The Cranky Voter

Obama to Israel - Screw the Jews

Obama just gave a speech on the Middle East. I mean he had to announce to the world that he was solely responsible for killing OBL. He made sure the time of the day was good for everyone in the Middle East to hear his speech live. So nice of him to accommodate everyone outside of the United States. It was his order to invade Pakistan with a bunch of Navy Seals and take him out. Assassinate a man in his jammies right in his bedroom. OBL wasn’t holding a gun and was defenseless (which is fine with me, but others seem to have been upset with that). Well Obama never used the word assassinate. He also didn’t say that it was his intention to capture him alive. There were a few other things that Obama didn’t say.

He never explained how we got the intelligence to find out where OBL was hiding. The truth is that the intelligence gathering process had actually started long before Obama was in office and benefited directly from some of the enhanced interrogation procedures that were being used by the last administration. I am not saying that there was no other ways to get the information. I am not saying that there was no other way to get OBL. What I am saying is that the information that helped find OBL came from some of the enhanced interrogation sessions of those terrorists that were being held at Gitmo? So you answer the question, were those methods worth it? Would you be happy if we still didn’t get OBL? Obama apparently had no comment.

Anyway, the cause of the policy speech aside, yeah we got OBL, the content of the speech is what is really what I am questioning. Obama made a statement in his speech that 6 months of protesters actions have accomplished more than years of terrorism. Huh? What does that mean? Does Obama mean that the protesters and the terrorists have the same goals? That the terrorist who blows up innocent women and children in Israel or people riding the trains in Spain or in a hotel in India or in France or kills over 3000 in the US is really motivated and trying to achieve regime change in their own country? Obama said, “Those shouts of human dignity are being heard across the region. And through the moral force of non-violence, the people of the region have achieved more change in six months than terrorists have accomplished in decades.” What does that mean? Do you really think OBL wanted reform in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia as his primary goal? Those terrorists talked about the Big Satan and the Little Satan and they were more concerned with changing the policies of the United States and the destruction of Israel. How do you make that comparison? Is he trying to justify the terrorist actions? Is he trying to say that the goals of the protesters and the terrorists are the same? Does that make any sense to you?

I am not sure if the protesting in these Arab countries is good or bad for either the countries where the protests are taking place or for the United States of America, but I know not to compare them to terrorists - good or bad. I support the right of assembly. I support the right of a people oppressed to express their grievances. I support the change of a government that doesn’t properly reflect the will of the people. But I pray to God that the choice of the people is one of Democracy and hope and tolerance, but I certainly can’t be sure that this was their goal. I don’t know if groups like the Muslim Brotherhood is going to impose on Egypt an even harsher government by taking advantage of an opportunity voiced by dissent of the people based upon previous oppression and economic hardship. I don’t know if the government that will be formed in Egypt will be better than the Government that existed under the authoritarian reign of Mubarak, but I hope that is will be. I don’t know if the new government of Egypt is going to be motivated to keep peace with Israel like Mubarak did, and I do know that an increase in the tension between Egypt and Israel would not be good for Egypt, would not be good for Israel and would not be good for the United States.

I do know that I too would want to help the people of Egypt. However, I wouldn’t give them assistance in the form of Billions of Dollars without any sort of conditions. Obama has proclaimed that he is going to do just that. The promised aid wasn’t tied to a Democratic Egypt. The promised aid wasn’t tied with continued peace with Israel. The promised aid wasn’t tied to continuing to fight against the terrorists that attacked our country. The aid was promised with no conditions what so ever. Way to lead Obama. He writes a blank check to a country in turmoil and provides no clear direction for that assistance. That is something less than I can be proud of. You can call it naive and inexperienced on the part of the American President. I call it a failure to lead and a signal of the decline of America.

However, by far, the most controversial part of Obama’s speech was his instructions to Israel. He had a proposal for his solution to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. So every President before him had valued the relationship that the United States has with Israel as the only Democratic country in the Middle East. Every President had supported the end of terrorism and recognition of Israel as a country. Not this President. Obama’s solution was to tell Israel that they had to accept and promote a peace agreement by unilaterally accepting the 1967 borders and remove all settlements from occupied territories. This was something that the Israeli’s had agreed to during the last peace accords and it was the Palestinians that had rejected that deal. But Obama went further, he said that Israel should accept this precondition even before continuing with negotiations and said that until that is done there is no point for the United States to help broker a peace deal. Yet he made no reference to Hamas, who are classified as a terrorist organization by the United States to accept Israel’s right to exist as a state. He did not mention the roadmap to peace that had been proposed in the past and refused by Hamas. He didn’t talk about the ceasing of rocket attacks on Israel. Instead in his speech, he made it sound as if the obstacle to peace was a direct result of the Israeli actions.

Now perhaps Obama is trying a different approach, but if he is I think his approach stinks. Historically Israel has not been the obstacle to peace in the Middle East. They have been fighting for their own survival. We have made the most progress on the situation when we were strong supporters of Israel. Telling Israel what to do is fine, but not when it is in violation of their own best interests. Providing direction to Israel is fine, but not when you ignore the other side and don’t provide recommendations to the Palestinians. If you are a supporter of Israel, you can not be happy with Obama’s speech. If you are a big Jewish fund raiser for Obama, you can’t be too happy with the results of your donations. If you are a big Democrat you can’t be too happy with how Obama is leading the Democratic Party. He gives a speech comparing terrorists to protesters, promises money to Egypt with no conditions and then condemns Israel for being the Obstacle in the Peace Process in the Middle East.

As I said before, maybe Obama has a different way of doing things and he is trying a different approach. Well I for one just don’t like it. He makes our country appear week and his approach is one of appeasement which is not appreciated by the Arab countries anyway. When reading about feedback from these nations that are part of the Arab Spring, it appears they feel Obama has not gone far enough. That his policies have been inconsistent and confusing. I am not sure what his policies are or what he is attempting to achieve. His approach seems more like experimentation then to be following a consistent plan, with one particular exception and that is to sacrifice Israel in his attempt to win favor with the other nations. His policy seems to be to tell all the Jews that supported him in this country to go scratch. To go against our long standing ally in an attempt to placate a terrorist organization that in his mind is really just a less effective method of descent than protesters. Forget about all that has been accomplished, Obama has a new way to fix the world. With a smile and a wink, Obama is going to fix the Middle East and grant the Palestinians a state. Does he have no regard for history? How can such an educated man be so stupid? Does he not realize he is telling all of his Jewish supporters to go to Hell? He says screw the Jews and their Jewish state too, because if they just accept what they have already tried to accept with no compromise on the other side, well then of course there will be peace. If the Jews would just get out of the way, then there could be peace in the Middle East… Screw the Jews. Aren’t they the one’s at fault? How dare they establish a country in a land that was theirs in the Bible and displace all those nomadic Palestinians, forgetting the fact that Britain and the United Nations were the one’s that established the state. Yeah Screw the Jews. That will bring about peace.

I don’t think so Mr. President. I most respectfully disagree. And maybe that sounds a little cranky .. and it most probably is, but that is because I am the Cranky Voter!!!