The tragic events in Cairo and Benghazi should remove doubt that the foreign policy of the current administration is the most destructive since that of Jimmy Carter.
The only question at this point is whether that policy is, as with Carter, the result of incompetence and naivete — or something more disturbing.
In other words, it may be time to ask whether the setbacks in Arab North Africa and elsewhere have been so numerous and unremitting that, rather than failures, they may be seen as consistent with the view of a president who thinks America is too rich and strong for the world’s good.
How else do you explain the apologies issued to the fanatics who killed our ambassador and burned our embassy, apologies that evoke those offered in a 2009 speech in Cairo by a just-seated president who blamed the hatred some in the Mideast have for the West on “colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims”?
How else do you to explain the forsaking of a 30-year ally, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, for a Muslim Brotherhood billed as moderate but now shown to be potentially as fanatical as any government in the region?
And how to explain the rejection of Israel, our only truly democratic ally in the region, which faces nuclear annihilation by Iran, but whose prime minister can’t get an audience with the president because he’s booked on the David Letterman show? (IBD)
The very last thing that America needs now is another destructive, expensive war. However, it’s been a war of our own making to some extent. (see the great apologist below)
“My position has always been, along with many other people, that any differences be resolved in a nonviolent way.