Is Obama Schizoid? National Security Speech Makes No Sense


Does he even read the speeches someone wrote for him before he babbles?  Or does he think any of latest offerings made any sense?

Zero gave a national security speech today.  Here are the highlights……

America “is at war with al Qaeda, the Taliban and their associated forces,” Obama said.

Okay, I buy that.  We are whether we want to be or not.  But, then, we don’t try people we are at war with in our civilian courts…….  like we intend to do with the scumbags walking freely in Libya. 

He justifies our killing of American citizens abroad……

“When a U.S. citizen goes abroad to wage war against America — and is actively plotting to kill U.S. citizens; and when neither the United States, nor our partners are in a position to capture him before he carries out a plot — his citizenship should no more serve as a shield than a sniper shooting down on an innocent crowd should be protected from a SWAT team,” Obama said.

But, this is easy to remedy without stripping the citizen of due process.  Anwar al-Awlaki had long been operating against the interests of the US.  Zero says we’re at war with nutjobs like Anwar al-Awlaki.  So, let’s call it for what it is, treason, and strip him of his citizenship before we kill him and those like him.  Sure, if he’s presenting an imminent danger.  But, let’s not pretend.  Anwar al-Awlaki operated for years in this manner. 

On one hand, Zero defended droning.  But, he wants to close Guantanamo, full of people we didn’t kill, making a moral argument…..

Guantanamo Bay also threatens to create new enemies of the state and diminish the country’s moral standing in the world, Obama said, revisiting a campaign promise he made before his first term.

Yeh, Zero, that makes sense.  It’s more moral to just drone-kill the SOBs than it is to detain them.  I don’t know if you’ve checked it lately but, the drone issue isn’t seen as a moral preference by many abroad.  I mean, if we’re going to worry about what other people think of us.  Personally, I don’t, but this is the argument Zero seemed to try and make. 

But, more on Guantanamo, here’s a laughable quote……

That’s not to mention the economic implications, the president said. The country spends $150 million annually to imprison 166 suspects, and the Defense Department estimates that keeping Gitmo open may cost another $200 million “at a time when we are cutting investments in education and research here at home,” he said.

Zero is going to pretend to care about $150 million?  Since when?  And please, quit pretending that we’re cutting anything.  We’re not.  Then he makes another illogical argument……

Explaining that no prisoner has ever escaped a supermax or military facility — and noting that U.S. courts have had no issue prosecuting terrorists, some more dangerous than those at Guantanamo — Obama said he would push again to close the detention center and appoint State and Defense department envoys to make sure the detainees are transferred to other countries.

What?  Because they’re held in Guantanamo they can’t be tried by our courts?  That’s nonsensical.  Of course they can be tried in our courts.  They tried to do that in New York but, decided against it.  Then there’s the red herring about no one ever escaping a supermax prison.  So what?  Neither has there been anyone escaping Guantanamo.  Can someone tell me what the difference is between holding them at Guantanamo vs holding them somewhere on the CONUS?  How does that make us in better moral standing?  If Zero wants the people to get behind this, he needs to make the argument of how it would be better for the American people to house the terrorists in our back yard than to house them in Guantanamo. 

Related to the speech…..

At Wednesday’s daily briefing, White House press secretary Jay Carney said Obama is “considering a range of options” to reduce the prison’s population. Senior officials say there is a focus on repatriating and transferring detainees.

“I would say that one of the options is reappointing a senior official at the State Department to renew our focus on repatriating or transferring those detainees,” Carney said.

As to repatriating some of these ….. people.  As I recollect the recidivism is simply too high to do this in the interest of the Western Civilization.  That’s why we quit releasing these scumbags. 

150 former Guantanamo detainees are either “confirmed or suspected of reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities,” according to a new intelligence assessment released by the Director of National Intelligence’s office on Tuesday. In total, 598 detainees have been transferred out of U.S. custody at Guantanamo. 1 out of every 4, or 25 percent, of these former detainees is now considered a confirmed or suspected recidivist by the U.S. government.

The to complete his circular thinking, he touches on foreign aid.  Because we care about $150 million……

Obama also raised the unpopular topic of foreign aid in his Thursday speech, presenting it not as charity but as a means of national security. It amounts to less than 1% of the national a budget but is integral to fighting terrorism, he said.

“For what we spent in a month in Iraq at the height of the war, we could be training security forces in Libya, maintaining peace agreements between Israel and its neighbors, feeding the hungry in Yemen, building schools in Pakistan, and creating reservoirs of goodwill that marginalize extremists,” he said.

By maintaining peace agreements, I take that to mean giving Muslim Brotherhood led Egypt tanks and fighter jets.  Yeh, I can see how that works towards maintaining peace.  As far as building schools, you just as well give a fish a bicycle.  It would provide the same utility.  Training security forces…… I think after our Benghazi experience, it’s pretty clear we’ve no idea who we’re training or where any munitions may end up.  Kinda like our Afghan experience.  I think we’re better off not training these people to be better killers. 

The whole speech was nothing but flipping back and forth from dichotomous thoughts.  We want to be frugal but, lets give money and munitions away to people who are likely to use them against US interests. 

We worry about our perceived moral standing among the world, presumably mostly the Muslim community we’re worried about, (I’m pretty sure many of our friends in the UK and elsewhere, would prefer we keep the terrorists where they are). But, drone-killing is justified over detention.

He thinks a sniper on a roof top is like driving around Yemen, worries that we flout “the rule of law” but, will kill American citizens without proper due process. 

We’re at war, but, want to try scumbags in our courts….. and on and on he goes.  Where he stops, even he doesn’t know. 

Does his teleprompter have a mind of its own?

You can read more here and here.

This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Is Obama Schizoid? National Security Speech Makes No Sense

  1. Latitude says:

    good grief…don’t tell me you actually listened to that!

    …now go wash your brain

  2. Bruce says:

    I took this to mean he’s getting heat from the left over the IRS and AP scandals and needed something to remind them he is on their side.

    So the ‘I will close Guantanamo’ press release is dusted off, with the twist that he now says he’ll allow the hundred Yemeni’s to be repatriated back to Yemen. Where I am sure they will all be nice decent people who get jobs and make valued contributions to society. Not.

    This bit is especially hilarious:

    He called on the Pentagon to designate a site on US soil to hold military tribunals for terrorism suspects now at Guantanamo Bay, and said Congress must work with him to close a facility that has stained the US image abroad.

    Pure dog whistling to the left, since the reason why Guantanamo is still there is because no one on US soil would ante up a place to hold tribunals at, nor let any Guantanamo inmates within a thousand miles of. Obama knows this after being bruised last time. Its not politically possible, therefore he is saying ‘look a unicorn’. Not hard to guess why.

  3. HankH says:

    What? Because they’re held in Guantanamo they can’t be tried by our courts? That’s nonsensical. Of course they can be tried in our courts. They tried to do that in New York but, decided against it.

    I’m assuming you mean tried in military court. Constitutionally, they can’t be tried in a civilian court unless they were on U.S. soil when they committed the crime in question. I think Zero makes the incorrect assumption that because someone is “detained” they’re awaiting trial. They can be detained until hostilities cease without a trial. Given that there is no real plan to defeat our enemy, there’ll be no cessation of hostilities so they’ll pretty much rot in prison. They don’t need nor should they be entitled to a trial unless their government petitions us to return them for trial in their own country.

    I believe the reason why the New York trials never happened is because constitutional law experts warned Zero and Holder against it.

    • suyts says:

      Yes, and yes. Sorry for the convoluted wording. I was trying to follow Zero’s thinking. But, the fact that they sit in Guantanamo isn’t relevant one way or the other, was what I was trying to convey.

    • miked1947 says:

      The opposing side declared war on the United States many years ago. I believe we declared war on terror even before 9-11 2001. That war only has two ways of ending. We obliterate all members of the terrorist group and those that support them. That is not Politically acceptable. They win! That is not acceptable on any level.

      • HankH says:

        Mike, you’re entirely correct. Until this administration is replaced by an administration that can name the enemy, we’ll continue to fight a war with no comprehensive plan to win and where our entire strategy is reactionary.

  4. miked1947 says:

    We could send them to our base on Antarctica!

  5. PhilJourdan says:

    Let me get this straight. It costs $200 million a year to run Gutmo? Hmmm, let’s see. Obama has spent 7 TIMES that in 4 years on vacations! So if he would stop wasting money on golf trips, he could save MORE money than we are spending there.

    The money is NOT the issue. It is just another lie from Obama.

    • suyts says:

      Exactly….. how stupid was that for him to include that in his speech? Does anyone really believe, I mean the most ardent leftist Zero supporter, does any of them really believe he cares about $200 million? And then in the next breath talk about how giving crap to radical nations in the mid-east to the tune of $billions is worthwhile? The man is having a mental break!!!

  6. david says:

    “Can someone tell me what the difference is between holding them at Guantanamo vs holding them somewhere on the CONUS?”

    Sure, placing them within the US, at a prision, they can convert and radicalize other restless aimless youths to Islamic Ideology. (And how would throwing them in prision here create any less animosity among those who wish to destroy all of western society?) Under Obama there has been no decrease in dislike for the west.

    So typical of Obama when he is agaist a wall, pay lip service to the “we are at war with Islamist terrorist camp”, then propose a bunch of vague non solutions interlaced with references to international peace, and in actuality, later when no one is watching, do things again and again which destabalise the middle east and support Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood who are pure terrorist active in over 90 nations.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s