Alexander's Column

Year Five of Obama's Foreign Policy Ineptitude

The Price of Appeasement and Tolerance in the Middle East

By Mark Alexander · Aug. 29, 2013
“A universal peace … is in the catalogue of events, which will never exist but in the imaginations of visionary philosophers, or in the breasts of benevolent enthusiasts.” –James Madison (1792)

As the Middle East approaches a critical mass meltdown, it is instructive to take account of our political standing in the region, and why our “foreign policy” has become the laughing stock of the entire world – particularly in Tehran, Moscow, Beijing and Pyongyang.

History of the World 101: Tyranny does not leave vacant the void created by appeasement and tolerance.

In 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain addressed his countrymen by infamously insisting that signing the Munich Agreement and adopting a policy of appeasement and tolerance toward Adolf Hitler would provide “peace for our time.”

Seventy years and some very hard lessons later, candidate Barack Hussein Obama promised another “peace for our time,” adopting Chamberlain’s foreign policy and insisting he could mollify our radical Islamist foes and “reset” our relationship with Middle Eastern states by resolving the conflict between Western democracy and Islamic fascism. Recall, too, that he did so to great applause from his legions of mesmerized supporters.

Regarding the post-9/11 Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, and the larger War on Terror, Obama promised, “Let me be as clear as I can be. I intend to end this war. My first day in office I will bring the Joint Chiefs of Staff in and I will give them a new mission and that is to end this war – responsibly, deliberately, but decisively.”

Of course, the only way to end a just war “responsibly, deliberately, but decisively” is through victory.

Obama based his foreign policy expertise with Islamists on little more than a grossly naïve assertion: “I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.”

At that time, it was abundantly clear to anyone who could think beyond the cadence of Obama’s rhetoric that he was a national security neophyte. Little has changed since then.

A few months after his first election, Obama departed on his now-infamous Middle East Apology Tour, with the objective of appeasing the world’s most dangerous fascist movement since the Third Reich – Islamists occupying the borderless nation of “Jihadistan” – one that is singularly devoted to the destruction of Western democracy, and one that seeks the imposition of a worldwide caliphate and Shariah law.

Obama’s National Security Adviser, Denis McDonough, insisted that Obama was uniquely qualified to satiate the threat of Islamist regimes, noting, “the president himself experienced Islam on three continents before … you know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father – obviously Muslim Americans are a key part of Illinois and Chicago.”

Well, “community organizer” to the rescue!

Obama insisted that a key part of his policy toward Islamist states was a more worldly citizenry – one that better understood the “religion of peace.” “I think that in the United States and the West generally,” he said, “we have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam. And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”

There are indeed about 2.5 million Muslims in the U.S., but Obama’s “largest Muslim countries” calculus neglected the fact that there are 205 million Muslims in Indonesia, 180 million in Pakistan, 175 million in India, 80 million in Egypt, 74 million in Iran, 32 million in Iraq, 30 million in Afghanistan, 25 million in Yemen and 20 million in Syria, and a billion Muslims in other countries around the world.

On the first stop of his Apology Tour, Obama outlined his Middle Eastern policy, telling Islamic masses in Cairo: “[I have] unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things … confidence in the rule of law; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. … America and Islam share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. … Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace. … The fear and anger that [9/11] provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our traditions and our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. … It’s easier to start wars than to end them. It’s easier to blame others than to look inward. … America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity and a state of their own. … Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.”

Thus saith Obama, but the lesson, tragically, did not endeth with the “Obama Doctrine.”

President George W. Bush’s Doctrine of Preemption toward Islamist terrorists was clear, and it was predicated on these tenets: Know our enemy; Take the fight to that enemy and keep it on their turf in order to prevent them from bringing it to ours; Don’t appease or tolerate this enemy, annihilate them.

I recall John McCain, in his 2008 campaign against Obama, being asked how long we should be in Iraq. He responded, “A hundred years,” meaning that our continued presence in the region was critical to stability. Of course McCain was pilloried by Obama’s Leftist NeoCom cadres, but the fact is, McCain understood the nature of the Long War commitment we would have to make in order to contain the Islamist threat. (For the record, virtually every terrorist act in the last five decades has been perpetrated by Islamists.)

Now, five years into Obama’s Middle East pretense of foreign policy, he has surrendered our hard-earned victory in Iraq (and with it, any hope we had of building a strong strategic relationship with that nation) and will soon abandon Afghanistan (and with it, any vestige of truth to his campaign slogan that Iraq was the bad war and Afghanistan the good one). Our military presence in the region, particularly in Iraq, was the only leverage we had to contain threats to our vital national interests. Obama has decimated our relationship with Israel, tolerated Iran’s nuclear ambitions, watched the disintegration of Libya and Egypt, and virtually ignored Syria. As a result, much of the Middle East is now in chaos.

In the aftermath of Benghazi, with Egypt on the verge of civil war and Syria fully engaged in civil war, and with clear indications that Islamic Jihadists are key players in conflicts throughout the region, it is abundantly clear that Obama’s foreign policy in the region has failed miserably. Now, his feckless administration is scrambling for solutions.

Clearly, we are in need of a real “reset” of our policy regarding Islamist states. Unfortunately, however, we can’t obtain a retroactive reset of the 2008 or 2012 presidential elections.

The cost of the War on Terror, both in terms of blood and treasure, has been enormous. But make no mistake: That cost will pale in comparison to the cost of our recovery from and response to a nuclear detonation in an East Coast urban center, which may well be the price we pay for years of Obama’s appeasement and tolerance of Islam, and his ignorance of Fourth Generation Warfare in this, the Second Nuclear Age.

The pendulum of politics and foreign policy has become well defined since World War II.

It is instructive to note that the bloodiest and most costly conflicts since then have begun under Democrat presidents and ended under Republican presidents. The Korean War began under the watch of Harry Truman and ended under the watch of Dwight Eisenhower. The Vietnam War began and escalated under Democrats Kennedy and Johnson and ended under Republican Richard Nixon. And, of course, the decades-long Cold War began under Harry Truman and ended under Ronald Reagan and his successor, George H.W. Bush.

In the Middle East, Nobel Peace Prize-winning Jimmy Carter’s appeasement and tolerance led to the rise of Islamist regimes, especially that which now controls Iran. Bill Clinton’s equivocal response to the Islamist threat led to the 9/11 attack on our country, resulting in the launch of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.

There is a distinct pattern here, one that is characterized by increasing hostilities in the wake of the Left’s appeasement and tolerance, followed by decreasing hostilities when the Right takes corrective action.

Now, under the Nobel Peace Prize-winning neophyte, Obama, Islamist coalitions are thriving, expanding their influence rapidly and oppressing millions. And, once again, they are threatening our vital national interests in the region and posing an increasing threat to our homeland.

Again, may I repeat myself, “History of the World 101: Tyranny does not leave vacant the void created by appeasement and tolerance.”

Footnote: For those of us with family members who are active duty military personnel, Obama’s failings hit close to home.

Appeal_patriots_day_1

View all comments

209 Comments

Mac in Arizona said:

Ask yourself what would be the worst possible move for America's best interest.....

... and you've got the best guess of what Obama will do.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Master Gunny in Tifton GA replied:

The application of "state policy by other means" should never be undertaken lightly. When a nation determines to apply any form of lethal force to achieve an objective a few things are wise to remember:

Things can get out of hand. We don't control our enemy's mind can his behavior be completely predictable. Bad guys often do irrational things.

If a small amount of force is applied initially then you had better be prepared to apply lots of force, rapidly, if things get out of hand.

Things often “get out of hand.”

Those whom you consider friends may decide to do nothing to support you, either morally or materially.

Those whom you consider to be your enemies, but not directly involved, may decide to get involved in spite of your best guesses that they won’t.

“Crap Happens.” Sometimes your subordinates misunderstand, misinterpret, or never “get the word” on what their limitations are. They may act completely contrary to your expectations (ex. The Cuban Missile Crisis which nearly got us into WW III).

Sometimes the enemy’s subordinates get out of their pay grade and spoil everyone’s best laid plans.

Iran wants to humiliate us; Russia feel due some payback for her defeat in Afghanistan; Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood are all loose cannons. If Iran sinks a tanker in the Straights of Harmuze we will be paying $5.00 for a gallon of gas within hours. If Russia gives S-300 anti-aircraft missile to Syria we could lose some pilots and lots of prestige.

Yep, any intervention into Syria is an L-shaped ambush and we oughta sit this one out.

Friday, August 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Jim in Western NC replied:

Mac - It's true. Whether by design or incompetence. When the president speaks, I immediately know two things for certain. 1) If what he says at first appears to be in America's interest--it's not (follow the man's actions not his words), and 2) When he's pretending to be really serious--the tongue under the bottom lip thing serious--he doesn't really have a clue. It's a bluff or cover to mask ineptness.

Friday, August 30, 2013 at 11:30 PM

Dick Boas in Long Pond, PA said:

Mark: Thanks for your insight. I look forward to your essays as they are a breath of fresh air as opposed to the progressive filth fed to us in the MSM. Thank you. Dick

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 10:24 AM

Git R Dunn in Alabama said:

"Use this opening to take out Syria's air power and chemical weapon resources. This will not end the conflict in Syria, but it will limit Bashar al-Assad's ability to use those resources elsewhere."

You assume that Assad actually used chemical weapons when it is increasingly evident that the rebels were the ones using those weapons of mass destruction.

From where and whom did they get those weapons?

The U.N. Inspectors will get to the bottom of this!

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 10:50 AM

wjm in Colorado replied:

The blue helmeted islam loving goat fornicators may BE at the bottom of this.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:07 AM

Barry Soetoro in Washington, D.C. replied:

Now, wjm, that's a conspiracy theory. You aren't a conspiracy theorist are you?

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA replied:

Those who don’t recognize there are people working covertly to accomplish certain goals are not paying attention to anything more than the smoke and mirrors.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:44 PM

enemaofthestatistquo in walnutgrove replied:

Smoke! but I didn't inhale. Ah. but you will and you will like it.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Brian in Newport News replied:

They were the chemical weapons that Saddam had. That is why we could not find them in Iraq. Read Mark's essay regarding this: http://patriotpost.us/alexander/4054

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Wes in CO replied:

The chemical weapons launched against the Syrian Rebels by Islamic Terrorists were shipped to them in wooden crates with a Saudi Arabian company logo (remember Saudi Arabia, the ones that brought us the first -- and probably second -- Sept. 11th?).

As a researcher, I find, with the exception of a few outstanding sites like Patriot Post, to avoid the party-line drivel of the MSM, one has to look to credible journalists both here and in other countries.

Yesterday, I started with an intriguing WND article by Dr. Jerome Corsi about rebels firing the chemical weapons in Syria, then followed some links to Syrian Free Press and some enlightening articles in "The Voice of Russia." While I certainly don't agree with everything, here's some serious food for thought.

What better way for radical Islamic jihadists "claiming" to support the Syrian rebels to overthrow the Assad regime and install a repressive Muslim Brotherhood theocracy as they did in Egypt than to enlist the help of the U.S. Navy and our cruise missiles to take out the Assad Air Force that is pounding the jihadis? Launch some chemical weapons at the Syrian rebels and let the world ASSume that Assad did it! Obama is chomping at the bit to attack and depose the Assad regime so his radical Islamic buddies can take over Syria just like they did in Egypt. These are the same radicals he was passing surplus Libyan arms to through Benghazi.

Evidence: Syria gas attack work of U.S. allies
Contrary evidence arises as U.S. considers punishing Assad regime
WND EXCLUSIVE article by Jerome Corsi, 8/26/13
http://tinyurl.com/mm92d3y

Syrian Rebels Manufactured Chemical Weapons Outside Damascus
Syrian Free Press Network article by Yara Saleh, 8/25/13
http://tinyurl.com/nuqz3v5

The US policy of terror and the invasion of Syria
The Voice of Russia article by John Robles, 8/27/13
http://tinyurl.com/qgux3q3

'Obama is a master of a double discourse: when he talks peace, he is shipping arms to the opposition' - expert
The Voice of Russia article by Linda Mills, 8/27/13
http://tinyurl.com/prb3sph

Lawmakers urge Obama to seek congressional OK on Syria strike
Voice Of Russia article, 8/27/13
http://tinyurl.com/pgpsahf

Attack on Syria may cause massive damage to the US
The Voice of Russia article by John Robles, 8/27/13
http://tinyurl.com/qzmf25g

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

Nicely done, Wes! Great work! Is it any wonder that Barack Hussein Obama, a Sunni Muslim, is chomping at the bit to depose Assad, a Shiite.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 4:59 PM

Wes in CO replied:

Git --

Thanks . . . and is it any wonder that the Syrian people who are predominantly Sunni are oppressed and suffering at the hands of a Shia tyrant?

The U.S. needs to turn it's ships around, pull all our overt and covert personnel and support out and let the Muslims kill each other off. It will save us a lot of ammunition, blood and treasure down the road. We don't have any real dog in this fight. Assad's government is brutal and injust, the Islamic radicals supporting the Rebels are only doing so to bolster forces to bring down the Assad regime so they can put a radical theocracy in place (like they did in Egypt), and once it's all over, the Syrian people will continue to be in the Russian and Iranian camps shouting "Death to Americans, Death to the Jews, and Allah akbar as they try to kill Americans. We need to get out of the Middle East and guard our own borders, do nation building at home, educate our own young people and focus on our own families. The United States was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs and values, so we must protect Israel if we are ever to regain the religious values and God-given rights that once made this nation great.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 8:31 PM

WTD in AZ replied:

Wonderful, Wes. How simple and direct, and yet, deadly if the opposite course, Obama's is followed. Oh how desperate is our plight, that our Great Leader and his cohorts are blind to the common sense of your argument. Not only that, but they are quite willingfor the U.S.to continue to be a subservient vassal of that enemy on our doorstep, the U.N.

Friday, August 30, 2013 at 12:40 AM

wjm in Colorado said:

Obama's foreign policy in the region has failed miserably.

Not to Obamao, who is enabling a jihadist caliphate in the region, and the anihilation of Israel. What is seen as failure to those who embrace the Constitution and our Republic, is a major success to islam loving marxist statist Traitors.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Patrick in Houston replied:

WJM, it isn't just the Middle East. The only place where Obama's foreign policy hasn't been a disaster is Antarctica.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Jim in Western NC replied:

Patrick, I imagine he's working on that. Probably some silly U.N. treaty that limits our research and presence in the name of the environment.

Friday, August 30, 2013 at 11:34 PM

jddotman in SC said:

So the more I think on the Syrian situation the more I think we should at the the very least stay out of it and if we do take action we should back Assad. Assad has had chemical/bio weapons for decades and even with ties to various terrorist groups those weapons have not made it into the hands of said groups. Now take the "rebels" fighting Assad. There is no doubt in my mind that if they win we will have to have boots on the ground and invade or those weapons will be in the hands of terrorists.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

Yeah, I know what you mean "the more I think about it". And when that happens to me, I open some Thomas Jefferson or George Washington tomes and reflect upon their God-inspired wisdom that warned against foreign entanglements ;-)

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:22 PM

J Kennedy in S City NC said:

Obama spends SO much time idolizing, and magnifying Islam that I think he does not have time or the expertise to TRY to be the leader of the US. He could not care less abuot the US without his being dictator of change to Islam of the US.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

He is a God-forsaken SUNNI MUSLIM. Do your homework! Get it? 2 + 2 =

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:34 PM

J Kennedy in S City, NC replied:

Five? Did you see Miley twerk? OMG!

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Wes in CO replied:

"Five" is correct if you use the government's CORES curriculum!

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 8:35 PM

Dr. Judy Meissner in Los Angeles, California said:

The enemies of Humanity attack the Syrian Govt and people in support of Muslim Brotherhood terrorists. Barack Obama betrays Dr. Martin Luther King's legacy and memory of peace. The Lies will be known. The Truth will surface!

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat.” - President Obama

Now Obama arbitrarily, unjustly, and without Congressional authorization prepares to attack Syria. Obama is a traitor to his own words and phony promises. Impeach Obama!

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Barry Soetoro in Washington, D.C. replied:

Dr. Judy,

That's a bit over the top, don'tcha think? Could we have a beer summit?

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:01 PM

Ernest Wilson in Maryland replied:

Why is there no Republican party outcry over ignoring the constitution? Where is the Bill of Impeachment from Libyia? Our Republic is threatened without opposition from anyone.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

Because the Republicans are COMPLICIT in the treason! It's not rocket surgery.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA replied:

War powers act 1973 only allows the POTUS to order military action for defense against attack all other action requires approval of congress.

For Obama to order military action against Syria to send a message or to punish for use of chemical weapons in their civil war is an impeachable crime as was his unilateral action in Libya to oust Gaddafi.

Obamas High crimes and misdemeanors are numerous and if he was not president and committed these offences it would be classified as a crime spree and he would be prosecuted as a career criminal.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

Anton D Rehling for WA Senator! You have my votes.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 2:00 PM

Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA replied:

If I was a Senator in DC I would make the nightly new every day as I would kick ass and take names, raise hell and pull no punches and spout no PC Speech and call out those that violate the trust of the American people by violating their oath of office and for allowing unconstitutional actions by any level of government bureaucracy. I would carry concealed everywhere I went and work to repeal all infringements on our 2nd amendment right; an amendment that doesn’t grant our rights but protects our God given rights.

Government of this country should protect our freedom not act like they grant through their benevolence the level of liberty we are to enjoy.

That is just the tip of the iceberg.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Mangus Colorado in Texas said:

A national foreign policy of APPEASEMENT is no policy at all . . our Allies no longer trust the word of Obama and that is now extended to the entire U.S.A.

We the People must use Article V to take away the money and power from Washington and return it to the many States . .

http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/the-28th-amendment.html

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Gladys H in Haynes said:

We should remember President Reagan's statement to the effect of "Whis country has never been attacked because it was too strong." Strength and action are the only thing our enemies understand.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Master Gunny in Tifton GA said:

The feigned outrage at the use of chemical weapons puzzles me. If I read the politicians correctly it is far less eggregious to use morters, artillery, airstrikes, and crew served weapons to kill civilians than it is to gas them. Anyoe who has tended the wounds of what shapnel does to the human body will, without doubt, take exception to the politicians rhetoric.

High explosives maim and kill with a terror that cannot be understood until experienced but of course only 1 in 200 of our political leaders have ever even served in the military let alone bled during their service.

It is ironic to me that the the greatest enemy ot Muslims are other Muslims! Each of the sects within Islam, and many of the subgroups within those sects, seem to take delight in blowing each other up. If current events are the evidence that Islam is a religion of peace then only a fool would buy into the claim, which brings us to Obama. Having lived among Muslims, witnessed their hatred firsthand, been exposed to NSA briefs that document the slaughter among Muslims, and then to pronounce Islam a religion of peace makes Obama either the biggest fool in history of the biggest liar (I believe he qualifies for both). That the American people have entrusted this charletan with the highest office in the land indicates to me that foolishness must be contagious and the infection is pandemic.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:37 AM

Peter in Nevada replied:

Simply, clearly, truly and well said, Gunny.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 3:32 PM

dennis in tucson said:

There will never be peace with muslims and especially while we are supportive of Israel. May we always be an Israeli ally.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:39 AM

geo2man in washington said:

Obama is an Al Qaeda operative facilitating their takeover of Arab countries..
He is now apparently obfuscating /twisting the fact of the Chemicals used by the rebels blaming Assad .The Brits and French are following him like little puppy dogs.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Ken in Texas said:

Enjoyed the analysis of why appeasement doesn't work. It never has. However, I take exception to one statement about George Bush's policy:

President George W. Bush's Doctrine of Preemption toward Islamist terrorists was clear, and it was predicated on these tenets: Know our enemy; Take the fight to that enemy and keep it on their turf in order to prevent them from bringing it to ours; Don't appease or tolerate this enemy, annihilate them.

George Bush never took steps to annihilate the enemy. He played politics with the war and did not turn the military lose to do what the military is designed to do; WIN the war. Using the military to nation build in Islamic countries was and is a naive policy. Sunni vs Shiite has been going on for 1000s of years and will continue till the earth ends. Either fight to win or get out.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA replied:

Islamic religion and law do not support any type of democracy; to think you can kill a few 100 thousand to change them is naïve to the level of absurdity. There is only one way to deal with any Islamic believer and that is by the sword. Give them all what they want, martyrdom.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

"Give them all what they want, martyrdom."

It is the highest honor in their religion of pieces, is it not?

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA replied:

who gives a sh*t, kill them all and let God sort them out

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 2:05 PM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

You have my votes.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Wes in CO replied:

There's not enough virgins in hell to go around!

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

Martyred Muslim: "I am finally here! Allah be praised. Where are my 72 virgins?"

Satan: "Dude, it's 72 year-old virgin. Weren't you listening?"

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM

Honest Abe in North Carolina replied:

Bear in mind, Hell has been progressive a lot longer than the United States and, of course, LGBT tolerant. Mo did not say to his followers what gender those promised virgins were going to be. As usual, Satan has lied to his victims again to get them to do evil for him.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 6:54 PM

Abu Nudnik in Toronto replied:

I agree. It should have been one, two three: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran: destroy their ability to even think of war for two generations, no "nation building" but leave them smoking ruins and out in three years. No prissy rules of engagement.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Tony in Venice Beach CA said:

All of the black speaker in Washington DC yesterday are major race baiters. Man did Ophra fool us all or what? She wants all white people dead.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Liz in Seattle WA replied:

Yeah and Jamie Fox mentioned S. Bellafonte a well known racist who yelled to Obama to jail his oponents. Hitlerization of a nation. Jail the white people and they can never leave. Welcome to the - HOTEL OBAMA.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Christina in Niles IL replied:

That's why Obama wants to disarm us. Then the American oil will be in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood, and bring in the Mexicans to drill. Blacks will be living in luxury.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Barry Soetoro in Washington, D.C. replied:

Christina,

Are you available for a Cabinet Post in my Administration?

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Abu Nudnik in Toronto replied:

My only disagreement is that if it's a choice between Mexicans and Muslims, I'll take Mexicans. So would the Europeans if given the choice.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Juscelino M. Acevedo in Norwalk, CT said:

Mark,

I really enjoy reading articles on The Patriot Post, but sometimes there are statements that make no sense to me within the articles. In this case, you stated two thing:

"Now, five years into Obama's Middle East policies, he has damaged our relations with Israel and tolerated Iran's nuclear ambition."

and

"My suggestion: Use this opening to take out Syria's air power and chemical weapon resources. This will not end the conflict in Syria, but it will limit Bashar al-Assad's ability to use those resources elsewhere."

This is NOT an attack, but can you help me understand why people feel that Israel is always such an important ally, and why Syria is any of our business?

Thanks.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Brian in Newport News replied:

I think we should stay out of Syria...both sides are hostile to the US so let them kill each other.

For you first question regarding Israel: read your Bible.

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Git R Dunn in Alabama replied:

Israel is 5 - 0 baby! I'm going to Vegas and I'm ALL IN on Israel. Odds-On Fav!

Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Juscelino M. Acevedo in Norwalk, CT replied:

The problem is that my Bible does not tell me how the Jews assisted in beating and crucifying Jesus, then decided to claim ownership of his birth place in order to "honor" him, while promoting the genocide of the Palestinians.

That's a bit disrespectful, in my opinion.

Thursday, January 16, 2014 at 1:12 PM