President Obama yesterday spoke
in defense of the Iran deal at American University, launching
an unusually blunt and aggressive attack on deal opponents.
Obama’s blistering criticisms aimed at the Israeli government and its
neocon supporters were accurate and unflinching, including the obvious fact
that what they really crave is regime change and war. About opposition to
the deal from the Israeli government, he said: “It would be an abrogation of my
constitutional duty to act against my best judgment simply because it causes
temporary friction with a dear friend and ally.”
Judged as a speech, it was an
impressive and effective rhetorical defense of the deal, which is why leading
deal opponents have reacted so hysterically. The editors of Bloomberg View —
which has spewed one Iraq-War-fearmongering-type article after the next
about the deal masquerading as “reporting” — whined
that Obama was “denigrating those who disagree with him” and that “it would be
far better to win this fight fairly.” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pronounced
himself “especially insulted” and said Obama’s speech went “way over
the line of civil discourse.” Our nation’s Churchillian warriors are such
sensitive souls: sociopathically indifferent to the lives they continually
extinguish around the world (provided it all takes place far away from their
comfort and safety), but deeply, deeply hurt — “especially insulted” — by mean
words directed at them and their motives.
Beyond
accurately describing Iran deal opponents, Obama also accurately described
himself and his own record of militarism. To defend against charges that he
Loves the Terrorists, he boasted:
As
commander-in-chief, I have not shied away from using force when necessary. I
have ordered tens of thousands of young Americans into combat. …
I’ve
ordered military action in seven countries.
By “ordered military actions in
seven countries,” what he means is that he has ordered bombs dropped, and he
has extinguished the lives of thousands of innocent people, in seven
different countries, all of which just so happen to be predominantly Muslim.
The list includes one
country where he twice escalated a war that was being waged when
he was inaugurated (Afghanistan), another where he withdrew troops to great
fanfare only to then order a new bombing campaign (Iraq), two countries where
he converted very rare bombings into a constant stream of American violence
featuring cluster
bombs and “signature
strikes” (Pakistan and Yemen), one country where he continued the
policy of bombing at will (Somalia), and one country where he started a
brand new war even in the face of Congressional rejection of his
authorization to do so, leaving it in tragic shambles (Libya). That
doesn’t count the aggression by allies that he sanctioned and supported (in
Gaza), nor the proxy wars he enabled (the current Saudi devastation of Yemen),
nor the whole new front of cyberattacks he
has launched, nor the multiple despots he
has propped up, nor the clandestine bombings that he still has not
confirmed (Philippines).
[As the
military historian and former U.S. Army Col. Andrew Bacevich noted in the Washington Post
after Obama began bombing Syria, “Syria has become at least the 14th country in
the Islamic world that U.S. forces have invaded or occupied or bombed, and in
which American soldiers have killed or been killed. And that’s just since
1980.” That is the fact that, by itself, renders tribalistic Westerners who
obsessively harp on the violence of Muslims such obvious self-deluded
jokes.]
Two recent foreign policy moves
are major positive items on Obama’s legacy: normalization of relations with
Cuba and agreeing to this deal with Iran. But, as he himself just proudly
touted yesterday, the overall record of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize laureate is
one of violence, militarism and aggression that has left a pile
of dead bodies of innocent people. That Obama feels the need (or desire)
to boast about how many countries he’s bombed, and that the only mainstream
criticisms of him in the Iran debate is that he is too unwilling to use more
aggression and force, says a lot about Obama, but even more about U.S.
political culture. And none of what it says is good.
No comments:
Post a Comment