Lame Duck President Obama

Submitted by Ludvikus (United States), Feb 15, 2015 at 12:52

Dear Daniel Pipes,

I voted for Barack Obama in 2008 for the good of our country; I perceived him to be extremely intelligent, and I knew that his elevation to the Office of President of the United States would be a wonderful remedy for our country's racist past; I also appreciated the opportunity his candidacy offered to affirm the American Dream, that with hard work, and luck, one could attain the highest goals available, irrespective of origins, other than birth in the territories of the United States.

However, that was in relation to our domestic policy. Regarding foreign policy issues, I was in a dillemma. And now I realize that my concerns were not unfounded. I believe our President Obama is completely mistaken as to the best policy regarding the "Islamist" confronting us, and the rest of the World, particularly Europe and Africa.

I particular, Obama appears to believe that Iran, and its version of Islam, and allies, are the "good guys," while the majority Sunni Muslims are the "bad guys" (or rather that is the consequency of his strategic choices). And like a modern "Don Quixote," Obama is "speaking softly" through his negotiators in peace conferences, while having forgotten his "Big Stick" at the Pentagon.

It seems to me he needs to be reminded of Shakespeare's line: "a plague on both their houses." The (Houthi) Shia'a are bussy conquering territory in Yemen and Iraq, while the Sunnis of IS are inspiring similar movement in sub-Sahara Africa. There is no way that outsiders, by which I mean non-Muslims, can solve this ancient struggle over the "correct" interpretation of the Koran, or the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad. Therefore, a smarter policy and strategy is the old Roman and British one: "divide and conquer." We need a President who can excercise Realpolitic and play off these forces against each other for the benefit of the civilized World, particularly the Western part.

Iran isn't even a party to the Arab Initiative. It's aim is the destruction of Israel. And our interests in Israel aren't merely those of sympathy and empathy. Rather, Israel is on the Front Line of Western World's struggle against the Islamization of the Mediteranean Lake.

How about considering Neocolonialism whereby North Africa particularly would be settled by European Muslims supported by private economic incentives?

444-days Democrat Carter - our President who was "paralyzed" with hostages held in our embassy in Tehran left office while this "Death to America" continued its imprisonment of innocent Americans. This "civilized" nation of Iran is rooted in disregarding the European custom of immunity in Embassies which even the Nazis (arguably) honored. It was only when Republican and "Cowboy" Ronald Regan assumed office that the hostages were released as a gift to the incumbent.

Anyone who believes that an agreement through diplomacy can be achieved with the theocracy of Iran has forgotten their recent history with "Apartheid" Carter; but also, hasn't learned his lessons as to the principles embodied in the Koran, and its interpretation, regarding a "temporary truce" with the "House of War." [i.e., we are the House of War, the Iranians are the House of Peace].

And on the Yemeni front, the Houthis have advised the few remaining Jews (a few score) that the Houthis have [http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/15/us-yemen-security-jews-idUSKBN0LJ0QB20150215] have no problems with Jews, only Israel. Accordingly, the West should have no problem with Muslims, only Islamism.

But the point is, dear Daniel Pipes, that Strategically speaking, we should prepare for a Republican Presidency, and do what it takes to recognize Obama as a Lame Duck since he'll be out of office in 2016.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".