Posted on 04/06/2009 9:22:14 AM PDT by AIM Freeper
When The New York Times reports on President Obama’s foreign policy pronouncements, it treats rhetoric as reality.
A story in today’s paper, covering the administration’s “response” to North Korea’s missile test yesterday, gave the illusion of action in the face of international peril.
The Times reports that Obama called for new U.N. sanctions (which haven’t worked in the past). Our bold and decisive leader also “laid out a new approach to American nuclear disarmament policy — one intended to strengthen the United States and its allies in halting proliferation.”
Further down in the story, The Times explains that this “new approach” would consist of the United States reducing its stockpile of nuclear weapons and signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, strenuously resisted by Congress in the past.
In other words, if the United States voluntarily reduces its stockpile and limits its own weapons development, that will somehow convince our “reluctant allies” to begin enforcing sanctions against North Korea and Iran.
This The Times reported with a straight face.
(Excerpt) Read more at boycottnyt.com ...
As with most libtards.....passive parenting (strong nations) yields spoiled children (rogue nations).
Since when did the NYT ever oppose craven appeasement in response to fanatics and despots?
Our ememies are not impressed by our unilateral disarmament, they are empowered by it.
Barry's "response" was to vote "present".
OH my, this crazy SOB is going to get us all Killed. Amen.
Well, should there be another 9/11, one can only hope the NYT will somehow be involved.
They're trying.
Oh great “Peace in our time”
All of which is to offer the observation that our present leaders are dangerously delusional and historically ignorant.
embargo dog and cat exports to N korea
When The New York Times reports on President Obama’s foreign policy pronouncements, it treats rhetoric as reality
Word may be mightier than sword at times, but its very easy to make a mistake by assuming that its always like that.
Perception of reality in many instances is as important as reality itself. “Bush=idiot, Obama=genius” reality was instrumental in bringing Obama to power. But it has limitations. It does not take into account the players outside of the system. And the real world provides schemers and intrigants that can and will eat Obama for breakfast. As Chicago machine had an advantage over less skillful players, its not a match against people that came to power in the jungles of Kremlin, Peking, Tehran, Pyongyang
Yes, the Kumbaya will be sung in the Gulag behind barbed wire.
During the Vietnam war and the Cold War, the NYT and other libs, were always pushing the government to do more, to make another proposal, incrementally weaking the U.S. with each new one. Meanwhile, the Soviets and the North Vietnamese just sat back, waiting to see what new (weakened) proposal would issue forth from the U.S. - why should they bother to respond?
They knew our media would eventually force the government to make another peace proposal - because the talks were "stalled". Remember that word? Intelligent people know why talks were stalled - The Soviets and NV weren't responding, so we "needed to do more" to get the talks going again.
When you know your enemy wants peace at any price (another phrase from the '70's), they just sit there and let you negotiate with yourself. They win, you lose. Liberals believe in good intentions, real people believe in actions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.