Obama Takes a Page from the Ahmadinejad Playbook
Posted in Public Affairs, Israel, Terrorism, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Iraq, wordpress, Politics, Religion, News Media, syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Osama bin Laden, United States, Iran, Hamas, Palestine, obama, Islam, Muslim, Abbas, Fatah, Saudi Arabia, Asia, 9/11 on January 28th, 2009 by Stanford Matthews President Obama takes another page from the Ahmadinejad (Columbia U) playbook. For the Iranian it was engage the opponent, your target, your enemy, the infidels. Attempt to persuade them you mean them no harm. For Ahmadinejad it was more a case of the trojan horse. For Obama it is more a case of the appeaser cowering to a sworn enemy of Israel and anyone who defends them. Falls nicely into place with that infidel thing. And just as nicely into Obama’s surrender strategy if you recall the campaign of 2008.
The only thing missing from Obama’s message below is ‘and they all lived happily ever after.’.. And we know the genre of writing from which that fantasy comes. Hope and change will not render it true. This Messiah would need to conjure a miracle or three for that to happen. Pleading shows weakness and no courage of conviction whereas strength through the projection of power and determination based on defending principle does. Count the number of times that appeasing the agenda of rogue nations has been successful in the past.
Russia was not requested to ‘tear down that wall’ during the Cuban missile crisis. Japan wasn’t asked to surrender right after they attacked Pearl Harbor. But President Obama tells the ‘Muslim world’ he intends ‘to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace.’ He tells people with no interest in peace with Israel that he will work on that. Is that what comes from a Harvard education?
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
President to Muslim World: “Americans are not your enemy”
In his first interview with an Arab television station, President Barack Obama offered a bold change to America’s relations with the Muslim world.
“My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives,” President Obama told Al Arabiya. “My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy.”
In the interview, conducted in the White House map room, President Obama also expressed his commitment to tackling the Middle East peace process immediately.
“Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we’re not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we’re going to start now,” he said. “It may take a long time to do, but we’re going to do it now.”
The interview is part of the President’s broader outreach to the Muslim world, which includes a promise to make a major address from the capital of a Muslim nation.
Al Arabiya is a 24-hour Arabic-language news channel based out of Dubai.
Obama to Muslims: America Not Enemy |
|
| By VOA News 27 January 2009 |
 |
| US President Obama gives exclusive interview to Al-Arabiya TV |
U.S. President Barack Obama says he will work to show the Muslim world that Americans are not their enemy.
In his first formal interview - granted to an Arab television network - the American leader said his job is also to show Americans that people in the Muslim world simply want to live their lives and make better lives for their children.
Speaking on Dubai-based Al-Arabiya television, Mr. Obama pointed out that he has lived in Muslim countries and has Muslim family members.
As for Islamist terrorists, he said their ideas are bankrupt. He said nothing they have done has ensured that a child in the Muslim world is getting a better education, or has better health care.
Mr. Obama also repeated his inaugural address pledge to extend a hand to countries such as Iran if they are - as he said - “willing to unclench their fist.”
He said the United States must be willing to engage in diplomacy with Iran and promised to lay out a general framework and approach over the next several months.
Asked about the president’s comments Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it is up to Iran to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community.
As for the current standoff between Israel and Hamas, he said “the moment is ripe” for Israelis and Palestinians to achieve a lasting peace, but he added that all parties in the region must play a role in the process.
Mr. Obama said it is not possible to think of the Middle East without looking at the region as a whole, including Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Pakistan, for he said they are all interrelated.
He also said he plans to follow through on a promise to address the Muslim world from a Muslim capital.
For those who feel inspired to criticize Israel for military action against rocket attack from Hamas the following excerpt and link is provided as the first in the chronology presented in this post. 
The US and Israel have been staunch, unyielding allies for most if not all of the long standing relationship. So why the 78% vote for Obama? To the casual observer it would seem logical that Jewish voters would have overwhelmingly supported John McCain for President. Here is one sources ’spin’ on the vote.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will meet Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas here in Jerusalem. Both Israel and the United States want to strengthen Mr. Abbas after the violent takeover of the Gaza Strip by the Islamic militant group Hamas two months ago. Hamas routed the forces of the rival Fatah faction, led by Mr. Abbas, who now heads a moderate government in the West Bank.
“Ultimately, the Israeli government and the Palestinian government, we share a common view of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace,” said Mark Regev, an Israeli government spokesman.
In a statement Friday, the State Department said the fresh warning supersedes a previous travel alert for the region issued in January. It cited “considerable violence” in recent months between Palestinian factions, as well as between Israeli security forces and armed Palestinian groups.
That is why it would be nice if the US could finish the missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Prepare them to take care of themselves and when ready call it a day. Every country foreign to the Middle East should then remove themselves and let the cards fall where they may. But there is a big flaw with this suggestion. It will never happen. Because the people in the Middle East countries are partly right. All the foreign countries involved in the Middle East have a stake in them but not for the right reasons. Other countries in the world will stay involved in the Middle East for their own selfish reasons. The centuries old conflicts in the region will continue and be complicated by outside interference. And the whole mess will never end.
The first reference in this post is from June 17th and outlines the fact that Americans are certainly not pleased with Congress. Based on polling data over many months, the President, the House and the Senate have record or near record low approval ratings from the public. Of course polls don’t tell the whole story and not all decisions should be made as a result of polling numbers. The importance of the polls here is a trend that applies to a long period of time. The statistical information can be significant as an indicator that all is not well. In addition to the midterm elections and the deluge of comments and demands communicated to the White House and Congress this year and last, one should be able to expect more appropriate response from elected officials. Not that they should be expected to find a perfect solution to satisfy all people but they should at least display the professionalism and intelligence in working together to solve issues.
Although the next reference is considerably older than the rest it is still valid. The point made closer to the beginning of this post indicated those favoring surrender in Iraq refused to accept the fact that everyone involved in the decision to go to war share the responsibility with the President and he alone should not bare the burden. If you glanced ahead you understand the point. The flawed intel everyone likes to mention was neglected by Congress in their assessment of a vote on authorizing the US to go to war. So why then does the surrender crowd continue to disregard this fact? Could it be they view it as harmful to their interest in bashing the President? Could the bashing be mostly political? Does the surrender crowd have an understanding of how damaging their surrender speech is? There are many questions and not much in the way of answers from those favoring surrender.
The articles referenced below are just a reminder of how central to all things MSM is the war in Iraq. The Dems have continued to make it a central theme of their campaigns. It is mentioned in nearly every speech, press release and news conference.