James Lewis
At this point there is no honest doubt that Obama is not just pro-Muslim, but that he favors Jihadist imperialism, whether by infiltration or violence. Or both.
Iran is an outright jihadist imperialist power, and it has been called the biggest terror sponsor by our State Department -- before Obama told it to shut up. Iran now controls the Syrian regime of Assad, the Houthi conquerors in Yemen's capital of Sanaa, parts of Iraq, much of Lebanon, and at times the Hamas-occupied Gaza strip. Iran's Revolutionary Guards are fighting in Iraq and Syria. Contrary to New York Times propaganda, the "smiling Ayatollah" Rouhani is actually grinning like a tiger after a big kill.
Obama's so-called "nuclear agreement" by the US and Europeans is simply a retreat before the most dangerous new rogue nuclear power. This is so barefaced a betrayal that even the US Congress is alarmed.
The rise of Iran as a nuclear and missile power has predictably freaked out the Sunni nations, Saudi Arabia (50 miles from Iran), Egypt (the Saudis' biggest protector), Jordan, and even Pakistan. These are Sunni powers, and in the case of the Wahhabi Saudis, they basically agree with the ISIS doctrine of barbaric killings, rapes, and slave-taking. The Saudis have already paid for Pakistan's nukes, and can call on them in a crisis, and may be taking steps to acquire its own production capability. Obama's "good friends" Turkey and Qatar have turned radical jihadist as well.
We are therefore seeing a nuclear breakout by extremist Muslim war ideologies in the Gulf, and Obama has done nothing to stop them; on the contrary, if Obama had his way, the paleofascist Muslim Brotherhood would now control Egypt as well. Fortunately Egypt's political elites rebelled and installed General El Sisi, who has dared to call for a "religious revolution" in Islam.
Obama may not be a Muslim, but he is a jihad sympathizer -- at every turn he supports Muslim extremists against moderates. Add to that evidence that the extremely dangerous Muslim Brotherhood has a number of known agents in this administration, and we see the United States facing the most dangerous threat since Communists infiltrated the FDR and Truman administration in the 1940s. A paranoid Stalin was the absolute ruler of the Soviet Union at that time.
Obama has now "negotiated" a surrender agreement on Iran's nuclear development and he will call it "peace." The Saudis, Egyptians and Israelis will correctly see it as the ultimate betrayal.
Obama has also retreated in Europe, where the US is doing nothing about Putin's aggression, and in Asia, where China has stolen vast amounts of disputed seabed territory from Vietnam, South Korea and the Philippines. Japan is now openly rearming, because it faces a Chinese threat to its existence. Everywhere in the world Obama's strategic retreat has empowered our deadly enemies and endangered our allies.
The silence of our media simply proves how ignorant, treacherous and corrupt they are.
Obama has brought us back to the most dangerous years of the Cold War, the Stalin period, when the Soviets had conquered half of Europe with overwhelming military force, and had stolen nuclear secrets from the US Manhattan Project.
So much for Obama's actions. Israel was supposed to bow down to his massive strategic betrayal. It hasn't. Obama is enraged by that, because that is the kind of human being he is. He now threatens to walk away from Israel at the UN, which uniformly hates Israel. The left-run European Union will join Obama's hostility and abandonment of Israel, with a few exceptions. Israel will feel psychologically isolated, which is important, but it is economically and militarily strong.
If a Democrat is elected in 2016, the policy of betraying our former allies may get worse. Hillary has been parading with Muslim Brotherhood heiress Huma Abedin for years, and taking money from Jihadist powers in the Middle East, notably the Saudi Broderbund itself. Nobody in the treacherous media has even bothered to pipe up. The general public understands nothing.
The biggest question in the world today is what kind of president America will elect next. Obama has 22 months -- but Iranian hardliners see the same deadline. Should they launch a major attack on Israel via Syria, to take advantage of a weak US and Europe? Or should they continue the patient expansionism that has worked so well before? Should they keep infiltrating the Arabian Peninsula step by step, or act quickly to throttle the entrances to the Gulf and the Red Sea?
What if the United States elects a sane Republican next year? Someone like Ted Cruz will face the most explosive international situation since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1963. In Europe he will face Putin's relentless pressure against Eastern Europe, the Baltic States and Finland. In Asia the Chinese are becoming a major military threat. In South America we see neo-communist Cuba and Venezuela being propped up by Russia. And in the Middle East we see all the makings of a major Sunni-Shi'ite war. Or possibly a war of extermination against Israel, which could quickly turn nuclear.
If we elect a sane president, he or she will face a sea of danger. Our federal government is infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood and other jihadist powers. Socialist Europe has idiotically cannibalized its own defenses, allowing Putin to romp back to a new Soviet Empire.
However, a sane US president would have some advantages as well. Our former allies are yearning for new American leadership, a new Pax Americana. The Sunni powers in the Middle East want to see the American cop back on the beat, to hold back Iranian aggression. So do Israel and southern Europe. In Asia, a defensive alliance is emerging between Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Australia. With the spread of shale exploitation, the Gulf may never again have the power to throttle forty percent of the world's energy supply.
A US president who believes in stability rather than "community disorganizing" will find a world that is eager to get back to safety.
It will not be easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment