Tag Archives: Appease

News

Iran laughs as Obama pleads for return of unmanned drone

2 Comments
Is that Neville Chamberlain or Barack Obama groveling?
"Ummm... can we have our drone back mister?" (H/T Sid)

CNN reports:

President Barack Obama said Monday that the United States has asked Iran to return a U.S. drone aircraft that Iran claims it recently brought down in Iranian territory.

“We’ve asked for it back. We’ll see how the Iranians respond,” Obama said in a news conference, alongside Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

A top Iranian military official previously vowed not to return the unmanned American stealth plane that it says it has.

[…]Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday criticized Obama’s decisions on the drone, but for an entirely different reason. He said that, after the aircraft went down, the president should have ordered an airstrike over Iran.

“The right response to that would have been to go in immediately after it had gone down and destroy it,” the Republican, who served with President George W. Bush, told CNN’s Erin Burnett. “You can do that from the air … and, in effect, make it impossible for them to benefit from having captured that drone.”

Instead, “he asked nicely for them to return it, and they aren’t going to,” Cheney said.

[…]One U.S. official said the United States can’t be certain it’s the real stealth drone, because U.S. personnel don’t have access to it. But he added there’s no reason to think it’s a fake. However, a second senior U.S. military official said that a big question is to how the drone could have remained virtually intact given the high altitude it is believed to have crashed from.

All American Blogger found this story on Fox News:

In an interview broadcast live Monday night on Venezuelan state television, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said nothing to suggest his country would grant the U.S. request.

“The Americans have perhaps decided to give us this spy plane,” Ahmadinejad said. “We now have control of this plane.”

Speaking through an interpreter, Ahmadinejad said: “There are people here who have been able to control this spy plane, who can surely analyze this plane’s system also. … In any case, now we have this spy plane.”

He added, “Very soon, they’re going to learn more about the abilities and possibilities of our country.”

On Tuesday, a semi-official Iranian news agency said authorities have shrugged off the U.S. request. Defense Minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi said the United States should apologize for invading Iranian air space instead of asking for the return of the unmanned aircraft.

Remember when Iran was having their elections and they started shooting people down in the street? Unlike Germany, France and Canada, Obama had nothing to say about that. Ronald Reagan would have had something to say. Margaret Thatcher would have something to say. But Obama had nothing to say. Maybe the Iranians looked at what Obama did and decided that Obama is a paper tiger.

Lately, we’ve seen an Iranian-backed attack on U.S. soil, an Iranian-backed attack on a U.K. embassy, and increased Iranian operations in Latin America. What could be emboldening Iran to be so aggressive? If we are nice to them and bow down to them and give them money, won’t that make them like us more?

News

Obama abandons Poland and the Czech Republic in order to appease Russia

Leave a comment

The Heritage Foundation analyzes Obama’s latest foreign policy blunder.

Excerpt:

President Obama’s decision to abandon plans for basing elements of the U.S. missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic is entirely a political one – in order to appease Russia. This decision is a strategic victory for the Kremlin, which is determined to have a sphere of privileged interest in its near-abroad. It represents the shameful abandonment of two of America’s closest allies in Central and Eastern Europe, and in future, America’s allies will have cause to question the integrity and credibility of American promises.

It also leaves the U.S. and Europe more vulnerable to the threat of ballistic missile attack. The Third Site installations proposed for Poland and the Czech Republic – Ground-Based Midcourse Defense interceptors in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic – were cost-effective, proven technologies which offered protection from long range missile attack to both Europe and the United States. The alternative deployments which President Obama has said he will now pursue will not satisfy those criteria.

Neither has Washington secured any great concession from Russia.

[…]The decision – to concentrate resources defending against short range missiles and not field defenses against long range missile attacks – makes no sense. To be truly strategic about national and international security, the United States must defend against current and future threats. Presenting a choice between defending against short or long range missile attack is a false one. Ballistic missile threats can emerge with little advanced warning, and as Admiral Mike Mullen (chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) recently stated, Iran has already amassed sufficient uranium to build an atomic bomb.

Looks like President Chamberlain Obama is totally oblivious to the emerging threat from Iran. Not only is he abandoning Israel, but he’s leaving us open to long-range ballistic missile attack from abroad.

The Western Experience explains Obama’s “reasoning”.

Excerpt:

By taking on a non-confrontational role with Russia, President Obama hopes he can lure Russia into becoming a working partner with the U.S. against Iran and terrorism. Additionally, work closer on policy goals like disarmament. So the possibilities for President Obama, in his eyes, are win-win. But right now it looks more like a very huge gamble, if not a misguided attempt to secure cooperation through appeasement.

You’ll recall from my last piece that Russia is selling Iran S-300 defense systems that Iran will use to shoot down Israeli aircraft in the event of a pre-emptive airstrike against their nuclear facilities. And Obama has decided that the proper response to these developments is appeasement. What a surprise! The naive leftist sides against our ally, Israel.

The Independent records the reactions of our allies. (H/T The Western Experience)

Poland’s media bluntly summed up the feelings of the country’s political right towards President Obama’s axing of plans for an east European missile shield today: “Betrayed! The USA has sold us to the Russians and stabbed us in the back,” was the headline in one popular newspaper.

[…]In the Czech Republic, where the missile shield was also meant to be deployed, newspapers were similarly dismissive: “Obama gave in to the Kremlin,” commented the daily Lidowe Noviny.

None of this is surprising if you recall how Obama sided with tyrants in Iran and Honduras. The man has no moral sense.

Commentary

Why do Democrats cut the funding of missile defense programs?

1 Comment

Article from the Heritage Foundation.

Excerpt:

President Obama, in his FY2010 defense budget, proposed a $1.2 billion cut to missile defense funding and halted development on our long-range interceptors in Alaska and California.

…Rep. Trent Franks offered an amendment to restore the $1.2 billion cut from missile defense by President Obama. The Democrats argued that this cut was reasonable, but in the face of Iranian and North Korean activities, any significant cut to missile defense funding seems foolish. In the last two months, we have seen Iran test its long-range missile capabilities (under the guise of a space launch) and North Korea test a nuclear weapon and launch (unsuccessfully) a long-range Taepo-Dong II missile. The North Koreans now appear to be preparing to launch yet another Taepo-Dong II. In the face of all of these activities, the Democrat majority on the Armed Services Committee voted down the Franks amendment to restore missile defense funding by a vote of 36-26. This amendment was then voted on by the full House of Representatives and again defeated along largely party lines.

There were a number of other amendments related to missile defense that we discussed, including Republican efforts to fund the European Site and the Airborne Laser, but they were all shot down by the Democrats. For the sake of our nation’s security, we should be focused on shooting down enemy missiles, not on shooting down our own missile defense system. As North Korea and Iran push forward, every member of the House of Representatives has taken a stand on missile defense. Unfortunately, it seems that the position of the Democratic majority is clear: shoot down missile defense.

The Heritage Foundation post I cited is a guest post by Congressman Todd Akin of Missouri.