Posted on 01/28/2014 8:46:57 AM PST by rktman
On the eve of his annual State of the Union address, Barack Obama’s five years as president have brought innumerable national security failures.
However, beyond the long, growing list of ideologically driven errors, missed opportunities and generally inattentive stewardship of foreign and defense issues is a larger problem.
National security is simply not a top Obama administration priority.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it. If we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for war.This is what Obama despises, but ultimately it will be the very thing he will wish he heeded when the fruits of his upside-down policies finally bloom.
— George Washington
One day the lion will lay down with the lamb. I prefer to be the lion until then.
Even then, only one of the two will get a good night's sleep.
I personally would prefer a stronger, but far less interventionist country. Obama seems to be the opposite on both: make us weak and get our noses into all sorts of foreign adventures like Libya and Syria.
I actually think it is even worse than John Bolton states. Obama is an active enemy of America and an ally of Islamists. He spreads chaos and topples governments to spread Islam and to try and create the Greater Caliphate. Islamic world domination is the ultimate goal and Obama is a soldier of Allah.
He is a sports fan and makes a big deal of playing golf and shooting hoops, yet he is unable to understand the human nature of the sports he loves.
Having no game is not the way to win a game. What coach or GM would purposely build a weak team hoping that other teams would play them softly?
Put another way, If barry and his gang were trying to destroy this county, would they be doing anything differently?
Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want peace, prepare for war. Peace doesn’t just “come” on its own, through inaction or despondency. Only a liberal is stupid enough to believe such drivel.
“....Barack Obama’s five years as president have brought innumerable national security failures.”
.
Isn’t national security not THE top priority of any nation?
Can anyone think of a more important item for ensuring the nation’s continued existence?
If Obama failed in this responsibility should he not be impeached so that someone more competent will lead the nation or are we going to wait with his replacement until the whole system caves in?
Where are our congresscritters?
De facto treason. I would love for someone to find a memo exlicitly stating that policy. It appears to me we have started fighting wars for the benefit of big businesses and unnamed power brokers, not for national security purposes.
“National security is simply not a top Obama administration priority.”
News flash: National IN-security IS a top Obama administration priority.
Yep, that worked real well in 1917, 1941 and 2001.
Odd isn't it, all democrat presidents.
[I know Bush was in office eight months of '01]
5.56mm
Even then? You do know the reference, right? (Isaiah 11:6) I’d say both will get a good night’s sleep during the time prophesied, which is of course not the present.
Bolton knows all about American weakness because he was a part of the foolish dissipation of American wealth and irreplaceable lives in a pointless invasion of Iraq that left the country weaker and led to the election of Obama. Whatever Bolton and the rest of the Bush brain trust says, I’m inclined to believe the opposite.
Wasn’t pointless. Only became pointless when the purpose got diluted thanks to the media acting as a fifth column, helping to sap the support of the people for it. Surrounding Iran by going into Afghanistan and Iraq would have been an ideal prelude for getting the Mullahcracy out once and for all—if that had become the goal.
Saddam, despite the evils of his rule, was the best force for stability we had over there. Using Iraq as a base against Iran as you mentioned, was the only logical reason to go there. But that would have required an expenditure of blood and money that the American people were not ready to pay.
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.