OBAMA’S CHICKENS COMING HOME TO ROOST

Ticking time bombs from Syria to North Korea.

Democrats inherit the foreign policy crises of a thousand Republican presidential fathers, but the foreign policy crises inherited by incoming Republicans in the White House are always orphans.

Or at least that’s how the media likes to spin it.

If you believe your random mainstream media outlet of choice, North Korea and Syria were crises freshly spawned by this administration with no prior history. But these ticking time bombs are the direct result of the two terrible terms of his predecessor.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner’s years in the White House were the most dysfunctional, schizophrenic and senseless eight years of our national foreign policy. His domestic policy was a disaster, but it was a radioactive toxic waste dump with clear and consistent goals. ObamaCare, the abuses of the Justice Department, the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency were the naturally terrible outcome of left-wing policies being implemented with inevitably terrible results.

But Obama’s foreign policy was a wildly inconsistent mess. The Nobel Peace Prize winner couldn’t quite decide if he was a humanitarian interventionist or a pacifist non-interventionist. He couldn’t make up his mind if he wanted to take the side of the Sunnis or the Shiites in their Islamic unholy war. He didn’t know if he wanted to appease Russia or sanction it, to pivot to Asia or run the other way, to play another round of golf or replace his defense secretary for the fifth time.

Obama could be consistent on domestic policy because there were few hard choices to make. Government had to be constantly expanded and every arm of it enlisted in pursuing left-wing goals. Republican opposition was largely hapless. The “Irish Democracy” of the public response to ObamaCare was more effective at sabotaging it, but by the time anyone understood that it was far too late.

The world stage was a much more dynamic place with players who didn’t fit into Obama’s ideology. The Islamist democracy proponents got Obama to kick off the Arab Spring. When Gaddafi shot the Islamists in the streets, the interventionists got him to sign on to regime change in Libya. But then Syria boiled down to Sunni and Shiite Islamists shooting each other and interventionism hit a roadblock.

Obama stopped at his own Red Line and couldn’t figure out what to do next. His foreign policy had somehow boiled down to helping Shiites kill Sunnis in Iraq and helping Sunnis kill Shiites in Syria.

He was bombing and arming the same Islamists at the same time to improve relations with them.

Even a guy who thought they speak Austrian in Austria and celebrated Cinco de Cuatro had to know that something had gone horribly wrong with his foreign policy. When the Russians stepped in and promised to clean up the WMD mess in Syria, he was happy to take them up on the offer without looking at the fine print.

Like a badly programmed computer, Obama locked up in Syria because Islamists fighting Islamists didn’t fit into his left-wing code. He feared alienating either Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood. Meanwhile appeasement not only failed to defuse the growing conflict with Russia, but poured more fuel on the flames. And bluffing China with a hollow pivot only sent the message that America was impotent.

Obama’s tenure was marked by two inexplicable wars; a surge in Afghanistan that failed to accomplish any of its goals while killing and crippling thousands of Americans, and an illegal regime change operation in Libya that left the country looking like Iraq. Obama and his fans don’t talk about either of these wars. And you can’t blame them. They make ObamaCare look like a shining success story.

But they’re not the biggest Obama disasters that President Trump inherited.

President Bush left Obama a largely stabilized Iraq. All he had to do was keep the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds working together. It wasn’t a cakewalk, but it was far from the mess that it had been or would be again. A decade ago though Democrats had been as obsessed with Iraq as they would be with Russia. Obama, like the leading non-Hillary candidates, ran on being against the war. So he pulled out instead.

Pulling out alone might have been disastrous because it would encourage the Shiite majority to trample on the Sunni minority. But Obama combined a pullout from Iraq with backing for Sunni Islamists nearly everywhere else, including next door in Syria, who helped swell the ranks of ISIS.

The threat of ISIS and other Sunni Islamists helped Iran get a firm grip on Iraq and Syria. The Arab Spring wedged it deeper into Yemen. And Obama was too worried that Iran would walk away from a potential nuclear deal to do anything about it. The nuclear deal sealed the deal for a resurgent Iran.

And that means that Russia is the dominant power in the region.

Obama alienated Egypt by backing the Brotherhood.  President Trump has been trying to undo that disaster. Obama backed Turkey’s totalitarian Islamist tyrant even as he quarreled with and then sidled up to Russia. The only remaining strong ally in the region capable of defending itself is Israel.

Meanwhile possible alliances in Asia fell apart as Obama dithered. The Philippines has an anti-American government that Obama further alienated during his disastrous final months in office. South Korea has fallen back into political instability at a time when it can least afford it while Japan stands alone.

Obama’s Asia pivot was exposed as another gimmick when he proved unwilling to defy the People’s Republic in the South China Sea. His diplomatic efforts seemed to prioritize ideological gestures toward Vietnam’s Communist regime over meaningful strategic alliances. Aside from the risk of war over China’s expansionism, this failed policy was cutting off the non-military China route to resolving North Korea.

This is the route that President Trump is now struggling to reopen again by restoring leverage.

Perversely, Obama did more damage with his failed Asia pivot than he would have done by staying out of it. The non-military option, like so much of diplomacy, depends on the perception of what we might do. In Asia, as in Syria, Obama made it painfully clear that he would do nothing. And the average totalitarian regime has difficulty grasping that different American governments really are different.

The Iran deal once again sent the message to North Korea that nuclear weapons can only benefit it. And that, when combined with Obama’s failures in Asia, funnels us into the military option in North Korea.

Back in Syria, Obama’s Red Line stranded us in the middle of an Islamic civil war and credibility crisis. Obama had handed over the keys to the region to Iran and Russia. America is now stuck trying to get them back.

President Trump chose to do it by going back to the point of collapse and enforcing Obama’s Red Line. It was a controversial choice, but it made a clear statement that presidential promises mean something. It also sent a message to Syria, Russia and Iran that just because we don’t want yet another war, doesn’t mean that they have a free hand to do anything they want.

Obama saw foreign policy in the social justice terms of the left. Trump and his people see a geopolitical struggle. His predecessor believed that we had to atone for our historical crimes. Trump understands that at the root of local crises like Syria and North Korea is a larger contest with Russia and China. It’s the worldview that Obama had sneeringly dismissed as rooted in the Cold War in his debate with Romney.

And yet it’s far more useful than Obama’s incoherent foreign policy whose three pillars were Islamism, appeasement and global warming.

President Trump believes that global stability comes from the stability in the relationship between world powers. Syria and North Korea are just the ways that Russia and China test us to see how far they can push. His goal is to achieve stability from the top down by reaching an understanding with the other powers. And to do that he has to undo the credibility crisis that he inherited from Barack Obama.

Obama left behind plenty of domestic and international ticking time bombs, from ObamaCare to Iran, and Trump’s first years in office will be occupied with finding ways to keep the bombs from going off.

Published First in FrontPageMag.

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RECOGNITION FAIT ACCOMPLI ACCORDING TO THE KNESSET

IT’S APRIL – YEAR 102 – NO OFFICIAL RECOGNITION

It’s that time again.  April 24th 2017 marks the 102nd commemoration of the Armenian Genocide where Armenians all over the world, including in Israel, will never let you forget what we went through and demand worldwide recognition.  

As An Armenian dedicated to Israel and Armenia, on occasion I write you about pertinent issues.  I have a platform where I am known, Israeli Armenian Solidarity and Israel Rising has welcomed me as a guest contributor from time to time.  Since before the inception of Israeli Armenian Solidarity I have strived to be an instrument of knowledge, information and encouragement.  For the last 2 years I’ve been bringing Israeli affairs and Armenian affairs to the members of the group to speak out for and teach about issues these 2 great peoples, I particularly relished the similarities and our horrific tragedies.  

WHAT IS THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?  A basic question but believe it or not a lot people still don’t know about the Armenian Genocide.  It was the Armenian Holocaust.  It was perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire 102 years ago.  Initiated on April 24th of 1915 through May of 1923.  Yes, systematically, methodically the government saw WWI as an opportunity to finish the ‘Armenian problem’ ultimately the Christian problem.  Along with slaughtering 1.5 Million of my people, they slaughtered hundreds of thousands Greeks and Assyrians.  Whereas some might say “Aha, it was not targeted” indeed it was.  All three groups are Christian.  Therefore a major underlying factor was our faith.  Every Turkish government has subsequently denied what was perpetrated hence the biggest difference between the Holocaust and the Genocide.  Mind you, the Germans were close allies and onlookers of what ‘their predecessors’ were committing.  And yet, Germany caught red handed could not deny the innocent blood spilt, the Turks did boldly deny and have continued for 102 years.  

So every year, we remember and demand.

ISRAEL’S STANCE:  WE SAY IT’S A FAIT ACCOMPLI

Here’s the definition: An accomplished fact, something that has already occurred; a (colloquial American) “done deal

Last year in July 2016, Zehava Gal-On of Meretz initiated discussions about how imperative it is for Israel the Jewish nation, to recognize the Armenian Genocide in the Knesset quoting Eli Weisel, BD, who had recently passed on.  After some discussion the brilliant decision was made to defer the topic to The Knesset Education Committee.  The next day, the Education Minister came out with a statement:

“It is our moral obligation to recognize the Armenian genocide,” said committee chair Yakov Margi (Shas) at a committee meeting.

We, at Israeli Armenian Solidarity believe the Knesset has recognized the Armenian Genocide as a Fait Accompli.  It is a done deal.  

In fact, I made a video: https://www.facebook.com/keren.m123/videos/1478394385519832/

OK then, great what’s the problem?  There was no official declaration.  Without the official statement we are in a constant arm twisting mode….

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Every year, around April 24th, there are different events/marches being held in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.  Armenians all over Israel gather and call out for admittance from the Turks and recognition from the Knesset.  I ask that you all share this article and demand the Knesset to take that final step.  

This year, my brilliant Hebrew teacher, Zev Garber informed me that Yom haShoah Nairim is also on April 24th. This is no coincidence.  Now is the time.  Stand with us in Solidarity! Thank you.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fait_accompli

http://asbarez.com/152504/knesset-discusses-but-does-not-recognize-armenian-genocide/

http://www.timesofisrael.com/knesset-education-committee-recognizes-armenian-genocide/

https://www.facebook.com/keren.m123/videos/1478394385519832/

Understanding the Left’s Language Inversion

As noted by many, there is a striking double standard that is applied to the far-Left. The world seems to allow their statements and views to be heard and treated seriously, while the far-Right is correctly shunned and treated as a pariah.

Why is this?

Let’s look at the British Labour party as an example. The far-left ‘Momentum’ movement within the party is the reason why Jeremy Corbyn has once again been elected as its leader. This is a man who called Hamas and Hezbollah “my friends” and had his picture taken with Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon. This is the man the Momentum movement has kept in leadership and they have basically taken over a centre Left party, not in some third world country, but in the United Kingdom. With such a man at the head of the party they will never win a national election especially when many MP’s from his own party have no confidence in him.   

Another example is the Democrat party in America, where the runner up to the chairman of the party was Keith Ellison, who was a member of the radical Nation of Islam, a virulent racist and anti-Semitic organisation. He has said things himself, even as late as 2010, that are anti-Semitic and he is known to hold far-Left views. As the runner up of the chairman elections he was made Deputy Chair of the Democrat party. This is yet another example of how the far-Left have shockingly managed to become mainstream.

The reason for all this lies in their use of inverted language, which is rooted in relativism, the Lefts’ idol. When they speak of equality, liberation, freedom and other such liberal concepts they do not mean it in the way a normal democratic liberal would. Rather; equality, liberation and freedom in the way they mean often equals the mirror opposite. This inversion of language is used to cover up their radical views and it then gains them access to the mainstream political parties.

This was a gift given by Fidel Castro to the PLO. While it is known that Fidel’s secret police trained hundreds of Palestinian terrorists, it is not so well known that Fidel trained Yassar Arafat in the art of language inversion. Using the language of human rights and liberation as a cover, Fidel trained Arafat how to take the moral high ground away from Israel. He learned to portray Israel as the aggressor, a colonial and imperialistic creation. He depicted that the Palestinians are the victims of many crimes and are justified for their “resistance” against the State of Israel. This tactic seems to have spread to the Islamic terrorists like Al Qaeda and to the terror state of Iran who use the same language inversion to attack America and the West for their “imperialism”. This in itself would not be such a problem, because it is unlikely they would be listened to based upon their reputation, but the major problem is when this kind of language is used by the far-Left in Western countries. This provides a cover for the terrorists and makes defeating them significantly and incomparably harder.

It must be emphasised that the real war is a war of concepts, not just words. When concepts lose their meaning and are free for interpretation by anyone it is a very small step away from nihilism, which should never be allowed to take root in any liberal democracy.

In order for the West to survive spiritually it must make a firm commitment to absolutism and a firm rejection of relativism.

[watch] A Palestinian Leader Trump Can Trust?

With May 3rd touted as the date for the face to face meeting between President Trump and Mahmoud Abbas, the Trump administration should watch the above video and find there is a growing movement f Palestinians led by Mudar Zahran, Secretary General of the Jordanian Opposition Coalition that are pushing for Jordan to be recognized as the actual Palestinian homeland.  Trump can choose to meet with an old terrorist murderer and push the same old “peace-process” lies or meet with Zahran a real leader.  The choice is his.

[the_ad id=”4744″]

Outrage after Arab MKs Equate Chemical Attack in Syria to IDF Operations in Gaza

MK Zoabi: Israel “slaughtered children and babies in Gaza”

MK Haneen Zoabi (Joint List) was booted off a radio program the other day after a stormy interview in which she equated the recent chemical attack in Syria to IDF operations in Gaza.

The heated exchange took place on Israel Radio’s “HaMaznon” program, after host Yoav Krakovsky asked MK Zoabi for her views on the world’s inaction in Syria.

Zoabi responded by asking Krakovsky if his “conscience and professional integrity only exists in a case when discussing children that the IDF didn’t kill,” and proceeded to accuse the IDF of perpetrating war crimes in Gaza.

“Why didn’t you interview me when you slaughtered children and babies in Gaza?,” asked Zoabi. “[Assad] has been a criminal for five years since the start of the revolution in Syria, but there is another criminal – the Israeli army, and their place is in the International Court of Justice in Hague.”

Zoabi’s remarks sparked outrage from one of the show’s guest hosts, who said that he can no longer remain silent when MK Zoabi is lying and turning the Israeli army, which is the most moral army in the world, into the army of Assad’s murderers.

“Don’t you dare preach about morality,” retorted a livid Zoabi, “I don’t want to hear you.” Zoabi was soon kicked off the program after shouting at the hosts to “shut up.”

Zoabi’s remarks came a day after Joint List Chairman Ayman Odeh drew sharp condemnation for drawing a parallel between the situation of the murdered children in Syria and the children in Gaza.

“My heart aches for the children murdered in Syria in the same way that it feels shame for the children murdered in Yemen and in Gaza too,” Odeh said yesterday from the Knesset plenum.

Im Tirtzu CEO Matan Peleg responded to the comments and said: “The radical remarks of Joint List MKs Zoabi and Odeh against the State of Israel and IDF soldiers prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is a party that seeks to damage the relations between Jews and Arabs in Israel.”

Peleg added: “These MKs are fueled by hatred and extremism and have no interest in serving the needs of the Arab sector, and this has always been the case.”

[the_ad id=”4690″]