow up Kim Jong Mentally Ill’s launchpad before they shot off that missile?

Why hasn’t he yet authorized the use of force to take out Iran’s nuclear production plants?

Why did he back away from the European missile defense shield after Putin threatened him?

Why hasn’t he authorized the use of force to secure our southern borders from those terrorist drug cartels?

Why is he giving close to $1 Billion to a state sponsored terrorist organization in Israel?

Why is he loosening restrictions on travel to a communist country ruled by a terroristic tyrant? I guess Obama really is the Socialists Socialist.

I don’t get it. Why did he choose a non-military threat to grow a set of balls?

Like I said, I’ll give him credit for finally doing the right thing. But, he has shown considerable weakness as far as out greatest threats are concerned.”

Responses:
As to why Obama did not choose to blow North Korea’s lauchpad up; Our President, unlike his predecessor, has shown great restraint, choosing to act in concert with our allies, and other countries, in condemning Kim and his hostile actions. To escalate any conflict in our present state is pure foolishness. Even the clowns on the right know this kind of talk is absurd, and have silenced those within their own party with such radical agressiveness. Bobo, you have been “left out” on your own on this one.

As to Iran’s nuclear production plant and why Obama didn’t bomb Natanz; Obama has chosen to the way of the U.N, much like Bush did, to enforce sanctions, while still attempting to reach out in a peaceful way. It seems Obama has sought the way of multilateral sanctions, and becoming part of a team for the US, instead of being the team and making all the decisions for that team. For too long now, The United States has been the aggressor in conflicts the world over, causing anti American sentiment to brew to new proportions. We voted for change and this is what we expected. The majority of Americans do not seek military solutions to diplomatic problems. It hasn’t worked in the past, and it is going to work now. Israel, who has way more to lose by Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, has also shown great restraint, so far. If any country should be concerned, it should be them. I am sure if the diplomatic process breaks down and peace is no longer a viable option, a military response will be carried out by Israel, rather than the U.S. The American people found out when Bush was president, to be cautious when a commander in chief claims someone has WMD. We do not need another Iraq. Bobo, you are “left out” again with your way out reasoning.

The missile defense shield you speak of on Russian borders has always been nothing more than a diplomatic tool the US has used to get Russia to bend in to some other foreign policy concerns. Now it seems Russia is willing to come to the table for talks on Nuclear weapons, and re-establishing a better friendship. To build a senseless missile shield is only to provoke hostilities. After all, if Russia wanted to dominate their neighbors, they could, as in times past, overrun their opponents borders with men, not missiles. The U.S. military already has the capability to shoot down long range missiles the world over. What’s the point in building a shield, except to make more enemies?

The Mexican drug cartels that have caused violence elicited a response from Washington to join in “joint operations” of the military with the Mexican government. But it seems, the president of Mexico, doesn’t want our soldiers on his side of the border in a fighting capacity. You have to question why, considering the violence. For years, we have given millions to eradicate crops and stop the flow, all to little avail. Bobo, it seems you have chosen to make this Obama’s problem solely, when this stuff has been plagueing the US for decades, not just two months. The killings down there have gone on for decades. The media has just now chosen to increase reporting of the violence. Check the historical record. Obama, just this week on Meet the Press, told Bob Shieffer that he is considering sending National Guard troops to the border region. The Mexican government claims all the guns in Mexico are coming from the US. Where is the documented proof? Calderon could just be positioning to get more money. All the cheap Chinese made guns in the world, and the Mexicans choose American weapons? Hmmm. Even if the weapons are coming from here, which is of high debate, how would sending troops to the border address that concern? I am sure most weapons arent driven over in cars along the Tijuana border. Authorizing the use of force is pointless if we cant go over the border, we have no one to fight. Anyway, the real problem is our dependence on drugs. We want to get high here in America. If there was no demand, there would be little violence. This problem has to be addressed at the root-our desire to get high. We need more money to set up interdiction programs, and more alternative ways to deal with drug offenders, not just drug and gun runners.

Hamas:

Here’s a Fox News article that debunks your claims about the money given to a terrorists organization.
“Obama administration officials had indicated last week that the U.S. was preparing to pledge $900 million in assistance for Gaza, but Wood’s description of the plan Sunday indicated that the only portion going directly to rebuilding Gaza was the $300 million.

Wood said that while all of the money is subject to approval by Congress, the intent is to provide about $200 million to help the Palestinian Authority shore up a budget shortfall and another $400 million to assist Palestinian institutional reforms and economic development. Wood said some of the $400 million might wind up aiding Gaza, but he said that would depend on the Palestinian Authority.

Some portion of the $900 million total U.S. pledge had already been budgeted for 2009, Wood said, adding that he could not immediately provide a breakdown.

Getting U.S. humanitarian aid quickly to Gaza is complicated by the U.S. refusal to funnel it through the Hamas militant movement that rules Gaza. The U.S. considers Hamas a terrorist organization. Wood said the U.S. aid that does not go directly to the Palestinian Authority would be funneled to Gaza through international organizations and agencies.”

Bobo, it seems, once again, you have put the cart before the horses. No money will be given to Hamas. Congressional approval is required in order for the deal to go through anyway. My only thought about this one is; I wouldn’t pledge a dime to rebuild Gaza. Food and humanitarian aid is one thing, building Gaza is another. Our road map to peace, which has always been a goal of the US, is ridiculous. It will never work as long as those two sides have fundamental differences over the whose right it is to be on the land. The other side is, if you dont rebuild Gaza, Gaza will have no economy and we will be forced to keep feeding people rather than them sustaining themselves. You pick.

On Cuba: What is the point to impose sanctions on the Cuban People? For over forty years, people in Cuba have suffered from the U.S. policies. At one time, these policies may have been necessary, but that was during the Bay of Pigs. Way outdated, and way useless. Let the people of Cuba get a taste of western life, and eventually the seeds of democracy will sprout itself. We do not need to force anything on anyone. These sanctions havent done anything but make other countries better trade partners with Cuba. We could use the revenue that trade would open up. The Cuban people could use the money to better their lives. Anyway, why would we sit back and let Russia establish better relations with a place that is 50 miles off our border? Be sensible, lest we see Russian warships docked on the coasts of Cuba. Americans are tired of the past Cuba policies. Look at the Polls. Now we have a President that is in touch with the will of the people, and willing to change idiotic policies that no longer serve any purpose.

The socialists talk you speak of is just more rightwing rhetoric that carries no weight in dealing with real world issues. All the military solutions you suggest, only serve the interests of the past empire, not a team player in the world of international relations.
And a special thank you to Bobo for providing my fire with the necessary kindling.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS