Obama on Vacation
The embarrassment that Obama has brought is greater than can be measured by today's standards. The first test that Obama will face is his party's pending nomination in the upcoming elections. Of course his party will nominate him, how strong that nomination will be is what is important.
It is unprecedented for a president to be re-elected when unemployment during his first term is high and remains so until the end of that term. Today the unemployment rate is at 7 percent.* The American media continue to say this is the norm.
No one in the United States spoke about withdrawing from Afghanistan and Iraq, despite Obama's comments on the subject.
The last two years have depicted Obama and his military intervention as folly after continual folly. Obama took action without the trouble of having to direct public opinion on how he would be changing the world map, specifically the Middle East, where the Taliban and Baath parties continue to operate.
Nevertheless, Obama settled for repeating a few lengthy sentences on the strict values of "world peace" and international cooperation against poverty, disease and natural disasters, all of which breed terrorism. These things were presumed to be under Obama's authority. Obama's former rival, John Edwards, said, "We must, as Americans, restore our connection with our allies in critical security issues. This includes avoiding terrorism and nuclear weapons and proposing solutions through means of trust. We must also reassess our arrangements with those who represent a security threat to us, such as Iran and North Korea. Our government must reorder its relationship with its citizens in order to restore the reputation of our nation's moral distinction."**
Edwards finished with these words, which clearly indicated that the reputation of the United States is cracked and in need of repair. Recognizing this is the halfway point to treating the problem, but the problem is nothing compared to the current confidence of the American people in the democratic system. Obama said, "We, as a nation, must not lose our mutual interdependence in order to face our plight during this global recession. This way, we as Americans, can prepare for the coming storm."** Obama's speech essentially pushed the law to subject all U.S. citizens whose assets total $1 million to a special tax.
Obama has already won congressional support to attack the wealthy, but he has simply devoted his image to being socialist. He has been trying to break this stereotype.
Obama has emerged hesitant after the first test of his soft power policies with which, if he had actually followed them, he might have imposed peace, simply because the United States is a superpower. When Obama spoke, his softness appeared to be vacillating — though not in such as way as to confuse his goals with the goals of his secretary of state.
The first test showed his position on the peaceful Arab revolutions. Now, after Obama failed to bring his plan to fruition, the Arab people are actually carrying out what Obama had said he would do. Obama also failed to condemn the other method (that of his predecessor, George W. Bush) of imposing hard power, as the head executioner of the people and the thief of society on behalf of the "sultanate."
The joke is political par excellence; it shows Obama waving the stick of international law in front of a woodpecker (it reads "dictatorial regimes"), which quickly turns to Obama's stick and pecks it to dust, later selling it to Iraq as tea. America's retreat seemed frightening in the face of rapidly expanding opposing forces in the global system, especially in the Middle East. However, Obama didn't embarrass himself, nor did he bother to ask if the United States could remain a superpower while pursuing a path of absolute peace.
The answer is simply this: Obama didn't notice that absolute evil exists in the world and awaits the demise of a superpower.
The United States has changed, despite the way Obama is dealing with the Libyan crisis, for example. I also think that Obama had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. It is up to Obama to discuss and consult his cadres in the Oval Office and prevent bin Laden from fading from view again. The credit for killing Osama bin Laden should go to the well-knit security forces that attacked him and I doubt it will help Obama as he tries to continue along the presidential path. The terrorist ghost works in silent ways, taking into consideration that the Bush administration supported it in the face of a settlement. Furthermore, Pakistan is not only a turbulent country but a country that spawns extremist institutions. The U.S. security agencies have dealt with this fact by killing bin Laden.
Do you think that now Obama's new security team will change this sterile policy?
Optimists view the switch from Robert Gates to Leon Pannetta as promising and more realistic. Robert Gates was shown saying he had been promised the gift of leaving a free Afghanistan. At the very least, it is politically naive to think that Gates understood the Taliban terrorists before he understood Obama.
*Editor's note: The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the current national unemployment rate as 9.1 percent.
**Editor's note: These quotes, accurately translated, could not be verified.
It is unprecedented for a president to be re-elected when unemployment during his first term is high and remains so until the end of that term. Today the unemployment rate is at 7 percent.* The American media continue to say this is the norm.
No one in the United States spoke about withdrawing from Afghanistan and Iraq, despite Obama's comments on the subject.
The last two years have depicted Obama and his military intervention as folly after continual folly. Obama took action without the trouble of having to direct public opinion on how he would be changing the world map, specifically the Middle East, where the Taliban and Baath parties continue to operate.
Nevertheless, Obama settled for repeating a few lengthy sentences on the strict values of "world peace" and international cooperation against poverty, disease and natural disasters, all of which breed terrorism. These things were presumed to be under Obama's authority. Obama's former rival, John Edwards, said, "We must, as Americans, restore our connection with our allies in critical security issues. This includes avoiding terrorism and nuclear weapons and proposing solutions through means of trust. We must also reassess our arrangements with those who represent a security threat to us, such as Iran and North Korea. Our government must reorder its relationship with its citizens in order to restore the reputation of our nation's moral distinction."**
Edwards finished with these words, which clearly indicated that the reputation of the United States is cracked and in need of repair. Recognizing this is the halfway point to treating the problem, but the problem is nothing compared to the current confidence of the American people in the democratic system. Obama said, "We, as a nation, must not lose our mutual interdependence in order to face our plight during this global recession. This way, we as Americans, can prepare for the coming storm."** Obama's speech essentially pushed the law to subject all U.S. citizens whose assets total $1 million to a special tax.
Obama has already won congressional support to attack the wealthy, but he has simply devoted his image to being socialist. He has been trying to break this stereotype.
Obama has emerged hesitant after the first test of his soft power policies with which, if he had actually followed them, he might have imposed peace, simply because the United States is a superpower. When Obama spoke, his softness appeared to be vacillating — though not in such as way as to confuse his goals with the goals of his secretary of state.
The first test showed his position on the peaceful Arab revolutions. Now, after Obama failed to bring his plan to fruition, the Arab people are actually carrying out what Obama had said he would do. Obama also failed to condemn the other method (that of his predecessor, George W. Bush) of imposing hard power, as the head executioner of the people and the thief of society on behalf of the "sultanate."
The joke is political par excellence; it shows Obama waving the stick of international law in front of a woodpecker (it reads "dictatorial regimes"), which quickly turns to Obama's stick and pecks it to dust, later selling it to Iraq as tea. America's retreat seemed frightening in the face of rapidly expanding opposing forces in the global system, especially in the Middle East. However, Obama didn't embarrass himself, nor did he bother to ask if the United States could remain a superpower while pursuing a path of absolute peace.
The answer is simply this: Obama didn't notice that absolute evil exists in the world and awaits the demise of a superpower.
The United States has changed, despite the way Obama is dealing with the Libyan crisis, for example. I also think that Obama had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. It is up to Obama to discuss and consult his cadres in the Oval Office and prevent bin Laden from fading from view again. The credit for killing Osama bin Laden should go to the well-knit security forces that attacked him and I doubt it will help Obama as he tries to continue along the presidential path. The terrorist ghost works in silent ways, taking into consideration that the Bush administration supported it in the face of a settlement. Furthermore, Pakistan is not only a turbulent country but a country that spawns extremist institutions. The U.S. security agencies have dealt with this fact by killing bin Laden.
Do you think that now Obama's new security team will change this sterile policy?
Optimists view the switch from Robert Gates to Leon Pannetta as promising and more realistic. Robert Gates was shown saying he had been promised the gift of leaving a free Afghanistan. At the very least, it is politically naive to think that Gates understood the Taliban terrorists before he understood Obama.
*Editor's note: The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the current national unemployment rate as 9.1 percent.
**Editor's note: These quotes, accurately translated, could not be verified.
Next article![]( "Border Politics: A Wall between Canada and the United States?")
