Posted on 04/25/2010 10:43:22 AM PDT by SJackson
It was one of the most significant developments in the Obama presidency. We refer to the leak last week of an explosive top secret memo sent in January by the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to President Obama's national security adviser, Gen. James L. Jones, deploring the lack of planning concerning Iranian nuclear aspirations should the administration's much ballyhooed outreach approach fail.
In itself, the memo's conclusion is nothing less than stunning - a senior official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, characterized the document as "a wake-up call." Yet the very fact that this highly classified analysis was leaked speaks volumes as to the apparent dismay at the highest echelons of our government over President Obama's lack of a realistic grip on national security issues. Taken together with Monday's front-page New York Times story about the president's relaxing domestic security standards ("White House Quietly Courts Muslims in U.S.") things seem to be on an ominous course.
Gen. Jones was interviewed by the Times but declined to directly address the memo. He did, however, say, "On Iran, we are doing what we said we were going to do. The fact that we don't announce publicly our entire strategy for the world to see doesn't mean we don't have a strategy that anticipates the full range of contingencies -- we do."
Secretary Gates issued a statement confirming he had written the memo, saying,
The memo was not intended as a "wake up call" or received as such by the president's national security team. Rather, it presented a number of questions and proposals intended to contribute to an orderly and timely decision-making process . The New York Times sources who revealed my January memo to the national security adviser mischaracterized its purpose and content.
But as the Times went on to report, "Senior administration officials, asked Sunday to give specific examples of what was mischaracterized in the article, declined to discuss the content of the memo, citing its classified status. In his statement, Mr. Gates offered no details on the issues he raised in his memo."
Excuse us if we are somewhat skeptical of these rather facile attempts at damage control. And do keep in mind that the memo was authored by the secretary of defense. And if he didn't know of any planning in January, more than a year into the Obama presidency, chances are none was ongoing. So whatever else one can say about the memo, it provides an important window on the administration's vacuous approach to foreign affairs and the extent of its naivete concerning prospects for success in dealing diplomatically with countries like Iran.
Maybe now Mr. Obama appreciates that the world's problems are not all the result of American arrogance or a desire to impose U.S. policy on other countries.
And there was this additional cause for concern: The Times reported on Monday that the Obama administration has ended "a policy subjecting passengers from 14 countries, most of them Muslim, to additional scrutiny at airports" and that during a visit to New York University, John O. Brennan, Mr. Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser, told an audience of mostly Muslim students he understood "their grievances including 'surveillance that has been excessive,' 'overinclusive no-fly lists' and 'an unhelpful atmosphere around many Muslim charities.' "
Significantly, in this latter regard, Valerie Jarrett, a senior White House adviser, recently gave the keynote address at the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North America, which was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the government's case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development "whose leaders, the Times noted, "were convicted in 2008 of funneling money to Hamas."
All of this does not speak well, we think, of the journey on which President Obama says he is taking us.
I would love to see the conservatives take Congress, impeach Obama and try him for treason.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
one of the most significant developments in the Obama presidency
Perhaps, though it's clear to lots of folks that our wannabe Emporer is naked. His foreign policy errors may be harder to correct than his domestic foolishness. Once Iran has gone nuclear it will be as difficult to confront them regionally as it would a nuclear Sadaam in 2001. Imagine Sadaam, at the very least astride Kuwait till today, more likely in posession of the oil reserves of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
Any fully-R Republicans elected would be too weak to do so, such as another McCain or Graham.
You betcha.
;-/
She seems too good of a person to do that to who would then be a former president.
A damning indictment.
We are experiencing a serious disadvantage of the unitary executive. It’s a great system with George Washington or Ronald Reagan at the helm, but with someone like Barack Obama in charge it can seriously endanger the safety of the nation. On the whole I think the Swiss style plural executive is a superior system. Even British cabinet-style government provides more safety from a really bad Prime Minister.
bookmark for later read
I would be so excited that I would toss my damn meds and go back to drinking just to celebrate.
Look at the merciless, baseless pounding she has taken for the last 2 years, non-stop. She hasn't missed a step, and her smile is still genuine.
What her assailers and her opponenets seem never to figure out, is that they are throwing spitballs at a battleship who barely knows, and just doesn't care, that they're even there.
Ask the good ole boys in Alaska's jails if she's "just too nice."
;-/
Ignoring justice would not make her a good person. I am counting on her to do the right thing, even when it hurts.
Unfortunately, you could add 100M Americans as props to that graphic.
gnip
The “Obozo Not-Quite-Ready-For Prime Time Players” are going to get a lot of people killed unless they are somehow brought to their senses?
What can they be thinking?
Bump
Or the other player in the axis of evil, North Korea, who can torpedo a South Korean naval ship with impunity, because it has nuclear weapons.
IIC - Idiot in Chief.
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.