Another reason.............

[justgotback]

Obama will be a tradgedy if President.

This guy really frightens me! This may be a repost, I'm not sure. If not it is certainly eye opening...

YouTube - Obama-Caucus4Priorities


JGB

[Dhunter55]

JGB, good to see you out of retirement.

The biggest issue I have with his "out of Iraq" policy is he'll only go spend the savings on entitlements for the illegals, the lame, and the lazy. He'll probably cut our military like Carter and we'll only have to play major catch up like we had to under Ronnie. I don't think we can afford to even let it lapse. Disarm our nukes? Uh uh!

[Brickboy240]

What is the incentive for other nations to honor a nuclear weapons ban? How do we know they'll honor it? Pakistan? India? Iran? ...are you SURE Obama can make them tow the line and keep good watch on these guys? Wow..thats a big dream if you ask me.

Sounds much like the overblown Kyoto Treaty...another worthless piece of legislation that has no guarantee that many key players in the emissions biz will adhere to it or ever honor it. Two of the worlds soon-to-be biggest polluters have not even signed it (India and China) and they're laughing at the fact that we're chopping our own balls off and handing them to these guys on a silver platter.

Typical leftist talking points that SOUND good to many, but are largely unenforceable and very well could leave more first world nations powerless against rogue nations that either brek treaties or never plan on adhering to them to begin with.

Daydreaming....just daydreaming away

- brickboy240

[AZXD]

The most dangerous fool money can buy.
Small & large arms disarmament proposals.
What more could an anti-American country ask for. I can understand why they support him. What I can't understand is the stupidity and blindness of those within this country that support his ideas.

[justgotback]

Originally Posted by AZXD

The most dangerous fool money can buy.
Small & large arms disarmament proposals.
What more could an anti-American country ask for. I can understand why they support him. What I can't understand is the stupidity and blindness of those within this country that support his ideas.

Excellent point AZ! Not to mention in the video he states he will cut back future combat weapons technologies!!! He wants to literally disarm America! I'm telling folks, if he makes it to President we will be a weaker Nation because of it....

[AZXD]

I agree with this article.
It makes sense. The agenda of the environmental groups is an agenda that we should embrace. People hurt the planet and Obama realizes this. So by weakening our ability to defend the nation ... He will in effect create a situation by which a population reduction can be achieved with minimal effort by our enemies.

His intentions are becoming quite clear. Weaken the nation and turn the remains over to the enemy. Saving the planet is the ultimate goal and we will be the sacrificial lamb.

Yea, it's an off-the-wall theory ... But does anything make sense about Obama ??
Weaken the military. It offends people!
Weaken the economic structure of the nation. It offends people!
Weaken the will of the people with propaganda. It offends ME!

Talk about a closing line ... "no people in history have ever survived, who thought they could protect their freedom by making themselves inoffensive to their enemies." ... I believe this to be true.

On Barack Obama


Leslie J Sacks
Weekly Blitz, Bangladesh
If Obama had his way he would replace the incomparably successful cult movie "Star Wars" with "Mary Poppins," a sentiment clearly evinced by his recent video posted on his website Welcome to Obama for America., and by the Center for Individual Freedom [CFIF] on YouTube.

He seems determined to weaken our military as though that will appease our enemies and convert all to pacifism and universal tolerance. Were it to be so!

Obama states that he will "cut investments in unproven missile defense systems" [unlike Russia], that he "will not weaponize space" [unlike the Chinese] and that "unnecessary" spending will be eliminated [unlike with Chavez, Iran and Syria].

Most worrying is his promise to "slow development of future combat systems" (which is exactly what we need to combat more dangerously asymmetrical warfare) putting at risk our modernization and our superiority. Other aspiring nations seek to match our prowess, but so far fortunately without success.

The CFIF cited new satellite technology that "allows us to pinpoint and eliminate the enemy, unmanned drones that promise amazing advances in battlefield safety and effectiveness, bunker-buster weapons that penetrate deep into the caves in which remote terrorists hide and communications systems that allow lightning-quick troop deployment and rescue missions." These technologies "ultimately protect the lives and health of our troops, just as they protect us."

This precision-guided weaponry saved not only American lives but those of all combatants. Iraq was the least lethal military takeover of a major army and country in living history. In no small part American superiority also helped force Gorbachev's hand and contributed to ending the Cold War.

Obama seems to feel comfortable in leveraging his children's future based on his bucolic fantasies - I don't believe Michelle Obama would do likewise [she may not respect much of America as she pointedly stated but I doubt she'd wager her family's safety] and I certainly would be mightily uncomfortable going forward in this world of nuclear proliferation and increasing terrorism, if I were not able to hedge my bets, if I had to rely on the left's belief in the munificence of Ahmadinejad.

Obama has expressed willingness to meet, without any preconditions whatsoever, the autocratic leaders of Iran and Syria, all amongst the world's most reprehensible regimes. Yet he never clarifies what he would do if the talks failed, he never seems motivated to leverage America's unrivaled strength and power to achieve his laudable goals.

Obama has not visited Iraq since January 2006 nor since the all important surge. Neither has he met with General Petraeus who was responsible for the surge, or with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki. Yet Democratic Senator Biden and Republican Senator John McCain have been to Iraq 10 and 8 times respectively. Is Obama so dogmatic, so stubborn and confident in his own personal theories, his own isolated judgment that he is astonishingly disinterested in the facts on the ground and in talking to the soldiers, the citizens, the commanders in Iraq? It is these people whose reality must necessarily be a crucial and truthful cog in the wheel that is now post-surge Iraq and is also at the center of America's and Al-Qaeda's primary strategies in the war.

What remains perplexing is Obama's similarity to Jimmy Carter's childlike worldview and his decimation of the military, certainly not a position I imagine the center of America will knowingly support.

Obama has stated that he will set a goal for a world without nuclear weapons. Will he be so kind as to first wait for Iran, Syria, Pakistan and other rogue nations to first disarm [weapons and research] and verify beyond any doubt? Furthermore, according to Harvard national security expert Graham Allison, if the U.S. and other governments just continue to keep doing what they are presently doing today, then more likely than not a nuclear terrorist attack in a major city is going to happen by 2014.

Obama's anti-military passion seems certain to supercede even Jimmy Carter's in undermining our military forces. He seems to be allergic to the possibility that the military may still have a role to play in the 21st Century [see Bret Stephens' incisive view on the subject in his Wall Street Journal article "There is a Military Solution to Terror"].

And what if Al Qaeda or another well financed terrorist group or regime ever develop such nuclear weapons - do we all convert immediately to Islam or do we emigrate to Mars or other more hospitable environments? After all the radical Islamic nations have shown such admirable ability to honor agreements and to tolerate our separate and very different existences.

We would thus do far better to ensure the eternal city of Jerusalem [which literally means "Vision of Peace"] remains safe and free than to follow Obama's advice if we ever want to achieve penultimate peace, for it is indeed Jerusalem that is at the center of the world, at the center of the Middle East and not Obama's temporal visions. We will need to stand unusually tall and free, bending to no one, no matter what, if we are to allow our children to inherit the wondrous freedoms and liberties we take so for granted.

It seems that Obama and the substantially left-leaning Democratic Party leaders need very much to learn the lesson outlined by Dean Acheson, that great Democratic Secretary of State who once warned that "no people in history have ever survived, who thought they could protect their freedom by making themselves inoffensive to their enemies."