Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Rudder, Anchor or Paddles


Author Profile PagePeter Koelliker

It’s interesting, John, that you've woven the STAR WARS analogy into your observations. It demonstrates that we are no longer living on the same planet. All the narratives and arguments so prevalent under past administrations no longer apply today. Bush/Cheney took the task of protecting our nation seriously. They did so within the context of their Weltanschauung which delineated the world as consisting of enemies on one hand and friends on the other.

Under Obama, the old alliances are no more. Most nations have not yet fully absorbed the implications of the Obama sea change. May 18th, when Obama is scheduled to meet with Netanyahu in Washington, will go a long way toward throwing down the (new) markers for all to see.

Cheney is still arguing from a now defunct paradigm. His words mean nothing to this administration. They do not fear a 9/11 style attack. They continue to argue that these attacks were in essence America’s fault; and they aim to change the priorities of U.S. foreign policy so that no (former) enemy would ever think of attacking us again.

The most efficacious way to accomplish this is to make nice with one’s enemies and dump on one’s friends. Throw in a blizzard of mea culpas for perceived past digressions; criminalize past policy; hold show trails involving one’s own; disarm; appease, and you’re well on your way to creating a conflict-free utopia. Obama has cleverly chosen to align himself with the most radical and virulent trans-national factions, dismissing those that, in his estimation, are incapable of mounting an effective challenge. The victims of Obama’s realignment will likely be Israel; Bush/Cheney; and the American people.

Such a strategy can be comprehensible only to one who considers himself as stateless - like today’s academics and members of the international press corps. It may make sense in theses contrived in ivory towers but will ultimately fail (in the real world). Russia, for example might not agree to erase her history and traditions (such as these are) in order to validate Obama’s (or anyone other than Putin’s) perceived sainthood.

Should we in the meantime be attacked again, they will spin it as residuals of past policy and do nothing. They may even succeed in claiming that such attacks are entirely homegrown and carried out by (preferably) right-wing talk radio inspired extremists. The MSM will promote this view all too eagerly as they will see themselves as protecting their own stretched-to-breaking credibility.

I sense all too often – even on this site – an unwillingness to let go and to realize that ‘change’ actually means ‘change’. Americans voted for change without wanting to know what it could mean. During the campaign, they showed no interest in finding out. Now they’re beginning to realize what has happened. I keep hearing that Obama is personally popular while his policies are not. This is hogwash! A man is known by his deeds. Gandhi did not look like a huge sex symbol. Neither will Obama after four years on the high seas without rudder, anchor or paddles.

3 comments:

  1. Do not judge America as a whole because of the actions of a very small few.

    ReplyDelete
  2. America will lose a devine umbrella of protection when it no longer supports Isreal. Sudden destruction is foretold.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I support Isreal's right to exist as a nation state. Any nation or people that refuses to acknowledge their right is tightly bound by the very core of evil in this world. I condemn them. I would have no sympathy to see their demise. I only hope that American policy will clearly decide in favor of Israel's right to be. And in fact, commit to their protection.

    ReplyDelete