Regarding Syria, Obama’s abject failure is all over the news:
BEIRUT/UNITED NATIONS, Feb 5 (Reuters) – Western and Arab states voiced outrage on Sunday after Russia and China vetoed a U.N. resolution that would have backed an Arab plan urging Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to give up power, and Washington vowed harsher sanctions against Damascus.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the veto a “travesty”. It came a day after activists say Syrian forces bombarded a district of Homs, killing more than 200 people in the worst night of bloodshed of the 11-month uprising.
Russia said the resolution was biased and would have meant taking sides in a civil war. Syria is Moscow’s only big ally in the Middle East, home to a Russian naval base and customer for its arms. China’s veto appeared to follow Russia’s lead.
Washington’s U.N. ambassador Susan Rice said she was “disgusted” by Russia and China’s vetoes on Saturday, and “any further bloodshed that flows will be on their hands”.
In Syria, Barack Obama has simply failed. His cabinent-level United Nations ambassador has failed. It’s past time for people to get fired according to a man who served four UN ambassadors over eight years:
It’s time for Susan Rice to resign
By Richard Grenell
Published February 08, 2012 | FoxNews.com
One of the reasons the American public holds unelected government officials in such low esteem is that they are never held accountable for their failures.
Presidents and cabinet officials could send a strong message of accountability if they held senior appointees responsible for their performance.
President Obama should use this weekend’s UN failure to show Americans and Arabs alike that it is unacceptable to stand idly by while some 6,500 Syrians are killed by their government. Obama should ask for U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice’s resignation and replace her with someone tougher and more effective. If she won’t voluntarily resign then she should be fired.
The case against Susan Rice has been building over the last few years.
This weekend’s embarrassing failure on a Syria resolution was the latest and last straw. Her diplomatic failures and silence have given the United States a weak representation at the United Nations.
Next month marks the anniversary of the Syrian uprising. But Rice, as she has on many issues, has ignored Syria’s growing problems for too long.
Rather than speaking out immediately when the violence started, she stayed silent.
Rather than calling for action, she did nothing.
Russia and China saw Rice’s passivity as a sign that Syrian President Assad’s removal wasn’t a priority.
By the time Rice started pressuring Security Council members to confront the growing violence and death, it was too late.
Once a draft resolution condemning Syria was introduced, Rice was too quick to negotiate changes that weakened it without insisting on a date for the Security Council to vote. Her constant agreement to changes seemed desperate. The frantic and late maneuvering left the United States at the mercy of Russia and China, who vetoed even the watered down measure.
On her post-veto media tour, however, Rice sought to blame Russia for not listening to the United States or other western governments rather than acknowledge her failed diplomatic skills – an ironic spin given that Rice and team Obama created this same new Russian resolve when they naively and dramatically called for a “re-set” to our relationship with Russia.
The “reset” Rice championed and spoke affectionately about has not only failed to deliver support for US national security policies but it has also exposed the dangers of an inexperienced team’s strategy of personal diplomacy.
This continues Rice’s pattern of failing at her own stated goals.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Susan Rice talked very openly about restoring America’s leadership at the United Nations and often derided President George W. Bush for acting without U.N. backing.
Rice cheerfully exclaimed that, unlike Bush, Barack Obama would engage in active diplomacy even with countries considered our enemies.
She was very critical of the US’s reputation at the UN and vowed to build better relationships with every country.
In her current stump speech Rice claims that her goal has been accomplished, “We’ve repaired frayed relations with countries around the world. We’ve ended needless American isolation on a wide range of issues. And as a consequence, we’ve gotten strong cooperation on things that matter most to our national security interest.”
This past weekend shows just how disastrous Rice’s strategy has been.
Rice has been silent on important issues and ineffective when she does engage. She skipped Security Council meetings when Israel needed defending and even failed to show up for the emergency session on the Gaza Flotilla incident.
Rice didn’t even show up for the first two emergency Security Council meetings on the unfolding Arab revolution last year.
Rice stayed silent when Iran was elected to the UN women’s committee, she didn’t call out Libya when it was elected to the Human Rights Council, she was absent from the Haiti crisis meeting and was a no-show for the last open meeting scheduled before the planned U.N. vote to recognize Palestinian statehood. When she actually shows up, she is a miserable failure.
Take the crucial issue of Iran. Rice spent the last several years undermining and grumbling about the Bush administration’s increasingly tough measures but has only been able to pass one resolution of her own – compared with the Bush team’s five.
Rice’s one and only Iran resolution was 22 months ago. And it passed with just 12 votes of support – the least support we have ever seen for a Security Council sanctions resolution on Iran. In fact, Susan Rice lost more support with her one resolution than the previous five Iran resolutions combined.
In another example, Rice secretly negotiated with the Arabs on acceptable language for a possible U.N. resolution to condemn Israel’s settlement activity.
Rice’s engagement sent a strong message that making a new policy, rather than encouraging the two sides to negotiate directly, may not garner an automatic U.S. veto.
In February of 2011, the US abruptly changed tactics on the Arabs and vetoed a UN resolution on Israeli settlements.
The Palestinians were justifiably furious with Rice. After all, they had just spent weeks going back and forth with her on acceptable language to make Israeli settlement activity a violation of international law — something previous U.S. administrations had bluntly and immediately threatened a veto over. Rice’s negotiations suggested the U.S. was open to change, when in fact it was not.
Whether the issue is Sudan, Egypt, North Korea or Rwanda, Rice has been either missing in action or unable to deliver a quick and effective resolution.
Firing Rice may serve Secretary of State Hillary Clinton too. Clinton’s team has always viewed Susan Rice with suspicion dating back to the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries, when Rice went on MSNBC to slam Clinton’s ad claiming she was best equipped to take the national security emergency call at 3 a.m.
“Clinton hasn’t had to answer the phone at three o’clock in the morning and yet she attacked Barack Obama for not being ready. They’re both not ready to have that 3 a.m. phone call,” Rice said. Secretary Clinton, one State Department diplomat told me, has tried to distance herself from Rice and her lackluster UN performance.
President Obama could show the Arab street that it is unacceptable for the United States government to sit idly by while the United Nations Security Council does nothing. What better way to show that things at the U.N. have to change than to fire the woman spearheading the failed U.S. efforts there.
Rice’s last diplomatic initiative should be putting the United States’ reputation above her own.
Richard Grenell served as the spokesman for four US Ambassadors to the United Nations. including John Negroponte, John Danforth, John Bolton and Zalmay Khalilzad. He is currently based in Los Angeles. For more visit his website at www.richardgrenell.com.
For the “disgusted” and “outraged” liberals who are so shocked that Russia and China would block such an effort, let me just say one thing as politely as I know how:
YOU QUIVERING, HYPOCRITE, ABJECT PILES OF FOUL-SMELLING TOXIC SLIME!!! HAVE THE DECENCY TO THINK BACK TO 2003 WHEN RUSSIA AND CHINA (ALONG WITH YOUR BUDDIES IN FRANCE) DID THE SAME EXACT THING WHEN GEORGE W. BUSH WAS JUST TRYING TO GET REASONABLE WMD INSPECTIONS!!! YOU ACTUALLY JOINED RUSSIA AND CHINA LIKE THE TRAITORS YOU ARE. AND YOU GAVE BUSH NO CHOICE WHATSOEVER BUT TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAQ!!!
I tried to write a history of what Democrats did in joining Russia and China as a means to undermine Bush:
I also provided the FACTS about how truly treacherous and in fact blatantly traitorous the Democrats truly were in their before-and-after statements about Iraq:
If Democrats had just been united with the rest of the nation, we could have presented a strong, united front to the world. As it was, Saddam Hussein did not believe America would invade because Democrats had so fractured America, and Russia, China and France saw no reason to cooperate with the President of the United States when no DEMOCRATS in his own country would lift a finger to do anything other than stab him in the back.
In the end, it was basically the United States and its historic ally England standing against Iraq, Russia, China, France, the United Nations and the Democrat Party.
So now Russia and China are doing the same thing they did to George Bush for year after year and suddenly only NOW it’s “disgusting” and “outrageous”???
It obviously IS “disgusting” and “outrageous” what Syria is doing. They have killed thousands of their own people.
WHY WEREN’T ALL THE MASS GRAVES IN IRAQ DISGUSTING AND OUTRAGEOUS TO YOU VILE LIBERALS???
We are talking about hundreds of thousands of people who just vanished under Saddam Hussein. It’s the lucky ones whose remains were ever even found.
Since 2003 in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of bodies have been discovered in more than 300 mass graves. The Ministry of Human Rights estimates that as many as 1,500,000 people remain missing and unidentified. The missing may have been captured, abducted, secretly detained or killed and buried en masse in unmarked graves. Iraqi Minister of Human Rights Mohammed S. Al-Sudaney stated “It is important for the future of Iraq that we engage in a sustainable effort to address this issue. Millions of Iraqis have been affected by decades of abuse and we must work on their behalf to find their missing relatives.”
You Democrats are on an eternal walk of shame.
As vile as Russia and China are for their veto of any resolution to help the people of Syria, it is no more than what the vile current president of the United States deserves.
And never forget that the Democrat Party stood for the rape, torture and murder of untold hundreds of thousands of the Iraqi people. Even as they falsely postured themselves as championing human values.
You need to understand the STAKES of what is going on in Syria as Russians and Chinese (along with Syrian thugs) sense weakness in a truly weak President Obama:
Syria raises spectre of proxy conflict for U.S., Russia
By Andrew Quinn | Reuters – 3 hrs ago.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – As the Obama administration weighs worst-case scenarios for Syria, one stands out: a civil war that develops into a proxy battle between Arabs and the West on one side, and Russia and Iran on the other.
U.S. officials stress they do not want to play a military role in Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad’s crackdown on protests has killed more than 5,000 people and raised fears of a protracted power struggle in a country at the heart of the Arab world.
But after U.S. and Arab-led efforts to craft consensus in the U.N. Security Council on Syria’s political transition were torpedoed by vetoes from Russia and China, some analysts say risks are growing that the international community will line up on opposite sides of a fratricidal war.
The volatile ingredients are already in place.
Resistance fighters known as the Free Syrian Army have pledged to liberate the country from Assad’s rule. Activists call for armed support for rebels. And Syrian security forces are ratcheting up the violence, vowing to fulfil their president’s threat to strike with an “iron fist” against the government’s opponents.
“”There is a risk of it could become a proxy conflict. It is already headed in that direction,” said Andrew Tabler, a Syria expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
Now think of Egypt and Obama’s massive failure there.
Mr. Obama downplayed concerns that the Muslim Brotherhood could take power and install a government hostile to U.S. interests.
“I think that the Muslim Brotherhood is one faction in Egypt. They don’t have majority support in Egypt but they are well organized and there are strains of their ideology that are anti U.S., there is no doubt about it,” Mr. Obama said.
Mr. Obama said he wanted a representative government in Egypt that reflected the country’s broader civil society.
Though the current upheavals in the Middle East were not initiated by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist parties in Egypt, as in Tunisia and Libya, have been the chief beneficiaries of the collapse of long-standing authoritarian repressive regimes across North Africa.
In Egypt itself, the two largest Islamist groups, the Brotherhood and the Salafists, won about three-quarters of the ballots in the second round of legislative elections held in December 2011, while the secular and the liberal forces took a battering.
The Brotherhood, an organization founded by Egyptian schoolteacher Hassan el Banna back in 1928, has never deviated from its founder’s central axiom:
“Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Koran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”
It is this radical vision, which animates all those in the region who seek a fully Islamic society and way of life.
The Muslim Brotherhood has always been deeply anti-Western, viscerally hostile to Israel and openly anti-Semitic — points usually downplayed in Western commentary on the “Arab Spring.”
And now, so soon after the Muslim Brotherhood took over the country contrary to fool Obama’s dismissals, we are already facing a similar moment to Carter’s hostage crisis with Iran. Let’s call it “Obama’s hostage crisis”:
CAIRO — Ignoring a U.S. threat to cut off aid, Egypt on Sunday referred 19 Americans and 24 other employees of nonprofit groups to trial before a criminal court on accusations they illegally used foreign funds to foment unrest in the country.
Egypt’s military rulers had already deeply strained ties with Washington after their crackdown on U.S.-funded groups promoting democracy and human rights that the country’s leadership has accused of stirring up violence in the aftermath of the uprising a year ago that ousted Hosni Mubarak. The decision to send 43 workers from the groups to stand trial marks a sharp escalation in the dispute.
The 19 Americans include Sam LaHood, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood’s son and the head of the Egypt office of the Washington-based International Republican Institute.
“Threatening to cut off aid”??? What the hell business do we have giving the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD AID?!?!?
But, yes, Obama was actually trying to INCREASE AID TO THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD-DOMINATED EGYPT JUST A FEW SHORT WEEKS AGO:
Obama set to speed aid to Egypt: official
By Warren Strobel
DAVOS, Switzerland | Wed Jan 25, 2012 4:52pm EST
DAVOS, Switzerland (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama plans to accelerate the pace of American aid to Egypt, a top State Department official said on Wednesday, as the most populous Arab nation reaches a critical stage in its uncertain transition away from autocratic rule.
Undersecretary of State Robert Hormats, part of a U.S. delegation that held unprecedented talks last week with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, said Washington wanted to provide “more immediate benefits” to Egyptians, who earlier this month conducted their first democratic elections in decades.
“During this period, we want to be as supportive as we can. This is an historic moment. Egypt’s a country of enormous importance,” Hormats said.
Hosni Mubarak was a dictator and a thug, but he was the best America and Israel were ever going to get in a region of evil nutjobs. Now what do we have thanks to Obama???
If you haven’t already seen the magnitude of this president’s utterly contemptible and despicable failure, you are without excuse if you don’t understand it now.
As for Iran and the nuclear weapons that Obama will allow them to have, and the war Obama’s failure to that regard will create, I just wrote a piece about that. Suffice it to say that George Bush TRIED to do something about Iran’s dangerous nuclear weapons program, but demonic Democrats including Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton prevented him from being able to do anything.
Democrats were completely wrong; Bush was 100 percent RIGHT.
Every single Democrat who voted for Obama deserves to have an Iranian nuclear bomb shoved right up their anuses and detonated, but unfortunately they are going to take the rest of the world with them.
Remember Libya and Obama’s overthrow of Gaddafi? And how Obama took all the credit in the world for that?
The political situation in Libya is falling apart:
I was pointing out that Obama had taken us from bad to far, far worse as far back as August of last year. So it’s not like Obama couldn’t have known what would probably happen.
Up to 3,000 Libyans demonstrated Friday in the eastern city of Benghazi, demanding that sharia be the source of the North African country’s future constitution.
“Islamic! Islamic!,” chanted the demonstrators, with some waving copies of the Qur’an.
A press statement distributed at the rally called for an article identifying Islam as the state religion to be added to the constitution.
That article should be non-negotiable and not subject to change in the forthcoming referendum on the constitution, it said.
Demonstrators also expressed opposition to any plan to make Libya a federal state.
What was it you said, Obama? “The call to Islamic prayer is one of the prettiest sounds on earth at sunset“?
Please move to Libya then, Barry Hussein; because they’ll give you a LOT of pretty-sounding sharia over there.
I wrote about how Obama ignored even his own lawyers in violating the Constitution to attack Libya. I also wrote about how Democrats demonized Bush for doing FAR less than Obama did in attacking Libya. And I wrote back when that if Libya went to hell, the same arrogant ass who took credit for it needed to take the blame; TAKE THE BLAME, Obama. Or as Democrats gleefully reminded us about Bush and Iraq (you know, before his successful surge policy that they demonized WORKED and we WON), “If you break it, you own it.”
OWN Libya, Obama. OWN IT.
I have mentioned Obama’s blatant moral hypocrisy before in addition to the utter failure of those hypocritical policies:
Can we talk about Libya? Obama said, “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 to the nation,” when he had a chance to demagogue Bush over Iraq. It didn’t matter that George Bush had congressional approval for his actions, Obama demonized him. And now here he is, in Libya – a country that clearly wasn’t any kind of “imminent threat” to us, and which he had no congressional support to attack – and just does he not deserve to be impeached in disgrace by his own hypocritical and demagogic standard?
But there’s so much more to say about Libya and Obama’s entire foreign policy. Think of how Obama demonized Bush, versus what he’s doing now: Guantanamo Bay. The Patriot Act. Domestic Eavesdropping. Rendition. The Surge Strategy. The Iraq War. The Iranian Nuclear Threat. Military Tribunals. And, of course, “Air-raiding villages and killing civilians.” It frankly isn’t nearly enough for me to simply claim that Barack Obama is a fascist. Barack Obama is a fascist even according to Barack Obama.
What is most frightening about Obama’s bizarre policy on Libya is that it could apply to any country. Or not. There is absolutely no doctrine to warn one country or encourage another. Other countries could use it to impose a no-fly zone here, if the “international community” wanted to do so. Why don’t we now attack next-door Syria for shooting crowds of civilians? Because we have a fundamentally incoherent policy that allows us to invade whoever we want. And - disturbingly – the Arabs are pushing for the same standard Obama is applying to Libya to be applied in imposing a no-fly zone over Israel. And Obama is willing to take his non-existent “standard” and play political games with it. Let’s just call that quintessential fascism.
Obama has Samantha Powers (the wife of Cass Sunstein, the man who “nudges us”) close to him and advising him on matters of war. According to the very liberal publication The Nation, “She began to see war as an instrument to achieving her liberal, even radical, values.” What if you had an ultra conservative – oh, say a Sarah Palin – openly acknowledged to pursue war and risk American lives to advance her radical values??? What would the left call this if not “fascist”?
But it’s only fascist if Republicans do it, of course.
Then we come to Obama’s colossal and inexcusable failure in Iraq.
I am very optimistic about — about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You’re going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You’re going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.
Aside from the fact that it is naked chutzpah that the same two men who demonized George Bush for his successful surge strategy and tried to do everything they could to undermine and backstab Bush during his efforts to prevail in Iraq, it at least serves to prove that Iraq was a huge success for Bush as Obama took office.
Listen to the general who directed that surge speaking of Obama’s disastrous and disgraceful failure in Iraq:
Key general: Iraq pullout plan a ‘disaster’
Others echo call for strength against Iran
By Rowan Scarborough – The Washington Times
Sunday, October 23, 2011
President Obama’s decision to pull all U.S. forces out of Iraq by Dec. 31 is an “absolute disaster” that puts the burgeoning Arab democracy at risk of an Iranian “strangling,” said an architect of the 2007 troop surge that turned around a losing war.
Retired Army Gen. John M. Keane was at the forefront of persuading President George W. Bush to scuttle a static counterinsurgency strategy and replace it with 30,000 reinforcements and a more activist, street-by-street counterterrorism tactic.
Today, even with that strategy producing a huge drop in daily attacks, Gen. Keane bluntly told The Washington Times that the United States again is losing.
“I think it’s an absolute disaster,” said Gen. Keane, who advised Gen. David H. Petraeus when he was top Iraq commander. “We won the war in Iraq, and we’re now losing the peace.”
We also learned that Obama’s decision to not even TRY to negotiate for U.S. troops to stay to safeguard what we had won was KNOWN to be a huge mistake even as Obama was MAKING that mistake:
(Reuters) – U.S. intelligence agencies warned that security gains in Iraq could degenerate into sectarian violence after a troop pullout that some officials say left the United States with little leverage in a country it occupied for nearly nine years.
A wave of bombings that killed at least 72 people in Baghdad on Thursday provided further evidence of a deteriorating security situation just days after the last U.S. troops left Iraq.
“This should be a surprise to no one that this is happening,” said House of Representatives intelligence committee chairman Mike Rogers.
“Most people believed, the assessments that were coming out believed, that the sudden rapid withdrawal with no troop presence on the ground was going to leave this vacuum that would be filled with the kind of problems that you’re seeing,” Rogers, a Republican, said in an interview with Reuters.
Rogers said the troop pullout reduced U.S. influence and that a chaotic Iraq plays into Iran’s desire for increased influence in that region.
And now, under Obama’s completely failed and depraved leadership, the headline is, “Iraq Stands on the Brink of Disaster.” It is poised to fall under the influence of Iran because Obama was too much of a coward and a weakling to stick around like America did in Germany and Japan and Korea and a whole bunch of other places.
Even the New York Times writes about “a sharp sign of declining American influence in the country.” It describes US State Department officials as being “confined to the embassy because of security concerns” after we pulled all of our troops out of the country. And the obvious result is that we are going to lose everything we fought so hard for and sacrificed so much for to win in Iraq.
And Barack Obama is criminally responsible for that complete disaster.
That leaves us with the dismal failure of Obama in Afghanistan.
Obama demanded a timetable for withdrawal so that our friends in Afghanistan would know they couldn’t count on us to stay and our enemies the Taliban would know that they could wait us out.
We find that Obama never bothered to listen to his generals in Afghanistan dating back to when they wanted 40,000 for their surge and he decided not to give them their request after humming and hawing FOREVER.
General Reveals that Obama Ignored Military’s Advice on Afghanistan
5:21 PM, Jun 28, 2011 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES
Lieutenant General John Allen told the Senate Armed Services Committee today that the Afghanistan decision President Obama announced last week was not among the range of options the military provided to the commander in chief. Allen’s testimony directly contradicts claims from senior Obama administration officials from a background briefing before the president’s announcement.
In response to questioning from Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Allen testified that Obama’s decision on the pace and size of Afghanistan withdrawals was “a more aggressive option than that which was presented.”
Graham pressed him. “My question is: Was that a option?”
Allen: “It was not.”
Allen’s claim, which came under oath, contradicts the line the White House had been providing reporters over the past week—that Obama simply chose one option among several presented by General David Petraeus. In a conference call last Wednesday, June 22, a reporter asked senior Obama administration officials about those options. “Did General Petraeus specifically endorse this plan, or was it one of the options that General Petraeus gave to the president?”
And what is the result of Obama in Afghanistan?
Taliban ‘poised to retake Afghanistan’ after NATO pullout, leaked U.S. report claims
Hamid Shalizi and Mirwais Harooni
Published Wednesday, Feb. 01, 2012 1:57AM EST
Last updated Wednesday, Feb. 01, 2012 11:13AM EST
The U.S. military said in a secret report that the Taliban, backed by Pakistan, are set to retake control of Afghanistan after NATO-led forces withdraw, raising the prospect of a major failure of Western policy after a costly war.
Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, confirmed the existence of the document, reported on Wednesday by Britian’s Times newspaper and the BBC.
Which is EXACTLY what conservatives predicted would happen if we followed Obama’s incredibly stupid and immoral policies.
When we elected Barack Obama, we elected a truly evil and vile man to lead us. Obama’s wicked reverend Jeremiah Wright spake as a prophet concerning the Obama presidency when he said, “No, no, no. Not God bless America! God DAMN America.” And this IS God damn America.
Barack Obama is a clear and present danger to America, to the American people and to the world. And if we don’t wise up and vote him out of office, we deserve every catastrophe that his presidency will create.
The Bible forewarned us that the beast is coming. And Obama was the useful idiot who has done so much to prepare the way for Antichrist.