THE DIPLOMACY OF TRADE BY BARACK OBAMA
Just when we thought that socializing the economy was the center piece of the Obama agenda, news come of the foreign policy stance that Obama is taking concerning Iran. But this time it also involves the Russians and the abandonment of United States commitments to help protect the security of many of our European allies.
Several nuclear watch dog groups including a recent report by the IAEA have discovered that rather than two, three or five years before Iran has the capability of having enough enriched uranium for a nuclear warhead, the Mullahs and their President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad already have at their disposal enough to yield a crude but no less dangerous nuclear weapon. Last month Iran launched a satellite into orbit from a two stage rocket which also indicates that they have the technology for a delivery system for a nuke.
So knowing that the danger is much more pronounced than originally thought and that Iran before this year is out can very possibly launch a nuclear weapon toward most likely Tel Aviv or some other populous Israeli city with the capability of reaching Europe and possibly the US East Coast, Obama introduces his first true foreign policy initiative.
In a letter delivered to the Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, Obama personally offered a trade. Yes a diplomatic trade. To enlist the Russians, (who have a good relationship with Iran), assistance with the Iranian nuclear problem, Obama offered to ditch the missile defense program that had been promised to several of our European allies, if Russia will help prevent Iran from making a nuke.
In other words Obama is willing to trade promised protection for certain European allies for assurance that the Russia MIGHT be able to convince Iran from doing something that no one thus far has been able to, and that is stop its nuclear program and especially the development of nuclear weapons.
The defense shield has been a sore spot between the US and Russia, because the Russians are convinced that the shield was aimed at protecting Eastern Europe from Russia. A throw back to the Cold War. The Bush administration assured Russia that this was not the case at all and that the system was protection against threats that have now become real from Iran and other rogue states who wish to do harm to the West.
The last time that a World leader was willing to trade an ally for assurances happened when Neville Chamberlain traded the Sudetenland for Hitler's signature on a peace accord that only gave the Nazi leader a free hand in his conquest of Europe.
While Obama's trade does not swap land for peace it is just as much appeasement because he is willing to trade for assurances that Russia possibly can talk and convince Iran from making a weapon. Iran has made it quite clear that being nuclear is their goal and while denying their wish for a nuclear weapon they have not admitted that they will not make one either.
Now with the possibility looming on the near horizon even this year Obama chooses to trade the security of our friends for Russian assurances of help. Is this the pattern for Obama 's foreign policy ? If so could Israel be next on the trading block ? Hillary Clinton has already stated that the US is providing $200 million dollars to rebuild Gaza after the unprovoked attacks earlier this year by Hamas on Israel.
Both Obama and Clinton have been rather weak in their,"support," of Israel and with the trade being offered to Russia, Israel could be next in order to achieve a Palestinian State which is one of Obama's goals. Other President's have tried to achieve this likely unachievable foreign policy coup, but no one has been willing to trade Israel for Palestinian sovereignty. Obama could be the first.
If not Israel then who else would Obama be willing to trade diplomatically in order to further his appeasement foreign policy ? The swap with the Russians could very well be the beginning of an Obama policy that is willing to trade rather than stand true to our friends and the unwillingness to use any military option to quell dangerous situations for our national security and that of our allies.
Ken Taylor
Several nuclear watch dog groups including a recent report by the IAEA have discovered that rather than two, three or five years before Iran has the capability of having enough enriched uranium for a nuclear warhead, the Mullahs and their President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad already have at their disposal enough to yield a crude but no less dangerous nuclear weapon. Last month Iran launched a satellite into orbit from a two stage rocket which also indicates that they have the technology for a delivery system for a nuke.
So knowing that the danger is much more pronounced than originally thought and that Iran before this year is out can very possibly launch a nuclear weapon toward most likely Tel Aviv or some other populous Israeli city with the capability of reaching Europe and possibly the US East Coast, Obama introduces his first true foreign policy initiative.
In a letter delivered to the Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, Obama personally offered a trade. Yes a diplomatic trade. To enlist the Russians, (who have a good relationship with Iran), assistance with the Iranian nuclear problem, Obama offered to ditch the missile defense program that had been promised to several of our European allies, if Russia will help prevent Iran from making a nuke.
In other words Obama is willing to trade promised protection for certain European allies for assurance that the Russia MIGHT be able to convince Iran from doing something that no one thus far has been able to, and that is stop its nuclear program and especially the development of nuclear weapons.
The defense shield has been a sore spot between the US and Russia, because the Russians are convinced that the shield was aimed at protecting Eastern Europe from Russia. A throw back to the Cold War. The Bush administration assured Russia that this was not the case at all and that the system was protection against threats that have now become real from Iran and other rogue states who wish to do harm to the West.
The last time that a World leader was willing to trade an ally for assurances happened when Neville Chamberlain traded the Sudetenland for Hitler's signature on a peace accord that only gave the Nazi leader a free hand in his conquest of Europe.
While Obama's trade does not swap land for peace it is just as much appeasement because he is willing to trade for assurances that Russia possibly can talk and convince Iran from making a weapon. Iran has made it quite clear that being nuclear is their goal and while denying their wish for a nuclear weapon they have not admitted that they will not make one either.
Now with the possibility looming on the near horizon even this year Obama chooses to trade the security of our friends for Russian assurances of help. Is this the pattern for Obama 's foreign policy ? If so could Israel be next on the trading block ? Hillary Clinton has already stated that the US is providing $200 million dollars to rebuild Gaza after the unprovoked attacks earlier this year by Hamas on Israel.
Both Obama and Clinton have been rather weak in their,"support," of Israel and with the trade being offered to Russia, Israel could be next in order to achieve a Palestinian State which is one of Obama's goals. Other President's have tried to achieve this likely unachievable foreign policy coup, but no one has been willing to trade Israel for Palestinian sovereignty. Obama could be the first.
If not Israel then who else would Obama be willing to trade diplomatically in order to further his appeasement foreign policy ? The swap with the Russians could very well be the beginning of an Obama policy that is willing to trade rather than stand true to our friends and the unwillingness to use any military option to quell dangerous situations for our national security and that of our allies.
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 9:59 AM
2 Comments:
I just saw one of your comments on another blog and I just wanted to come here to applaud you.
Thank you for NOT supporting Obama socialist agenda.
I personally see Obama's failure as a victory for the United States of America.
Hey, Ken. I am proud to announce that Texas is finally taking up the banner of State's rights and challenging the Federal government. We are not alone either. Check out the two HRs in this post at Judging Truth.
http://www.judgingtruth.com/
Post a Comment
<< Home