Obama Strategy?

As the decision relative to Afghanistan continues to wait on President Obama, perhaps it is time to ask precisely what his strategy is relative to America and American foreign policy. During one of his overseas trips, President Obama was asked about the exceptionalism of America. Specifically Ronald Reagan viewed America as “A shining city on a hill” and how did President Obama see America? He was very clear in that he did not see America as unique or with any interests above or different from those of – say – Cuba, Greece, or Venezuela. This startling view was reflected in the mainstream media as a refreshing change from the jingoism that has characterized America. Newsweek almost got the vapors in their fawning over President Obama’s stance that America is no longer chauvinistic and parochial, but we stand as equals with the world and that Obama stands above the country – even above the world – “he is sort of God”. I think even with his overweening ego, President Obama might be a little embarrassed by that quote. But it does raise the question of exactly how does President Obama see the US and where does he think our interests lie?

The United States never intended to be world power much less a super power. America never set out to create the Pax Americana – that role was forced upon us by the continued Machiavellian machinations of Europe. It was the nationalistic policies of Europe that initiated the First World War and it was they who dragged America into it. It was they who set the stage for World War II with the Treaty of Versailles and it was they who so destroyed their own countries that they were left defenseless in face of USSR imperialism. So it was the very people who today criticize the US, accuse Americans of being arrogant, and who work against our interests at every turn while relying on the American Military for protection. It is these Europeans who continue their devious and self-destructive policies as they strive to gain control over America and American power through a world government. Is NATO necessary any longer? What benefit does the US gain from NATO other than to annoy the Russians? Does the UN provide any benefit to the US given its domination by Islamic countries and almost universal anti-American stance? This is the situation and questions that face President Obama and how he deals with these is vital to America’s long term interests.

If President Obama has any over arching strategy, it is one of negotiation and withdrawal – ironically this is analogous to the isolationist position the US had in the early 20th Century. If any policy exists today it seems to be to negotiate with North Korea, Palestine, and Iran while abandoning Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems that President Obama has been asleep like Rip van Winkle because he is unaware of the diplomatic efforts of Presidents Clinton and Bush, who have tried negotiating with North Korea, Palestine, and Iran with virtually no effect, although Arafat did stab President Clinton in the back. So what is Obama’s new diplomatic strategy that he plans on using to negotiate? He has leaned on the Israeli’s and supported the Palestinians only to leave both angrier so what is his new basis for negotiation? Perhaps someone should point out that negotiation is not a policy or even a strategy – it is a technique or process that is used in order to accomplish some objective. Both Presidents Bush and Clinton established objectives of disarmament and failed but President Obama’s approach seems to be encapsulated in the term “negotiation” which really reflects the almost total lack of experience both he and his administration have in international affairs. An objective of “peace” doesn’t seem to be very specific and this has been the objective for 16 years without any noticeable change, other to spend millions of dollars which have gone to fund terrorism and into Swiss Banks. So is the current plan to continue the failed policies of the past are does he intend to set new objectives?

So what about the other part of what appears to be President Obama’s over arching strategy of negotiation and withdrawal. It seems that he promised to withdraw the troops from Iraq because they had no business being there in the first place, but this promise seems to have been made to his liberal constituency without any knowledge of the real situation. Iraq is Islamic and has historically been dominated by the Sunni’s who were a minority. The Shiites are the majority and supported by Iran – a Shiite dominated country. The focus seems to be on withdrawing troops rather than a stable government in Iraq. A precipitous withdrawal of American troops could easily throw Iraq into a civil war and destabilize the entire region as the US would be seen as unreliable, intransigent, and defeated by radical Islam. This would greatly strengthen Iran and Hezbollah while dramatically increasing the threat to Israel. Iran has been pushing for a causus belli because the current government is very unstable and they need a unifying force. A perceived defeat of the US by Islam, which is what a withdrawal by the US would be viewed as, would certainly help Iran and would throw Iraq into even greater chaos. But the real problem lies in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan itself is really not the issue, the issue actually is Pakistan. The Taliban supported Al Qaeda who used Afghanistan as a base of operations to attack the US and to spread terror across the world. So the invasion of Afghanistan was actually an attack on the guerilla group known as Al Qaeda who fled into Pakistan. A large part of Pakistan is tribal and only loosely under the control of the central government. It is in these semi-autonomous regions that Al Qaeda found a home from which they launch attacks into Afghanistan and across the world. Once the US began to attack Al Qaeda in these tribal regions the whole area has erupted into chaos and the Taliban is attempting to destabilize Pakistan and to take over the country much as they did in Afghanistan. This is a real threat because in Islam the true Muslim is first and foremost a Muslim with no allegiance to his nation. In Pakistan the government is heavily infiltrated by these radical Muslims who are first Muslim and only secondarily Pakistani. If Pakistan cannot root out these radical forces and establish control then it is possible the substantial nuclear arsenal in Pakistan would fall into the hands of the Taliban and then into the hands of terrorists. Currently the American forces in Afghanistan in association with the Pakistani Army have Al Qaeda and the Taliban caught in classic pincer. But the American Military says they need more troops because the NATO troops there are little more than a token force. The border is very porous, the Pakistani’s hard pressed, and the Americans can’t be everywhere. But President Obama’s liberal supporters are anti-war and want him to withdraw American troops entirely. Apparently he intends to try to satisfy both camps and send some troops into Afghanistan but not the number requested. This of course is the worst possible solution and is a reflection of his total lack of military experience, knowledge of international affairs, and failure to grasp the difference between policies and action.

To date Iran continues its pursuit of nuclear weapons while laughing their way to Obama’s negotiating table. More importantly they are using their diplomats to drive a wedge between Israel and the US because Israel is the only country outside of the US with a military force capable of confronting the Iranian military. The Iranian strategy seems to be to divide and conquer. The North Koreans are playing Obama just like they have played the entire international community into providing them with whatever it is they want at the time, but this is really just a side show and Obama seems to be just going along like Bush and Clinton before him.

So does President Obama have a strategy? Will he make a decision in America’s best interest or does he plan on fulfilling his election promises to his liberal constituency? He no longer has time on his side – he must show his plans now.

Obama

It seems the party of white guilt has caught Obama Fever – apparently in the vain hope this is a remedy for the Bush Disorder Syndrome, which is characterized by irrational thinking and sometimes by hallucinations regarding facts. Dan Rather succumbed to BDS, so clearly the remainder of the Democratic Party is attempting to recover their sanity by pushing Obama – the fact that he has virtually no qualifications other than his race, seems to be lost in the rush for a cure to BDS.

From the time of his announcement that he was a candidate for President the media has showered him with fulsome praise to the point that one would think he was the second coming of Jesus, but then the radical left doesn’t believe in God much less Jesus, so Obama must be viewed as simply the hero of the hour. Of course hero here is a relative term because the Presidential wannabe has no military experience and is calling for a complete surrender to Al Qaeda, so his heroism seems to be restricted to waving the white flag. So what precisely makes Obama so popular with the left – other than his color and Muslim roots?

Well the media fawn over Obama because of his eloquence, but eloquence really only describes the quality of the delivery not the content, and Obama is certainly slick in his delivery. In his announcement speech Obama stated without hesitation that he firmly believes in “the basic decency of the American People”. Very heady and controversial stuff which certainly sets him apart from most of the Liberals who are rushing to prove how tolerant they are by supporting a black (semi) Muslim.. Unfortunately, while this controversial stand regarding the decency of the American people may distinguish him from the other Democratic candidates, it sort of places him right in the middle of the Republicans, who generally – and I’m not making this up—believe America and Americans are good and decent people.
But Senator Obama went on to condemn the “smallness” in our politics, but precisely what he meant by that isn’t clear. Perhaps this was his eloquent way of saying those people who believe in “small government” shouldn’t vote for me because I am firmly convinced that government should be big and the bigger the better. Of course, he may have meant that there is a certain “pettiness” in contemporary politics, which is certainly true but since most of his Liberal constituency is directly responsible for all of the sniping and mud slinging, he prudently left this a little vague. Courage requires honesty, nevertheless Obama forthrightly decried "a smallness of our politics" -- deftly slipping a sword into the sides of the smallness-in-politics advocates. (To his credit, he somehow avoided saying, "My fellow Americans, size does matter.")
Continuing in his forthright and controversial vein, he took a strong stand against the anti-hope crowd, saying: "There are those who don't believe in talking about hope." Take that, Hillary! But he didn’t stop there, no-siree bob – he underscored his courageous stand by continuing with "I recognize there is a certain presumptuousness in this -- a certain audacity -- to this announcement." Naturally this was a stunning statement that truly impressed the media who are hungry for any controversial morsel, but those of us who are harder to impress were also stunned by Obama’s courageous stand in favor of hope. What stunned the less gullible was what is so audacious about announcing that you're running for president? Any idiot can run for president and many do. Dennis Kucinich is perpetually running for president as is Ralph Nader. Even John Kerry ran for president and Al Gore aka the Goreacle actually got elected Vice President, proving that anyone can be elected. Today, all you have to do is suggest a date by which U.S. forces in Iraq should surrender, and you're officially a Democratic candidate for president.
Obama made his announcement surrounded by hundreds of adoring Democratic voters, who were mostly the reporters. However, to be fair one or two of these reporters actually attended Mitt Romney’s announcement, but they were more interested in seeing a live Mormon and interviewing his wives, who unfortunately turned out be just one wife. But Mormonism lacks the cachet that the controversial Barrack Hussein Obama brings with his Muslim roots, his blackness, and his penchant for saying penetrating and moving statements as he endorses the American People and takes a firm stand in favor of decency. He electrifies the crowd of adoring reporters and other Democratic loyalists by telling us he's brave for announcing that he's running for president and if life gives you lemons, make lemonade. However, to prove that he is really a serious candidate and in an effort to turn his inexperience into an asset, he went on to say: "I know that I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change." The reporters all swooned at this so they missed the great tagline delivered by Jesse Jackson “What did he say?”

The Muslim Brotherhood

THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD
Recently I was asked about the veracity of an article that cited connections between Nazi Germany, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Al Qaeda. The contents of this article seemed so outrageous that it couldn’t be true – or so I thought. I was particularly struck by the allegation that Adolf Hitler had formed a Waffen SS Division composed exclusively of Muslims. Surprisingly this turned out to be true and in reality there were two divisions who fought Tito in Yugoslavia. As an interesting sidelight Bernard Lewis in his book “The Middle East” covers the rather cozy relationship the Arabs had with Nazi Germany without once mentioning the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a highly secret society whose actual membership is closely guarded.

Background
The "Al-Ikhwan Al-Moslemoon" (Muslim Brotherhood) was founded in 1928 as a movement in Egypt. But soon after it began to have several branches outside Egypt and began spreading the principal Islamic idea that Islam is "Creed and state, book and sword, and a way of life" These principles were not common among many Muslim "scholars" who believed that Islam is restricted within the walls of the mosque. Members of the Brotherhood were banned and tortured in most of the Muslim countries but the movement continued to grow under the leadership of Hassan Al-Banna. The Brotherhood now has branches in over 70 countries all over the world – including the United States. The movement is organizationally flexible meaning that the Brotherhood works under multiple names – including Hamas, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Islamic Jihad, and virtually every known terrorist organization. However, all of the Brotherhood groups, in all countries are characterized by a common set of principles, which seem innocuous enough but buried within these principles and guidelines we find:

Political Activism: By putting political programs for "Islamising" government in different countries (after realistic studies), and establishing these programs thru the convenient ways which do not conflict with Islam

Building the Muslim state.
Building the Khilafa (basically a shape of unity between the Islamic states).
Mastering the world with Islam

I think these items really announce the true intentions of the Brotherhood more than the high flown phrases that surround them but if you still have any doubts this is the announced theme for the Brotherhood
· Allah is our objective.
· The messenger is our leader.
· Quran is our law.
· Jihad is our way.
· Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

It is virtually impossible for anyone raised in the Judeo-Christian ethos to comprehend these principles. The problem is that many Westerners will see these and not see any difference between them and a Christian or Jew trying to live by their religious principles. Unfortunately these are not parallel philosophies because under the “law” and the “Qur’an” killing infidels – meaning non-Muslims is expected.

The Muslim Brotherhood believes (http://www.ummah.org.uk/ikhwan/) that they must prepare a country or society for accepting Islamic Law prior to taking over the government because taking over a “corrupt” (meaning non-Muslim) government poses a great risk to the Brotherhood. They believe that Muslims should be trained to administer all aspects of a government and society but they should rule “Islamically”. I think we witnessed what this means when we saw the Brotherhood in action as the Taliban. It is worth noting that the Brotherhood professes to not want power themselves but they support any leader who wants to establish a TRUE Islamic government (Think Mullah Omar).

Achievements
During WW II everyone was amazed at how Heinrich Himmler was able to get so many people to accept his propaganda as true. He stated quite openly that if the lie was big enough and told often enough many people would believe it. We see this in the various conspiracy theories that abound but for the most part these are harmless but when you look at the Muslim community you see the concept of the “Big Lie” in its highly developed state. For example this quote;

Throughout their history, the ikhwan (aka Brotherhood) have had many accomplishments. However, their philosophy is that they prefer action and work over words and propaganda. The ikhwan have played and continue to play a major role in the struggle to liberate Muslims lands. The ikhwan's bravery in the 1948 Palestine war has been recorded by all sides. The total number of volunteers from the ikhwan in 1948 numbered 10,000 from Egypt, Syria and other countries. In addition to participating in the battle to liberate Palestine, they served to raise the consciousness of Muslims all over the Islamic World and restore to them the spirit of struggle and dignity. The ikhwan have played a role in liberating Muslim lands from colonialist powers in almost every Muslim country. The ikhwan were active amongst Muslims in Central Asian Muslim republics since the '70s, and their involvement can be seen recently in such republics as Tajikistan. More recently they had a major role in the struggle for Afghanistan and Kashmir.

Notice that nothing is said about the failures of Arab attacks on Israel in every single instance or how the Israeli’s crushed the combined Muslim Armies and would have occupied all of Egypt had it not been for the Americans. This is very typical of how the Brotherhood operates. It convinces the ignorant tribesmen that constitute most of the Muslim countries that they are winning, thus these crushing defeats are shown here as triumphs. It would seem that any thinking person would see through these blatant lies but the Brotherhood is more subtle than that. They are using our very laws and freedoms against us. Anytime the US Government attempts to stymie the Brotherhood there is an immediate outcry about racism and racial profiling. These attacks on our government are aided and abetted by the ACLU and the Press who are so blinded by political correctness that they fail to see the dangers. But while the danger is very real in the United States, Canada is not only under attack but are losing. If fact Canada may be so far gone that it may be impossible to reverse their slide into an Islamic state.

The Muslim Brotherhood and Canada
The Muslim Brotherhood in Canada is right on schedule in their drive to control the government and convert Canada into an Islamic State. Overblown rhetoric you think – think again and consider these events in terms of a global strategy. (http://www.shariahprogram.ca/)

Muslims are currently demanding uncensored Al Jazeera on Canadian Dish Services
Muslims are demanding shariah law for Muslims
The Canadian Government is considering the implementation of a separate Islamic Court
The Saudi Government is funding the web site http:www.shariahprogram.ca, which is spreading Wahabbism throughout Canada
CAIR states that Canada needs Quranic Law to be humane and just.
CAIR now endorses the Hijab since the Canadian Civil Liberties Board is now headed by a Muslim
Canadian Universities must have prayer rooms and Muslims must be seen by Muslim Doctors
Schools must have Halal menus
The Muslim Brotherhood now brags that the Muslims now have the largest prison population in Canada (does this sound familiar)

The Al Quaeda and Osama bin Laden have made it clear that the Christian Nation of Canada is guilty for the high standard of living found in the West while Islamic countries suffer. Canada has no military and so is quite vulnerable to a takeover from within. This is especially easy because Canada is very left leaning whose politicians spend most of their time and effort attacking the US and denigrating President Bush.

The Muslim Brotherhood and America
This quasi-secret society is active in America and is largely unknown to many Muslims. Bernard Lewis who is a leading authority on Islam and has written various books on the topic makes no mention of the Muslim Brotherhood. The conclusion must be that either he is a member of the Brotherhood or oblivious to it. This Brotherhood is active in America but not all Muslims support it and it has become a divisive force within the Islamic Community. The basic tenet of the Brotherhood is that “Muslims come first, not humans come first”. Since many Muslims in this country were born here they don’t accept this radical viewpoint but many do. The separation of Church and State is fundamental to American Government the Muslim Brotherhood preaches that religion and politics can’t be separated and that all governments should be Islamic. In order to achieve this they teach martyrdom and jihad. Increasingly the Mosques in America are being infiltrated and taken over by the Brotherhood.

Once you understand the goals and objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood and recognize their fundamental beliefs then it is easy to see how they can see murdering innocent children as well as any infidel or Muslim who gets in their way, can be justified. We are engaged in a global war one that is rooted in religion and one that we are losing. We are losing because we are free and tolerant while our enemy is not. It is time we wake up because we are losing. Spain is already lost, France is on the downward slope as is Canada.