« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Aggression accepts Obama’s invitations in Pakistan and Iraq

Candidate Barack Obama suggested last fall that, as President he would not rule out invading Pakistan. He was more hawkish on that issue than both his Democratic nomination rival Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee John McCain.

The Taliban didn’t believe him.

In short order this past week, the Taliban captured Buner (see map), a strategically vital district just 60 miles northwest of the capital, Islamabad. The militants flooded in by the hundreds, startling Pakistani and American officials with the speed of their advance.

The President recently visited the troops in Iraq and assured the Iraqi people that:

“…we are [their] stalwart partner, that we are working alongside them, that we are committed to their success,” he added.

Obama said that in terms of training the Iraqi security forces, the U.S. must make sure “they know that they have a steady partner with us.”

The enemies of freedom in Iraq didn’t believe him.

A series of explosions killed at least 43 people Wednesday, making April the bloodiest month Baghdad has seen in more than a year.

Wednesday’s attacks are the latest sign that Iraq’s security gains are beginning to reverse. Large-scale bombings targeting civilians have been on the rise since March and there is widespread concern among Iraqis that the violence may quickly spread as the United States begins to drawdown.

Why should anyone other than American corporate CEOs fear threats of force from a man that voted twice as a Senator to cut off funds for the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? And why should anyone trust a man that threw his white grandmother and pastor of 20 years under the bus?

After all, the Commander-in-Chief didn’t say he stood between the pitchforks and our Islamist enemies. The forces he prefers to command seek to satisfy class envy, not homeland security.

In fact, our enemies abroad didn’t even need the further instruction of the President’s recent apology tours to be emboldened. Last year, great progress was being made by the people of Pakistan against the al Qaida and Taliban terrorists.

At first, Buner was a hard place for the Taliban to crack.

When they attacked a police station in the valley district last year, the resistance was fearless. Local people picked up rifles, pistols and daggers, hunted down the militants and killed six of them.

What changed to reverse progress in Iraq and Pakistan?

Americans elected a member of the Democratic weak horse, paper tiger Party, that’s what.

The world has seen this movie before. Whether it was Democrats cutting off South Vietnam in 1975, appeasing the Soviet Union as they opposed President Reagan’s victory in the Cold War until it was won, treating acts of war as felonies to indicted in the 90s, or bush lied lies emboldening Iranian, Baathist and al Qaida to keep heart and soul together, thus lengthening the Iraq War and costing more American and Iraqi lives.

President Bush was able to stay the course given the requirement of 67 votes to override a veto, and so essentially won the Iraq War, which President Obama tacitly admitted while with the troops. And we also learned last year that U.S. forces had made at least 10 incursions into Pakistan in addition to drone attacks.

But unlike 2001, the Muslim extremists are not so ignorant during this transition. Osama bin Laden miscalculated that President George W. Bush would respond to 911 with bombings of empty camps and nightwatchman like his predecessor, so long ago had been the partisan lessons to be learned about American politics.

Our enemies heard all the weak talk and saw all the weak surrender votes of ObamaDems from 2003-2008. They laughed as Obama feigned outrage at nose swabbings of KSM; library card snoopings and the denial of “OJ” trials for man-made disaster causers at Gitmo.

So they began preparations for their offensives soon after Election Day.

Now, post-Inauguration Day, see America in the Age of Obama betraying Poland, Georgia and Ukraine by denying them Reagan’s missile defense that he also deprives his own country of, despite North Korea’s GPS sitings of Honolulu and Anchorage.

They see him bow to a Saudi king and indifferently shrug at Communist Sandinista anti-American harangues.

Evil men see weakness. Evil men act.

Such is the way life has been on Earth since Eve bit the apple and will be till Jesus returns.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Examiner.com and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all for verification links may be accessed.

COMMENTS

  • TNJim

    what I’ve thought about the recent upsurge in violence in Iraq. Our enemies see a new opportunity to resume their aggressiveness in the wake of Obama’s pullout plans and the closing of Gitmo. They’re testing the waters now to see how Obama might respond, to see if he might flinch, as far as mounting a new surge goes. Basically, they’re trying to find out now if he’s a Clinton or a Bush.

    You’re exactly right when you say “Our enemies heard all the weak talk and saw all the weak surrender votes of ObamaDems from 2003-2008.” I see these attacks as “testing this new president” as Biden predicted now.

    Unfortunately, I see Obama staying on the course he set. Prayers for our troops are always the order of the day, but more so now.

  • David123

    Doing what worked then would move us toward peace now.

    We shouldn’t be ashamed of victory.

  • avgamerican

    The dems spent the last 8 years denouncing Bush’s war on terror. The simple repeated argument that the dems and Obama would be weak on national security was easily prophetic and now a terrible reality for the United States. New dialogue is Obama’s answer to raging violent hatred and threats. New dialogue aka APPEASEMENT. A fool is the man who thinks he can make new rules to old games only this isn’t a game or a telepromter. A bigger fool is the fool that elects this fool to lead them.

  • mom2oneson

    being in Afghanistan.

  • Karina

    They will continue to tweek our nose as they our non-reaction to their attacks. They’ll be bigger with more casualties while we sit back and complain about Michelle’s shoes (talk about a slap in our face). The terrorists are just getting started! When we let the guys out of Gitmo, do you think they’ll happily return home to raise goats? No, they’ll be fighting mad and ready to get back in the game. Duck and cover, folks. There’s more on the way.

  • Jack_Savage

    As soon as I figure out what I am doing wrong and the little button pops up…

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • bk

    The Pakistani government doesn’t have any problems related to the Taliban. The only problems they have is that they need to do a better job of providing basic services like education, health care, and a judicial system.

    Well at least that’s what the President just told us. Check out 2:30 to 5:30 in this clip from the other night.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=md6ZwWKOCpA

    This was the scariest part of the whole presser for me.

  • izoneguy

    And that is what the Taliban are trying to do…..
    They want to educate the children of Pakistian THEIR WAY.
    They want to provide healthcare to the people of Pakistian THEIR WAY.
    They want to provide justice to the people of Pakistian THEIR WAY.

    Just like Obama wants to provide all of these to the people of America HIS WAY.

    Obama is our Taliban.

  • redneck_hippie

    et al succeed in destroying the Constitution even further there will be no need for coups, Juntas or Taliban. Democracy will be a corpse.

  • johnminehan

    The Taliban had some success outside the Swat Valley and may be gaining some support outside Pastun tribal circles, but they were pushed back with heavy casualties this week by the Pakistani Army.

    April was a comparatively bloody month in Iraq, but (as in November and December) the attacks petered out when the leaders were rolled up. The Surge and the Anbar Awakening worked.

    Future success in Iraq depends on two things: 1) continued involvement; and 2) a smaller footprint. As with the Iraqi rising at the start of WWII that required the Brits to garrison the place with troops they could not afford to tie up, looking like an occupation force is almost as unworkable as abandoning the place.

  • johnminehan

    what a lot of people who understand the issues are saying:

    http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2009/04/journal-the-plausible-promise-of-pakistans-insurgency.html

    http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2009/04/pakistan-and-open-source-warfare.html

  • David123

    Our enemies don’t believe girls should be educated.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    was loved so much by muslims because of al qaida day care

    washington state’s patty murray?

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    the push back was reported after my column was published

    But that doesn’t change the fact that the Taliban has made progress since after the Nov election and esp since Obama took office.

    same in Iraq

  • antisocial

    on the grounds of “national interest”. The army and ISI will not view the Taliban as their enemy. The plan is to get strategic control of Afghanistan once US forces leave. Terrorist violence via JeM, LeT or other groups in India could quickly escalate tension and give Pakistan excuse to deploy on the border.

    Don’t for a moment buy into the crappy theory of basic services…

    This is a complex game going on within Pakistan. Extremist elements are embedded into the system. Army and ISI are symapthetic to Taliban and other extremist elements. Why do you think Pakistan has so many terrorist groups camped out there?

    It is a fluid situation and this President is going to have a very tough time learning on the job.

    Iraq is definitely worsening. I think the situation there is going to deteriorate.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • raider

    Rest assured, though, that Obama and his liberal allies in the media will spin any of these troubles to be the fault of Bush 43.

  • mailloux

    of just how dangerous Obama is in terms of foreign policy. You tied all the pieces together beautifully . . . connecting the dots of Obama’s words and actions spell big trouble.

    I didn’t Redstate much this weekend [those darn kids want to get out and play . . . the nerve of them! ;-) ], so I’m a bit late to the discussion, but I can’t hardly recommend this more.

    Keep up with your excellent work.

    Take Care, mailloux

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://www.tommyland.org/ lesreaper

    for the rise of violence in Iraq? Who wants to bet it’s going to be “Bush put us in this position and it’s his fault it’s falling apart now.”

    Patraeus himself said Afghanistan was going to need a major COIN change than the strategy in Iraq. Is Obama going to listen to Patraeus, or let Rahm run the war?