Posts Tagged 'Barack Obama'

Your move, Mr Obama

This blog holds no brief for the Russian thugocracy led by thug-in-chief Vladimir Putin. But we may have just witnessed what could rank as a top drawer geopolitical equivalent of a chess move.

In matters of international relations, when it comes to diplomatic confrontation with the United States and President Obama, the disagreement has just been shown to be one of men versus boys.

Moscow has shown itself to be home of the men and Washington the playground of the boys.

Putin’s move, if it is accepted by al-Assad, has the capacity to completely wrong-foot Obama and Kerry and undermine their efforts to push for authorisation from Congress for an attack on Syria.  If Syria responds positively Obama will struggle to secure the votes needed to let the Tomahawks fly.

Russia has coolly opened to the door to another way of dealing with the chemical weapons threat the US is using as an excuse to intervene in the country’s civil war.  It is a face saving opportunity for the US to back down and stay out of the Syrian disaster.

We could sum up Putin’s communication to the White House and where it leaves Obama in one word.  ‘Check’.

Obama’s staggering hubris

The sheer arrogance on display from President Barack Obama, in a pathetic attempt at self justification over his stance concerning Syria, is absolutely staggering.

Since last year, Obama has been (in typical American fashion) working to an American agenda on Syria.  His pisspoor attempts to grandstand on heavyweight foreign affairs matters, to compensate for what could be generously described as disastrous performance on the world stage, led to him talking tough to al-Assad and setting a ‘red line’ on chemical weapons.

The Telegraph is reporting Obama’s comment that the world needed to show the Syrian regime that they could not use chemical weapons with impunity.  The paper goes on to explain that Obama defended his assertion that ‘a red line’ would be crossed by the use of such weapons, arguing that he was simply emphasising accepted international laws.  But then Obama elevated himself from President of the United States to self declared spokesman for the entire world when he said:

First of all, I didn’t set a red line.  The world set a red line.

So when I said that my calculus would be altered by chemical weapons, which the overall consensus of humanity says is wrong – that’s not something I just made up. I didn’t pluck it out of thin air.

My credibility isn’t on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line.

I try to avoid the use of profanity on this blog, but what a load of utter bollocks.  One drawback of being the American President is that a lot of what you utter gets reported.  This can prove rather inconvenient for the President when he takes off on one of his flights of fantastic delusion and denies his own words – which as you can see from his comments last year on this infamous ‘red line’, made on 19/20 August 2012, he has done.  The Washington Post is the journal of record here…

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus.

That would change my equation. . . . We’re monitoring that situation very carefully. We have put together a range of contingency plans.

The use of the Royal ‘we’ to describe the American position, followed by evidence that the red line is his calculus, his equation.  The world didn’t set a red line, Obama did.  He made no reference to speaking for the world, because he doesn’t.

The red line is Obama’s alone.  Therefore it is his credibility that is on the line – and that is why he is now pretending he was speaking for the world, rather than the bubble inside the Washington Beltway.   Obama is telling a naked lie and exhibiting hubris of staggering proportions.  It is the sign of a meglomaniac and someone who is irrational.  Obama was the choice of the American people, but from an external perspective what an appalling choice they made.

The President of the United States has demonstrated he has no credibility.

And it’s no better for the Russians either.  President Putin seems to have developed a serious case of amnesia about countries who launch a military attack on another country without UN approval, as these comments, translated on BBC 10 o’clock news tonight, make clear:

In line with international law only the UN Security Council can sanction the use of force against a sovereign state.

Any other pretext or method which might be used to justify the use of force against an independent sovereign state is inadmissable and can only be interpreted as aggression.

Just to refresh Vladimir’s memory…

Candy Crowley: Romney was right, just picked the wrong word

The moderator in the debate between Obama and Romney stepped in to ‘correct’ Romney as the pair clashed over what Obama said (referencing the assault on the embassy as a terrorist act, or not) the day following the murder of the US Ambassador to Libya in Benghazi.  Now outside the heat of the debate and having done her pro-Obama work, the reality emerges.

If Crowley had been unbiased and impartial, not that one expects that in the US media which leans so far to the Democrat party it’s a surprise it’s not toppled over, one wonders if Crowley’s injection would have been rather different.  Elsewhere someone who has undertaken their own fact check of Obama’s speech that day offers this assessment:

As for the actual Rose Garden speech by Barack Obama the day after the Benghazi Massacre, the one and only use of the word terror comes toward the end  – the exact phrase being “no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.”  The president was unclear as to whether or not he was referencing the specific coordinated terrorist attack in Benghazi, or acts of terror in general.  This confusion is furthered by the fact Obama referenced that anti-Islam video in this same speech and placed its reference toward the beginning, further adding to its significance as the primary cause of the attack.

Possibly this small but significant part of the debate is going to get a lot of focus in the hours and days ahead.  It will be interesting to see if Romney plays this up as the actual quote is spread far and wide.  Fraser Nelson is already helping that along

It’s Groundhog Day in Washington, again

The Washington Teleprompter King stoked up the drama of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill accident last night across US TV networks in a live address from the Oval Office. 

After comparing the oil spill to the terrorist attacks on 9/11 several days ago, Barack Obama has now described the effects of the spill as being like an ‘epidemic’.  He also went on to say that:

“We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused,”

I’m sure we’ve heard that line somewhere before…  it must be Groundhog Day!  Boy, making BP pay will be really tough considering BP – as long ago as 3rd May – proactively assumed responsibility for the clean up operation and promised it would pay compensation to those affected by the spill, without needing to be told.

But despite this, the snippy lightweight in the Oval Office feels the need to talk tough and give the impression he is telling BP what to do.  Yet again there was no mention of fully American companies, Transocean (whose employees ran the Deepwater Horizon rig using their own processes) or Halliburton, and their involvement in the accident.  This ‘broken record’ act by Obama is a feeble piece of posturing from a political pygmy, whose only interest is trying to prevent a melt down in Democrat support ahead of the November mid-term elections.

Obama’s continuing attempts to deflect blame onto a largely foreign company (BP) need to be seen for what they are, protectionist hypocrisy.  But Obama will be allowed to get away with it as long as our spineless fool in 10 Downing Street coos at him like a lovestruck teenager and fails to stand up against the blatant smear operation against BP and the UK in general.

Perhaps we should run a sweepstake on the blog to guess how many more times Obama will pledge to make BP do what it’s already said it would.  Any offers?

Obama should grow up and shut up

The Washington Teleprompter King is a desperate man.  As has been covered in the media on both sides of the Atlantic, President Barack Obama is incapable of opening his mouth about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill tragedy without parroting his blame-game narrative.

From his determination to deliberately mis-name BP as British Petroleum – akin to calling British Airways by the name BOAC – Obama has moved on to saying he would sack BP Chief Executive, Tony Hayward.  Big words.  Just like his retaliatory comment about his ineffective involvement in the oil spill, where, under pressure from the media he said:

“I was down there a month ago before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the Gulf,”

“I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar, we talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers – so I know whose ass to kick,”

Obama can kid himself as much as he likes that he is kicking ass, but short of taking a deep breath and swimming a mile to the bottom of the ocean and plugging the pipe with his bare hands, nothing he says or does is going to make an iota of difference.  The only people who can make a difference are the BP engineers who are trying to divise a way of stopping a leak the likes of which no one has ever experienced.

While Obama seems unable to stop the name ‘British Petroleum’ dripping from his tongue, his vocabulary seems distinctly limited given that the names of American companies Halliburton and Transocean seem notably absent from his rants.  Halliburton was conducting work to cement the pipework of the Deepwater Horizon rig and the rig itself is owned by Transocean.  BP were merely leasing the rig, but as the only non-American company involved in the accident, make a convenient scapegoat for Obama to attack.  If this were an American company rather than a rival, Obama’s comments would be nothing more than soft soap rhetoric.  After all, it was only a few weeks before the accident that Obama wanted to give the green light for an expansion in oil exploration.

BP has stepped up and taken responsibility and Obama has taken full advantage of the fact to act in a thinly veiled xenophobic fashion.  Obama’s judgement has been tested and he has been found wanting.  He is still running for President rather than acting like one.  Many people refused to be taken in by the spin and deification of Obama, an academic, unseasoned and untested political climber who played on ethnicity and meaningless soundbites to sweep people into a frenzy.  When the going has got tough the mind numbing chant of ‘Yes we can’ has been shown to mean ‘No I can’t’.

Since arriving in the White House, people have come to realise that Obama is just another Washington Windbag, a Political Puppet whose strings are pulled by special interests and left wing self loathers who are undermining the United States.  He has nothing of value to add to the effort to cap the Deepwater Horizon pipe.  His outbursts are just a self serving effort to maintain his own popularity amid the exposure that sitting in the Oval Office doesn’t amount to anything when he doesn’t control the people who will eventually develop and execute a solution to stop the oil leak.  Obama should do us all a favour, grow up and shut up.

Our former friends the Americans

Writing on his Telegraph blog today, Alex Singleton had this to say:

The special relationship is over. We gave America years of unwavering support after September 11. And now we see how Barack Obama’s administration repays us.

First, Obama declared that America was “neutral” over the sovereignty of the Falklands, ignoring the clear wishes of the islands’ population. And, second, his Assistant Secretary of State, Philip Crowley, snubbed Britain by failing to use their proper name and instead calling them the “Malvinas”.

I don’t know where Obama learned about diplomacy, but his stinks. I’m normally pro-American, but Mr Obama’s seeming support for Argentinian aggressors, who have no legitimate claim over the Falklands, is gratuitously offensive. So from today, I’m boycotting America as a tourist destination. This summer, I’ll be going to France, not California.

Let me be clear: I’m not normally in favour of boycotts, and I love the American people.  I holiday in their country regularly, and hate the tedious snobby sneers against the United States. But the American people chose to elect an idiot who seems hell bent on insulting their allies, and something must be done to stop Obama’s reckless foreign policy, before he does the dirty on his allies on every issue.

If our American friends want to stop Obama shredding the respect the rest of the planet has towards America, they need to stop Obama’s destructive policies – and fast.

With the exception of believing in the ‘special relationship’ and holidaying in France, ditto.  The election of Barack Obama as President was the most astonishing example of gesture politics in history. His election was the end in itself and the hysteria and unquestioning fealty evident among many voters and across the media deserves all the ridicule that can be mustered.  Rarely has so much power been secured by someone who campaigned not on policy, but on the meaningless and undefined idea of ‘change’.  What that change actually means is now becoming clear around the world and as Obama’s administration shows its banal vacuousness his popularity and credibility is rightly going into freefall.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive

%d bloggers like this: