Obama's failed foreign "policy" is coming home to roost. Here is why:

Click to enlarge to readable size

59 share

<<<<  While Obama is destroying our military preparedness, all in the name of unilateral "peace" (how can there be war if we don't fight?),   China is doubling the size of its army,  across the board;  so too,  Russia.  

Why "now" is critical to our enemies.

J Smithson

Clearly, at least to me,  Russia and Mr. Putin , have decided that now,  with three years remaining in the term of the weakest US president, Putin has personally known,  now is the time to press international changes that challenge both the leadership of the US and its very sovereignty. 

Understand that Crimea did not “just happen,”  as the natural consequence of the passing of time.  Rather,  the recent turn of events,  began in 2006,  when Obama and other “peace at any price” One Worlders,  helped to disarm Unkraine,  with promises to support that country,  militarily,  if that should be necessary in the future.  

Again,  in 2009/2010,  Obama,  as president,  chose to violate treatises with the Czech Republic and Poland,  and invalidate the effort to create a missile defense system in each country.   Those systems were strongly opposed by the Russians,  but initiated by Bush in a display of decided leadership.  These were to be defense systems against projected Russian and Iranian aggression.  Obama vacated those treatises in an arrogant and unilateral display of "I know better than all my generals,  all of world leadership," and did so without consulting the Czech Republic or Poland, or giving heed to their protests. And, so,  the stage was set for Russia's invasion of Crimea and its rebuilding efforts, as it returns to Cold War conduct.  

We can do nothing to stop Russia,  today,  because Obama and his fellow Peacenikes  did nothing,  5 years ago, and before. 

Obama's empty threats against blatant aggression in the European region and the Middle East,  have proven to be laughable acts of verbal cowardice,  and,  as a result of all this, the theme of this post is confirmed, as Russia sees "now" as the perfect time to act. 

Putin is taking a calculated risk now,  believing  the next American President will not be as weak-kneed as Obama;   that Obama will not strike back with a heavy hand,  fearing that he will take on blame for intensifying hostilities if he does act decisively, and, finally,  believing that sanctions will be no more effective against his (Putin) country than they have been against Iran and Syria. 

Because "now" is the time,  we can expect to see continuing acts of aggression, not only from Putin,  but from Syria,  Iran,  the Pakistani Taliban,  N Korea and,  China.  

Which brings us to the following news about a Russian/Chinese partnership, designed to increase their physical presence in Central and South America,  knowing, full well,  that the United States has a coward for a president.  

The following news excerpt adds to the warnings of this post.  The future belongs to us,  but only if we read with understanding AND act on that understanding.  

Write letters,  make phone calls,  email your complaints or views. It works.  I mean,  look what "we" have accomplished in our battle against domestic forces that hate our traditions and founding documents.  We are winning.   

Here is what is continuing and about to happen in our part of the world.  Will Obama surrender our very future as a nation,  or,  present a demonstrative resolve that threatens the security of those who would threaten ours (think "JFK - 1960's - Cuban Missile Crisis") ?  

WASHINGTON – As Russia continues to take strategic initiatives that put the United States on the defensive, Russian President Vladimir Putin is teaming up with China to help construct a trans-oceanic canal in Nicaragua that gives Moscow an even greater foothold in Washington’s area of influence

The prospect comes as Moscow not only intends more massive arms sales in Latin America but, as WND recently reported, moves to establish a base in Nicaragua besides using existing facilities for refueling for aircraft and port calls for Russian warships.

In addition to Nicaragua, Moscow also is looking to establish bases in Cuba and Venezuela.

The establishment of permanent Russian bases and a major Russian presence in the Western Hemisphere will challenge U.S. policies and threaten to diminish Washington’s influence in the region.

And like a repeat of events leading up to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, it will give Moscow a basis to stage offensive weapons in the Western Hemisphere, placing another formidable challenge to U.S. homeland defenses from potential missile threats.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/05/russia-joins-china-in-building-nicaragua-canal/#6Hod6AsgBvjzzc4B.99

This one minute plus, video of JFK, is why I was once a Democrat.

"They" keep saying,  "Reagan could not survive in the GOP of today."  Laying aside the fact that those preaching such nonsense hated  -  absolutely hated - Ronald Reagan,  we remind them that John F. Kennedy would have been very much at home in the GOP of 2012.  This short video is a reminder of what John Kennedy cared about.  B Obama would never call out the communist of today,  in the  terms used by JFK.  Obama would never say,  "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask, 'what can I do for my country.' "  And why?  Because this is  all crap to our first Rogue President.  

In 1963,  President Kennedy was murdered by members of the mafia,  the same mafia used by the CIA in its clandestined war against despots in foreign countries.  Before his death,  he and his Attorney General,  Robert Kennedy,  had singled out a dozen crime "families,"  and intended on putting them out of business.  In 1961,  Robert ordered the kidnapping of a mafia crime boss named Marcello,  "arrested" as he entered a restaurant,  placed in a small plane and flown to Central America,  where he was taken in the Guatemala jungles and left to die.  Instead of dying,  Marcello survived and was the only individual I know,  who openly talked about killing Kennedy.  

Before he was murdered,  President Kennedy established the peace corps  (pronounced "core" for all you Obamanites, out there),  cut the income tax rate from 90% to 70%,  and decided to bring home the 1,000 advisors in Viet Nam.  That last order was reversed by LBJ as his first declaration (an executive order, btw)  following the death of his president.  Viet Nam was a Democrat war used by reprobate,  Richard Nixon,  used for political purposes.   Clearly,  JFK was no modern day Democrat.  The Democrat Party has never been the same.  

____________________
End notes:
Here is a blog I found in my recent surfing expedition:   Voting Female.


JFK was killed on November 22, 1963,  the same day CS Lewis passed into the next life.

A review of presidents from Truman to Obama - Obama very nearly has the record.

Editor's notes: lets put Obama's polling numbers into context beginning with Truman. We use the charting services found at the Wall Street Journal here.

Truman began his tenure as president with the decision to use the Atomic bomb. On the WSJ chart, this decision was an extremely unpopular idea. Public opinion for this president was the most erratic for any president since and including Truman. Eisenhower followed Truman and scored the most consistently high marks for this group of politicians. Kennedy, in spite of the fact that he was our first Catholic President, also proved to be a very popular Executive. LBJ took the Helm after the murder of JFK and was elected to a full term as president. The Viet Nam War was raging and the Marxist Libs were able to orchestrate a national rebellion to that war that eventually made victory impossible. LBJ wound up with a popular polling number in the 40 percentile bracket, but not until after his 3rd year as president. Nixon followed JBJ, who decided not to run for a second full term, opening the door for the Nixon ascension. He ended the Viet Nam war but was destroyed by the Watergate Scandal. While the scandal itself, was a rather minor offense, the lying and cover up consumed Nixon and revealed a very immoral Chief of Administration. Midknight Review sees Nixon as our most immoral president, but his numbers did not go into the tank until Watergate and the events leading up to his forced resignation (under threat of a successful impeachment). Gerald Ford was the Speaker of House during the Nixon Administration. He was moved to the Vice President's position after Spiro Agnew, Nixon's VP, proved to be a crook and was forced out of office. After Nixon's resignation near the beginning of his second term, Ford took over as President, the first to be VP and President without having been elected to either position. One of his first actions as President was to pardon Richard Nixon. That sealed his doom and he was defeated in his effort at being elected . . . . defeated by Jimmy Carter. Carter proved to be in over his head on at least two levels - foreign policy and homeland economics. Iran took American hostages and held them for 444 days, Carter having no clue on what to do to get these Americans back home. And then there was the matter of the national economy. Unemployment benefit rates rose to 13% and interest rates rose to above 21%, bringing to a complete halt construction and housing sales. Carter was a much a Marxist as Obama, but not nearly as well schooled in the Marxist tradition. His presidency was beyond pathetic. Carter was this editor's reason for leaving the Democrat Party. Reagan ran and won against Carter. After 444 days, the hostages were released the afternoon Reagan was sworn in as president. His tax policies were quickly enacted but did not go into effect for two years. Ultimately, his tax cuts counted for a doubling of income from taxation but a Democrat controlled Congress managed to do what they always do and spend more than the Government took in from the wildly successful Reagan tax cuts. The eight years of Reagan were followed by four years of Bush 41 and his infamous "read my lips, no more taxes." This turned out to be a lie and he lost to Clinton in an election Clinton would not have won had it not been for the 19% vote count given to Ross Perot. Clinton won two elections, never with more than 48% of the vote, but wound up being more popular in the end than in the beginning. Bush 43 won the nation's closest election ever against Fat Al Gore, all of us voters waiting from election night, November 7, 2000, until December the 13th and the Democrat filled Florida Supreme Court to decide in Bush's favor. While the whiners on the Left have never moved away from this election result, they never mention the fact that had Gore won his home state of Tennessee, Florida would not have mattered at all. In fact, if he had won Clinton's state of Arkansas, that too would have given the election to Gore. What we are saying is this: Gore did not lose the 2000 election because of Florida. Rather he lost because he could not convince the peoples of either Arkansas or Tennessee that he deserved to be President. But the press and the Marxists will continue to whine about Florida without regard to the facts of the election. Something we should have mentioned but left out is the fact that while we waited for Court's decision, there were 8 "recounts," Bush winning each and every one.

Under Clinton, there was a separation of powers within the intelligence community (FBI, SS, CIA among others) orchestrated by Jamie Gorelick, Clinton's Deputy Attorney General. Experts believe that this separation of powers made it possible for al Qaeda to plan its assault on the Twin Towers (During Clinton's Administration) and successfully attack the Towers just seven and a half months after Bush took office and before he had his Cabinet in place. What one agency knew about alQaeda was not permitted to be shared with the other agencies -- a decision that proved to be disastrous. Further and what is completely ignored by the Marxist revisionists, George Bush was told by Bill Clinton that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. THAT IS WHERE BUSH GOT THE IDEA. That "fact" was confirmed by Clinton's CIA and every national intelligence agency in the world, not to mention the fact that Saddam, himself, boldly stated their existence and his willingness to use them should his country be invaded. At any rate, as unpopular as Bush became, he did not dip into the 40% bracket until his second term. Obama managed to fall from 65% to 49% on July 24, just 6 months and 2 days into his presidency (using Rasmussen). Only Truman managed to do this more quickly and that was after he ordered the deaths (in effect) of 160,000 people via the Atom bomb (keep in mind that most experts agree that the bombings saved upwards of a million American lives as well as hundreds of thousands of Japanese lives in a battle royale for the Japan Island Complex).

It is beginning to look as if Obama will govern in the minority for all but 6 months of his last term in office. And it couldn't happen to nicer guy. He has told the voting public, "go to hell" and they are returning the favor.

(C) J Smithson
Midknight Review