This may be the most IDIOTIC liberal view of foreign policy you’ve ever seen

I came across an article that for me, demonstrates just how out of sorts the liberal progressive mind is when it comes to foreign policy. Please indulge me and allow me to share the full intro to this Politico piece. You have to read the whole thing to get the full flavor (or stench, depending on how you look at it). Ready?

“On a late July day this past summer, a roar filled the sky over Cairo. It was the sound of Barack Obama’s capitulation to a dictator. Eight new American fighter jets, freshly delivered from Washington, swooped low over the city, F-16s flying in formation. As they banked hard over the city’s center, they trailed plumes of red, white and black smoke—the colors of the Egyptian flag. For Egypt’s brutally repressive president, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, the spectacle was a triumph, symbolizing not only his militaristic power at home, but also his victory over an American president who had tried to punish him before surrendering to the cold realities of geopolitics.

Just two years earlier, Sisi had seized power in a military coup, toppling Mohamed Morsi, the democratically elected successor to Hosni Mubarak, himself a strongman of 30 years pushed out in early 2011 by mass protests in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. In the summer of 2013, Sisi followed his coup with a brutal crackdown that would have done Saddam Hussein proud. His security forces arrested thousands of people, including much of his political opposition, and in one bloody day that summer, they gunned down some 1,000 pro-Morsi protesters (or more) who were staging peaceful sit-ins. The massacre was shocking even by the standards of Egypt’s long-dismal human rights record.

Obama was appalled. “We can’t return to business as usual,” he declared after the slaughter. “We have to be very careful about being seen as aiding and abetting actions that we think run contrary to our values and ideals.”

Several weeks later, Obama halted the planned delivery of U.S. military hardware to Cairo, including attack helicopters, Harpoon missiles and several F-16 fighter jets, as well as $260 million in cash transfers. He also cast doubt on the future of America’s $1.3 billion in annual military aid to Egypt—a subsidy on which Cairo depends heavily, and much more than the United States sends to any country in the world aside from Israel.

But a fierce internal debate soon broke out over whether and how to sanction Egypt further, a fight that many officials told me was one of the most agonizing of the Obama administration’s seven years, as the president’s most powerful advisers spent months engaged in what one called “trench warfare” against each other. It was an excruciating test of how to balance American values with its cold-blooded security interests in an age of terrorism. Some of Obama’s top White House aides, including his deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, and the celebrated human rights champion Samantha Power, now U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, urged the president to link further military aid to clear progress by Sisi on human rights and democracy.

But Secretary of State John Kerry, then-Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Hagel’s successor, Ash Carter, argued for restoring the aid. Trying to punish Sisi would have little effect on his behavior, they said, while alienating a bulwark against Islamic radicalism in an imploding Middle East. “Egypt was one of the most significant policy divides between the White House and the State Department and the Department of Defense,” says Matthew Spence, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for Middle East policy. For months, Obama tried to split the difference. In meetings and phone calls with the Egyptian ruler, by now paranoid and resentful about America’s intentions, Obama and Kerry urged Sisi to respect human rights, while also seeking his help in countering the the metastisizing Islamic State in nearby Syria and Iraq. Sisi did little of either.

In the end, Obama folded. This past March, he called Sisi once again, this time to explain that he would release the cash transfers and delayed hardware—including the F-16s—and end the administration’s threats to block the larger $1.3 billion annual aid package. “We caved,” says a former senior administration official who participated in the debates.”

Herein lies the problem. The writer of this article continues on with his insidious drivel but he actually believes the United States of America and Obama, “caved” to Egypt.

This writer makes no mention at all in this opening diatribe that Mohamed Morsi was a longstanding member of the Muslim Brotherhood. He failed to mention the Egyptian people rejected Morsi and his desire to institute Sharia law in the largest Arab nation in the world.

There was no mention of how the Muslim Brotherhood took over the Tahrir Square “Arab Spring” protests and turned it into an Arab nightmare. It is President el-Sisi who has been fighting Islamists in his country and into the Sinai peninsula — who we now know are ISIS-inspired after the terror attack on the civilian aircraft that took the lives of some 240 Russians.

But, thanks to Obama, el-Sisi must now contend with Islamists to his west in neighboring Libya. This writer fails to mention the destabilizing effect of Obama’s unconstitutional actions — he violated the War Powers Act – and endeavors, supported by Hillary Clinton, into Libya.

There is no mention of how the Egyptian people despised President Obama for his open support to the Muslim Brotherhood, which began with his 2009 address at the University of Cairo when he openly requested Brotherhood members be seated front and center.

This piece criticizes Egypt but what shall we say of Obama’s Iranian nuclear deal? Does this writer want us to believe Iran has some distinguished record of human rights and democracy? For God’s sake, the Iranians are illegally holding five Americans hostage and Obama refuses to rescind the agreement, even with incessant violations and provocations. And this whiny chucklehead is writing about “caving” to Egypt?

This article represents the delusional world of the liberal progressive socialist left in America when it comes to foreign policy. They shun those who would be our strong allies and castigate them as horrible. Yet they fully embrace the enemy, and heck, based on what Obama’s impending release of $150 billion in frozen assets back to Iran…that is aiding and abetting the enemy and their actions, which run contrary to our values and ideals. But for Obama, Ben Rhodes (who is hardly a national security expert, holding a MFA in creative writing), and Samantha Power chumming up to Iran is a grand endeavor, while helping el-Sisi is caving.

Ladies and gents, I submit that when you hear those refer to President Obama as inept or incompetent in the area of foreign policy, that is not the case. He has done exactly what he’s set out to do, and no one has challenged him.

I’m glad Egyptian President el-Sisi overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood in his country. Can you imagine the deeper quagmire if he had not? Can you imagine the even worse situation for Israel if el-Sisi had not stepped in? Hamas would be running rampant and the Sinai peninsula would be an even greater Islamic terror sanctuary. Egyptian President el-Sisi threw a monkey wrench into Obama’s plans — heck, he’s done more than our own Congress in that instance.

And as we go forward into 2016, just remember who Obama’s first secretary of state was…and with whom do you think she’d side, if she avoids jail and becomes president?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here