Obama's Middle East Incredibility

What a difference three years in a presidency can make! President Obama was very vocal last year in his approval of the so-called “Arab Spring,” giving about as much aid and comfort – actually just hot air – to the insurgents as possible in places like Tunisia, Egypt, and Yemen. The fact that there’s been little but violence in those countries since the events of last year, along with no recognizable governments except perhaps in Yemen, is a good indicator that the spring was not all that great.

The problem is enhanced when taking into account the fact that the worst of the Islamic terrorist groups, not to mention al Qaeda cells, are propelling themselves into governmental leadership roles. For instance, it appears that the Muslim Brotherhood will wind up running Egypt when the army finally relinquishes control. Mubarak may have been a greedy tyrant (aren’t they all?) but he was a U.S. ally and formed a critical protection of Israel. Now, the entire region is in an uproar and Israel is even more constantly under the gun.

This remarks a lesson not learned by president Obama. This is from the BBC of 19 June 2009: “Mr Obama said he believed Iranian voices should be heard, although he added that he did not want to be seen to be ‘meddling.’” This was during the uprising in Iran when the Iranian government was furnishing weapons to kill American GIs in Iraq and no telling what other kinds of “help” to the Iraqi insurgents and/or al Qaeda cutthroats.

The Iranian government was killing its people in the streets or trucking off protesters to prison for no telling what tortures and beheadings. The “people” in Iran, just as the “people” in Egypt, were attempting to change the government. It was the Iranian version of the “Arab spring” although the Iranis make no claim to being Arabs. The president might have at least awarded some hot air to the Iranis but he didn’t want to “meddle.” Now, the Iranian government has promised to bring turmoil to the nth degree to the Middle East, including with nuclear weapons.

Fast forward to March 2011. For actual reasons no one has yet figured out, President Obama decided to waste Libya, bypassed Congress and by executive order declared war on that benighted nation, dragging in NATO after the worst damage had been accomplished in the first ten days. It then took seven long months and over a billion U.S. dollars to completely wreck the country and bring about the killing of probably thousands – nobody knows the actual numbers, but American/NATO missiles were falling in Libyan neighborhoods, as well documented in the media.

Fast forward to the present. In the daily media, a bedraggled State Secretary Clinton is traveling the world damning Syrian president Assad for doing what all the other tyrants routinely do (Saddam offed 400,000 citizens), kill protesters in the streets. Early last year, she was talking about Assad as a “reformer,” certainly nothing like the horrific Qaddafi, Libya’s strongman. She indicated that members of Congress who had visited Assad considered him a “reformer,” ergo, leave him alone. One remembers the famous visits of Pelosi and Kerry, for instance, who might have furnished that incredibly wrong information.

Now, there are scenes shown on TV daily of Syrians calling for help as thousands are being wasted by Assad, not surprising since his father before him killed them like dogs in the street. Some say up to 25,000 or so and the uprising that precipitated the whole mess was conducted by the…yep…Muslim Brotherhood. The president’s credibility, and Clinton’s, stand at exactly zilch. They stamp their feet and send UN Ambassador Rice to stamp hers at the UN…for what? Obama established his bona fides as commander-in-chief by devastating Libya, population 2 million less than that of New York City, so the “Arab Spring” folks believe he should devastate Syria and hand it over to who knows whom, probably the…yep…Muslim Brotherhood.

But Syria is not Libya. It has an active military strength of 295,000 boots on the ground plus an air force. Moreover, though this sounds harsh, it may be to the final good to do whatever is necessary to see that the murderous Muslim Brotherhood does not capture yet another country.

Has the president learned anything in more than three years in office about foreign affairs? His statement in 2009 alone (just months after taking office) concerning Iran actually took him out of “meddling” anywhere in the Middle East, but that’s just what he’s done, along with Clinton, who looks worn-out doing virtually nothing but roaming the world (keeps her out of Washington’s hair). Now is the time for him/her to shut up and leave the Middle Easterners to their perpetual bloodbaths. The two misguided officials are an embarrassment and should not be in public un-chaperoned. Add Senator McCain to that matter since he’s just come out in favor of arming the rebels, i.e., one presumes, if anyone knows who they are or what that would ultimately mean.