Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Not in Our Name
Barack Obama has no business bowing before the Saudis
"The United States is not, and will never be, at war with Islam," Barack Obama explained to the Turkish Parliament on his recent tour of Europe, emphasizing the need for "mutual respect" between our cultures.
"War" and "respect" are two distinct ideas. Both ought to be meted out judiciously. But let's reserve the former as a last resort and the latter to those who actually deserve it.
When Obama bowed to Saudi Arabian "King" Abdullah last week (sadly reminiscent of W.'s insufferable hand-holding with a Saudi prince), he probably thought it an appropriate level of deference. The problem is the wrong person was prostrate.
Why should we "respect" the Saudis? Is it the corporal punishment and amputations? Is it the lack of free speech? Is it a judicial system in which women often are forbidden from testifying, as they are incapable of "understanding what they observe"? Or is it that victims of sexual assault are prosecuted for the crime of being in the presence of unknown males? The honor killings? The forced circumcisions? The terrorist funding?
Though we need not drop Marines into Mecca to remedy that nation's historical and moral sickness, we never should be expected to "respect" gangsters, either.
Why so many on the left are willing to extend tolerance toward those who are militantly illiberal has always been a mystery. Many of these countries wage internal wars to exterminate Christianity and Judaism (religions that existed in some of those places long before Islam), and the concepts of secularism and atheism live only in fantasy.
It's not only fanatics holed up in the caves of Pakistan but also the majority of Islamic nations that, on some level, disregard basic human rights.
And instead of "respecting" Turkey, Obama might have taken the time to live up to his campaign promise to acknowledge last century's Turkish genocide of 1.5 million Christian Armenians. He hasn't.
In Iraq—a country propped up by American lives and generosity—The New York Times reported that in 2005, the most influential Shiite cleric in Iraq, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, issued a religious decree declaring that gay men and women should be "punished, in fact, killed." But that wasn't enough. Gays, he decreed, "should be killed in the worst, most severe way of killing." The Iraqi government looks the other way
Even Egypt—our "moderate" ally that subsists on $6 billion in U.S. bribe money not to wage war on its neighbor—regularly imprisons political dissidents, executes sexual "deviants," and runs state-funded television shows that would give Nazis pause.
Hey, I guess Egypt is "moderate," compared with Sudan.
Our nation should not be in the business of imposing our values on other cultures. We can't. Our values not only diverge but also are, most often, antithetical. And let's never pretend there is anything "mutual" about a call for respect. The deep and fanatical hatred of America flourished decades before the Iraq war or George W. Bush. Islamic leaders have long blamed their own societal corrosion on the West.
Obama promised to transform American foreign policy. He was elected to do so. So he used his first chance to make an impression as president by apologizing for imaginary crimes against Islam and employing a tone of subservience rather than defending our principles.
Not surprisingly, the more "thoughtful" among us immediately embraced the president's self-flagellation in front of some of the world's worst offenders of human rights as a constructive approach. As a geopolitics ploy ... well, we'll see what happens.
But there is undoubtedly nothing thoughtful about offering a false choice. To wage war or to offer respect? We can avoid both. We should.
David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Denver Post and the author of Nanny State. Visit his Web site at www.DavidHarsanyi.com.
COPYRIGHT 2009 THE DENVER POST
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
ed|4.10.09 @ 3:04PM|#
Why should we "respect" the Saudis?
Because they are still useful to us as an oil exporter.
Next question?
|4.10.09 @ 3:10PM|#
Good article.
An Islamist theocracy is an Islamist theocracy - whether its
ostensibly a Saudi monarchy or an Iraqi "democracy".
First article of Iraqi Constitution - "No law may contradict
Islamic law".
The Iraqis just formalized it.
Rick H.|4.10.09 @ 3:10PM|#
Because they are still useful to us as an oil
exporter.
If you're the world's biggest superpower, you should be able to
simply do business with these creeps and skip the blowjob.
Bronwyn|4.10.09 @ 3:10PM|#
*stands and claps*
The Magic Kingdom is a sandbox largely populated by sexually
repressed, lazy men and their virtually enslaved female
relatives.
Every time I feel homesick for the place, I just about sprain
something trying to kick myself.
|4.10.09 @ 3:16PM|#
Apparently the Obama-haters are making a big fuss over this
bowing thing, for some reason.
I don't particularly care for bowing either, but don't we have a
few million bigger issues to worry about in this country? I get
annoyed when seemingly intelligent people go to such lengths to
portray non-issues as being somehow important.
Justen|4.10.09 @ 3:17PM|#
I agree with the general sentiment but I don't quite buy the venom. I also disagree about "imaginary crimes against Islam". The crimes the U.S. has committed overseas as a substitute for foreign policy absolutely are substantial and measurable, whether supporting genocidal dictators, guerilla wars, or convenient terrorists who happened to be harassing communists at the time. Many of those crimes have lead directly to the suffering of Islamic people, and according to their religion that means other Islamics are thereby obligated to fight against us. If you ask me if I think that's fucking stupid on a dozen different levels, I'll answer emphatically yes, but to claim that they have imagined these offenses is ignorant at best.
|4.10.09 @ 3:26PM|#
Contrary to popular belief, as a percentage of the U.S.'s total oil, the Middle East ranks pretty low. So then, why are we kissing ass and intervening so much? Response to 9/11 aside, I don't get it, and I'd welcome us washing our hands of the whole region. Let Europe and Russia play their games there, while we worry about things that are more central to our interests.
Gimme Back My Dog|4.10.09 @ 3:36PM|#
The Magic Kingdom is a sandbox largely populated by sexually
repressed, lazy men and their virtually enslaved female
relatives.
Wow, Disneyland has really changed since I was there last
year.
The bowing doesn't bother me as much as Bush and the hand holding.
A quick bow when in a foreign land vs. strolling hand in hand with
a dictator through of White House Rose Garden?
Big Cat Kahuna|4.10.09 @ 3:38PM|#
I don't particularly care for bowing either, but don't we
have a few million bigger issues to worry about in this
country?
Mr. O made it an issue by failing to grasp basic diplomatic
protocol, or worse, grasping it but being unable to stand as
President of the country that elected him. There do seem to be more
immediate issues than fussing over one gaffe in the Obama World
Pander Tour 09, yet these things are important. At
best this incident represents a lack of preparedness, at worst a
basic disregard for the country he is representing.
JP|4.10.09 @ 3:39PM|#
Apparently the Obama-haters are making a big fuss over this
bowing thing, for some reason.
I think it encapsulates so many things that have been bugging
Obama-haters (and reluctant Obama-dislikers such as myself): the
administration's incompetence and/or failure to noticeably advance
up the learning curve, Obama's and many Democrats' readiness to
blame the U.S., the administration's arrogance (in denying that it
was a bow).
Plus, it's the kind of thing that anyone with eyes can easily
grasp.
Unka Sam|4.10.09 @ 3:41PM|#
Contrary to popular belief, as a percentage of the U.S.'s total oil, the Middle East ranks pretty low.
So where do we get the majority of our oil? I have always thought
if all the oil in Iraq dried up tomorrow, our government would pull
all the troops out as soon as possible. You're saying that we're
there solely for democracy and trying to instill the American way
of life on Iraqis independent of them having a fossil fuel
connection? I don't buy it.
|4.10.09 @ 3:41PM|#
Contrary to popular belief, as a percentage of the U.S.'s
total oil, the Middle East ranks pretty low. So then, why are we
kissing ass and intervening so much?
The people have generally been more OK with bombing brown people
and stealing their resources than bombing Canada to do the
same.
|4.10.09 @ 3:45PM|#
While it's true that we get more oil from Mexico, and Canada
than the Middle East, the oil market is a global thing. That's why
Iran can have an effect on our oil supplies even though we don't
purchase any directly from them.
Anyway, IMO this is just a continuation of Bush's policies when he
went begging for oil when gas prices where high. It won't be till
we develop a national energy policy and get off foreign oil that
things change.
|4.10.09 @ 3:45PM|#
The real outrage is that the Obama Dep't of Justice is
continuing Bush's stance on warrantless spying. Since neocons love
that stuff, they harp on the stupid bowing story.
I
wrote about this after the EFF's
newsletter and blog discussed it.
ed|4.10.09 @ 3:48PM|#
do business with these creeps and skip the
blowjob
I'm on board with that, Mitch. But I'm not a million-dollar
Administration advisor, so my opinions count about as much as those
of the black White House shoe-shines.
IceTrey|4.10.09 @ 3:50PM|#
He wasn't bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia, he was bowing to one of the Illuminati. They are the ones who put him in power and he knows it.
|4.10.09 @ 3:51PM|#
We have reasons for meddling in the Middle East, but protecting
our oil shouldn't be central to that. We get something like 17% of
our oil from the entire region. We produce a lot of our own oil,
then Canada, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela, and other countries
outside of the Middle East make up the difference.
Even if we said buh-bye to the region, it's not like they'd stop
taking our money when we wanted to buy oil, so it's not an
all-or-nothing proposition.
Frankly, I think we got into this role because of the Cold War and
out of an interest in preserving Europe's access to this oil. Even
today, we're nervous about leaving the region to Russia's tender
mercies. That's a legitimate concern, but I think Europe can hold
its own there, provided that we make it clear to them in advance
that the region is their concern, not ours.
Also, of course, we could just all acknowledge that what happens
there is the business of the countries there, and stop meddling,
period. They need us far more than we need them.
|4.10.09 @ 3:54PM|#
Lamar,
I saw that. Like I've said all along, the Democrats aren't going to
make any substantive changes in the bad Bush policies and
assertions of power. You see, now the neat toys are in their hands,
so why not use them?
This is why objecting to who has power rather than to the abuse of
power by anyone is foolish.
The Angry Optimist |4.10.09 @ 3:56PM|#
The real outrage is that the Obama Dep't of Justice is
continuing Bush's stance on warrantless spying.
But look at the principled stance he took on telecom immunity,
Lamar!
Oh, wait...
ed|4.10.09 @ 3:56PM|#
When he starts holding hands with them I just might throw up in my mouth a little, cliche notwithstanding. Diplomacy is often repugnant. I leave it to the experts and hope for the best.
|4.10.09 @ 4:02PM|#
I know, Pro, but I have to at least point it out. Plus, I like the folks at the Weekly and they could use another point of view every now and then.
|4.10.09 @ 4:05PM|#
"But look at the principled stance he took on telecom
immunity, Lamar!"
Obama's stance on both telecom liability and gov't spying has been,
shall we say, "wide".
|4.10.09 @ 4:09PM|#
Pro,
I don't get the whole we have to kiss the Arabs ass because we need
their oil. What are they going to do with the stuff if not sell it
to us? Drink it? They are more dependent on us for a market than we
are on them. That is why the Saudis always get nervous when the
price of oil spikes. The last thing they want to do is get the
price too high and give us a reason to stop buying the stuff. The
Devil himself could run the middle east and he would still have to
sell us his oil.
|4.10.09 @ 4:10PM|#
"Obama's stance on both telecom liability and gov't spying has
been, shall we say, "wide"."
Actually it has been his civil libertarian supporters' stance that
has been wide. Obama's stance has been very forceful and from
behind ramming it home to those supporters.
|4.10.09 @ 4:12PM|#
"""So where do we get the majority of our oil?""
Canada and Mexico.
"""Frankly, I think we got into this role because of the Cold War
and out of an interest in preserving Europe's access to this oil.
Even today, we're nervous about leaving the region to Russia's
tender mercies. That's a legitimate concern, but I think Europe can
hold its own there, """
I do think it was a result of the cold war, but I also think it has
something to do with being the world power. A world power must have
major influence almost every where be it via of hard or soft power.
That, of course, is linked to the cold war philosophy of our world
influence must be greater than Russia's.
"""The real outrage is that the Obama Dep't of Justice is
continuing Bush's stance on warrantless spying. Since neocons love
that stuff, they harp on the stupid bowing story. """
Of course.
|4.10.09 @ 4:16PM|#
We've gotten wussy, that's the problem. Why bow to the Arabs?
Why kowtow to the Chinese? Even today--even today--we are the 800
pound gorilla in both of those relationships. In fact, our relative
advantages are so huge, you'd think we'd be dictating terms rather
than kissing ass. We can have shit made cheaply elsewhere, and we
can buy oil from all sorts of places.
Trickyvic,
True enough. We're the superpower, so we must do superpowery things
on occasion. There is a valid argument that we're ensuing a kind of
Pax Americana.
|4.10.09 @ 4:19PM|#
"We can have shit made cheaply elsewhere, and we can buy oil
from all sorts of places."
Exactly. Further, I really hate the T Boone Pickens canard about
our buying oil being a transfer of wealth. Bullshit. We buy that
oil and use it to make a great economy. They sell the oil and get
nothing but the ability to buy shit we make. If I were a Saudi I
would be complaining about my country selling our raw materials and
letting other countries exploit it.
|4.10.09 @ 4:21PM|#
"Obama's stance has been very forceful and from behind
ramming it home to those supporters."
He wouldn't have been able to ram it home with such force if he
didn't have a Holder.
duderman|4.10.09 @ 4:37PM|#
"The people have generally been more OK with bombing brown
people and stealing their resources than bombing Canada to do the
same."
Hmm. Canada. Good idea.
P.S. Great phony outrage. I see you've studied your George Carlin
tapes.
|4.10.09 @ 4:43PM|#
They sell the oil and get nothing but the ability to buy
shit we make.
Don't forget all that starchitecture.
|4.10.09 @ 4:46PM|#
"""If I were a Saudi I would be complaining about my country
selling our raw materials and letting other countries exploit
it."""
Like us selling raw materials to China then buying a shitload of
Chinese made products?
|4.10.09 @ 4:52PM|#
"Like us selling raw materials to China then buying a shitload
of Chinese made products?"
What raw materials do we sell to China? Timber maybe? Certainly not
oil. Food perhaps. But what else?
The Angry Optimist |4.10.09 @ 4:55PM|#
Free trade > unfree trade.
Individuals should be allowed to trade with the Saudis, no matter
how personally repugnant we find that regime.
...
...
I just felt that the Standard Libertarian Disclaimer needed to be
said this time.
|4.10.09 @ 5:04PM|#
China Imports from U.S.
Of the $55.2 billion in American exports to China in 2006, the
following product categories had the highest values.
Semi-conductors … US$5.9 billion (10.6% of China from U.S. imports,
up 74.7% from 2005)
Civilian aircraft … $5.3 billion (9.6%, up 39.7%)
Soybeans … $2.5 billion (4.6%, up 12.5%)
Plastics …. $2.2 billion (3.9%, up 18.8%)
Raw cotton … $2.1 billion (3.7%, up 47%)
Industrial machines … $1.97 billion (3.6%, up 29%)
Copper … $1.86 billion (3.4%, up 99.7%)
Computer accessories … $1.82 billion (3.3%, up 27.5%)
Aluminum … $1.7 billion (3.1%, up 90.3%)
Steelmaking material … $1.69 billion (3.1%, up 11.9%)
"""http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/top_chinese_exports_imports"""
|4.10.09 @ 5:15PM|#
Apparently the Obama-haters are making a big fuss over this
bowing thing, for some reason.
Not a big fuss here. BUT the President of the
United States should bow before no man. Fuck monarchies. Does he
bow to the King of Tonga* next? How about the deranged midget in
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea?**
It does piss me off. The entire House of Saud can kiss my royal
American ass and I don't like my president bowing to the
medieval scumbuckets.
* A nice guy king*** who, unlike QE II, actually rules.
** Hereditary dictatorship. Yeah he's a fucking monarch.
*** All things being relative.
Nobody|4.10.09 @ 5:24PM|#
In Iraq-a country propped up by American lives and
generosity
Seriously? I expect better discourse from Reason.
Putting aside the fact that Harsanyi's nitpicking about diplomatic
protocol, I used to count on the fact that I'd disagree with half
of what you guys printed, but I also knew that at least I'd come
away with a better understanding and respect for a point of view
that was often different from my own.
I can't respect anyone who seriously thinks we're being "generous"
to Iraq, or who fails to recognize the very simple math that would
show even the dullest fourth grader that the situation there now
(as difficult as it might have been pre 2003) is entirely our
doing.
At the very least you could stick to your principles and tell me
that 600+ billion is graft and not "generosity."
smartass sob|4.10.09 @ 5:44PM|#
We can have shit made cheaply elsewhere, and we can buy oil
from all sorts of places.
Considering the way the scum in DC is turning this country and it's
economy into a land of paupers, one will soon be able to have shit
made here cheaply as well. Of course, the only ones able to buy it
will be government employees and others who get the funny money
first.
|4.10.09 @ 6:51PM|#
""""Considering the way the scum in DC is turning this country
and it's economy into a land of paupers..."""
Who's going to buy our debt when China stops? Maybe Obama is paying
it forward by showing a willingness to kiss ass.
smartass sob|4.10.09 @ 7:35PM|#
Who's going to buy our debt when China stops?
I suppose that depends on what you mean by buying our debt. China
essentially is selling us manufactured goods on credit. It isn't
going to stop unless a better market can be found. In fact, China
doesn't dare stop, because it would put too many of its own people
out of a job. Eight or nine percent unemployment in a country of
three hundred million is one thing, but in a country whose
population is well over one billion it is quite another. The last
thing an authoritarian regime wants is to have a hundred million
people or so out of work and no longer able to enjoy the relative
prosperity they've become used to over the last thirty years. The
government of China is probably even more afraid of torches and
pitchforks than our own.
So China is stuck with having to accept our paper dollars. What are
they going to spend them on if not T-bills, bonds, etc.? What else
is there to buy with them? Political influence? Ask the
Clintons.
smartass sob|4.10.09 @ 7:40PM|#
Maybe Obama is paying it forward by showing a willingness to
kiss ass.
Yeah, I'd agree he's definitely showing a willingness to kiss
Islam's ass. I notice he didn't bother to bow to that old white
woman in England, though.
economist|4.10.09 @ 8:52PM|#
Don't particularly care, but can we finally put to rest the notion that Obama is especially sophisticated in matters of foreign policy or even the smaller diplomatic graces? It's just the "Intellectual President" drumbeat gets old after awhile.
Barry O.|4.10.09 @ 9:09PM|#
I think the president is doin the best he can, and you should
LEAVE BARACK ALONE!
LEAVE HIM ALONE! I'M SERIOUS! YOU'RE LUCKY HE WAS WILLING TO BE
YOUR PRESIDENT, YOU BASTARDS!
|4.11.09 @ 2:08AM|#
I am disgusted that the president of the United States would bow
to a tyrant, and I don't see why we should treat any authoritarian
dictatorship as legitimate. We can do business with Saudi Arabia
without treating the king as anything more or less than a man with
a lot of power to get us things that we want. All the same, when
Harsanyi's goes from saying that no right thinking American should
bow to a despot, let alone the president of the United States, to
the notion that we also shouldn't respect Islam or Muslims, he
pisses me off a lot worse than Obama does with the bow. Muslims are
human beings who believe things that he doesn't believe. Some of
them do wonderful things, some of them do terrible things. Many of
them live under governments that treat their people like
dogs.
But by saying that he thinks Muslim people are unworthy of respect,
Harsanyi ignores the basic foundation of individual rights, that
all human beings deserve respect. If the government of the United
States of America goes around treating the practitioners of one
religion with disdain, it's not behaving in accordance with the
principles set out by the Constitution and it is not a government
that any Muslim should respect. If we're going to be meddling with
muslim countries and determining the course of muslim lives, the
least we can do is give the people of those countries the respect
due to any human being.
Ebeneezer Scrooge|4.11.09 @ 6:09AM|#
Jorgen, you twisted what Harsanyi said way-all out of
shape.
What Harsanyi actually said, is pretty accurate. [good article btw,
Harsanyi]
But liberal Democrats are like that. "The enemy is not really our
enemy, and it is our fault that they are our enemy if they were in
fact actually our enemy." We had to suffer listening to Democrats
say that about the USSR for what, 4+ decades?
What Democrats refuse to grasp is that, as Harsanyi points out,
some ideological systems cannot be reconciled.
Let's sum up what this article says in simple terms: by and large
Islamic countries suck.
Anyone disagree with that summary of the article?
And given what actually in fact does really happen in Islamic
countries, Jorgen, I see zero substance behind your protest.
Perhaps you haven't taken your true meanings out of the closet just
yet?
Ahn Dee|4.11.09 @ 6:17AM|#
The American flag is never dipped in salute first. The American
vessel of war never renders honors to those who do not render
honors to America.
And yet here is our president bowing to a monarch. One that would
make King George look like a Saint. What happened to "All men are
created equal?" I would hope that the leader of a Nation of free
peoples would not demean us all by bowing to anyone. Not the Queen
of England, not the King of Tonga and certainly not the King of
Saudi Arabia.
I've been on the fence about Obama for a while now but his star is
falling and falling fast in my eyes.
Ebeneezer Scrooge|4.11.09 @ 6:21AM|#
Pro Libertate,
We have reasons for meddling in the Middle East, but protecting
our oil shouldn't be central to that.
I agree, for the very reasons you gave. However,
Frankly, I think we got into this role because of the Cold War
and out of an interest in preserving Europe's access to this oil.
Even today, we're nervous about leaving the region to Russia's
tender mercies.
That was all true in the past, I agree. But today there is a very
different issue at stake that nearly everyone, it seems, is
missing. Perhaps because Bush actually did recognize it, but then
f***ed handling it so badly.
Our real interest in Afghanistan today is none other than: making
sure it's not a safe haven for idiots like bin Laden to train the
next generation of 9-11 terrorists. At this point, the same is true
of Iraq.
Problem is, we face this same risk with most of the Islamic
countries on the globe today. Perhaps the only thing Bush proved is
that, powerful as we may be, we're still not Roman blooded enough
to just conquer the Islamic universe. Which is about the only way
to insure bin Laden types don't find themselves a new home.
I don't know what the solution to this problem is, but Bush was
right in recognizing that it is a problem. Too bad he didn't leave
us a solution that actually makes sense.
but I think Europe can hold its own there
Europe can't hold its own anywhere anymore, because they don't
spend money on their miltary. They've got a welfare state to keep
up and that's expensive you know, and besides they can count on us
to protect them (though they'll bitch about how we do it).
It's a funny little truth, but diplomacy and foreign relations gets
a whole big crap load more difficult when you don't have any real
military power backing you up. The French for one can't stand their
own global impotence, just to give an example, but do you think
they're going to change their priorities?
Ebeneezer Scrooge|4.11.09 @ 6:23AM|#
Ahn Dee,
I'd have said the same thing, but his star burned out in my world
long before he got elected.
WTF is Obama doing bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia? Let alone
apologizing for shit.
|4.11.09 @ 10:51AM|#
I agree with Harsanyi most of the time, but not this
Hannity-O'Reilly bullsh*t.
"In Iraq-a country propped up by American lives and
generosity..."
Those damn Iraqis are just so ungrateful for our
invasion/occupation.
"And instead of "respecting" Turkey, Obama might have taken the
time to live up to his campaign promise to acknowledge last
century's Turkish genocide of 1.5 million Christian Armenians. He
hasn't."
Imagine if every world leader that showed up at the White House
made a point of bringing up the USA's defense of slavery long after
most countries had given it up, or the treatment of Native
Americans. We'd love that.
"Obama promised to transform American foreign policy. He was
elected to do so. So he used his first chance to make an impression
as president by apologizing for imaginary crimes against Islam and
employing a tone of subservience rather than defending our
principles."
US agression against Muslim countries is not imaginary. Humility is
not subservience. And preaching to anyone about human rights would
elicit scorn and laughter.
As for the bow, who gives a sh*t?
|4.11.09 @ 11:14AM|#
Ebeneezer-
1. Yesterday, the French had something to say about their
"impotence."
2. We do not have the ABILITY to conquer the entire Islamic world.
The United States military is just not up to the task. One of the
reasons is that for all the money we spend on the military, most of
it goes to fraud and waste and to pay intellectually inferior
killers.
Art-P.O.G.|4.11.09 @ 12:14PM|#
Libertymike,
Intellectually inferior compared to what? And no, most of
the money doesn't go to fraud and waste, that's ridiculous.
pulp|4.11.09 @ 1:48PM|#
I think Big Cat Kahuna hit it on the head-- you can't claim this
is a "neo-con" issue, unless you're willing to consider Machiavelli
a neo-con. The bow is symbolic and important in many subtle,
diplomatic ways. It telegraphs intention and position. When Obama
acts-- especially on the foreign stage-- he is not acting as a
private citizen but as the figurehead for the nation. It is
pandering to bow and--I think-- a display of weakness for the
president to bow to any so-called world leader, especially a
monarch.
Further-- I find it highly insulting for the white house and the
media to continually try to persuade me that it wasn't a bow, that
2+2=5. I'm not ready to move into doublethink in order to love the
great leader. Unlike practically everybody I run into on a regular
basis. (quick aside-- I have a good friend who bought one of those
stupid sheppard ferrey Obama silkscreens and he had it framed and
placed in a prominent spot in his apartment--which made me feel
physically ill).
It's pretty clear Obama doesn't have much respect for the
philosophic roots of a constitutional republic such as ours-- let
alone free-market principles-- and I for one find it deeply
troubling that he seems to prefer kowtowing to despotic monarchs
rather than representing western democratic values when abroad.
|4.11.09 @ 4:02PM|#
Art-P.O.G.-
For starters, those of us who choose not to wear one of Caesar's
clown costumes.
Justen|4.11.09 @ 5:53PM|#
@Art: Maybe, maybe not. I saw a lot, and I mean a *lot* of ridiculous waste in the time I spent working for the DOD. Sure some of that missing money you hear about is going to black ops and secret research, but a lot of it is literally waste and fraud. For example, try 50,000 dollars to a local contractor to put up ~8 feet of chain link fence with a bicycle gate. The project took a year to complete and before it had even started it was already recognized that it was pointless, as the gate bypassed access control at the guard posts and therefore could not even be used. My opinion? Someone up the chain had golf buddy who wanted a new pool or a boat or something. That's just a small example, anyway, a drop in the bucket compared to millions that went to waste every year in the area I worked.
Art-P.O.G.|4.12.09 @ 9:35AM|#
Ha ha, OK Liberty Mike,
Justen,
I'm not saying there isn't fraud and waste (I remember the scandal
surrounding that hotel (at Ramstein IIRC), I'm just saying that
LM's comment was a gross exaggeration.
P.S. Would this even be a scandal if that were the Burger King
mascot?
|4.12.09 @ 1:30PM|#
Of the 60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the
Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14,
2006 and April 8, 2009, only 10 were able to hit their actual
targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders, besides killing 687
innocent Pakistani civilians. The success percentage of the US
predator strikes thus comes to not more than six per cent.
Thus, Mr.Harsanyi should not put Mr. Obama, Mr. Bush, the spineless
U.S. Congress or anyone else leading this Country on a higher moral
ground than the corrupt Saudi ruler.
Why is Mr, H. so concerned about the supposed bow? Why not write
about the 600 or so civilian deaths from the drones?
calvin|4.12.09 @ 2:56PM|#
"Islamic leaders have long blamed their own societal corrosion
on the West."
Right. As if the West hasn't played a massive role in the tyranny
and ineptitude within Middle Eastern societies since the early-20th
century through constant imperial meddling.
Epicurus|4.12.09 @ 7:15PM|#
I doubt it was Obama's idea to bow or Bush's idea to hold hands
with the SOB. Someone convinces them that this is important to do.
We need to know why.
How many of our political leaders and generals are on the Saudi
payroll? Most of them? All of them?
smartass sob|4.12.09 @ 7:23PM|#
Of the 60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, only 10 were able to hit their actual targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders, besides killing 687 innocent Pakistani civilians. The success percentage of the US predator strikes thus comes to not more than six per cent.
Ten hits out of sixty is more like sixteen point seven percent -
not six.
As for the "innocent" Pakistani civilians - why should they be
considered so innocent? They give safe harbour to the enemy. If
their deaths are on anyone's head morally, it is the enemy who
comes out to take pot shots but then runs and hides among
non-combatants. And if the government of Pakistan doesn't like the
US sending drones across their borders to take out al-Qaeda, it
could get off its worthless ass and take care of al-Qaeda itself -
as it has often pledged to do, and as it has accepted US financial
aid to do.
Eo|4.13.09 @ 6:06PM|#
"In Iraq-a country propped up by American lives and
generosity...."
Oh, and what about the tens thousands that died after the US
invasion? Mr. Harsanyi is a typical neocon shitbag.
AndreainNY|4.13.09 @ 11:03PM|#
I'm more bothered by the "big lie" about Obama's not bowing when
we all saw him bow.
His bow was a mistake. His claiming not to have bowed was not.
Leave a Comment
More Articles by David Harsanyi
- The Palin Experience, David Harsanyi, November 18, 2009
- The Case Against Twitter, David Harsanyi, November 14, 2009
- Freedom to Confuse, David Harsanyi, November 11, 2009
Related Articles (Foreign Policy, Saudi Arabia, Barack Obama)
- Mandating Disaster, Shikha Dalmia, November 20, 2009
- Are Tea Parties Racist?, Matt Welch, November 16, 2009
- The Secret Message of Stimulus Spending, Veronique de Rugy, November 3, 2009
- Sanity on Marijuana?, Steve Chapman, October 22, 2009
- The Cold War Never Ended, Michael C. Moynihan, October 21, 2009
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245