SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: longnshort who wrote (633162)10/25/2011 5:25:56 PM
From: Land Shark  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578531
 
Pinhead



To: longnshort who wrote (633162)10/25/2011 6:06:45 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1578531
 
Captain America Abandons the Entire Middle East
.........................................................................
By James Lewis October 25, 2011
americanthinker.com


I doubt that President Obama loves the name "Captain America," but that's the job he was elected to do in 2008. National security is the president's first job. But Obama has been by far the most catastrophic captain of the ship of state in American history in every conceivable way.

The last two weeks have seen more dagger-stabs in the back to the Muslim Middle East: yes, Obama has tried shafting Israel over and over again, but also the much more fragile Saudis and Gulf oil states, a very vulnerable Egypt (by publicly endorsing overthrowing President Mubarak and supporting a Muslim Brothers grab for his office), Libya (which had abandoned its nuclear program after Bush invaded Iraq), and now Iraq itself.

Retired Army General John M. Keane just denounced Obama's off-like-a-rabbit strategy from Iraq. Keane was the author of the "U.S. surge" that essentially won that war -- though not to the point of permanent stability. We stayed in Japan and Germany for decades after winning those wars.

"I think it's an absolute disaster," said Gen. Keane. "We won the war in Iraq, and we're now losing the peace."

General Keane is not the kind of man to talk about "absolute disaster" if it isn't literally true.

" Forty-four hundred lives lost," Gen. Keane said. "Tens of thousands of troops wounded. Over a couple hundred thousand Iraqis killed. We liberated 25 million people. There is only one Arab Muslim country that elects its own government, and that is Iraq."

"We should be staying there to strengthen that democracy, to let them get the kind of political gains they need to get and keep the Iranians away from strangling that country. That should be our objective, and we are walking away from that objective."

The Heritage Foundation is also sounding the alarm. Even Senator McCain sounds outraged and alarmed, and it takes a lot to do that.

Now StrategyPage reports that the Syrian Army is on the run against the rebels, meaning that Sunni Muslims are likely to take over from the minority Shiite regime of the Assads.

Just last week StrategyPage reported that the "Arab Spring" has turned into an enormous massacre, taking some 25,000 lives. But watch -- the New York Times still thinks it's Springtime for Hitler in Tehran.

Add to all that the giant Islamist election turnout in Tunisia, and the new piratical "liberators" of Libya, and we are seeing a huge radicalization and throwback of the entire Arab Middle East.

The winners? The radical reactionaries of Iran, Turkey, and the Sunni Arab countries. The losers? Modernization, democracy, and peace.

In maritime history, the captain would be the last person to abandon ship. In Obama's administration, the captain is "leading from behind."

Just watch his dust as he scampers off over the horizon.

When Jimmy Carter shafted the shah of Iran in 1979, a million people died in the resulting Iran-Iraq War. The Gulf War of 1992 followed Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, another consequence of Jimmy's gross abandonment of the most stable regime in the Middle East.

Obama has now wrapped up Carter's betrayal of the Muslim Middle East.

Carter destroyed only one powerful American ally.

Obama has started to do in all the others.

There's just one spot of light in the Egyptian darkness: Israel is turning out to be the single most stable government in the region, bar none. While Syria is tottering and Egypt has crashed, while Libya is now controlled by rebels with reported al-Qaeda links and even Tunisia has huge radical Muslims demonstrations, with an al-Qaeda civil war going on in Yemen and Iranian nuclear weapons soon to be 50 miles away from Saudi oil fields, only Israel has not even bothered to have a parliamentary election. Israel has seen a big but peaceful "Cottage Cheese Rebellion" against the high price of food.

Israel (and Cyprus) have together discovered a vast shale source of natural gas under the Mediterranean, thereby driving the radical Turkish "neo-Ottoman" regime into stuttering incoherence. Because Israel liberalized its economy under Benjamin Netanyahu as finance minister ten years ago, it has largely escaped the chaos of the Greek and Spanish defaults, to be followed by other European governments running out of welfare money to buy votes.

If you want to have a permanent American ally in the Middle East, you've got to have only one choice left: Israel. Egypt has lost control over the Sinai Desert, the huge buffer between the contending tank armies of previous wars. Syria has a Russian naval base. Lebanon is controlled by Iran. Iran has now been run for thirty years by hair-raising maniacs with an advanced nuclear program.

If Obama's suicidal actions in the Middle East don't lead to a major regional war, it will only be a matter of dumb luck. I'm placing my bets the other way. I'm sorry. I think we're in for big, big trouble.

Jimmy Carter's stab-in-the-back to the shah killed more than a million people and enabled the rise of the first truly throwback (12th-century) Islamofascist regime in the Middle East.

Pretty soon, Obama will have to return his Nobel Peace Prize to Oslo. I sure hope the Peace Prize Committee included return postage with his shiny medal, so he won't have to spend his own money FedExing it back to sender.




To: longnshort who wrote (633162)10/25/2011 6:29:17 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578531
 
Result of Obama's $2 billion Libya expenditure is regime that will be led by jihadists, controls vast oil reserves and has inherited a very substantial arsenal(

.....................................................................................

Who lost the world? Obama has paved the way for an explosive era

By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. Oct 25, 2011

jewishworldreview.com


















http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Conventional wisdom has it that the 2012 presidential election will be all about the dismal economy, unemployment and the soaring deficit. That appears a safe bet because such matters touch the electorate, are much in the news at the moment and have indisputably become worse on Barack Obama's watch.

It seems increasingly likely, however, that the American people will have a whole lot more to worry about by next fall. Indeed, the way things are going, by November 2012, we may see the Middle East - and perhaps other parts of the planet - plunged into a cataclysmic war.

Consider just a few of the straws in the wind of a gathering storm:

Moammar Gadhafi's death last week prompted the Obama administration to trumpet the president's competence as commander in chief and the superiority of his "small footprint," "lead-from-behind" approach to waging war over the more traditional - and costly and messy - one pursued by George W. Bush.


The bloom came off that false rose on Sunday when Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, chairman of the National Transitional Council, repeatedly declared his government's fealty to Shariah, Islam's brutally repressive, totalitarian political-military-legal doctrine.

Among other things, Mr. Abdul-Jalil said Shariah would be the "basic source" of all legislation. Translation: Forget about representative democracy. Under Shariah, Allah - not man - makes the laws.

In short, the result of Mr. Obama's $2 billion expenditure to oust Gadhafi is a regime that will be led by jihadists, controls vast oil reserves and has inherited a very substantial arsenal (although some of it - including reportedly as many as 20,000 surface-to-air missiles - has "gone missing"). This scarcely can be considered a victory for the United States and probably will prove a grave liability.

An Islamist party called Ennahda seems likely to have captured the lion's share of the votes cast in the first free election in Tunisia. Although we are assured it is a "moderate" religious party, the same has long been said of Turkey's governing AKP party. Unfortunately, we have lately seen the latter's true colors as it has become ever more insistent at home on jettisoning the secular form of government handed down by Mustafa Kemal Attaturk and acted ever more aggressively abroad. A similar transformation can be expected, later if not sooner, of any Shariah-adherent political movement.

In Egypt, meanwhile, the agenda of the Islamists' mother ship - the Muslim Brotherhood - is being adopted even before elections formally bring it to power. The interim military government has abetted efforts to punish and even kill the Coptic Christian minority. It has facilitated the arming of the Brotherhood's franchise in Gaza and allowed the Sinai to become the launching pad for al Qaeda and others' attacks on Israel.

Egypt's transitional regime also helped broker the odious exchange of more than 1,000 convicted terrorists held by Israel for a single soldier kidnapped and held hostage for five years by Hamas. Upon their release, the convicts with Jewish blood on their hands received heroes' welcomes even as they affirmed their desire to destroy Israel and called for the seizure of still more Israelis to spring their comrades still behind bars. This does not augur well for either the Jewish state or for our interests.

The increasingly mercurial Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, has announced that - despite the long-running, immensely costly and ongoing U.S. effort to protect his kleptocratic government - in a war between Pakistan and the United States, Afghanistan would side with Pakistan. The magnitude of this insulting repudiation of America is all the greater since Pakistan is widely seen as doing everything it can to re-establish the Taliban in Kabul.

In Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has touted his success in thwarting Washington's belated (and halfhearted) efforts to keep a significant number of U.S. forces in his country after the end of this year. His coalition partner and fellow Iranian cat's paw, Muqtada al-Sadr, already is boasting that he also will drive out the American contractor personnel who are, for the moment, expected to provide a measure of security after the military withdraws. In that case, we may well see the mullahs' agents take over a U.S. embassy for the second time since 1979 - this one the newest, largest and most expensive in the world.

Add to this litany an emboldened and ascendant China, a revanchist Russia once again under the absolute control of Vladimir Putin, a Mexico free-falling into civil war with narcotraffickers and their Hezbollah allies on our southern border and you get a world that is fraught with peril for the United States. Matters are made infinitely worse by the prospect of reckless budget cuts hollowing out the U.S. military.

The Republican candidates to succeed Mr. Obama are beginning to find their voices on the national security portfolio. They will be formally debating the president's sorry record in coming weeks. The question the American people will want answered is not only "Who lost the world?" but what they will do to get it back.



To: longnshort who wrote (633162)10/25/2011 6:37:08 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1578531
 
Barack Obama Led #OccupyChicago – Circa 1988
...............................................................................................
by Joel B. Pollak
biggovernment.com


Obama at anti-war protest, 2002 (Source: Verum Serum)

Just twenty or so years ago, Barack Obama wouldn’t just have supported the Occupy protests.

He would have organized them.

From Stanley Kurtz’s essential Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism, pp. 117-8:

In fact, Obama personally helped plan one of UNO’s most confrontational actions of the eighties [in 1988]: a break-in meant to intimidate a coalition of local business and neighborhood leaders into dropping a landfill expansion deal.

We know of Obama’s involvement in this demonstration only because his supporters in 2008 felt it necessary to rebut charges that, contrary to his claims of inter-racial healing, he had organized exclusively with blacks. Only then did Obama’s former colleagues from UNO [United Neighborhood Organization, a largely Mexican group] of Chicago reveal that he had helped to plan and lead this multi-ethnic demonstration against landfill expansion on Chicago’s South Side.

…Shouting “No deals!” somewhere between eighty and a hundred UNO-DCP [Developing Communities Project, a black group organized by Obama] marched to a local bank. There they broke into a meeting being conducted by the bank president and local community leaders. The group was exploring the possibility of a deal with Waste Management. The protestors, presumably including Obama, surrounded the meeting table while [Mary-Ellen] Montes [of UNO] told the negotiators, “We will fight you every step of the way.”

Obama was also likely involved with other aggressive UNO protests, including protests for school reform, through which he likely met former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Ayers is involved in the Occupy protests today.

In the 1990s, Obama maintained his ties to radical activists, and “channel[ed] foundation funding to his confrontational Alinskyite colleagues.”

It’s clear that Obama’s ties to the Occupy movement–its forbears, its tactics, and some of its current luminaries–run deep.

This is what “community organizing” looks like.