Putin got Crimea and wants lots more. Iran is still working on the bomb. And ISIS is expanding its territory as fast as it can. But fear not, our illustrious Man On Fire in the White House has everything under control.
Our fearless leader knows what he’s doing. First he golfs incessantly to make them think he’s a lightweight. He bows and appeases in person. And then at the last possible second, when they least expect it, he…attacks? No, he falls back to his totally-thought-out plan of Patient Strategy. Or Strategic Patience. It’s also been called Leading From Behind.
Just be strategically patient.
Critics of Obama’s foreign policy have for years assailed his administration for responding too slowly to crises ranging from Syria to Russia. In a far-reaching blueprint released Friday that outlines the administration’s worldview, the White House insisted the United States is leading the global effort to confront challenges in a deliberate manner described as “strategic patience.” (“Leading the global effort” from behind.)
Instead of taking that 3 AM phone call, Barry sleeps in and gets back to it at 3 PM. Strategic patience.
Instead of rescuing Americans under fire in Benghazi, he lets them die and blames a video. Patient strategy.
A White House summary of the strategy, released in tandem with the overall plan, repeatedly highlights the administration’s intent to lead — in partnerships, with military power, and “with a long-term perspective, influencing the trajectory of major shifts in the security landscape today in order to secure our national interests in the future.”
This is the sort of thing a new business with no business plan puts out to explain why they need money. “We’re, uh, influencing major shifts, working toward synergy in order to secure marketplace share as part of our long-term perspective. You know, shifts. And synergy. Long-term stuff. We just need some short-term money now so we can get to the long-term stuff.”
Friday’s strategy essentially is the written product of what the White House has all along argued is in America’s best interests: Carefully constructed security plans that consider all options before getting ensnared in risky and potentially open-ended conflicts.
Like Libya? You know, the illegal war Obama launched by lying to the UN, that ended with Al Qaeda taking over.
How about Afghanistan? Syria? Iraq? Where are those carefully constructed security plans that consider all options before getting ensnared in risky conflicts?
Maybe we need to be more strategically patient until the carefully constructed plans are revealed.
“The United States should not “attempt to dictate the trajectory of all unfolding events around the world,” Obama wrote. “As powerful as we are and will remain, our resources and influence are not infinite.”
Says the man who keeps trying and failing to influence other countries as he squanders most of our resources and all our influence. Thanks for clearing that up for us, Mr. O.
National Security Adviser Susan Rice is set to publicly roll out the strategy in a speech Friday afternoon at the Brookings Institution think tank in Washington.
And if you don’t like her speech, she’ll blame a YouTube video.
Additionally, the White House calls climate change and energy security as key to US national security. Not opposing the man-burning barbarians who are trying to figure out how to get to Washington as soon as possible. Climate change is the key to our security.
Also gay rights. And ObamaCare. And golfing.
Even Obama’s own top advisers have criticized his administration’s national security decisions. Late last month, former Defense Intelligence Agency head Mike Flynn, a retired Army three-star general, said many in the administration were “paralyzed” by the complexity of fighting the Islamic State, leading them to “accept a defensive posture, reasoning that passivity is less likely to provoke our enemies.”
But wait, General. That’s not passivity. That’s Strategic Patience in action.
Although a 1986 U.S. law requires US presidents to issue an annual national security strategy, Obama’s last policy was issued in May 2010, and made the case for ending the war in Iraq and adding more troops to the fight in Afghanistan.
Well, gosh…big mistake. We’re sorry. Those plans worked out pretty well, didn’t they?
[by Daniel Greenfield, writing for Front Page Magazine]
As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by
NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis