World politics« Previous Entries Next Entries »
In fact, there is essentially only one nation that has better relations with the US via the Obama Administration than in 2008 when the US was actively involved in 2 internationally and domestically unpopular wars. That nation is Cuba, and it only gained improvement mere weeks ago.
Worse yet, when the American public is treated as little more than a lab rat, to confirm the failure of “social justice” experiments in Europe, the result is not just a temporary loss in tax revenue but the long-term loss of quality of life for every citizen.
Who benefits from our new diplomatic relations with Cuba? Raul Castro and the powerbase of that regime. That’s it. That is not enough for me, and I don’t think it is enough for most Americans either.
Why the US would pursue such a divergent path, beyond the political partisan benefit, is unclear. What is clear is the lesson that an immigration policy that is not well thought out will result in a burden to the system that will outlast and outweigh the political benefit in the long-term.
“At this moment, no country has been ask to put boots on the ground…” – Secretary Kerry. “…airstrikes alone, can backfire on us and actually strengthen our foes’ credibility.” – Retired Marine Gen. Mattis. Khorasan Group “…is focused on trying to build bombs capable of being sneaked onto airliners…” Bob Orr. And finally “”…the Obama Administration would like us to do the right thing in as chaotic and confused a way as possible.” – Jon Stewart
So the plan is to arm Syrian anti-Assad rebels to fight another group of anti-Assad rebels that were previously armed by the US. And without any nation’s ground troops present, it essentially relies on the honor code that this next batch of armed rebels won’t turn around and be a threat next. How well has that plan worked so far?
If Middle East nations are only willing to provide lip service to the US-led coalition, and the most ardent allies of America are not willing to have troops put a foot on the ground, how is ISIS supposed to be thwarted?
Definitely not a speech to make terrorists around the world any more concerned than they were even a day ago. But America has a big stick, and we may or may not actually use it. So ISIS better be scared.
With the advent of the current growing crisis in Iraq, the past several years of the Obama Administration’s international policy agenda has be put into question. Thus whatever the legacy will be of the Obama presidency, without swift action to enact a coherent international policy – especially in the Middle East – that legacy will surely rank akin to that of President Jimmy Carter.
There cannot be found in the Constitution, or any Amendment, an expressed or even implied power for the Executive Branch that allows a President to enact law because the President is at odds with the Congress or either of its Houses. Thus we conclude that the proposed action by the President would unbalance the separation of powers, a necessity as stated in the 1935 Supreme Court decision. It violates current immigration law in opposition to the 1995 OLC memo. It also exemplifies the very overreach of power that then-Senator Obama objected to in his speech in 2007.« Previous Entries Next Entries »