Obama's Foreign Policy: A Feckless Exercise

As we reflect on the terrorist attacks against our Embassy and Consulate in Cairo and Benghazi, respectively, it is entirely reasonable to wonder what events allowed this to happen? As with any foreign policy issue, the contributing factors are varied and complex. No one thing leads to such violent attacks - certainly not an anti-Islamic video that no one has actually seen. It's a concoction of things, facilitated by an American Administration that leads from behind and treats foreign policy as an unimportant nuisance to the greater importance of spreading socialism domestically.

After 8 years of George W. Bush, we were told that the world hated us. Suffering under the delusion that the world just adored us before the evil, stupid, war-monger Bush took power in 2000. We were told our security was dependent on electing someone who people 'liked'. Obama spent time giving speeches in the U.K., Germany, and elsewhere even before being elected to tell the world, 'we are sorry we thought we were better than you'. He told the world, "I will be a uniter," and they all swooned. One of his first big trips as President United States saw Obama giving a nearly hour-long speech in Cairo, basically apologizing for American policy of the past and promising 'closer relations' to the Muslim world (video/transcript). Keep in mind, this was also the first president in many years who did not visit Israel in his first year, even as he was right next door.

Forget the fact that most Americans didn't feel the need to be apologized for. Forget the fact that this merely proved we'd elected a president who did not believe American Exceptionalism. Forget the fact that we toppled a dictator in Iraq that was guilty of millions of deaths. Forget the fact that the Taliban, who we tried to take down in Afghanistan was responsible for systematic death of people who didn't believe in their brand of Islam. Simply stated, Obama made the world believe he knew the United States was at fault for the hatred aimed at us. Nevermind that the hatred stems from a religion intent on fighting Westernization (progress), or terrorism rose from poverty reaped upon these people by their own governments, or that Islamic extremism is perpetuated by governments who use the religion to keep their people in line and their anger aimed at the U.S. and Israel rather than the true culprits. No, it was all about American Foreign Policy.

But where does that leave us now? Say what you want about George W. Bush, but no one murdered our Ambassadors under him. Do you think that's coincidence? Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that Bush wouldn't think twice about laying down an iron fist on the people who seek to murder Americans abroad (especially foreign service members)? Just look at Obama's reaction:

1. Mitt Romney, presidential Candidate, was able to say what needed to be said about the issue before Obama even bothered. He didn't need to consult with anyone to stand up for American Values. While Obama was trying to figure out how to apologize for a video no one had any knowledge of, while not sounding like he was apologizing, Romney was saying what needed to be said. "I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks." 

Of course, the media rushed to criticize Romney for making this statement so fast, claiming he got the timeline wrong. What about Romney's statement is wrong? The Administration is responsible for it's Embassies. Further, Obama eventually came out in agreement with what Romney said, throwing the Embassy statement under the bus. But again, he was leading from behind. Romney said it first and best. 

2. Even if the timeline on the Embassy 'apology' was wrong, why in the hell is the United States Embassy apologizing for a video made by a private citizen living in California. It still can't be found, with the exception of a 13 minute trailer on youtube, by the way. This is a primary problem with the Obama Administration. Never apologize for Freedom of Speech. Ever. The end. No need for explanation or further discussion. No need to say you think the video is bad. No need to say anything but, 'you are wrong, and you will pay.'

3. It's clear the attacks had nothing to do with this movie anyway. It was a concerted effort to commit terror on the United States on the anniversary of 9/11. And Our President couldn't even be bothered to cancel a fundraising opportunity in Las Vegas. ARE YOU SERIOUS? Even the liberals can't justify that one.

So, here we are attacking Romney for showing leadership on the issue while Obama lags behind, and he gets attacked. Obama, the President, goes to a campaign function during a crisis, and no one bats an eye. I couldn't make this stuff up, folks.

But back to the original point which is, why are we in this position? Barack Obama's Administration has no respect or understanding of Foreign Policy. When Hilary Clinton conceded Obama's victory in the Primaries in 2008, it's obvious she was offered a place in his Cabinet. So, which position does he give her? This is the woman who trailblazed the Healthcare issue, the woman who had clear experience in domestic policy making but none in foreign policy. He made her SECRETARY OF STATE! If that's not an example of how little he cares about foreign policy, I'm not sure what is. He thought SOS was a 'throw away' position!

And why shouldn't he, really? He thinks if he talks out of both sides of his mouth, has wishy washy policy, and apologizes for us, we will be loved again. Of course, a blind moron could have told him that wasn't going to work if you simply look at the REAL factors that lead to terrorism. So now, we have 4 dead service members including an Ambassador (first since the Carter Administration in 1979),  and we have Embassies/Consulates on fire in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, and Libya. Did you notice a trend there. Yep, the countries from the 'Arab Spring'.

I used to believe democracy solved all problems. I was wrong. Bush was wrong. These people have absolutely no understanding of freedom. They use their votes to oppress people who disagree with them. They vote in people worse than the dictators that they toppled. And Obama stands by and congratulates them for it. Why wouldn't these countries believe us to be weak? The one country where the uprising might have lead to a rational leader (Iran) and Obama was too scared to stand up for the revolutionaries. But when mob rule will favor religious nuts (like in the Arab Spring) all of a sudden, he believes in democracy.

Can anyone explain Obama's foreign policy? What is the 'Obama Doctrine'? Duck and cover until it's over and hope it's not too bad? He's hoping to win this election on the fact that he killed Osama Bin Laden. That's all well and good. Having him dead is awesome. But that's the tip of the iceberg to this problem of Islamic terrorism. Al-Qaeda flags were being flown at these riots. Reports indicated high-up officials in Al-Qaeda were in the crowds. If anyone thought killing OBL would change anything, they were horribly naive.

Even in the aftermath of this nonsense, Obama couldn't decide if Egypt was an ally or not. Yesterday morning they were 'not our ally'. By 2:30 they were our ally again. He's like a fish out of water on these issues. He has no idea what he's doing and the only advice he seems to have is, "make no sudden movements". This is catastrophic for our interests. How can our President lead when he'd rather apologize for a movie than stand up for American values? How can he protect our citizens abroad when he believes that these violent extremists are few and far between (they aren't) and can be controlled by a few apologies (they can't).

One more thought I'll leave you with. An attack on an Embassy or Consulate is an attack on American soil. They are as much a part of the country as any American city. We now have multiple American Embassies under attack and we have a President who is campaigning. When he actually does talk about the attacks, his response couldn't be weaker if he was trying. We attack Romney for his harsh response, but don't we wish our own President had even half that conviction?