It seems President Barack Obama’s foreign policy is on full display, for the whole world to see. The President, seeking to capitalize on the killing of 9/11 terror mastermind and founder of al-Qaeda Osama bin Laden, started the conversation by seeking political gain from the one year anniversary by alleging Mitt Romney, the eventual Republican nominee for President, would not have ordered “the raid to capture Osama bin Laden last year.”
Following such an outrageous accusation (without merit or basis), I posted this piece on Obama’s real foreign policy record on accommodation and appeasement, specifically towards Russia and Communist China.
On Friday, I posted this piece about President Barack Obama’s record on foreign policy, specifically his record of accommodation and appeasement with the Russians and the Communist Chinese. I noted at the end that there was much more to President Obama’s foreign policy record that should be of concern to Americans.
Little did I know that The Washington Post would publish a story only two days later touching on another very serious issue: Afghanistan. Before I get into the Post’s story and some other tid-bits, consider what Obama said at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in August 2009.
When Islamic Fascists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11, the “War on Terror” began. America was united in an effort to dispose of terrorists and their State sponsors. More than eight years later Americans have grown weary. In the latest Rasmussen poll, 45% of Americans say they want U.S. troops “home from Afghanistan either right away or within a year.”
Complacency has set in. Americans have forgotten the reason we are in Afghanistan and why, as President Barack Obama says, it is a “war of necessity.” Afghanistan is where Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Al Qaeda planned the attacks of 9/11. They did so with the aid and comfort of the Taliban and its leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar. To come away from Afghanistan with anything other than completing the mission’s objectives – routing out Al Qaeda and the Taliban – would be to invite more 9/11s. Unfortunately, it may not matter.
Seriously, is the answer to every woe a tax increase? That’s the way Democrats seem to think. It’s a knee-jerk reaction. Raise taxes to pay for whatever may come.
Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Is Calling For Tax Increase To Pay For More Troops In Afghanistan. “Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said higher-income Americans should be taxed to pay for additional troops sent to Afghanistan and that NATO should provide half of the new soldiers.” (Viola Gienger, “High-Income Tax May Be Needed For Afghan War Cost, Levin Says,” Bloomberg, 11/20/09)
The Associated Press is reporting that the Obama Administration is “prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan's political future.” (Jennifer Loven, “AP Source: Obama Focusing On Al-Qaeada, Not Taliban,” The Associated Press, 10/8/09)
Michael O’Brien over at The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room is reporting on an effort in the House by liberals to bar “funding to increase the troop level in Afghanistan beyond its current level.” Sounds like a replay from when Democrats opposed the troop surge in Iraq. . . before it was successful.