Not at all. Why would you ask that?
Oh, I don't know, how about reducing the size of our nuclear arsenal (a continuing feature of Obama's game plan), enabling and empowering the expanding nuclear program of Iran, the highly likely planned 'surrender' of our sailors to Iran in the latest failure to show resolve towards terrorist states like the one run by those mullahs?
Right. All of these are imminent threats. So now the United States can only destroy the world 15 times over, rather than 25 times over.
This country suffered more damage to its credibility -- and its interests -- between 2003 and 2008 than it did in the years since. I've posted many times here on FreeRepublic my suspicions that the administration of George W. Bush was filled with moles and paid agents of Iran. If the Iranian government wanted to see a series of events play out in the Middle East that would promote its interests and maximize its influence, then it couldn't have done anything more effective than what the Bush administration did for it. But even with all of that, there's nothing that would constitute an imminent threat to the U.S. among all of those things.
And we can take a look at Obama's failure to take effective action so far as North Korea's nuclear program.
Right -- like the effective actions his predecessors have taken for the last 50 years? How do you deter North Korea when they could simply get whatever they want from China anyway?
And let's not forget how Obama has emasculated our military leadership, reducing them to nothing but yes-men, AND the fact that our military is less prepared than at any time in our national history.
I hate to break this to you, but the U.S. military has been filled with "yes-men" ever since it became standard practice to maintain a massive standing army. No leader of a colonial or state militia would have put up with the kind of idiotic civilian leadership we've seen in military campaigns over the last 50 years.
You don't think the above factors (just to name a few) don't represent an 'imminent' danger?
No.