Veer Right Weblog

A Conservative View on Politics and the World

  • cover_art_xsmall1
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • The Freedom Our Forefathers fought for must be protected.

    "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." - Ronald Reagan

  • revised120x602
  • Advertisements

What did Obama say in NC?

Posted by rightwinger on May 10, 2008

Meeting with our enemies has not been successful in the past. Specifically this is not recommended in dealing with Al Qaeda. I think Obama needs a history lesson.

In his victory speech after the North Carolina primary, Sen. Barack Obama said something that is all the more remarkable for how little it has been remarked upon. In defending his stated intent to meet with America’s enemies without preconditions, Sen. Obama said: “I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.”

I assume the Roosevelt to whom Sen. Obama referred is Franklin D. Roosevelt. Our enemies in World War II were Nazi Germany, headed by Adolf Hitler; fascist Italy, headed by Benito Mussolini, and militarist Japan, headed by Hideki Tojo. FDR talked directly with none of them before the outbreak of hostilities, and his policy once war began was unconditional surrender. FDR died before victory was achieved, and was succeeded by Harry Truman. Truman did not modify the policy of unconditional surrender. He ended that war not with negotiation, but with the atomic bomb. (Real Clear Politics) Read the full article for yourself.

From the September 7, 2006 Congressional Hearing 9/11 FIVE YEARS LATER: GAUGING ISLAMIST TERRORISM:

In order to defeat Al Qaeda the following recommendations are given to Congress:

I would just very quickly summarize some of those
ideological tools or counter ideological tools, if you would, as born
of very much the same sort of mindset that Ronald Reagan used
to defeat the last terrible totalitarian movement with global ambitions;
namely, Soviet communism.
They are, in short, a comprehensive
strategy using energy, financial, legal and security measures,
and integrating them into what might be called a political warfare
program. Its goals should be to undermine and divide the enemy,
to split apart and peel away the enemy’s base, to deny the enemy
the social support infrastructure and, needless to say, the safe havens
that shelter its forces, fund its operations and provide its
cadre, pitting enemy factions against one another wherever possible,
and most especially, discrediting the ideological belief system
that legitimizes its cause

For example, it was striking that, in his excellent speech before the Military
Officers Association of America on September 5th, President Bush forcefully explained
why it is not possible to appease or negotiate with Islamofascists like al
Qaeda and its allies. He then proceeded to show convincingly that the behavior and
ambitions of such Sunni extremists are shared by their Shia counterparts led by
Iran. Yet, his State Department is actively promoting the notion that we can safely
and successfully engage in negotiations with Islamofascists like Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad and the ruling mullahs in Tehran.

Friends and foes alike are affected in ways harmful to our interests by such a
manifest lack of consistency and principle. (One case in point is the recent, increasingly
aggressive behavior of Iran, both directly on the nuclear issue and in Iraq and
through its proxy, Hezbollah, in Lebanon. Another is the deal recently struck by our
putative ally, Pakistan with tribal leaders in its western territories, affording what
amounts to a safe haven there for al Qaeda.) The same applies to the American people. (p.16)

We have to bring coherence to this effort because whether it is the Khatami visit, or whether it is the notion that we can’t negotiate with the bin Ladens of the world, rightly so, but we can negotiate with their Shiia Islamofascist counterparts in Iran is crazy making and, I think, discredits our efforts. (p. 12)



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: