This story, Obamacare fiasco, plummeting poll results, etc... Makes you wonder how far away Obama really is from being on a youtube video doing his very own Charlie Sheen ‘winning’ video.
If the White House doesn’t attack, western man will not find it acceptable that he has let Iran get stronger and develop more technologies for use against the West.
Unacceptable leadership from the White House.
If the White House doesn’t attack, western man will not find it acceptable that he has let Iran get stronger and develop more technologies for use against the West.
Unacceptable leadership from the White House.
I love the headline, especially the part about 0 losing his presidency. However, I have a different take: there is every bit as much of a chance that an Israeli attack could improve Obama’s chances of winning re-election. Here’s how: In the wake of an Israeli attack, Obama will have the opportunity to shore up support with the Jewish electorate by making a show of support for Israel as it receives missile attacks, and in the face of the diplomatic onslaught including the SOP at the UN condemning Israel and trying to impose some kind of sanctions. And he doesn’t have to do much. Liberal Jews who have become somewhat alienated by Obama’s attitude to Israel are just dying for the least excuse to come back into the fold and vote to keep the evil Republicans out.
On a broader scale, Obama can come off looking strong on defense by making a display of American military power in the Gulf. The hotter things are, the better for Obama, because Americans tend to rally around the President when we are in a hot military conflict.
Now, you may ask, if an Israeli strike is good for his re-elections chances, why does Obama seem to be doing everything to prevent an attack? Two reasons: 1. Armed conflict is extremely unpredictable. As much as the scenario I described is the likely result, anything can happen. No one running for office, especially the highest office, wants to play with any more unknown, volatile variables than they absolutely have to. 2. Obama wants Iran to get nukes. This is no conspiracy theory. Obama, whether a muslim or a muslim sympathizer, wants to force Israel to make concessions to the Pali’s so he can go for a second Nobel prize and ensure some kind of legacy other than “he was actually worse than Jimmy Carter”. In his sympathies for the Pali cause and his corresponding antipathy towards Israel, he wants the Palis to get a State and he may even wish to see the ultimate demise of Israel. Mind you, he can put a significant amount of distance between himself and an Israeli calamity because, in the wake of the creation of a pali state, it will take a number of years before they can actually destroy Israel. Sort of the same way Clinton keeps feeding off the economic good times he had little to do with in spite of the fact that he also laid the seeds for the subsequent collapse, Obama will bask in the glory of a resolution to the conflict. Years later, the reasons for the collapse of the arrangement and the resumption of war will be impenetrably obscured by propaganda mostly from the leftist media about how it was all Israel’s fault anyway and Obama did the best he could.
Sorry if this sounds pessimistic, but I believe it is more in line with well-established patterns of voting behavior and Obama’s conduct of Mid-East foreign policy, from the day he made that disgusting speech in Cairo. May G-d bless and protect the United States and her best ally, Israel.