Obama: How To Screw American Foreign Policy in 5 Easy Steps

Yesterday in Washington, D.C., Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama laid out his anti-Bush foreign policy to undo as much of America’s international progress in the past 7 years as possible. (SPEECH TRANSCRIPT) His 5 simple steps to achieve mediocrity are as follows:

OBAMA: I will focus this strategy on 5 goals essential to making America safer.

1. Ending the war in Iraq responsibly.

2. Finishing the fight against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

3. Securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states.

4. Achieving true energy security

5. Rebuilding our alliances to meet the challenges of the 21^st century.

Sound good, doesn’t it?  The devil is in the details (see video below)

FULL VIDEO OF SPEECH HERE

Speech highlights include:

• Acknowledging the success of the surge and saying his objective will be to pull troops ASAP from Iraq regardless of conditions on the ground
• Claiming Iraqis had failed to achieve any political progress or national reconciliation 
• Saying Iraqis need to start stepping up and fight for their own country
• Accusing Pres. Bush of purposely misleading America into a needless war to rid Iraq of Saddam and WMD while vowing to rid the world of terrorist leaders and WMD
• Telling Pakistan we will enter its borders or airspace with or without permission to kill al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden

There were some great lines in the Obama speech. These ones in particular deserve an award and special recognition:

2^nd Runner-up Obama comment:

Both America and Iraq will be more secure when the terrorist in Anbar is taken out by the Iraqi Army, and the criminal in Baghdad fears Iraqi Police, not just coalition forces.

STATING THE OBVIOUS:  Coalition Forces play a supporting role in Anbar Province and it was Iraqis who drove out al-Qaeda terrorists and insurgents from the province.  Provincial handover is imminent.

1^st Runner Up Obama comment:

(We will) send once more a message to those yearning faces beyond our shores that says, “You matter to us. Your future is our future. And our moment is now.”

STATING THE OBVIOUS:   This does not apply to Iraqis.

Winning Obama comment:

America seeks a world with no nuclear weapons. As long as nuclear weapons exist, we must retain a strong deterrent.

STATING THE OBVIOUS:  What kind of deterrent does Obama offer when he calls Iraq Bush’s willful lie because there were not stockpiles of WMD?

Hopefully every American citizen watched this speech yesterday.  It was so uninformed and hypocritical it can only show what harm an inexperienced Commander in Chief can do.

Trackback URL: 
http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/1992732

Comments

[Karen]

Yes Amy, Obama basically wants to take us militarily back to 1930. Unfortunately, other countries will continue to advance militarily. And we will be the proverbial idiot with the knife at the gunfight.

Great entry, as always.

[Amy Proctor]

1930! Now there's change you can believe in!

[Leticia]

OBAMA: I will focus this strategy on 5 goals essential to making America safer.

1. Ending the war in Iraq responsibly. Ummm....how does he plan on doing that if our troops aren't there? What is responsibly? Is he going to say, "Gee, we're so sorry, do you mind ending this war?

2. Finishing the fight against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Okay, we still need our troops for that. Is he going on his own and bring some homemade bread as a peace offering?

3. Securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states. Ohhh...sure, like they are just going to hand over their weapons because he said so? Yeah, like that's really going to work. These aren't children with toy guns, ya know.

4. Achieving true energy security. Yeah, uh-huh...and how is that going to get done?

5. Rebuilding our alliances to meet the challenges of the 21st century. By what? Going back to the stone age?

Not a very bright and lucid individual we are dealing with here, are we?

[StephC]

It all sounds very pretty but it's a little short on details as far as HOW. You know the devil is all in the details and Obama makes pretty speeches but doesn't really worry much about how to get from point A to point x,y, or z. When he or anybody else says things like what he said, it just ticks me off because it sounds as if they believe anybody who supports our nation at war must enjoy war but there's a whole world of difference between enjoying war and willing to fight for one's right to live.

I also believe it's rather egotistical of them to believe they can just stop everything and the enemy will stop too when all it does is make them looker increasingly weaker in the enemies' eyes.

[Desert Storm Veteran]

Obama is EXACTLY what this country needs! I am a veteran with 10 1/2 years of active duty military service. I also lived 4 blocks from the World Trade Center on 9/11/01 & work for the airline those terrorists used to attack us. September 11 has true meaning to me - I did not sit at home & watch it on TV! This country's defense is a major concern of mine. I was in TOTAL agreement with attacking Afghanistan after 9/11. What George Bush & his administration did afterwards is the problem & Obama states it perfectly. We are seen as a backward, unilateral acting nation of war mongers to many citizens of foreign nations. I'm embarrassed and angry about this. Iraq did NOT attack us on 9/11! We should have concentrated on the REAL enemy & worked to stop the anti-American sentiments by concentrating on Israel/ Palestine. That one issue is probably 90% of why middle eastern countries detest us. George Bush dropped the ball when he turned his attention away from Afghanistan. We need a leader who will pick that ball up & take us toward the touchdown zone, not away from it! McCain will continue the failed politics of a failed President who will go down in the record books as the WORST President this country has ever elected.

[airforcewife]

Every time I hear Senator Obama start on about nuclear weapons and how they need to be rooted out of the world I can't help but think, "Good luck with that. Didn't work so well in Superman IV, though."

[robert verdi]

Desert,
Really, the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who work with the US might disagree. Also the people of Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, Ukraine, Columbia, and much of the world are quite pro-american. Finnaly most countries in Europe have been electing pro-american governments. Why? Nice use of talking points to create your narrative, did you make this your self or did you cut and paste it from different echo chambers.

[Amy Proctor]

Leticia, isn't is a bit odd that Obama would swear he'll "finish" the job of defeating al-Qaeda and the Taliban while he won't listen to commanders on the ground and finish the job with al-Qaeda in Iraq? How can we trust him to "finish the job" in Afghanistan if he won't finish it in Iraq?

Also, his terminology, "Finishing the fight against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban" concedes that Bush/Gates/Petraeus/Crocker/U.S. military - Democrats were successful in almost completely defeating the enemy that had overrun Iraq. This also contradicts his assertion that Iraqis aren't stepping up to the plate and defending their own country. He is so completely clueless on Iraq that he doesn't know

1) Anbar Province is no longer under Coaltion control,
2) Iraqis are the true heroes in this war because they stepped up and engaged in hand to hand combat against the most lethal foe imaginable: al-Qaeda in sheeps clothing,
3) 15 of Congress' and the President's 20 imposed "benchmarks" have been met
4) there has been incredible political and sectarian progress. In fact, Iraqi unification and cooperation politically puts the U.S. Congress and Senate to shame.

Storm Desert Veteran, first, thank you for your service. Your contributions to the defense of our nation puts you in our debt (I of course am presuming you served honorably as most soldiers do).

Secondly, your misconceptions about this topic and the misconceptions of other soldiers are more likely the reason for our reception in Middle Eastern countries. I'm living in S. Korea right now, my husband is active duty Army, MSG, and the cultural and religious ignorance is overwhelming and distressing to both me and my husband, who worked under Petraeus at Ft. Leavenworth and has played a major role in the war both in combat and defining COIN and religious leader engagement. The intentions of the U.S. are honorable. Some soldiers and their ignorant actions are what screw it up for us in these countries. Here are several things to note:

-Afghanistan didn't attack us on 9/11. Al-Qaeda is not a nation but a terrorist organization.

-We didn't go to war against Iraq or Iraqis, we went to disarm Saddam and liberate Iraq from a state sponsor of terrorism who claimed to be developing WMD even by most U.N. accounts.

-Bush will go down as one of the best presidents of our lifetime beside Reagan, who also wasn't perfect. He has changed the face of the Middle East for the better. Before there were no free elections in Egypt, Syria occupied Lebanon, Syria had WMD which they surrendered because of the Iraq invasion, Iran reportedly stopped its nuclear program in 2003 for the same reason, , Pakistan is evolving into something different and better than what it was as a result of our participation in the Middle East, North Korea is laying down its nuclear program and seeking reunification with South Korea. All these are HUGE SUCCESSES.

-the leader of the free world is a glass house that people in toll sheds like to throw stones at. I teach my childaren to stand for what is right even when no one else will, no matter what peer pressure is influencing you to do....."if everyone else is jumping off a bridge should you?" This has been our mission since no one in the world will stand up and act.

-we did NOT act unilaterally in Iraq. We were under a U.N. mandate to invade and had dozens of countries with us. We are the leaders, that's clear, but we were not alone. We are currently in Iraq under a yearly renewable U.N. mandate at the request of the Iraqi government.

Did you know that Iraq War Costs Less Than 1% of U.S. GDP? Here is the cost of NOT going to war:

THE COST OF NOT GOING TO WAR

TROOP LEVELS

In late 2002 the U.S. had more than 60,000 troops stationed in the countries around Iraq to back up UN Security Council resolutions. Hans Blix, the UN’s weapons inspector, credited those forces as being the reason he was getting even limited co-operation from Saddam. In the congressional debate about authorizing the war, the opponents’ position was that we should continue with the UN inspection process, which required U.S. troops to stay on the scene. It was presumed that Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), not just by President Bush, but by the National Intelligence Estimate and the spy agencies of many other countries. It would have taken a long time to convince a skeptical world that Saddam’s noncompliance with 17 UN resolutions was innocent. Under the alternative scenario of the time American forces would have been stationed around Iraq for years, many of them in harm’s way.

We would have still stationed half to three-fourths as many troops as we now have in Iraq in neighboring countries. The cost of stationing them there would be lower than what we now pay but would still be substantial.

The continuous use of air power would have been necessary to police the no-fly zones established in the ceasefire of the first Iraq war.

Increased surveillance of the Iran-Iraq and Syria-Iraq borders would have been necessary to limit terrorist migration.

Evidence suggests Saddam would have rebuilt his WMD capability. it isplausible that not invading Iraq would probably have cost at least a third as much as we ultimately spent on deposing Saddam.

It is a myth that Iraq as it was cost us nothing and required no action. It was costing us already. Do you recall that in 1993 Saddam tried to assassinate George H. W. Bush while visiting Kuwait, the country he helped liberate from Iraq? New Pres. Bill Clinton dropped a bomb or two in Baghdad as retaliation for the thwarted plot, which almost took place.

And Kuwait is now a TREMENDOUS asset to the United States in the war on terror.

So I appreciate your perspective but believe you are completely wrong. I understand your point of view but it is too simplistic to be applied to U.S. foreign policy or our national defense, which is of course Obama's error, too.

[Amy Proctor]

Wow, that was long.

[Johnny]

I would say it is naive, but it is dangerous to tell the Americam people that all we have to do to 'end the war' in Iraq is unilaterally pull our troops out. No one who understands that our forces operating the two UN-mandated No Fly Zones were fired upon by Saddam's forces over 500x in 2002 ALONE would buy the "I wouldn't have gone into Iraq" baloney.

I like the way young Mr. Shapiro put it:

I got married last week. Hence my absence from this space for the first time in seven years. It was a beautiful wedding in Acre, Israel, overlooking the ocean at sunset. My father wrote the music for the processional, which brought everyone to tears. My bride looked stunning, of course. We broke the glass, we danced, we ate and we celebrated until deep into the night.

Outside the wedding hall stood a guard. Every wedding in Israel requires an armed guard to prevent terrorist attacks. Only the armed guards prevent the infliction of mass casualties at joyous events; only the armed guards protect the ceremonies that act as the foundation stones to civilization.

In the general war against Islamofascism, civilization requires three elements. First, civilization requires building blocks -- families dedicated to teaching traditional values, freedom and liberty to future generations. Second, civilization requires the armed guard -- the men and women willing to put themselves on the line to protect those building blocks. Third, civilization requires leaders.

Those leaders must recognize the value of the foundational blocks -- they must understand the value of family. They must see that families represent a bulwark of independence against the overbearing state, and are small spheres of private initiative and activity.

Just as importantly, those leaders must recognize the value of the armed guard. The leaders must understand that there are those who seek to destroy the freedom-loving family in favor of Islamic tyranny. Our leaders must see that our enemies are those who seek to create a world where fear of the theistic state trumps love of family. And most of all, our leaders must appreciate that the armed guard must fight the enemy with every weapon in civilization's arsenal.

Any aspiring leader who shirks from nurturing, cherishing and, when necessary, deploying the armed guard in defense of freedom is unqualified to lead. Such leaders are pretenders. They may speak prettily and murmur soothing noises, but when the time comes to place the armed guard at the door, they balk. "Is the armed guard necessary?" they protest. "After all, he may provoke our enemy rather than defeating him. Would it not be better to leave the wedding unprotected and rely on the mercy of our nemeses?"

The do-nothing leaders -- men like Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama -- destroy families. They leave families open to attack by trusting the untrustworthy. They watch idly while families are torn asunder, then disarm the armed guard in the fleeting hope that further appeasement will do the trick.

This is worse than foolishness -- it is unmitigated surrender. No country needs a leader who enters office waving a white flag.

I am 24 years old. My wife is 20. Together we plan, with the help of God, on having healthy, happy, freedom-loving children who will grow up with the security provided by the armed guard. The question of who will lead America is no longer a political question to me -- it is a personal question. Who will protect my family? Who will protect the future of my children?

As the waves beat on the shore in Acre, the rabbi intoned the words of the sheva berachot -- the blessings recited at the Jewish wedding ceremony. "Blessed are You, God, King of the Universe," sang the rabbi, "Who created joy and gladness, groom and bride, mirth, glad song, pleasure, delight, love, brotherhood, peace and companionship." Without the armed guard -- and the leader who empowers the armed guard -- the joy of liberty, the power of love, and the future of our children are murdered before they begin.

(Ben Shapiro, 24, is a graduate of UCLA and HarvardLawSchool. He is the author of the new book "Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House," as well as the national bestseller "Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America's Youth.")

[Leticia]

Amy, he is truly clueless and full of empty-headed promises.

[Snerd Gronk]

Leticia: "Amy, he is truly clueless and full of empty-headed promises."

SG: I didn't agree with everything Ben Shapiro had to say, but I think you're being a little harsh on him, Leti

Snerd