Reflections From a Murky Pond

On Thursday, March 17, 2011, acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which provides for the use of force if deemed to be needed by the UNSC, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) adopted Resolution 1973.

President Obama promptly gave the orders for American forces in the region to begin attacking Mu’ammar Qaddafi’s loyalists in Libya.

This is not a course of action that, at first pass, makes a great deal of sense to me. It makes even less sense to me when I look back to the start of Obama’s campaign for the Presidency of America.

It’s time to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else’s civil war.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)
Candidacy Announcement, February 10, 2007

This is not like Obama’s reversing his decisions about Gitmo and Military Commissions; that was bowing with some small grace to necessity. Having his regime’s UNSC delegate vote in favor of Resolution 1973 was an unforced act.

So what, if anything, changed? Why has Obama committed our forces to a type of war that he previously stated he believed could not be won?

I think Americans require an answer to that question before we get too much further into the 2012 Election season.

Related Reading:

So what exactly is the foundation of Obama’s foreign policy? What are Obama’s goals for America’s international relations? Nobody seems to know those answers, not our State Department, not Congress, not the People, not our Enemies, and certainly not our Allies.

With no apparent rhyme or reason to Obama’s statements, occasional half-measures, and string of inactions in response to any of the situations in the Mid-East, Africa, Asia, and Latin America people keep searching for some deeper game that he’s playing and ascribing various and sundry motivations to him.

There’s a far simpler and, I believe, much more likely rationale for Obama’s foreign policy inconsistencies:

Infographic: Obama’s Foreign Policy Goals

There are two rules one should always remember: “The simplest explanation is most likely the correct one” and “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

I firmly believe that Obama already displayed the extent of his foreign policy. He apologied to all and sundry for America’s status as a superpower, vilified the actions of his predecessors, and thought that our enemies would now begin to like, if not America, at least him.

Beyond that, I don’t think that Obama has any foreign policy goals.

As the international situation grows ever more fluid and we in America move towards the 2012 Elections this is something to keep firmly in one’s mind.

Related Reading:

General David Patraeus, Commander of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and Commander of the US Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A) recently told the Wall Street Journal that he wasn’t too pleased with Rev. Terry Jones’ and his Dove World Church’s plan to burn a pile of Qur’ans on September 11, 2010, the 10th anniversary of the Muslims’ terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.

General Petraeus’ concerns seem to be over the probable additional risks to our troops stationed in the Muslim World the burning of the Qur’ans by the Gainesville, FL church would cause.

It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort. It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.

Firstly, let me say the General Petraeus is quite accurate in his claims that Muslims will respond violently to the burning of Qur’an and that such a violent response would explicitly increase the dangers faced by our soldiery stationed within the Muslim World, especially those serving and fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Stimulus: Burning A Qur’an

Response: Muslims Riot And Go On Violent Rampage

It’s simply a proven fact that a great number of Muslims respond to being  offended by either targeted or mass acts of violence.  Their responses to insulting cartoons of their Prophet proved that point to the world. Therefor it’s hard to blame Gen. Petraeus for being against such a public burning of Qur’an. It will, without a doubt, make his job and the jobs of the troops he commands that much harder and that much more dangerous. Simple.

Read the rest of this entry »

Related Reading: