Oh my. Right there at the top of Memeorandum is the text of Obama's UN speech. Should I read it? Will it enrage me? Is it another apology speech? Augh!I've been away from the computer and blog for some 36 hours - an eternity in the news loop. I had to work at school 13 hours yesterday - got home around 8. Today? No planning period - giving a PLAN test instead. So it's been a busy day. No time to click over to Hot Air or Memeorandum during the day! And holy crap, I pulled up in my driveway this afternoon to find that my neighbor is getting a new roof. We have a double driveway between our houses which means MY driveway is somewhere under pallets of shingles, nails, and roof debris. How long before I get a flat?
What did Obama say? I guess I better go look.
Hmph. I only got to sentence two before I had a gripe. I'm wondering what exactly he means when he says he is "determined to act boldly and collectively on behalf of justice and prosperity at home and abroad"? Because I don't think those protesting for freedom and for a fair election in Iran think he acted "boldly...on behalf of justice" abroad. I'm not sure General McChrystal is prepared to say that's what Obama is doing either. But, I'll keep going...
Well, well. Cue the Kumbaya Chorus: "I have outlined a comprehensive agenda to seek the goal of a world without nuclear weapons." Naive dolt. Does Iran know about this? Did they get that memo?
Later in the speech he says "if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards; if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people; if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East -- then they must be held accountable." I'm not sure what he means by "accountable" other than sanctions and we all know how well sanctions work. Like, not at all?
Overall, I think the speech is not so much anti-Americanism as what he has displayed in speeches abroad, although there is some of that, as it is a display of submission and weakness. When he says "For the most powerful weapon in our arsenal is the hope of human beings -- the belief that the future belongs to those who would build and not destroy; the confidence that conflicts can end and a new day can begin." For my part, I'd rather be armed with serious hardware weaponry when they come after me rather than the "hope" that they'll leave me alone. Call me paranoid, but I think it's pretty clear that the terrorists aren't impressed with his hope, change, love, and pretty words. By the way, gun sales are way up in the U.S.; same for ammunition.
I think all in all, after reading the whole speech, that he does nothing to appease our allies whom he has alienated to an alarming degree in just nine months. He does more to appease those that hate us and want to destroy us. He completely disavowed the moral superiority of America that we have held dear for so long, that we have fought for so long, and that is at the root of who we are. He makes us no more relative, important or superior in the total world scheme of things than Iran or any other tiny little country.
He did Israel no favors in the speech either. And according to the NYT text, he got an applause when he said he made sure we quit torturing people. It doesn't seem like he's as committed to upholding our national security as he is in trying to be sure that the world "likes" us.
Overall, I'd call the speech incredibly weak and naive. It's an embarrassing day if you ask me. Depressing.
2 comments:
In the past,when we have had a weak leader of this nature , it has led to war. I just hope we can survive this nut.
What I want to know is how the heck can they stand behind a podium and speak? I'd go nuts if I tried that. I stalk around the room like a caged tiger when I teach.
Post a Comment