Obama’s Power Ranger
- 02.20.2008 - 11:10 AMToday Iraqpundit weighs in on Samantha Power’s Salon interview, and her declaration that the problems of the Middle East revolve around the Israeli-Arab conflict:
Ah, that “Arab-Israeli situation.” Power is demonstrably in harmony with the Arab world, especially its long line of dictators. Her words reminded me of the unceasing echo we heard growing up under Arab dictatorship. To wit, Palestine comes first; everything else is to be sacrificed for the cause. Solve the Palestinian problem and everything else (especially our own freedom) will fall into place. That’s exactly what we were told, and it’s what the Egyptians were told, and what Arabs all over the Middle East and North Africa were told. Nobody in Iraq would dare comment on the shortages of food and ordinary supplies, but we could all comment on the injustice being done to Palestinians.
His conclusion:
I have a suggestion for people who support Barack Obama: They should make their support contingent on Obama finding a new foreign-policy adviser.
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
February 20th, 2008 at 11:40 AM
The problem with the concluding suggestion is that the fundamental issue is not Samantha Power, it’s that Obama would chose her as an advisor. The most logical reason for him to pick her is because he agrees with her. Changing advisors doesn’t change Obama.
February 20th, 2008 at 11:41 AM
“Power is demonstrably in harmony with the Arab world,”
that’s the idea. is it a bad thing?
February 20th, 2008 at 11:56 AM
“that’s the idea. is it a bad thing?”
It’s a very bad thing because Arab values are predominantly anti-Semitic, anti-woman, racist, and overall reactionary. “Being in harmony with the Arab world” is usually the same thing as forsaking the nonnegotiable values of Western Civilization.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:35 PM
The problem is not that one Obama advisor or group of advisors is a danger. It’s that Obama seeks out such people to be his advisors.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:28 PM
“It’s a very bad thing because Arab values are predominantly anti-Semitic, anti-woman, racist, and overall reactionary”
well that’s not true first of all. but anyway it is in our strategic interest to hav ea good relationship with that part of the world. if you were looking to have an ambassador or advisor on trade with china you wouldn’t go with someone who has a major bone to pick with them. You don’t want someone who is totally uncritical of the meither, of course.
also from the article “Nobody in Iraq would dare comment on the shortages of food and ordinary supplies”
wasn’t that our doing as well via the sanctions? what’s this guy smoking
February 20th, 2008 at 7:08 PM
lester
so what would you have proposed doing with the Hussein regime in Iraq? Did you agree with the sanctions? Or would you care to elaborate an alternative course of action?
February 20th, 2008 at 8:49 PM
Sorry, but you need to get your facts straight. The polling data and every other bit of evidence one can find clearly shows this to be the case. Most Arabs are reactionary and bigoted—and this is especially true of their governments! They literally make the Ku Klux Klan seem like a somewhat libertarian and inclusive organization. Our scholars should not be in “harmony” with these people. They should, unlike Samantha Power, instead politely and firmly guide them into the 21st Century.
February 21st, 2008 at 11:14 AM
Yba- I did not at all agree with the sanctions. and I was right. they did nothing to dislodge the dictator and merely set us on a course for our current debacle. I agree with Cheney circa 93, saddam wasn’t worth one american life or cent or much of anything. Most interventions wether in foreign affairs or the economy , have the opposite effect of what they were intended for. Cuba is another example, as our embargo solidified Castro’s position and made him a hero.
David Thomson- He didn’t say she was in harmony with their alleged bigotry. he said he was in harmony with the idea of the palestine/ israel conflict’s centrality in the disputes there. are there people who doubt that? look at commentary or any right or left wing publication or book abuot the middle east and the subject is always front and center.
February 21st, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I find it amazing how the idea that everything will be OK if only the Palestinian problem is solved, can be utterd with a straihght face, much less proposed as serious policy by people in positions of importance, who surely must know better if they read the newspapers.
The Moslem and particularly the Arab world is universally riven by conflicts whith whoever happens to be those countries’ neighbors, or intramurally. Start with Algeria in the West and work your way to Indonesia in the Far East, and what do you see? Just about every one of those countries in embroiled in outright wars or informal armed hostilities against their neighbors, and against internal elements. For example, Libya has historically funded and trained Western Europeal terroriosts? What does that have to do with Israel? Ditto for Egypt’s internal repression of the Moslem Brotherhood, the slaughterhouses in Somalia and Sudan, the intramural warfare in Jordan (remember “Black September”?), and the civil war in Lebanon. Then there is Syria, Iraq vs. Iran. Afghanistan, Pakistan vs. India, the bloody persecution of Christians and the overseas Chinese in Indonesia, etc., etc. Can anybody seriously suggest that if the Israel-Palestinian problem were solved, all these lethal controversies would just go away? What utter nonsense!
February 21st, 2008 at 4:10 PM
it’s not saying everything will be great if the conflict is resolved, but it is CENTRAL to the whole thing and again, isn’t it pretty much the first thing you think about when you think of any of this stuff?