‘Divorced From Reality’

Assigned Reading: The Nuclear Illusionist
(FROM: The Wall Street Journal)

Fantastic. A must read commentary in today’s Wall Street Journal. Here we have an American president who was able to assume office because words meant nothing, arguing that when dealing with the threat of atomic terrorism, “words must mean something.”

Where does the idealism on the left end? Just as the dirty crack addict on the street will not break his addiction regardless of whether you give him a dime or a twenty, terrorists around the globe will not simply ignore their blind and bred hatred of the Infidel because the American president declares America to not be at war with Islam. Even if it did matter–it doesn’t–no amount of pandering or America-bashing will convince those who dream of sawing off American and Israeli heads to somehow change course and ask us to the next dance.

So the detente-at-all-costs approach to foreign policy continues. And the Journal editors absolutely eviscerate the president for it. Here’s an excerpt:

“Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words must mean something.”

So declared President Obama Sunday in Prague regarding North Korea’s missile launch, which America’s U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice added was a direct violation of U.N. resolutions. At which point, the Security Council spent hours debating its nonresponse, thus proving to nuclear proliferators everywhere that rules aren’t binding, violations won’t be punished, and words of warning mean nothing.

Rarely has a Presidential speech been so immediately and transparently divorced from reality as Mr. Obama’s in Prague. The President delivered a stirring call to banish nuclear weapons at the very moment that North Korea and Iran are bidding to trigger the greatest proliferation breakout in the nuclear age. Mr. Obama also proposed an elaborate new arms-control regime to reduce nuclear weapons, even as both Pyongyang and Tehran are proving that the world’s great powers lack the will to enforce current arms-control treaties.

There’s no doubting the emotive appeal of Mr. Obama’s grand no-nukes vision. Ronald Reagan shared a similar hope, and in recent years these pages have run a pair of news-making essays by George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, William Perry and Sam Nunn positing such a diplomatic goal. They probably gave Mr. Obama the idea. But the Gipper understood the practical limits of arms control in delivering such a world, and Messrs. Shultz and Kissinger are hard-headed enough to know that global rogues must be contained if we are going to have any hope of a nuclear-free future.

Mr. Obama recognized this rogue proliferation threat in his Prague address, but to counter it he offered only more treaties of the kind that are already ignored.

Share

Comments

  1. READING THE FINE PRINT says:

    uh, uh, uh teleprompter scrollings must mean something!

    All hail TOTUS !

  2. EVERYBODY UNDER THE DESK! says:

    We can get to a nuke free world real quick, AND end human caused global warming, by just going ahead and using all the nukes now, eliminating mankind! (a democrat and environmentalist dream come true). Just sayin….

  3. LEWINSKY UNDER THE DESK says:

    What is it with these Democrat presidents????????

  4. BIG STICK says:

    A world without nuclear weapons would be less stable and more dangerous for all of us.
    – Margaret Thatcher

  5. RELIGION OF PEACE says:

    “The problem with writing about religion is that you run the risk of offending sincerely religious people, and then they come after you with machetes.” –Dave Barry

  6. Gail B says:

    Apparently, North Korea hasn’t been charmed yet by AKA Obama’s Koolness. Maybe a usurper is trying to control things beyond his pay grade.

    We should have told NK, “If you shoot it off, we’re going to shoot it down.” And, if NK attacked South Korea (we have troops there) because we did shoot it down, we could just wipe NK off the map. That would have taken care of that threat.

    And, we’re stopping production of the F22, the best fighter plane on the planet?!

    And, we’re not at war with Islam?! Islamic terrorists?

    Why are we sending more troops to Afghanistan?

  7. SO TRUE says:

    The Democrats seem to be basically nicer people, but they have demonstrated time and again that they have the management skills of celery. –Dave Barry

  8. Anonymous says:

    This little Kenyan is a dangerous buffoon who needs to be put back in his box before he gets a lot of us killed.

    JV

  9. BLOG BOG says:

    Were it not for my little jokes, I could not bear the burdens of this blog.
    - Sam (taken from Abraham Lincoln)

  10. HACK HACK COUGH says:

    DO NOT SEND TEA BAGS! Send cartons of cigarettes to Barry. He just might smoke himself into oblivion. That’s some AUDACITY OF HOPE there, huh?

  11. Anonymous says:

    Please note: In case of nuclear attack you have 30 minutes from launch(from Russia)to prepare or respond. If you trigger this bomb in the local area – no time. It would be best applied as an air-burst bomb to destroy a wider area…The Enhanced radiation bomb will destroy more people than a normal nuclear bomb and leave the buildings. I feel really secure now that we are heading down this path to no-nukes..don’t you?

  12. Anonymous says:

    “Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words must mean something.”

    Mr. Soetoro needs to “walk the talk”

    What about the Constitution and The Declaration Of Independence?

    Sally

  13. tm says:

    His naivete about this matter only shows how he really is the second term of James Earl Carter.

  14. Left Coast Rebel says:

    Hearing the Obamation proclaim that ‘words must mean something’ is mind-boggingly absurd. Like you said, he was elected precisely because he said everything and nothing at the same time, better than anyone ever has.

  15. Wayne_from_Jeremiah_Films says:

    I’ve linked to your post under headlines on the Jeremiah Films’ post Demoralized enough yet?

  16. Anonymous says:

    Ronald Reagan called for no-nukes and you right wing nuts didn’t say a thing. Hypocrites.

  17. Jeff Schreiber says:

    Reagan stepped up nuclear weapons and defense spending, but didn’t want nuclear war. Instead, he wanted to achieve the same idyllic goals embraced by Barack Obama—world peace—but wanted to do so in a way that would render nuclear weapons and defense systems unneeded. He did that through increasing the power and scope and strength of the American military. He did that through investing in missile defense systems. He did that through a proactive and confidence-inspiring attitude toward foreign policy. He did that by ensuring, through reduced taxes, that we would be stronger on an individual level here at home.

    Barack Obama is inviting disaster.

  18. BAAAAAAA says:

    Right on Jeff, you just sheared that sheeple.

  19. Gail B says:

    Right, Jeff–Reagan is the one who gave the United States Military its respected reputation.

    He poured money into defense because he wanted the world to know that countries were not only not to mess with Texas, they weren’t to mess with the United States!

    My jaw is still dropped at the dropping of the F22, the best fighter plane on this planet. No one has anything near it.

    Oh, our dear president makes me feel so safe! I’m sure I will sleep peacefully now!

  20. OBAMA IS A SERTA PLOT says:

    Gail,

    SLEEP? Seriously, what is THAT?

    word verification: decibled
    What Barry gets (from Michelle) after she reads The Globe

  21. Gail B says:

    Well, the after-effects of all this is that the world is now perceiving us as unreliable allies and AKA Obama as weak.

    Guess all this might have been to take the heat off of our corrupt Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner. As head of the Federal Bank of New York, he was supposed to be regulating all these (now) bailed out banks.

    I hope Jeff does a story on it because I am loaded for bear about it. The whole thing–for two administrations–has been a scam and then cover-up. And American taxpayers’ dollars are paying the bill unnecessarily. Geithner and the banks are in violation of the Prompt Corrective Action law, requiring the banks to be closed. (But don’t panic–our money is protected by the FDIC–seriously.) I just found out about it yesterday.

    And in another hot-flash moment, I read that a psychiatrist has said that tension is mounting so over the eligibility deal that it could become a “flash point” for Americans, if Obama does not resolve the eligibility issue soon.

    How’s that for news on a beautiful Good Friday? Hope or without hope, we must persevere to protect our national sovereignty.

    Jeff, the very fact that you write to keep us informed and to explain things to us gives me courage to keep digging for answers. Thanks!

  22. Gail B says:

    OBAMA IS A SERTA PLOT –

    Sleep is what my brain allows me to do after 1:15 a.m., when my computer’s virus program begins its scan.

    And, being dyslectic, I read my verifying word as “cockroach” –rococh. (That’s about what my opinion of AKA Obama is. I like yesterday’s word, too: weaslterd.

  23. Gail B says:

    Clarification: If anyone wants my respect, (s)he has to EARN it with integrity.

Speak Your Mind

*