Weak presidents make wars

Liberals/Progressives/Democrats (the whole crew on the Left) voted for Obama in significant part because they thought he was the antidote to the wars that Bush fought.  I wonder if any of them have noticed that, on Obama’s watch, there’s actually been more war in the headlines.  To his credit Obama continued the fights in Iraq and Afghanistan for quite a while, although he destroyed that credit when he announced in advance planned “pre-victory” withdrawals, giving Islamists time to re-group and turning our troops into sitting ducks.  He also expanded the fight to include Pakistan, he took the fight to Libya, and now there is every indication that our troops will be in Syria sometime soon.  In addition, civil wars are simmering and boiling all over, and there’s no doubt that the situation between Iran and Israel will soon come to a head.

(It’s worth noting that, even if the liberals have gotten their heads out of their . . . um, whatevers, they’ve been remarkably silent.  That is, they’ve ceased entirely the incessant anti-War squawking that characterized the Bush presidency.)

Unlike those few observant liberals who might be surprised by the global war frenzy, I am not surprised at all.  First, I’m not surprised that various pots are boiling over.  A weak American president is an absent cat — which means that the war-mongering mice can play all over.  Nor am I surprised that Obama himself has escalated fights, made them more vicious and impersonal, and taken us to battlefields that Americans haven’t seen before.  There is no more aggressive fighter than a cornered narcissist.  Cowardice flees when his own sense of self is finally at stake.

I’ve got to run, so this isn’t a very well-developed post, but I just wanted to get it in writing after reading the headlines today.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Cheesestick

    As much as I’d like to blame Obama, there are others that deserve blame too.  Weak people elect weak presidents who endanger the world.  

    I think libs should be forced to sit through a long video of the best samples of all the stuff they said prior to Obama coming into office.  Their constant harping was so off the charts, but I have no doubt that, at the time, they truly believed what they were saying.  I wonder if they are even able to look back at their previous hysterics and ask themselves why they don’t feel the same way now about gitmo, drone attacks, sand wars in oil countries, etc.  And if they can actually detect that they have changed their position (I doubt they are capable), I then wonder if they will notice that most of us on the right have not changed out positions.  And since they previously held us in such low regard due to those beliefs they now seem to share with us, do they now see themselves as evil, knuckle-dragging idiots the way they once viewed us?  

  • jj

    Liberalism does not reward introspection.

  • Danny Lemieux

    I guess another way to put this is that human nature abhors a vacuum. 

    We are in for a lot of world turmoil, blood and guts this coming year. Even more, if the Obamanation is reelected. 

    But, in fairness, “the world” despised America as the world’s policeman, so I confess to being somewhat ambivalent. Maybe the world (Europe, Middle East, North Africa, Asia) deserves a world without American interference, especially since we really don’t depend upon “the world” for our energy needs, anymore. Let’s see how it all works out.

    Perhaps it will also give us the opportunity to focus on those wars that do directly affect us: Iran (which has openly declared war on the U.S.), Mexico (which threatens to spill across our border) and…and… 

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    And the Left.

    Every nation and empire eventually has to figure out that the corruption at the capital is 10 times more evil than whatever barbarian warlord or two bit dictator they blew up with their conquering army.