Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Licensed to Kill

by Sam Huntington

It has been said that nothing is more lethal to a Moslem than another Moslem—particularly one who is unable to maintain control over his emotions. But then, we suppose that given the lethal incompetence of Barack Obama and his state department, James Bond isn’t the only agent of government who is licensed to kill.

[Que up Monty Norman's James Bond Theme]

We do recognize, however, that the rape of the Middle East has been a free-for-all event since World War I, when Enver Bey made a poor choice in his political alliances. If there have been improvements in the Middle Eastern standard of living, they have been marginal. This may be an intentional strategy among Moslem power brokers, and when added to our own political incompetence, it is no small wonder the innocents are so easily persuaded that we’re the problem. In many ways, we truly are.



We think the problem must be that the USA lacks diplomatic ethics. Perhaps we should create a set of ethics, beginning with the notion primum non nocere. We are actually surprised that more diplomats haven’t been murdered by angry mobs. We can pretend to be outraged (the president wasn’t), but now it is time for honest introspection. We have transformed the Middle East into a drain, through which we pour gallons blood —ours, and theirs. Depressingly, there is not one single indication that any of this is about to change.

One may recall the following in recent times: Bill Clinton didn’t even know what Al Qaeda was, not even after the first World Trade Center attack. George Bush proved that he didn’t know much of anything at all—about the Middle East, or the folks here at home. Why else would the idiot be seen holding hands in public with the King of Saudi Arabia following the attacks of 11 September? And now, here we are, cursed with Barack Obama: a man who is almost certain that Al Qaeda is evil (he’s defeated them in single combat, you know), nearly positive that Salafis are not quite as bad, and absolutely sure the Moslem Brotherhood are actually peachy good fellows who deserve our trust, our money, and our most sophisticated weapons.

The long and short of it is that Mr. Obama is a buffoon. We are not arguing that his new Syrian policy is bad—only that it is far to late to do any good. What we are saying is that according to Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity, Obama is clinically, and possibly criminally insane. Benghazi and Syria are part of the same Obama ineptitude. We are trapped in a Groundhog Day time warp, but it isn’t at all funny. Given the choices Americans make at the voting booth, this tawdry situation could last for decades —just as George Bush promised. We should wonder why this situation must go unresolved. Are we that incompetent?

Most assuredly.

At the very outset of the Syrian conflict, American diplomats were overheard fretting about the visible Salafi domination within the ranks of the opposition—which they, of course, helped to create. Months have passed and it finally dawns on these bungling fools that they in fact helped to create a new terrorist mandate, and ... uh (snap), maybe they ought to do something about it.

In camera, it isn’t as if the Americans haven’t been warned about this …

Presently, Obama supports the creation of a Jordanian-sponsored Free Syrian Army and the establishment of buffer zones between Jordan and Syria and Syria and Israel. Additionally, someone in the State Department finally figured out that it isn’t a good idea to have a large section of Iraq’s border jointly patrolled by Syrian Sunni terrorists and Iraqi Sunni terrorists —groups responsible for large numbers of American deaths during the Iraq War.

Yet, the Obama mindlessness continues unabated. He and his minions refuse to realize that the problem isn’t simply one involving “the defeated” Al Qaeda organization … it is also the proliferation of extremist Salafis and radical members of the Moslem Brotherhood.

Like Benghazi, the Syrian debacle is something our government helped create. Through milquetoast foreign policy, we have helped arm jihadists through Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. In the doing, the lethality of jihadis to non-Islamacists and us has increased exponentially. Next, we seal our fate and those of the innocents by handing political power over to the Moslem Brotherhood. Finally, we place in jeopardy the very FSA we are attempting to create by making it a target of collaborating extremists. The icing on this cake, the definitive proof of how utterly incompetent the U. S. diplomatic effort is, is that we have opened the door to Syrian aligned Kurdish radicals to start a major conflict with Turkey. In effect, the United States is making things much worse for Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and Israel.

Now let’s add a few sprinkles. We now know that Obama/Clinton bungling has placed 20,000 man-pack rockets into the hands of terrorists. This novella unfolded when Libyan rebels gained access to the rockets, which they promptly sold to the Saudis and Qataris, who in turn supplied them to Syrian Salafis and the Moslem Brotherhood —all while the Obama administration stood around looking nonchalant, muttering “… ain’t nuth’in.”

In fact, at the time Ambassador Stevens was murdered, he was attempting to negotiate with extremists for the return of those man-portable weapons. His attempt was a catastrophic failure on several levels. The money pot was just too good for the Libyans to pass up … but one should wonder why our diplomats did not intercede with the Saudis and Qataris. Now let us consider the possibility that these extraordinary weapons could be used to shoot down passenger aircraft.

One cannot help but wonder if keeping Gaddafi and Mubarak in office was a wiser course. One may even begin to wonder whose side Barack Obama is on in this so-called war on terror. A reminder here: the cost of electing fools to political office can be excruciatingly high.

[Fade out to Monty Norman’s James Bond theme]

16 comments:

  1. I'm not sure the president is a fool. I see him more as a tool -- of unseen, largely unknown, extraordinarily powerful moguls -- nefarious influences with unimaginable wealth who operate behind the scenes and remain unaccountable to the people of any nation.

    I believe Barack Obama was selected groomed and placed in office by these high-handed forces. I believe that virtually all of our presidents in the modern era with the possible exceptions of Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan -- and maybe Richard Nixon -- were foisted on us in this way.

    I believe our elections are largely a sham.

    I have been stunned by the apparently deliberate obtuseness of the GOP in selecting candidates bound and determined to lose, and in the feeble show of opposition the Republican members of congress make to Democratic initiatives.

    It's almost impossible NOT to believe that the failure of conservative-libertarians to gain ground is the result of some sort of unholy agreement between the parties.

    All that aside I see the situation in the Middle East as the direct result of two things:

    1. Our insatiable thirst for oil

    2. Our -- I think inordinate and inappropriate -- support of the Jewish State, which no matter how you slice it came about because of the machinations of Great Britain and later the United States, who in my opinion had no RIGHT to IMPOSE their policies on the Arab countries.

    Sooner or later everyone's chickens come home to roost, and the lack or foresight and the colossal errors in judgment of the Western Powers in monkeying around in the internal affairs of sovereign states have made the Middle East the tinderbox it is today.

    YES, the Arabs are backward, arrogant and bellicose by nature, but THEY have every much right to be who THEY are as anyone ELSE.

    It IS our fault things are the way they are, and the sooner we face it, get rid of our SUPERIORITY COMPLEX (a grievous fault inherited from the Jewish peoples' belief in their own exceptionalism) and STOP trying to DOMINATE the world with our money and military might, the better things are apt to be.

    I think we need to adopt a policy of VOLUNTARY austerity, curb our excesses, discipline our tastes and ambitions, humble ourselves before God, and accept our profound LACK of OMNIPOTENCE and OMNISCIENCE.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It has been said that nothing is more lethal to a Moslem than another Moslem

    True dat!

    The Middle East's perpetual warfare is merely a continuation of their tribe against tribe, sect against sect mentality.

    Let them wipe themselves out.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ...or colonize them like the British, Dutch and French did North America in the 1600's. Tribes are easy to conquer, if you have advanced (firearm) technologies.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The film Lawrence of Arabia was recently on t.v. It is the same old story. The Middle East has been at war for centuries. Why we ever thought we were going to civilize the region beats Mel

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well said. We are foolish for embroiling ourselves in Satan's Sandbox.

    I was there, and I pray to God none of my progeny ever have to go there.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Maybe not such a fool. How better to keep the military industrial complex haapy the creating an ever lasting source of terrorists emerging from the caotic culdren known as the Middle East.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I pretty much agree with what Sam has written. I think Free thinke is correct too, but like Marx, he has unrealistic expectations. We can’t get to that place, given the nature of those in power. On the other hand, has anyone yet heard a compelling argument from any prominent politician that there is a compelling national interest for our muddling in Middle Eastern affairs? I think it should be incumbent upon elected officials to convince the American people – to convince the Congress – that we must employ our troops and lethal weapons in another country. If they cannot show a compelling national interest, then we shouldn’t be there, period. Equally important, our standard for “compelling interest” should be extremely high.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The term "political incompentence" is a very mild way to the describe what Obama and his adminstraion are engaging in. Madness or even worse would be a better way to put it. For example Obama had send last year 1:5 billion to uphold the radical Islamic group THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD that is now in power in Egypt. This year so far alone Obama has sent another 2.5 million to the radical Islamic enitiy. All at the same time America is in grear national debt. A debt that Obama himself has had a hand in the making. Some of those billions or million could to pay off this debt. Furthermore, Obama has also send many tanks and M-16's fighters to this Islamic group that is now in power in Egypt. What could be the reason behind this ? Could it be that Obama is hoping that Egypt will use these weapon to attack The State of Israel ? Could be that Obama is that evil? Nevertheless, Obama has used this national debt as an excuse to make large in the US military spending. The US military should have those tanks and M-16's instead of the Islamic group in Egypt. The American military should have some of that American taxpayers money that Obama has sent to Egypt. Morover, Obama has used this national debt as an excuse to make great cuts in US intellengence and information gathering agencies. Such as the CIA. FBI, NSA, DIA, etc... The America taxpayers money that Obama has sent the that Islamic entity in Egypt should to fund these American national security agencies. One former Muslim who is now a Christian said of Obama one night in a lecture about Islam that "He is going to hurt this country. All this brings up the question about Obama "Just who's side is he on anyway ?"

    ReplyDelete
  9. On the other hand, has anyone yet heard a compelling argument from any prominent politician that there is a compelling national interest for our muddling in Middle Eastern affairs?

    Didn't we declare a WoT? Have they signed the "peace treaty" yet?

    Jes' sayin'...

    ReplyDelete
  10. Does declaring a war on terror (just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard) actually make the case for a compelling national interest?

    We declare wars on other countries, not goat herding associations, or ideologies.

    ... Jus' say'in.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sell that thought to Congress...

    Cuz the money spigot is still, decidedly, "on".

    ReplyDelete
  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Bunkerville --- The film Lawrence of Arabia was recently on t.v. It is the same old story. The Middle East has been at war for centuries.
    --

    Pretty good film wasted on a shallow reading by a fringe right winger.

    Now go back, watch the film and PAY SOME ATTENTION to Lawrence's reaction to the betrayal of Faisal by the British.
    What happened to the self rule he was promised?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Warren Sieruk is English or Hebrew your primary language?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Obama, like his predecessor, gets no pass from me on foreign policy. But, also like his predecessor, there are dynamics both outside of his span of control and irrespective of the chosen course of action.

    Libyan SAMs were vulnerable to falling in the wrong hands [and indeed many did at the outset of the rebellion] regardless of our involvement.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I am thinking that those who are happy to keep the bar low encourage more of the same from government. It seems to be a very low standard.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective