Advertise on the Tentacle


| Guest Columnist | Harry M. Covert | Hayden Duke | Jason Miller | Ken Kellar | Patricia A. Kelly | Edward Lulie III | Cindy A. Rose | Richard B. Weldon Jr. | Brooke Winn |


Advertise on the Tentacle

September 25, 2009

We are the World

Joe Charlebois

Two days ago the President of the United States spoke before the United Nations to put forth four points of his international focus as leader of free world.


First, he spoke out against the proliferation of nuclear weapons; second was for a goal of world peace; third was stemming the tide of global warming, and lastly for economic parity worldwide.


During his address to the member nations, Mr. Obama chose to speak out of both sides of his mouth. He initially slammed the previous administration for going at things unilaterally, while chastising member nations for not stepping up and joining the United States as it lead on issues of international import.


Mr. Obama spoke of a world free of nuclear weapons as North Korea continues to increase their prospects of producing missiles able to deliver the warheads that they have already manufactured. This call for nuclear disarmament also coincides with the administration’s hollow attempt to prevent Iran from completing its own weapons of mass destruction program.


This administration shows none of the backbone that the oft-criticized Bush Administration employed. Whereas, George W. Bush used diplomatic channels with potential force in dealing with international crises, the states of Iran and North Korea know that Mr. Obama will only act in response. They know that they can buy time over the next four to eight years to perfect their weapons. They are patient.


The fact that the president is calling for the elimination of a number of our nuclear weapons is not really an issue; we have more than enough weapons strategically placed to still assure response to any state that may wish to cross swords.


The greater issue here is not the ability to have a retaliatory response, but rather can we provide a defensive umbrella in response to an act of aggression? Our NATO allies wonder. With the capitulation to Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev of Russia by pulling the missile defense shields and radar systems from the Czech Republic and Poland, we have alienated two of our strongest NATO allies. These countries know the influence that a strong Russia (Soviet Union) has in the region. They joined NATO for just this reason.


There are those who have expressed opinion that it is about time we limit our influence in Europe and stop forcing ourselves into these countries. These critics should understand – they want us there. They want the technology to protect their citizens.


In Mr. Obama’s speech his second pillar of international concern was world peace. As he addressed this issue, one could hardly understand just where Mr. Obama stands on the sovereignty of the state of Israel. He calls for peace between Israel and the Palestinian people, but he goes on to call the Israelis an occupying force since 1967. This area was formerly Palestine and he claims that the Palestinians have a right to that land. Which is why over the last decade calls for an independent Palestinian state has been accepted by both sides of the argument.


The fact that the President of the United States calls Israel an occupying force plays into the hands of those throughout the Middle East and others who are anti-Semitic, who see the end of state of Israel as legitimate.


The fact that this state was created by a United Nations mandate after WWII has had neighbor states at war with Israel off and on ever since. This does not make the land gained through battle illegitimate. Rather the land gained by Israel was held for nothing more than the ability to defend itself from future attacks.


For those who argue the case of occupation – like Mr. Obama – and call for the immediate withdrawal of Israel from those lands, I ask this question: Should the president call for immediate withdrawal of California residents from their homes and relocate them throughout the country and cede it back to Mexico?


Overall, the president may disagree with the way President Bush handled foreign affairs. If he was hated around the world, it was not by our allies in power, but by our enemies and anyone who wants to see the downfall of the United States. He was respected because he was powerful and backed up what he said.


What reason could be giving for the world’s love affair with this President? Why was he applauded by our staunchest critics – including leaders of Iran and Libya – on Wednesday? Our enemies received confirmation to what they already knew. The president officially put into words that he was abdicating the United States leading role in the community of nations. He stepped down as leader of the free world.


We will no longer speak about freedom worldwide (that is imposing our values); we will no longer defend allies (that threatens our enemies); we will turn a blind eye to wrongdoing (we’ll just threaten sanctions).


Welcome to New York, the capital of the world. We are now just a member of the United Nations.


Yellow Cab
The Morning News Express with Bob Miller
The Covert Letter

Advertisers here do not necessarily agree or disagree with the opinions expressed by the individual columnist appearing on The Tentacle.

Each Article contained on this website is COPYRIGHTED by The Octopussm LLC. All rights reserved. No Part of this website and/or its contents may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means - graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems, without the expressed written permission of The Tentaclesm, and the individual authors. Pages may be printed for personal use, but may not be reproduced in any publication - electronic or printed - without the express written permission of The Tentaclesm; and the individual authors.

Site Developed & Hosted by The JaBITCo Group, Inc. For questions on site navigation or links please contact Webmaster.

The JaBITCo Group, Inc. is not responsible for any written articles or letters on this site.