Terrorist-in-Chief Barack Obama

June 7, 2008

We face the prospect of electing as President a man who has never spoken directly with General David Petraeus, the U.S. commander who turned around the War in Iraq that has enabled us to cripple Al Qaeda and pave the way for the emergence of an incipient pro-American democracy in that country. Indeed, we face the prospect of electing a man who, if he ever does meet with General Petraeus, probably won't be able to look him in the eye, so devastating to U.S. security interests are the plans that Barack Obama has for decimating our military.
Before Obama gets done with his plans to undermine our country's interests, he'll be much more appropriately named Terrorist-in Chief of the United States Army.

Obama's announced agenda of military cuts and negotiating unequivocally with terrorist leaders of every stripe brands him as someone only a card-carrying leftist Democrat could love. Unfortunately, it's precisely those anti-American Dems who have forced this candidate on the American people, and, like the tyrant-wannabes they are, largely by overriding their party members' expressed desires, thanks to Bob Beckel's insidiously anti-democratic Super Delegate strategy.

Obama's position seems to be "negotiate from a position of weakness, or don't negotiate at all," because among the first things on his announced agenda are withdrawing our military forces from Iraq and Afghanistan immediately, and decimating our military through drastic cuts in military spending.

Now, one of the difficulties we had in responding to the terrorist attack that killed some 3,000 Americans on our own soil on September 11, 2001, was that President George W. Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton, had himself gutted the military and weakened us seriously during his presidency. It is widely acknowledged that Islamist terrorists read the Clinton administration during the 1990s as "weak on terror." Generally, Clinton's response to the terrorist incidents that took American lives during his administration was to treat them as requiring what can be characterized as "police action." There is fairly broad agreement that the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon were even possible because Osama bin Laden viewed Clinton (and, by extension, the United States itself) as not having the backbone to respond aggressively and militarily to such an attack.

There was a great deal coming from the Clinton Administration to reinforce that notion. During the 1990s, President Clinton decimated America's military resources. Never mind that his predecessor once removed, President Ronald Reagan, had demonstrated that a strong military presence was the foundation for negotiations and policies leading to American triumphs. And never mind that Russian President Gorbachev had responded to Reagan's ringing "tear down this wall," backed by an upsurge in American military might during Reagan's administration, by actually tearing down that wall.

The facts speak for themselves: During the Clinton Administration, the number of active duty Army divisions was reduced from 18 to 10. And Clinton reduced the number of active ships from 586 in 1990 to 278 at the end of his term. In all, Clinton slashed military spending on everything from planes to guns to bullets to ships by nearly 90% during his terms in office.

Obama plans to follow the Clinton blueprint for military weakness leading to terrorist attacks on the United States to the letter. Obama has promised to "cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful [military] spending." He has also vowed to "cut investments in unproven missile defense systems," to "slow our development of future combat systems," and to "set a goal for a world without nuclear weapons." He vows that the U.S., under his watch, "will not develop new nuclear weapons," and that he will "negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal."

This, coupled with holding talks with every terrorist regime he can think of, will certainly put us well on the path to another 9/11 attack. Our new Terrorist-in-Chief and his anti-American cronies in the left wing of the Democrat Party will certainly see to that.