A MAJOR INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EXPERT CALLS IT LIKE HE SEES IT:
WE POSTED THIS THE OTHER DAY.The Bush administration got a lot of things wrong – but at least they usually had some idea of who America’s adversaries were and who America’s friends were. For example, Bush’s policy of maintaining the special relationship with Britain was a simple recognition of the close bonds of alliance, friendship and interests that the British and Americans have had since World War I.
In contrast, Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are apparently clueless about some of the most basic aspects of foreign policy: supporting one’s friends and fencing in one’s adversaries.
The declaration of neutrality on the issue of the sovereignty of the Falklands issued by the US State Department is clear proof of the uselessness of the Obama administration.
...this mess is just typical of the drift in US foreign policy – if one can say that it even HAS a coherent foreign policy these days.
As I said, at the core of the problem is a simple inability to recognise and support our friends over adversaries. In his first year in office Obama made numerous apologies for America’s past to the Third World, he effusively greeted the Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, he bowed low to the Saudi ruler, and called for a “reset” of relations with Russia – all the while implying that America was at fault for all these problems.
At the same time he rudely undermined the security of America’s Eastern European allies by cancelling the ballistic missile defence with no notice and no prior discussion, he failed to push for a free trade agreement with Colombia – America’s strongest ally in South America – and he supported Chavez’s allies when they tried (luckily unsuccessfully) to unseat a democratic and pro-US government in Honduras.
...On assuming office, Obama’s vision of foreign policy was simple: he would repudiate past American policies and the whole world would melt before the president’s charm.
The administration somehow thought that we really didn’t have enemies with agendas completely hostile to our own – there were just countries that had become offended by US actions and they would happily cooperate with America as soon as the evil Republicans were gone.
Well, it hasn’t worked – and there was no Plan B.
BTW: THE BRITS ESTIMATE THAT THE FALKLANDS CONTAIN 60 BILLION BARRELS OF OIL.
OBAMA IS HELPING BRAZIL DRILL FOR THEIR OFF-SHORE OIL, BUT IS NIT HELPING THE BRITS AT ALL.
WHY?!?!?! SIMPLE: IT'S HIS LEFTISM: HE IS BIASED AGAINST EUROPE (AND OUR ALLIES) AND IN FAVOR OF THE SO-CALLED THIRD WORLD AND OUR FOES.
OBAMA BOLLIXED UP OBAMACAREE AND HE IS BOLLIXING UP FOREIGN POLICY.
OBAMA: WORST PRESIDENT EVER - ON RECORD TIME.
NO SURPRISE HERE. SIGH...
(VIA MEMEORANDUM.)
6 comments:
Just south of Rio Gallegos, Chile
has an impressive wall of derricks
lined up right at the frontier,
pumping...horizontally...all the
oil they need from these argie
retards' oil fields...
On Argiestan's side, hardly a few
derricks pumping a minuscule
fraction of their needs.
Argentina is totally unable to
pump any oil, despite huge
deposits in Tierra del Fuego.
Despite Britain's reduced capacity, Argentina is utterly unable to mount ANY military
action against the Falklanders.
Interesting times down there,
watching the Argies turning green with envy at the huge oil operation
certainly to start soon,
displaying the stark evidence
of their socialist incompetence!
Argentina has as much of a claim for the falklands as Japan has for Hawaii.
Britain has adequate forces down there. Nuclear attack sub with cruise missiles, permanent RN warships on station, a flight of the latest Typhoon air defence fighters, a modern airbase that can bring in reinforcements quickly, 1,000 troops, anti aircraft missile defence system.
No way will they get anywhere, except it is worrying that virtually the whole of S.America is against us. Obama doesn't want to upset them and the US's own latino's.
My view (and others) is we should say FU Obama, deal with Afghanistan, we are pulling out so we can reinforce the Falklands garrison.
For once, I agree with Ray.
:)
Rule friggin Brittania on this one baby.
'DO YOU ANCHOR HARDY?'
Tin horn dictators and their socialist wannabe brothers and sisters in law can jam it
Say, where is the General Belgrano these days?
"For once, I agree with Ray." Pasto: don't be so sensitive, we agree on a lot more than you realise. My views are an enigma wrapped in foggy mist. I cannot be labelled but quite often our views coincide but I don't always tell you :)
Epamondinas: The General Belgrano is down with Davy Jones and much of the Argentinian Air Force also, thanks to US support by supplying the latest sidewinders. Those were the days. Maggie and Ronnie.
Argentina stood a better chance in 1982 than they do now of recliaming the Falklands. In 1982, they actually had 220 modern (for '82) fighter aircraft with deadly Exocet anti-ship missiles. Despite this, they had severe difficulties dealing with the Britain's 34 Harriers at the time and were completely petrified of British nuclear attack submarines (see sinking of Belgrano). Now, Argentina's airforce is made up of about 50 outdated fighter aircraft that would likely be blasted out of the sky by two modern RAF Typhoons. The Falklanders themselves scoff at the idea of Argentine rule. While Brazil is overtly cozying up to the enemy, Iran, the U.S. supports them in oil recovery and not its cultural father and historical ally? This is a travesty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_air_forces_in_the_Falklands_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_force_of_Argentina
Post a Comment