Well that's the American election over and done with, and we have four years ahead of us where the so-called leader of the free world will sympathise with those who want to undermine and destroy our civilisation from without, and from within. It is far from certain that we will survive another four years of this sort of self-destructive leadership, and if we do the consequences will be felt for generations to come. And that's the rosy outlook. The alternative is even worse.
Romney's failure, and that of the political establishments in general, is similar to the failure of Neville Chamberlain and those within the German establishment who had to contest with Adolf Hitler. They did not realise that Hitler was immune to rational argument and simply did not listen to opposing viewpoints. That was not the type of leader he was. Hitler ruled as a charismatic leader, not as a traditional political figure. So it is with Obama.
Just as no traditional political figure could oppose Hitler and the Nazis, so no grey haired man dressed in a business suit, offering the same tired old political platitudes, was going to seriously challenge Obama. That's not the type of thing that interests Obama's followers, any more than a serious discussion would ever have appealed to the believers in Hitler. To his followers, Obama is more than a politician. One follower of Hitler said that "I never stopped thinking of him. Sometimes, he meets us in our dreams."
Here's the thing: the same holds true of the Iranian leadership. Western politicians hope to deal with Iran in a "normal" way, using political and economic means. However, they will be as unsuccessful as Neville Chamberlain was in trying to deal with the Nazis. Iran isn't seeking nuclear power for "normal" reasons; they are ideologically driven to surpass Israel militarily, and this is the one course they can take where they believe they can leap suddenly into a position where they will be able to attack Israel, be it on their own or via a proxy, and actually prevail.
If Iran should manage to get themselves into that position, does anyone seriously think they would at that point ... suddenly decide to stop? The very fact that Iran is enduring sanctions now in order to get to that point tells anyone who cares to think about it for more than a minute that they're not trying to get to that point just to arrive there. The Iranians are paying a short-term cost now, because they want to reap a long-term benefit. And we all know what they think that will be - a Middle East without Israel.
There are many issues which the guy employed as American President will have to deal with in the next four years, but the most crucial is the question of what the civilised world is going to do about Iran. Because if it all kicks off over there, then all our domestic political issues will become immediately irrelevant, and we will all be living in a world as unstable and as dangerous as it was during WWII. We did for Hitler eventually, but it cost - plenty. And if Hitler had done one or two things differently (finished off the BEF in France, not delayed Barbarossa, gone after Moscow instead of Stalingrad, not declared war on America, thereby forcing their hand, etc.) we may not have had the same outcome as we did (bad as that outcome was, with Britain bust, and half of Europe swallowed up by the Soviets.)
Obama's inbuilt sympathy for the islamic world has not produced good results for either America, Britain or Israel over the last four years. We can expect more of the same from the White House in his second term. It may even be worse, given Obama's overheard conversation with the Russians in which he promised to bend over on behalf of America after the election.
One of the first things Obama did when he took power in America was remove a bust of Winston Churchill from the White House. Obama's motives for carrying out that highly symbolic act may manifest themselves during the next four years. Without that one man, Winston Churchill, Britain would not have stood up to the Nazis, America would not have entered the war as she did (as allies with Britain and committed to a "Germany first" strategy) or even at all, and the world would be a far different, darker place today.
Now, at this most crucial time, America has re-elected the anti-Churchill, someone who has shown that when it comes to the crunch, and he is faced with a do-or-die situation against that which is evil in this world, he simply does not have what Winston Churchill had. He never had, and he never will.
We need a man of moral courage, of unshakeable resolve, who is able to recognise evil and name it, then inspire the world to stand against it.
Instead, we have Barack Hussein Obama.
We are so screwed.
Tags: Winston Churchill, election, Iran, Ahmadinejad, Obama To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!