“Changes That Could Have The Same Disastrous Consequences For America As Mr. Carter’s Policy”
“Americans have, of course, been here before: Jimmy Carter pledged to reform US foreign policy… and look what happened. Mr Obama’s policies are not just naïve; they are unworkable.”
Telegraph:
by Con Coughlin
Over the course of the primary season, Barack Obama has demonstrated an unerring ability to reach out to all Americans, irrespective of ethnic background or social status. He is a black man who was born on the wrong side of the tracks, but his campaign has been refreshingly devoid of the divisive race agenda that characterised the bids of black politicians such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in the 1980s and 1990s.
His simple promise to undertake a radical change in the way the country is run has struck a chord with a nation that has become disillusioned with the Bush Administration’s reputation for deceit and arrogance, particularly with regard to the war on terror.
Americans have, of course, been here before: in 1976, sickened by Watergate, they elected a naïve and inexperienced peanut farmer from Georgia to clear away the cynicism that came to define the Nixon era. From the moment he took office in January 1977, President Jimmy Carter made it clear that he wanted to make a new start in America’s relations with the rest of the world. Gone was the hard-nosed Realpolitik of Henry Kissinger. Mr Carter transformed US policy by insisting that human rights be placed at the top of the agenda - with disastrous results.
The main reason the Shah of Iran, a key ally in Washington’s attempts to keep the Soviet Union at bay in the Gulf, had managed to survive was the ruthless efficiency of his CIA-trained Savak security service. But after Mr Carter hosted a state visit in Washington for the Shah and Empress of Iran in November 1977, the Pahlavi dynasty was encouraged to release hundreds of political prisoners, with the result that, two years later, the Shah was overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamic revolution. We are still trying to come to terms with the consequences.
One of the less appealing aspects of Mr Obama’s campaign has been the support he has attracted from Mr Carter who, seemingly oblivious to his handling of the Iran debacle (which culminated in 66 Americans being held hostage in Tehran for 444 days), has not been shy about offering his advice. Mr Carter was at it again this week, counselling Mr Obama against making Hillary Clinton his running mate.
Like Mr Carter, Mr Obama is an outsider who was relatively unknown before he decided to make his run for the White House. And like Mr Carter, Mr Obama appears determined to undertake a radical change in the way Washington does business with the outside world; changes that could have the same disastrous consequences for America and the rest of the world as Mr Carter’s policy.
Take Mr Obama’s attitude towards Iran. Until this week, Mr Obama consistently argued that Iran poses no more of a threat than countries such as Venezuela or Cuba, and that the controversy over Tehran’s uranium enrichment programme could easily be resolved by the simple expedient of sitting down and talking to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Mr Obama might not know it, but this is precisely what Europe has been trying to do these past four years. The so-called EU3 - Britain, France and Germany - has done nothing else but talk to Mr Ahmadinejad’s regime in an attempt to negotiate a solution to the nuclear crisis.
Alas, these painstaking negotiations have been to no avail. Having exploited the West’s good intentions for nearly four years, the Iranians simply tore up all the agreements and resumed uranium enrichment which, at the current rate of progress, could give them enough fissile material for a nuclear warhead next year.
Mr Obama’s approach to Iraq is equally ill-considered. Having opposed the campaign to remove Saddam’s regime from the start, Mr Obama wants to withdraw the 200,000 or so American troops currently deployed at the earliest opportunity - 18 months is the most likely time-frame.
But undertaking a unilateral withdrawal at precisely the moment the country is starting to recover from the trauma of the past five years would hardly be in America’s interest. Just as the military surge orchestrated by General David Petraeus has succeeded in destroying the power base of the insurgent groups that have tried so hard to provoke all-out civil war, Mr Obama would be abandoning Iraq to the very groups that want to destroy it.
Mr Obama’s policies are not just naïve; they are unworkable, a fact he now seems belatedly to have taken on board. Addressing the annual conference of AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby group, in Washington on Wednesday night, Mr Obama declared that he would do “everything in my power” to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.
Even if he was vague about precisely how he intends to do this, it is a welcome improvement on his previous policy statements on Iran. But if he really wants to reassure the American public, and the wider world, that he has the credentials to be an effective world leader, he needs to give a lot more thought to how he will tackle the great security challenges of our age, whether it be protecting us from the designs of Islamist terrorists or the nuclear ambitions of crazed dictators.
Otherwise, I fear that Osama bin Laden and his chums will be rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of Mr Obama becoming the 44th President of the United States of America.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
This guy is going to be a disaster. There will be a push by Barry’s campaign to create the message that he was Martin Luther King envisioned as one whom was judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin. Instead they are running an vapid empty suit essentially “Mugabe Lite”
I got this from the Hill Blog:
June 5, 2008
DeLay: ‘Unless Obama Proves Me Wrong, He Is a Marxist’
@ 5:24 pm by Andy Barr
Former House Republican Leader Tom DeLay (Texas) called Barack Obama a “Marxist” on the Mike Gallagher radio show Thursday.
Explaining that Obama clinching the Democratic nomination is a good thing for John McCain, DeLay said Obama’s “weakness” is that “nobody knows him.”
“And if McCain does not define him as what he is — hey, I have said publicly, and I will again, that unless he proves me wrong, he is a Marxist,” DeLay said.
The radio host agreed with DeLay, who is facing money laundering charges, saying Obama is “desperately trying to cover up what seems to be the kind of old school Marxist radical liberal failed ideology.”
“Absolutely,” DeLay said. “No doubt about it.”
http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/06/05/delay-unless-obama-proves-me-wrong-he-is-a-marxist/
I am not a huge fan of DeLay, but hey I have been thinking the same thing.
June 6th, 2008 at 7:52 amWe will be praying for the late 1970’s after this guy is finished.
June 6th, 2008 at 7:53 amWhy is everyone so afraid to say it? Like even Bill O’Reilly has been very disappointing because he keeps trying to put nice pink lipstick on the pig that Obama Marxist Lite is. No amount of nicey, pink will make it what it isn’t. B. Hussein Obama is surrounded by, influenced by and spouts Marxism.
June 6th, 2008 at 8:15 amKL
Spot on.
MLK was a Communist as well. This guy is cut from the same cloth.
Both hate Whites and Americans.
June 6th, 2008 at 8:18 amWJC
Exactly. We will be praying for the 1970’s escpecially with 2008 Benedict Arnold Award Winner, Nancy Pelosi at the helm of the US House and B. Hussein as POTUS.
It’s like Harry Potter. He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named what he is, a Marxist.
June 6th, 2008 at 8:26 amThe positive, successful future of the United States depends on Hussein Obama being defeated in the fall election. If this man is elected, the USA will be changed, for the worse, forever. There has never been a reason for strong independents states to cecede from the US, until now that is. If Obama is elected, some states wold be better off alone. Sad to think.
June 6th, 2008 at 8:47 amWJC is right on the mark. Obama has all the traits of a fool that is full of himself. That messiah will gut the military and support America’s enemies. But that has been the plan for both, Obama and his wife, from the start.
I can’t wait for the Michelle tape.
June 6th, 2008 at 9:38 am“..if he really wants to reassure the American public, and the wider world, that he has the credentials to be an effective world leader, he needs to give a lot more thought to how he will tackle the great security challenges of our age….”
Credentials?? Thought? What a fucking joke that is.
Nice try at an article hanging the world class dumbfuck Carter around Bambi’s neck though.
June 6th, 2008 at 12:00 pmNow if we can get the RNC to do it…..
o. hussein should select jimmah cotta as his VP so that we can hang the 2 of them at the same time, mussolini style.
June 6th, 2008 at 1:22 pm