Posted on 01/15/2013 10:22:41 AM PST by Kaslin
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly declared that "a world without America is not only desirable, it is achievable." While that sentiment won't be embraced in President Obama's inaugural address next week, all other things being equal, it seems likely to be the practical effect of his second term.
Of course, Iran's regime seeks a world literally without America. More to the point, Ahmadinejad and the mullahs in Tehran are working tirelessly to secure the means by which to accomplish that goal. Specifically, they have or are developing the ability to engage in devastating electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks, biological warfare and other asymmetric terrorist strikes.
For his part, Barack Obama seems to have in mind bringing about a world without America in a geo-strategic sense. As Mark Steyn notes in a characteristically brilliant essay in National Review Online National Review Online, that would be "Obamacare's other shoe." It would amount to a "fundamental transformation" of America's place in the world, evidently intended to be the President's second-act counterpart to the socialist transformation of this country that dominated his first term.
That agenda is strongly evident in Mr. Obama's choices for key national security cabinet positions: John Kerry at the State Department, Chuck Hagel at Defense and John Brennan at the CIA. The three are, like the President, imbued with a post-American, post-sovereignty, post-constitutional, transnationalist outlook. In his administration, it would appear that their mission would be, as the American Enterprise Institute's Danielle Pletka puts it, to manage the United States' decline.
Having addressed previously in this space the serious problems with the judgment, records and policy proclivities of Messrs. Hagel and Kerry, let's consider those of John Brennan to further illustrate the syndrome.
Brennan is a textbook example of a U.S. official who has "gone native." He speaks Arabic and was formerly the top CIA officer in Saudi Arabia. He has shown himself to be deeply sympathetic to Islamists -- for example, excusing and dissembling about their commitment to jihad and the necessity of not offending them.
After President Obama himself, John Brennan is, arguably, the single most important enabler of the Islamic supremacists' agenda in government today. In his role as Homeland Security Advisor to the President -- a position that does not require Senate confirmation and that he was given as a consolation prize when it became clear that he might not be confirmable as CIA director back in 2009 -- Brennan has helped legitimate, empower, fund, arm and embolden them abroad, and embraced and appeased them here at home.
Of particular concern is the fact that John Brennan has presided over: the policy of engaging the Muslim Brotherhood, which has consequently been portrayed by a politicized intelligence community as "largely secular" and "eschewing violence"; the shredding of training briefings and the proscribing of trainers that might upset Muslims by telling the truth about shariah and the jihad it commands; the penetration of U.S. agencies by Muslim Brotherhood-associated individuals as employees and/or senior advisors; and misrepresentations to Congress about the true, jihadist character of the attack that killed four Americans in Benghazi last September 11th.
Of particular concern is the prospect that Team Obama's second-term team will, if confirmed, be even more insistent than their predecessors on engaging Iran. Make no mistake about it: The practical effect will be to buy the regime in Tehran the last few months it evidently needs to achieve what it has sought for decades: the means to have the world not only bereft of America's leadership and stabilizing force, but to neutralize and perhaps eliminate the United States as a 21st Century society.
Ordinarily, a president should be given wide latitude by the Senate to appoint those he wants to staff his administration. This is no ordinary time, though, and this is no ordinary president or administration. The circumstances are such that a Team Obama that is pursuing so dangerous a policy course must be challenged and impeded, not encouraged and abetted.
The Senate's constitutional responsibility to confirm senior executive branch appointees is one of the few it hasn't compromised, or allowed the president to expropriate. It must exercise its authority to assure "quality control" with respect to his picks for top national security cabinet posts.
Indeed, the fact that President Obama seeks not one or two, but three individuals who share his determination to achieve the radical and dangerous national security transformation he seeks in his second term demands that Senators defy him. After all, should the Senate fail to object to this trajectory by rigorously debating and defeating any -- and preferably all -- of these problematic choices, its members risk not only allowing, but becoming party to, the realization of a world without America.
We’re already there. Just as the great European powers have long since vanished so have we. It’s all pretend now.
Well, if the Muslim world, and their allies in the United States government, actually achieve a world without the United States, it would be only a few weeks until Russian
and/or Chinese troops cut through the Arab world and take
possession of their oil. Maybe the Muslims should add
another prayer ritual for the preservation of the power of the United States.
The isolationists also held sway during the interim of WWI and into WWII.
That did not work out well, but the US fortunately, by the skin of our teeth, was able to survive anyway.
Will we survive this century’s isolationists?
Didn’t the State of Iran endorse 0’Zero for re-election? If so, they did this knowing that 0’Zero would facilitate the wishes of those hoping for America’s decline.
Clearly, the Iranian president no longer wants our money. Time to stop sending it.
Liberals don't get it - when they've finished with us - they'll go after liberals who don't 'believe' enough.
Liberals don't get it - when they've finished with us - they'll go after liberals who don't 'believe' enough.
I basically see us following the same path of the former great nations of Europe....countries such as Great Britain, France, Spain, etc.... More interested in entitlements and pacifying restless minority groups, a strong move towards a secular society, declining birthrates, ageing population, children born out of wedlock, normalization of same sex relationships and other nontraditional family structures, a dumming down of our culture....all the signs are there...the America we knew is no longer there. People now days proudly proclaim they do not belong to any organized religion or political party. It is no longer about making money — it is about taking money....other people’s money. I see little to be upbeat about these days. Pax Americana is fini.
Iran is not a state, but a country. The Ayatollah and I believe Mahmoud Ahmanutjob did, but not the Iranian people
The American people have allowed this to happen.
If they use an EMP , how do I pay my taxes?
An EMP would be a big reset button...
It would make it harder for the government to
control it’s citizens.
Loss of medical advancement and media junk
would be a good compromise.
While we are all focused on gun control, the dollar is about to collapse.
While we’re fighting both a potential civil war, and a revolution against tyranny - Islam is going to build it’s forces to epic proportions.
If America is taken out of the global arena for a year, and that is a hopeful figure, Islam will dominate europe and Asia.
Then we’ll wake from a terrible night to a worse morning.
State - an organized political community, living under a government
Yes, and possibly 90% of Americans would die in the first year afterward.
Read the book "One Second After" for an idea of the disaster an effective EMP attack would cause.
Will we survive this century’s isolationists?
&&&
Most of the isolationists that refer to from the inter-bellum period were not hell-bent on destroying the US. These quislings are.
Well the North Atlantic would sure be bigger.
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.