Obama’s America – Episode 191 – Obama’s Unholy Middle East Alliance

“This Is Your Leader Speaking”

By Arthur Piccolo

News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Fri. Sept. 26, 2014: From President Obama’s statement …

Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates cooperated with U.S. forces in the strikes against ISIL, he said, and “the strength of this coalition makes clear that this is not America’s fight alone.”

From the New York Times …

In disclosing the identities of the five Sunni Arab nations that joined or supported the attacks in Syria – Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan and Qatar – the Obama administration sought to paint a picture of an international coalition resolute in its determination to take on the Sunni militant group.

In fact it is a very bad picture!

These “allies” Barack Obama is so high on in his new crusade against ISIS  are not quite as brutal as ISIS but as bad in many ways, and even more insurgents – always call them terrorists please – can grow and prosper in their sick way because of conditions in places like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan and Qatar ….

So called countries in which there is no democracy and almost no freedom, and where women and others are severely repressed while Clowns that get away with being called kings and princes and sheiks are nothing more than villainous vile creatures who have been able to steal the wealth and the power in the places they lord over.

And now virtuous (sic) President Barack Obama is making them more powerful than ever embracing them even more than he has for the last almost 6 years – now considering noble warriors with the U.S. not only against ISIS but Evil wherever he finds it.

In other words dear readers, Obama is EMPOWERING these repressive, fundamentally corrupt goon regimes in these five dynasties, single powerful families who rule over these 5 so called nations with their iron fists.

And here comes the irony – it is the U.S. doing almost all of the bombing and missiles launching, and paying for much of this air campaign against ISIS, while the others do practically nothing , except take the credit as Obama’s buddies and become even less likely to ever lose their absolute power over their own citizens. And of course all these thieves are running around in white sheets for show when they are out in public in their own lands – and they do own them – but they party hard on their luxurious jets and villas all over the world and their gambling escapades.

What a  rotten bunch to the core and Obama loves them all

But they are just part of this ugly story. Even if we leave them out of the picture for the rest of this episode, it still gets worse for Obama. That he is a make believe clueless toy soldier. Both the New York Times and the Financial Times among others have just SLAMMED Obama as an idiot for the absurdity of his war against ISIS and All the Forces of Evil.

Barack Obama is so profoundly Dumb. There is NO hope for him.

So let me provide the New York Times and Financial Times the honor of utilizing the rest of this episode to tell their version of this Sad Story.

First, our regular partner The New York Times, Wednesday’s editorial ..

It is titled: “Wrong Turn on Syria: No Convincing Plan.” 9/24/14 …

“President Obama has put America at the center of a widening war by expanding into Syria airstrikes against the Islamic State, the Sunni extremist group known as ISIS and ISIL. He has done this without allowing the public debate that needs to take place before this nation enters another costly and potentially lengthy conflict in the Middle East.”

“He says he has justification for taking military action against the Islamic State and Khorasan, another militant group. But his assertions have not been tested or examined by the people’s representatives in Congress. How are Americans to know whether they have the information to make any judgment on the wisdom of his actions?”

“There isn’t a full picture — because Mr. Obama has not provided one — of how this bombing campaign will degrade the extremist groups without unleashing unforeseen consequences in a violent and volatile region. In the absence of public understanding or discussion and a coherent plan, the strikes in Syria were a bad decision.”

Some ENCORES please …

“He has done this without allowing the public debate that needs to take place before this nation enters another costly and potentially lengthy conflict in the Middle East”

“How are Americans to know whether they have the information to make any judgment on the wisdom of his actions?”

“In the absence of public understanding or discussion and a coherent plan, the strikes in Syria were a bad decision.”

I probably should print the entire editorial but here is some more ..

“The military action early Tuesday was quite different from what Mr. Obama explained in a televised speech on Sept. 10. For months, the administration has focused on the ISIS threat, yet these strikes also targeted Khorasan, a group the government says is linked to Al Qaeda and engaged in “active plotting that posed an imminent threat to the United States and potentially our allies.”

It is puzzling that Mr. Obama would address the nation on a terrorist threat and not mention the group that officials now say poses an imminent threat to the United States, which ISIS does not. They say they kept details about Khorasan secret so the group would not know it was being tracked. But past threats, including Osama bin Laden, were discussed openly even as they were tracked.

In its totality, this brutally critical response to Obama amounts, although they never say, to the New York Times in effect calling Obama  a Clown, which of course we do not hesitate to do here in Obama’s America.

Now let’s turn to our occasional partner, The Financial Times. An opinion piece titled: “Obama revives the failed logic of the war on terror” 9/25/14 …

“The US invaded Iraq in 2003 with misplaced certainty, misconstrued assumptions and poor foresight. The same is true of its armed intervention against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (known as Isis).”

“President Barack Obama’s Middle East policy is adrift amid the region’s shifting currents. Indeed, since the Arab uprisings began, the White House has misdiagnosed each crisis, intervened with little heed to the consequences and overestimated its ability to shape the outcomes in its favor.”

ENCORE …

“President Barack Obama’s Middle East policy is adrift amid the region’s shifting currents. Indeed, since the Arab uprisings began, the White House has misdiagnosed each crisis, intervened with little heed to the consequences and overestimated its ability to shape the outcomes in its favor.”

And this ….

“Isis is not the fundamental cause of the problems in Iraq and Syria; it is a deadly symptom of a toxic environment. Mr. Obama is following the flawed logic behind the failed “war on terror”, focusing on body counts rather than the conditions that give rise to radicalization. After more than a decade, western military intervention has generated more threats than it has defeated.”

ENCORE ….

“Isis is not the fundamental cause of the problems in Iraq and Syria; it is a deadly symptom of a toxic environment. Mr. Obama is following the flawed logic behind the failed “war on terror,” focusing on body counts rather than the conditions that give rise to radicalization. After more than a decade, western military intervention has generated more threats than it has defeated.”

SECOND ENCORE …

“Mr. Obama is following the flawed logic behind the failed “war on terror”, focusing on body counts rather than the conditions that give rise to radicalization.”

Here is more from FT …

“Furthermore, the involvement of a superpower could intensify regional competition, perpetuating Sunni hubris and Shia fears, and increasing the prospect of war among states in the Middle East. Indeed, the US cannot target militants in Syria and also assume it is not an active participant in a regional and sectarian contest over the balance of power.”

“On one hand, current US policy perpetuates the Sunni Arab perception of an axis between Washington, the Shia and Shia-aligned regimes in Tehran, Baghdad and Damascus. It also could raise fears among Shia that confronting Isis is a prelude to regime change in Syria. On the other, it may weaken the incentive of Iraq’s factions to compromise, and could intensify competition among regional rivals in Syria.”

What more can I say? I don’t need to say more!