And now for a few more 140s

MilitantIslam-FLIKR-WEB I don’t recall if I’ve mentioned this before, but one of the many ways in which the Obama administration is cozying up to the Islamist world is by changing the basic vocabulary of US security documents. As reported by ICEJ, Unity Coalition for Israel, and others, efforts are being made to remove terms such as “Islamic extremism” and “jihad” from core defense policy statements. The President has repeatedly said he wishes to promote better relations with the Muslim world, but doesn’t he also say that extremism and jihad are not truly a part of that world? So why then would he have a problem with those terms?

***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***

That last was of course a rhetorical question. It sadly does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why Barack Obama wants to remove references to Islamist terror from US defense documents. Lt.-Col. (ret.) Ralph Peters doesn’t bill himself as a rocket scientist, but does have credentials as a military analyst, and is cited in Israel National News as putting it rather bluntly:

Obama apparently has a chip on his shoulder against Israel – and it’s not “helpful to our civilization.”

***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***

More bad news: Jonathan Tobin has written an article in Commentary Magazine titled Obama’s Diplomatic War on Israel Is Just Getting Started. In his column he points out that as far as Obama is concerned, it’s about having his way without regard for regional realities. As Tobin lays it out, the way the Obama administration approaches Middle East issues

obama_wh_032610_monster_397x224 …fits in with the messianic self-confidence of the president, and with the vision of his presidency that his staffers exude. They are not interested in the fact that such attempts have always failed because of Palestinian intransigence, or that such attempts have ultimately led to more, not less, violence. It isn’t clear whether they truly believe that weak figures like Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad can sign any peace deal that recognizes Israel’s existence within any borders. But the administration’s simmering resentment against Israel seems to be driving this development more than anything else…

***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***

I’d like to think I’m changing the subject with this next one, but I’m not really. At least I get to talk about Iran rather than Israel for just a  moment. New York Post writer Rich Lowry nicely sums up the entire farce of putting the brakes on a nuclear Iran through endless talk of sanctions:

The rules of the great Iranian nuclear charade are simple: We pretend to punish the Iranians for the nuclear- weapons program that they pretend doesn’t exist.

I’m sorry, Rich, but I admit I didn’t pay all that much attention to the rest of your article, but you just nailed it so well in that opening line. Maybe we need more minds that can just see it the way it is, and say so.

And with that I’ll say good night!

Advertisements

Comments Off on And now for a few more 140s

Filed under 140s, U.S. against Israel

Comments are closed.