Obama the war monger

An American President who won his job, in part, on an antiwar platform showed up in Oslo this week to support war while accepting a prize for peace.

So strong was Barack Obama’s endorsement of war as a necessary means to fight evil that conservatives praised his speech while liberals frothed at the mouth and barfed all over their Guccis.

Right-wing firebrand Newt Gingrich called it “a very historic speech.”

Even Sarah Palin liked it.

Said Obama:

I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida’s leaders to lay down their arms.

The Washington Post’s Richard Cohen was not impressed:

Obama’ s time may come, but he is not yet a great man. He is merely a famous man — a very famous man. He had no right to give this speech and the Nobel committee had no right to ask him. Someday, Obama may grow into the speech he gave. It was a good speech — but like a young wine, served before its time.

Alas, Obama’s speech adds to liberal angst in this nation. They thought they elected one of their own but he is turning out to be a pragmatic President who puts reality ahead of idealism.

As President, Obama realizes something too many on the left can never comprehend: that words alone cannot defeat evil, that war — however repugnant — is all too often the only viable solution.

In many ways, Obama is the most enigmatic President in modern American history. He continues to surprise while evolving into the job. While legitimate questions remain over whether or not he should have accepted a Nobel Peace Prize awarded for what he is expected to accomplish rather than what he has actually done, his speech served notice that this President is no peacenik and may be one willing to make the hard decisions to defend America when necessary.

He appears to realize that positions cannot be static and that a President must look beyound partisan considerations when representing the needs of a nation. Candidate Obama campaigned against the war in Iraq but said resolution was necessary in Afghanistan. That’s one campaign promise he kept. The surge that sends 30,000 more Americans to that war may or may not work but he made the call and then jetted off to Oslo to accept an award for peace.

While I have many doubts about Obama, I’m impressed by what he said in Norway. I’m impressed that he kept his promises on Afghanistan while the liberals in Congress tried to pressure him to back off.

“This speech has got to be the Obama doctrine,” says historian John Baick, a professor at Western New England College.

If so, then the Barack Obama we saw is Oslo may finally start to deliver on the promise of his young Presidency.


  1. It all comes down to what sort of people we want to be as Americans. Are we the leaders of the world held together by our military might, or are we leaders of the world held together by our principles? Yeah, that’s a really nebulous rhetorical question. But it’s one that is not examined often enough and deeply enough.


    We began as a people of principle defended with military might. We’ve become a people of military might who rationalize its use with principle. The ass is backwards.


  2. Concluding a final briefing to with his generals the night before the offensive to take the Belgian town of Bastogne in the Ardennes Forest, Hitler tells them, “This battle is to decide whether we shall live or die. I want all my soldiers to fight hard and without pity. The battle must be fought with brutality and all resistance must be broken in a wave of terror. In this most seroius hour of the Fatherland, I expect every one of my soldiers to be courageous and again courageous. The enemy must be beaten – now or never! Thus lives our Germany!”

    How are we different?   

  3. We have two parties in America and they both follow the “road to Empire” tactics that Perot warned us about in 1992.  Many of us did see the truth about this Empire Building center in Washington D.C. where both parties were sold on the one world order.  As long as we continue to elect leaders from either party we must pay the consequences.  America is hated abroad and the new generations will never bother to vote.  I remember  back in the 1960’s when the Christians did not vote as no one would go along with their Christian America.  We are seeing the results of our faith- based grants issued by President Bush 43 and we will see a President Palin in the future.  “Kill the enemy”  “Drill the oil out of America” we need it to kill the enemy.  The first thing on the menu will be to put women back to slavery and homosexuals will be banned from government involvement. 

    Had I know where this government took us, I would never have raised my kids here.  Had I known that our candidates had to appease the Christian voters, I would have never voted. 

    This is all a repeat of history of the civilation.  We are acting as if we have a King in the White House who wants his empire just as Rome demanded theirs.  Each growing empire was based on religious growth and destroyed by it.   

    Putting the churches on payroll meant changing the freedoms of those millions of Americans who were considered sinners.  I’m not gay and I’m pro-life but I object completely to what is happening on both sides of the aisle.  It is too easy to blame the winners every 2 to 4 years.  We put the bastards in power and we will continue to do so. 


Comments are closed.