Another excellent op-ed piece from Dan Scott. This piece talks about the failures of the Obama administration in dealing with Foreign Policy, something I think we can all agree was pre-determined. Think about it… when was the last time that a Democrat got Foreign Policy right?
Obama’s Foreign Policy Failure
-By Dan Scott
How much puzzling did President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton do when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran rebuffed them? Remember how liberal Democrats claimed the world hated the US because of President Bush and then tossed up the canard that 911 was the result of Bush’s power projection? Barely eight months in office President Bush hadn’t even visited Israel yet by September 2001 let alone stirred the hornet’s nest in the Middle East. He didn’t visit Israel until 2008; in fact prior to his election in 2000 there were questions whether he would be pro-Israel at all. Iran was just a footnote in the long line of nettlesome issues yet to raise its ugly head. After eight years of Clinton foreign policy failures, Rwanda, Darfur, Somalia and liberal assertions of women’s rights to the UN by the year 2000, the world, namely the Muslim world hated the US to the point extremists attacked US overseas targets some ten times. The 911 event was conceived, planned, financed and trained for under President Clinton’s watch and then executed eight months later after President Bush took office. So what did President Clinton do over eight years to raise the ire of the Muslim world? To the point that a former ally in Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden attacked us?
Despite a liberal Democrat as the President of the US apologizing for the previous eight years of President Bush’s term, the Muslim world still hates us. I wonder why? Since the day President Obama took office his administration has pushed the liberal line at the UN of Kum Ba Yah, that the US is only one nation among many and we are prepared to give away all our wealth under Copenhagen, yet the world still hates us. It appears the liberals have never learned the lesson from the overthrow of the Shah of Iran when President Carter, a liberal Democrat, was in office. The liberal line (talking point) was Iranians were angry that President Eisenhower (Republican) helped overthrow a previous Iranian government. In other words, we meddled in their internal affairs. Liberal Democrats of Obama’s stripe are typical of demagogues, they hear only what they want to hear and prattle their talking points, they never listen and hence they never seek to understand or acknowledge contrary points of view. Domestically, we as conservatives know this all too well when liberals typically in their hyperbole mischaracterize our positions. Thus the liberal Democrat’s line that the (Muslim) world hates us because we are well off and they are poor. If only things were that simple, but then simpletons require simple problems with simple solutions. It’s all very populist sounding that way and the solution is throwing money at the problem just as they are wont to do here domestically. Unfortunately for all of us, this comes off very condescending to Muslims and no one likes to be treated in a condescending manner.
The reality has been since the days of the Shah, that Muslim culture has viewed the West as decadent with it’s Feminism, divorce rates, single motherhood, out of wedlock births, and gratuitous sex plastered everywhere from the music to the movies. Those who preach Islam despise the Western culture because they view it in terms of debauchery. Most conservatives would agree our culture has devolved due to Feminism. The Shah was overthrown because he confused modernization with Western values. The male dominated culture of Iran responded accordingly when their divorce rates rose and the Mullahs pointed the finger of guilt at the Shah for infecting Iran with Feminism. The Iranian people welcomed the Mullahs with open arms to save their culture. They in the end traded the social despotism of moral decline for religious political despotism.
When liberals push Feminism under the guise of women’s rights at the UN, Muslims recoil in horror and hate at what threatens their culture. From the Islamist point of view, when liberals self righteously trumpet women’s rights, what they see instead is the degradation of society, not equal treatment of females. We in the West frequently confuse Feminism with equal rights for women; they are in fact not the same. Feminism as currently practiced in the West is just another form of bigotry where one group stereotypes and vilifies another based upon their genetic make up. Any reading of the likes of Maureen Dowd and others confirms this sickening bigotry. From this point of view, most conservatives would agree with Muslim preachers that what Liberalism advocates with it’s euphemism for women’s rights is not equality but Feminism’s moral failure. Liberals falsely equate via Feminism, freedom of equality with acting irresponsibly without consequence. Personal Responsibility, Equality and Freedom go hand in hand and are the polar opposites of Irresponsibility, Entitlement and the Nanny State just as being an adult is the opposite of being a child.
Where conservatives and Muslim preachers part company is how one opposes Liberalism and Feminism. For the Muslim, the threat of liberal moral debauchery is so stark that they see it as a war of good versus evil, as an infected gangrenous leg to be amputated lest it consumes the whole body. Those who collaborate with the West are seen as gangrene actively spreading the disease of cultural destruction. Osama Bin Laden and his henchmen have said as much, that’s if you were listening. Don’t confuse understanding with acceptance, as a conservative I reject this radical response. This is why al Qaeda had no problem bombing public markets maiming women and children as they were seen as part of the problem collaborating with Feminism. This is why they had no problem with killing 3000 civilians on 911, they seemingly embraced Feminism by tolerating it. This shouldn’t surprise us since the Palestinian Intifada took the same approach to the Israeli civilian population, seemingly bombing indiscriminately. No, in their mind they were attacking Jewish people as though they were a gangrenous infection. When we watch the Basji in Iran, the militia attacking students demonstrating in the streets, what we are watching is a group of people trying to tamp down the infection of Western influence, not the yearnings of a people to be free from the tyranny of the Mullahs. Just like the Shah confused Western culture with modernization, so now the Basji like most of the radical Muslim teachers confuse Western culture with Feminism. This is in complete contrast to our approach as conservatives in the US, the patient refuting of error with the facts. As conservatives, we believe there is truth and that truth is found in the sum of the facts, all the facts are relevant. Whereas liberals believe the truth is what you want it to be according to the agenda, only those facts that support the argument are relevant and you make up (lie) the rest to fill in the gaps (sales talk to sell the agenda).
Because few if any liberals take time to listen to contrary points of view, their mischaracterization of their opponent’s positions comes off condescending. It is typical of liberals to prattle talking points in order not to acknowledge the contrary position. If you deny the issue, you deny the argument in favor of the issue. In the case of Islam, poverty is not the issue, it is the threat the US (and the West) poses to their culture from Feminism when they push pseudo women’s rights at the UN. Throwing money at Islam only makes them angrier still because of the refusal to listen to what they have been saying. Why? Because funding any activity (family planning, mirco loans to women) by the West in their lands is seen as proselytizing “Western” culture, you might as well call yourselves “Crusaders.” The Muslim world confuses Western culture with Feminism because liberals are constantly pushing that agenda every time they are in power.
Which brings us to why President Bush was successful in Anbar Province and the Surge in Iraq. The objective of both operations was not simply to kill off al Qaeda while it did involve that aspect, but to empower the locals to take control of their own destiny. That empowerment was NOT Westernizing, pushing feminists agendas in their area but giving the tools of support to local people to rebuild according to their culture. The effort was not to create the 51st State or Little America, but Iraq of the people, by the people and for the people OF IRAQ. You will notice the US military has taken great pains to give deference to the local elders and religious authorities. Everything that is done is according to their wishes. Having taken this strategy, the US military has destroyed al Qaeda’s main propaganda weapon – we are out to Westernize (proselytize) them. As a consequence of that effort there was a drop in terrorism world wide under Bush’s time in office. Now under Obama, terrorism is back on an upswing. I wonder why? Look at the issues the Obama administration is pushing at the UN, the same issues Carter and Clinton pushed.President Obama and the rest of the liberal elites have failed to recognize why the Surge was successful, they think throwing money at the problem will solve it like every other thing they do. After all, if you spend enough money on anything you can accomplish it? Right? Thus the illusions to putting a man on the moon. Wrong, you create more Osama Bin Ladens. Until liberals stop being meddling, know-it-all, busybodies, and cease interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, sticking their noses in other people’s business where it doesn’t belong we will continue to have a terrorist threat. Stop stirring the hornet’s nest using the stick of Feminism and Muslims will cease to feel threatened. But then asking a liberal to not push their agenda down other people’s throats would make them Neo-Cons.