Posted on 07/10/2009 7:07:06 AM PDT by OK Right
There’s a disturbing video clip making its way around the Internet. It features President Barack Hussein Obama dashing up to Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, shaking his hand exuberantly and then bowing to Putin. We can quibble about whether it’s an actual bow or not, but it’s very close. Given Obama’s past supplicating behavior – his literal and figurative bowing to people who don’t care for America – this could well be a bow.
Certainly, the president’s antics in Russia constitute a bow to the country. Obama wasted no time in deeding away the American National Security farm when he got there. And things might get worse if he decides to toss our nuclear missile defense system plans into the bargain.
We heard that a guarded Prime Minister Putin spent the first 50 minutes or so of their meeting lecturing Pupil Obama on Cold War history. The truth is that it’s in part because of our missile defense shield plans that Putin can't stand America. He and President George W. Bush got along initially, but things soured when Bush wouldn’t budge on plans to erect a nuke shield in Poland. Putin isn’t happy that we still have those plans on the table.
Now Obama seems ready to scrap those defense plans, even though he hasn't out and out stated so. Given his pacifist idealism, we must suspect that Obama has every intention of giving away the missile defense farm. Long before he became president, Obama was showcasing pacifism. Andy McCarthy points out a 1983 Columbia campus newspaper article the New York Times recently unearthed. In “Breaking the War Mentality,” Obama quoted Rastafarian Peter Tosh song lyrics (“Obama: Student Radical,” National Review, July 6, 2009, http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDEyMGNkZTI4MWE1ZjU4MzBiZjcwZjJhNzMyYzljYTA). In the article, Obama reflects, “When Peter Tosh sings that ‘everybody’s asking for peace, but nobody’s asking for justice,’ one is forced to wonder whether disarmament or arms control issues, severed from economic and political issues, might be another instance of focusing on the symptoms of a problem, and not the disease itself” (“Obama’s 1983 College Magazine Article,” New York Times, http://documents.nytimes.com/obama-s-1983-college-magazine-article#p=1). What idealistic profundity! Catch us as we swoon! Who didn’t anticipate a future national leader after reading that stunning missive?
Obama has already gift-wrapped a third of our nukes to Russia. In turn, Russia is letting us cut across their backyard on land and on air as we fight the Afghan war. They’ve also thrown a few antiquated rotting missiles into the mix. Who’d want them? Who has state-of-the-art technology? Who comes out a winner here? A genuine no brain barter just took place, and Russia came out the winner.
Even more disturbing: Ralph Peters contends that “the Russians don’t care much about our warhead numbers . . . What they really wanted – and got – was a US cave-in regarding limits on our nuclear-capable bombers, submarines and missiles that could leave us with as few as 500 such systems, if the Russians continue to have their way as the final details are negotiated” (“Desperate Deal,” New York Post, July 7, 2009).
Since “President Obama even expressed an interest in further nuclear-weapons cuts” (Ralph Peters, “Desperate Deal”), OK believes the next step for our pacifist prez may well be to scrap our U.S. nuclear missile defense system.
Iran is moving ever closer to having nuclear capabilities. The U.S. needs the nuke defense shield to keep Amoudinajad in check. Can we trust Russia to police Iran for us? Obama think so. He wants Russia to strong-arm Iran into cutting its nuclear program.
An attempt to forge a stronger U.S.-Russian alliance makes sense – but we should be prepared to flex our own muscle instead of relying on a former prime adversary to solve an impending crisis.
By the way, cutting through Russia saves the U.S. a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of what the porkulus bill cost us. So money isn't an issue. It's having an idealistic president in charge of America; a president whose actions repeatedly signal diffidence for the welfare of the American people and re-election and legacy building as his ultimate goals.
Conservatives leaders like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush never deeded the National Security Farm, nor did they waver in their resolve to protect America. Obama is already doing the former and hasn't begun to do the latter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.