Have Liberals now got a War President of Their Very Own?
Question by Gandhi: Have Liberals now got a War President of Their Very Own?
To the applause of liberal hawks and formerly critical neocons, the president declared in his Nobel Peace Prize speech that the U.S. will continue to wage war,…though naturally, only “just” war….anywhere,.. and against anyone it chooses in a never-ending struggle against the forces of evil.
Now,..forgive me if I’m wrong,..but does that not sound like exactly the sort of thing the “previous” incumbent of the White House would have said?
Ronald Reagan employed that rationale in defending the proxy war in Central America waged by U.S.-backed Contras. George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton extended the tradition of intervention, sending troops to theaters of combat as far-flung as Panama, Kuwait, and the Balkans, while the second Bush launched invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. They have all been war presidents.
But Barack Obama was going to be different, or so the antiwar liberals,.. and a few antiwar conservatives hoped.
He was to herald the end of that uncompromising and unilateral era of preventive war. The hundreds of thousands who joyously greeted the president elect in Grant Park or the 1.5 million at his inauguration were ecstatic with anticipation. Left-wing pundits wrote excitedly about FDR’s One Hundred Days and projected great plans onto the new Man From Illinois.
In countless articles, Republicans were declared brain dead, and the Bush Cheney policies that got us into Iraq, Afghanistan, and the torture business were buried.
One year after those celebrations, it’s the neocons cheering, seeing in Obama’s policies a vindication of the late administration. Who would have dreamed that following Obama’s West Point speech announcing 30,000 more troops destined for Afghanistan, William Kristol would laud Obama in the pages of the Washington Post, writing:
“the rationale for this surge is identical to Bush’s,” and praise the Democratic president for having “embraced the use of military force as a key instrument of national power”?
After West Point and Oslo, neocons saw Obama as a more coherent Bush, an electrifying orator who had dazzled antiwar Democrats and independents and then promptly dumped them. When the New York Times printed a photo of the men and women who helped Obama reach his decision to escalate, not one dove was present.
So, have you all been had?
Have the elites in Wall St and the Fed, got one over you all again, by placing another puppet in the Oval Office?
Answer by Love Canada.
There is no free ride in this world.
Changing Presidents does not wipe out all the previous misdeeds
Obama got stuck with a mess, and to get out out of it is not easy, especially when your own countrymen are plotting against your every move
As your beloved George said, your with us or against us!
Add your own answer in the comments!