How Relevant ARE We?
Vol: 114 Issue: 18 Friday, March 18, 2011
As of the UN vote yesterday, the United States is now making preparations to commit an act of war. Am I the only one that thinks this is an inappropriate time for the President to take his family on vacation to Rio?
The president says that his trip is all business. He says that he is going to Latin America to “strengthen our economic relationship with neighbors who are playing a growing role in our economic future.”
So that’s why he is taking Michelle and Malia and Sasha with him? To strengthen America’s economic relationship with Brazil?
From Brazil, the Obama family will take in the sights and sounds of Santiago, Chile, where they “will work with Chile to deepen that relationship and address other common economic, hemispheric and global challenges.”
From Chile they will jet off to beautiful El Salvador, from which Obama acknowledges is responsible for one of America’s largest Hispanic populations.
All that is well and good, but seriously. . . the UN Security Council just voted to impose a no-fly zone over Libya. How does one impose a “no-fly” zone? There are a series of steps, the first of which is to bomb Libya’s air defenses!
Shouldn’t the nation’s Commander-in-Chief be at the helm instead of touring Latin America with his family? Brazil can’t wait???
Secretary of State Clinton gave an interview with CNN following the vote. It would appear that she has had enough of Barack Hussein Obama and his Traveling Show.
She was asked four times by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer if she would be interested in keeping her job through a second Obama term. In each instance, she responded with a crisp, one-word answer. “No.”
A report from the subscription-based iPad experiment, “the Daily”– reading between the lines – summarized the Secretary’s position thusly:
“Fed up with a president “who can’t make his mind up” as Libyan rebels are on the brink of defeat, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is looking to the exits. . .
When French president Nicolas Sarkozy urged her to press the White House to take more aggressive action in Libya, Clinton repeatedly replied only, “There are difficulties,” according to Foreign Policy magazine.
“Frankly we are just completely puzzled,” one of the diplomats told Foreign Policy magazine. “We are wondering if this is a priority for the United States.”
Or as the insider described Obama’s foreign policy shop: “It’s amateur night.”
For its part, the president openly mocked Secretary Clinton’s position on intervention in Libya at the Gridiron Club last week.
“I’ve dispatched Hillary to the Middle East to talk about how these countries can transition to new leaders — though, I’ve got to be honest, she’s gotten a little passionate about the subject,” Obama said to laughter from the audience.
“These past few weeks it’s been tough falling asleep with Hillary out there on Pennsylvania Avenue shouting, throwing rocks at the window.”
(Maybe that’s why he’s taking the vacation? With Hillary throwing rocks at the window, it is harder to ignore those pesky three am phone calls.)
Personally, I think the no-fly zone is a necessary idea and one that should have been implemented a month ago when it would have made a significant difference.
But it isn’t a good idea to start a war from somebody else’s country. Is it?
Rio could wait. But evidently the Obamas can’t.
It isn’t really Obama’s problem — the effort to impose a no-fly zone over Libya wasn’t spearheaded by the United States. America is just along for the ride. The effort was led by France. . . and backed by Lebanon!
Great Britain is also joining the effort — probably as a form of penance for its double-dealing over releasing the Lockerbie Bomber in exchange for special oil leases for British Petroleum.
The Italians said that they would make their military bases available to allied aircraft to enforce the no-fly zone. The Italian airbase at Sigonella is the closet NATO base to Libya, which lies just across the Med.
The latest draft of the UN resolution goes well beyond calling for a no-fly zone. It authorizes the Arab League, individual nations and NATO to:
“. . . take all necessary measures…to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat…including Benghazi, while excluding an occupation force.”
It is expected that the first airstrikes will be launched unilaterally by British and French aircraft. They could be in the air within hours. Up to five Arab air forces may also take part in the effort.
Upon hearing news of the UN vote, Ghadaffi (or whatever) issued a statement saying that Libyan air space was closed to foreign aircraft.
For his part, Obama telephoned the leaders of Britain and France after the vote, the White House said. THAT must have been an interesting conversation. . .
“Uhhh, the UN Security Council voted to use force, but I’m gonna be in Rio for the weekend with my family . . . important business, far too important to postpone for a little bitty war like this one. So why don’t you guys take the point and if there’s any heavy lifting to do, I’ll be back in town next week.”
Canada has pledged to send fighters in support of the no-fly zone. The British say they will have their planes in the air within hours.
Columnist Pat Buchanan noted that, “Among the few things that may be said with certainty about the Arab revolution of 2011 is that it has revealed the rising irrelevance of President Obama in that part of the world.”
“Caught flat-footed by the uprising in Tunisia, the White House could only offer belated congratulations to the demonstrators who had deposed and driven out our longtime ally, President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.
After Tunisia, Vice President Joe Biden insisted the embattled Hosni Mubarak was not a dictator in Egypt. Obama sided with Mubarak and then said he ought to go. Then, when the Saudis and Israelis protested that we were abandoning a friend of 30 years, Obama concluded Mubarak should stay.
When the army suddenly sent Mubarak packing, the White House hailed the revolution as the harbinger of an Arab spring.”
Lt. Col. Oliver North (USMC – Ret.) published a timeline of recent international events and what action the president took in response. It’s an eye-opening article worth taking the time to read. Here are just a few snippets.
“Thursday, March 17: U.S. citizens are warned to evacuate Japan. As Gadhafi’s forces prepare to assault the remaining rebel strongholds in Libya, the U.N. Security Council debates what to do. Before celebrating St. Patrick’s Day at the White House, O’Bama visited the Japanese Embassy, had our U.N. ambassador announce we may have to “go beyond a no-fly zone” in Libya, and told the world he is part Irish.
(Of course! Bill O’Reilly. Paddy O’Brien. Barack O’Bama. How could I miss something that obvious?)
All of these tough decisions on Libya, the Middle East, the disaster in Japan, a teetering U.S. economy, the lack of a federal budget, basketball games, golf outings and DNC fundraisers are taking a toll on our chief executive. So it’s only fair he should take a taxpayer-funded spring break in Rio de Janeiro.”
Indeed. There is a link on today’s Drudge report that summarizes a growing suspicion now shared in many corners of the planet. “Paper: Obama: The Weakest President in US History?”
All this comes at a significant point in history. Well, actually, future history as outlined by Bible prophecy tens of centuries ago — and now coming to pass before our eyes.
The Bible says that during the last days the world will be divided into four separate spheres of power. None of those world powers bears any resemblance to the United States. It is as if America simply ceases to be relevant.
That is pretty much the same way that Pat Buchanan describes it from his vantage point on the timeline — and quite apart from any Biblical insights.
“As for Obama, with our foremost Asian ally going through the agony of its worst natural disaster and with revolution raging through the Arab world, he has given us his picks for the Final Four in the “March Madness” of college basketball — and set off with Michelle to party in Rio.
How relevant is he? And how relevant are we?”
The answer that question may be forthcoming in a matter of hours. While the US blustered and threatened, Ghadaffi remained defiant.
Remember that when Ghadaffi thought George Bush was coming after him next, he surrendered his entire nuclear program, practically begging the UN to disarm him before Bush did.
When it was Obama doing the talking, Ghadaffi felt perfectly safe.
Breaking news from the Associated Press is reporting that when Ghadaffi realized the UN was coming after him instead, he ordered an immediate cease-fire.
How relevant are we? Not relevant enough to scare Ghadaffi.