Get PJ Media on your Apple

The Rosett Report

Department of Peace for Our Time

November 16th, 2013 - 11:27 pm
obama_ocean_thumbnail_3-14-13_big-2

Neville again.

American healthcare aside (“If you like your plan…”), there are some promises that President Obama has kept. Notably, his promise last year to Russia’s Vladimir Putin — accidentally overheard by the entire world, via an open microphone — that once he’d won the 2012 presidential election, he’d have more “flexibility.” He was true to his word. With this September’s Russia-brokered deal over Syria’s chemical weapons, the Obama administration showed flexibility enough to compete with Cirque du Soleil.

Now, just when it seemed that U.S. policy toward Russia could hardly become more flexible without requiring all Americans to dine daily on borscht (or does the Affordable Care Act already include a provision for that?), here comes a story in the New York Times, headlined “A Russian GPS Using U.S. Soil Stirs Spy Fears.” The gist is that the State Department is gung-ho to allow the Russian Space Agency, Roscosmos (which coordinates with Russian military launches), to install on U.S. turf some half a dozen electronic monitor stations for a Russian Global Positioning System. The Times reports that not everyone in the administration thinks this is a great idea. The Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency see this plan as a threat to U.S. security: “They fear that these structures could help Russia spy on the United States and improve the precision of Russian weaponry.”

But does that worry the State Department? Not according to the Times, which goes on to provide the following account of the State Department’s rationale:

For the State Department, permitting Russia to build the stations would help mend the Obama administration’s relationship with the government of President Vladimir V. Putin, now at a nadir because of Moscow’s granting asylum to Mr. Snowden and its backing of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

Come again? I have read that paragraph over, at least half a dozen times, and it still doesn’t make sense. If the Obama administration’s ties to Putin’s regime are at a low, the reason is not that the U.S. has snubbed or damaged Russia, but that Russia’s Putin has mocked and undermined the U.S. First came Russia’s dalliance with American fugitive Edward Snowden. Then came the aborted showdown over Syria, in which Russia, one of Assad’s chief weapons suppliers, walked away with the jackpot, sending warships into the Mediterranean and wielding diplomacy to translate Assad’s use of chemical weapons into a ticket for the Russian-backed survival of his regime and alarming expansion at U.S. expense of Russian influence in the Middle East. Surely, if the U.S.-Russia relationship is to be improved, it is Russia that owes the U.S. some conciliatory moves. Not the other way round.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
A Marxist making all the moves to expand Marxism.

"Time for our piece"

Sometimes conspiracy isn't just a theory...it's treason.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Well, at least give the Clown Prince credit for consistency.

Domestic affairs, foreign affairs, social issues, economic issues, political issues...without fail, everything that he does undermines the United States of America.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (20)
All Comments   (20)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Of course, Obama needs flexibility. That's how he puts his head up his as$ --
so he can lead from behind.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The MSM is even more 'flexible' than Obama. After all, it has to bend over backwards to cover his ass.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
As Putin said to me the other day:
"Every time I see this bama bimbo, I laugh. He thinks he knows what Communism is. Ha. Ha. Ha. I laugh at him."
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Thank you for writing. I am seriously doubting more all the time that this administration's intent is to protect US interests and national security. How can they do it wrong nearly every step of the way? Even a fool would have to do the right thing a lot more often. I am very, very sorry for my children and their generation.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Kerry's hero is Hanoy Jane, what could go wrong?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Obama is suffering from "Battered Leader Of The Free World Syndrome".
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If the Soros Junta were agents of a hostile power, what would they do differently?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If we hanged every traitor at Foggy Bottom, we would need a domestic hemp industry to supply enough rope.

In the modern age of instant global communications, we should cut State by 90% and stop sending Ambassadors to wine and dine every tinpot dictator in the world.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
A Marxist making all the moves to expand Marxism.

"Time for our piece"

Sometimes conspiracy isn't just a theory...it's treason.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Well, at least give the Clown Prince credit for consistency.

Domestic affairs, foreign affairs, social issues, economic issues, political issues...without fail, everything that he does undermines the United States of America.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Earlier this month Paul Mirengoff (Powerline blog) wrote a post (titled: "Obama's cheerful capitulation"). He contends that the comparison of Obama's capitulation to Iran with Neville Chamberlain's "peace for our time" is not entirely accurate. He notes that Germany of the 30's was the stronger entity, Britain the weaker party -- the reverse is the case between Iran (the weaker party) and the United States (the stronger party). Hence there is far less "logic" behind Obama's capitulations (including his bizarre desire to appease Russia, when it has been America who has been aggrieved by Russia). Mirengoff attributes Obama's stances to ideology. He also suspects that Obama (unlike Chamberlain) would remain "chipper" if not happy if Iran acquires nukes, in defiance of the US.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I don't think that analogy works. Neville Chamberlain was a good and decent man who horribly miscalculated his foe, and then proceeded into negotiations utterly prostrate to the Fuehrer. Even Churchill, who opposed virtually everything Chamberlain did with regard to Nazi Germany, was unable to find any malicious intent.

In today's scenario, it is Obama that is dripping in malevolence. He erodes the influence of the United States both militarily and diplomatically at every turn, treats allies as mortal enemies and enemies as best friends with benefits.

Whenever possible, Obama plays the role of the Malevolent Catalyst - he is not involved directly, but his influence is most definitely felt.

For example, he would not intervene in the student demonstrations in Iran a couple of years back. His entire conduct in the Arab Spring has been a disaster for the United States.

If I were to work Mirengoff's analogy such that it made sense in my mind, it would have to be changing Neville Chamberlain into a clandestine Nazi operative acting as Prime Minister.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Yes, indeed, the analogy doesn't work, it's flawed (that' is, I believe, the point of Mirengoff's blog post. He takes issue with the easy comparison of Obama to Chamberlain). Mirengoff also notes that after being betrayed by the nazis Chamberlain was utterly distraught, devastated.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Thus, to put it bluntly, Obama's actions are far worse than a Chamberlain's, and (while Chamberlain can be excused) Obama cannot be.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And the Jerusalem Post reports, quoting an article from the Sunday Times:

QUOTE
"According to the Times, Riyadh has already given its consent for Israel to use Saudi airspace for a potential attack on Iran.

The paper quoted a diplomatic source as saying the Saudis were willing to assist an Israeli attack by cooperating on the use of drones, rescue helicopters and tanker planes.

“Once the Geneva agreement is signed, the military option will be back on the table. The Saudis are furious and are willing to give Israel all the help it needs,” the Times quoted the source as saying. "

END QUOTE


The appeaser in chief is thus triggering a war that could have catastrophic consequences.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All