Recent public opinion polls have indicated that Obama might lose to Mitt Romney, the likely GOP candidate. My concern is whether that election will be held; especially if Romney appears to be the winner or nearly so.
During the 2008 election, Obama said, during a campaign stop in Colorado, that he wanted a civilian national security force established with a budget equal to that of the Pentagon. Obama also said that his expectation was that energy prices would necessarily skyrocket and that any power generation plant using coal would be bankrupted. Remember also that Obama back then was most surprised by how fast gas prices increased that fall but not how high they became. And, of course, once Obama was inaugurated, he bowed to the Saudi king, to the Emperor of Japan, to the President of China, and interestingly, to the Mayor of Tampa, Florida. Americans do not bow to others; it’s not our style, at least that was before Obama set his own stamp on what our public officials do.
Then, during 2011, the world saw the so-called Arab Spring sprout in Tunisia, then in Egypt and Libya. Shortly afterward, Syria’s population rose up yet Obama did not express support for the people of that country. In fact Obama’s Secretary of State referred to Syria’s tyrannical leader as a “reformer,” that statement seemed quite strange at the time. And before that, in 2009, Iran’s people rose up and took to the streets expressing a desire for more freedom in their lives. Obama did nothing to support those masses, even after the Iranian government began to suppress them most violently too.
Lastly, for the past year, there have been many rumblings about whether Iran is developing a nuclear weapon; coupled with Iran’s continued statements about intending to wipe the State of Israel off the face of the Earth. Many American take Iran’s threats quite seriously as does, seemingly, Obama, yet he does little except admonish Iran. Syria is Iran’s close ally in many things and Iran has said that the world should not interfere with Syria’s internal affairs.
So now, North Korea tried to launch a rocket, which it said was meant to be used to put a new satellite into space; that rocket launch failed. Now, North Korea is threatening to conduct another test of its nuclear weapon capability; two of which it has done in recent times; the second of which seemed to be a fizzle. India successfully launched a missile test, showing it could launch weapon strikes on targets 3,000 miles away; it is now the 6th nuclear weapons country to have shown that capability. Its neighbor and fierce traditional opponent, also a nuclear power, followed up with its own missile test, demonstrating it could match India’s ability with its own.
The world seems to be waiting, in a real sense, for whatever will happen next. History does not truly repeat in lockstep however the past does show what can happen under similar conditions. The many warnings about repeating the failure of Munich, back in 1938, do ring true today yet I doubt that very same conditions exist.
The vaunted Arab Spring has turned into a somber morass of much doubt about how it shall turn out. Pakistan and India do not trust each other and a failure on one side could turn the sub-continent into a raging nuclear firestorm before others could raise a caution. Syria is repeating what Old Man Assad did back in 1982 when he put down a rebellion after many killings and violence; perhaps 30,000 were killed by Syria’s military. Iran is warning the world to keep its hands off of Syria; not too sure if there’s an “Or Else” clause in that warning but that seems to be implied.
Obama’s administration has said that it is leading from behind, unlike past administrations which might have led from the front. Personally, Obama’s foreign policy is a disaster site and that’s not really funny in any sense of the word.
And of course, America’s internal politics seems just as screwed up as our foreign policy; why not, got to be fair and balanced. The Occupy Wallstreet efforts of 2011 are scheduled to be repeated in 2012. Van Jones, an admitted Marxist and Communist, is leading a renewal of the Occupy efforts, calling for a great push for May 1st; perhaps like the great May Day Parades that the old Kremlin held in balmy old Moscow back in the day of the Soviet Union. Of course, the history of the 2011 Occupy efforts is one of violence against established order, occupation of public spaces as a sense of entitlement on the part of the Occupy activists and strong resistance to police and order. Somehow, it seems that Van Jones is calling for something more than holding parades, perhaps more like so-called street actions, whatever that is supposed to mean.
To me, there are many such portends of possible gloom and likely doom that appear to be on horizon of our society. The external forces that are possibly arrayed against our country will be greatly amplified by our domestic economic conditions, an ongoing recession, one fueled by Obama’s many decisions regarding our economy. Obama’s veto of the Keystone Pipeline caused a large ripple in the price of gas for our cars. The EPA restrictions being placed against shale oil production or being withheld have hurt our economy. Uncertainty as to what near term taxes business must pay has been the source of much concern and hindered business expansion; that has really harmed our economy.
So, what is my concern? It is quite frankly that Obama wants there to be civil unrest in this country, throughout the land. Recall that in 2008 Obama said he wanted to have a civil national security force, a paramilitary force, to protect our country. The question then was why was this security force needed and who was it protecting and from whom?
For a while, in 2009 and 2010, it seemed that the Purple shirts of the SEIU union locals would be that civilian national security force that Obama mentioned. That still might be. However, Van Jones might be organizing his so-called protestors as either a supplement to such a SEIU group or even in place of that group; a paramilitary force might come from multitude sources.
Another possible force for disorder in the country could come from people like Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn, both admitted Communists and former members of the domestic terrorist group the Weather Underground, which Ayers co-founded back during the late 1960s. Ayers was quoted as saying back then that the radicals might have to kill 25-million Americans to take over effective control of this country.
Ayers statements back then sounds much like that of a current USA EPA manager’s statement that his approach to controlling our energy companies will be much like that of the ancient Romans crucifying the first five men they meet in a newly conquered town; made for a peaceful town citizenry for some time thereafter. Ayers and Dohrn are now getting to be quite aged and no idea of how they might like to engage in an active demonstration of their radical communist principles, yet I suspect they would encourage Obama to act on those ideas they had back in so long ago.
It’s been proved in country after country that a group that uses terror as tactic to control its citizenry can succeed at a great cost in lives. There are too many examples of that happening in Europe, Asia, and in Latin America too. The issue has always been about control of the masses by the elite, power, control.
The change in a country’s makeup can result from many different causes but a common cause can be great unrest and much civil disorder. That is my concern about Obama, that he wants that disorder to happen in our country so that he can realize his goal to exert power over our society. Our former allies now seem to distrust the USA that we’ll keep our word to support them and to assist them in mutual endeavors. Obama has behaved very coolly towards Great Britain traditionally our closest ally, France our oldest ally, South Korea, and others. It’s like Obama has intentionally acted in a hostile manner towards our friends and bowed, figuratively and literally, to other nations that are not typically friendly towards our country.
Iran acts like it has the power to strike down our country. Venezuela, a close ally of Iran, acts in a hostile manner. Cuba, openly hostile towards us for over 50-years, seems to mock Obama and the USA.
If there were to be a major strike against our country, from any external source, Obama will use that as an excuse, in my opinion, to declare martial law and suspend civil rights until that emergency is over. That emergency will never be over if Obama has his way. That great civil disorder can come about if Van Jones efforts come to full fruition, or if Ayers’ and Dohrn’s old plans from the 1960s and 1970s are realized, or if there is another terrorist or military strike against our country.
I truly don’t believe that the cause of that civil disorder is important to Obama but rather than it happen in some significant manner, one that causes great concern over loss of life or material damage to the country. Of course, one way is to encourage an outside force to strike at our country.
Look at how this country came together over Pearl Harbor, or over the 9/11 attacks. By the time the dust settled, Obama will have achieved his goals, power over our society. Obama will then have the flexibility he wishes to achieve. By then, even when we the people realize what has happened, Obama will be in control and that control would have to be wrestled from his grasp. So, what Obama said to the outgoing Russian president, that Obama would have more flexibility after his last election, might come true in ways that many of us will not accept nor appreciate.
Even if my concerns are never even realized, we are living in interesting times, much more exciting than I ever wished for. Pax Americana might be over. What else?