Silence From The Left... Again

Imagine it is the 1980s. The left hates Ronald Reagan. They accuse him of being a warmongering in the thrall of the right-wing military industrial complex. They see Russia as peaceful. Russia is just a country who loves everyone... ignore the military doctrine they discuss openly about first strikes and destroying America. Now imagine Reagan's Secretary of Defense gave this speech:

The speech in question happened at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and the Secretary begins by actually having the nerve of accusing Russia of "endangering world order." Can you believe that, the left squeals? They demand to know when has Russia ever threatened the United States, and they shout down every attempt to answer. Many even point out that the US is pointing thousands of nuclear missiles at Russian cities even after the Russians agree in the 1990s to de-target their missiles (something symbolic which can be undone in seconds).

The Secretary says that Russia is undertaking "challenging activities" at sea, in the air, in space and in cyberspace. He claims that "Moscow's nuclear saber-rattling raises questions about Russia leaders' commitment to strategic stability, their respect for norms against the use of nuclear weapons, and whether they respect the profound caution nuclear-age leaders showed with regard to the brandishing of nuclear weapons." Wow is that paranoid, says the left. Putin has never once said he would nuke the US, though he has a couple times made indirect threats to destroy the US and his generals have spoken openly about nuking the US, but that doesn't matter. We are still the only country to use nuclear weapons, the left reminds us, and until the Russians actually do it, they are innocent.

What's more, we are asked to think "critically" about the provocations cited by the Secretary and to realize that they are a pretext. DOD is upset that the Russians are sending their navy out to defend their interests. So it's fine when we "police" the world's oceans, but it's not fine when someone else chooses to do the same? Besides, Russia's navy is sclerotic. DOD is upset that Russia is flying more long-range air patrols off US shores. Well, that is legal and the US does it too. They are upset that Moscow is reopening 10 Soviet-era bases along the Arctic that were closed in 1991. How are the internal workings of other countries our affair? Besides, we still operate bases from the Cold War, are we being aggressors?

This Secretary is clearly just looking for a reason to go to war, right?

The Secretary claims that Russia is "stirring trouble" in Europe and the Middle East. In that, he claims the Russians invaded Ukraine and Georgia and are trying to "intimidate" the Baltic states, despite the fact that Russia can show that it was asked to intervene in each instance, despite the fact that each is a former Soviet territory and should be within the Russian zone of influence -- not ours, and despite the fact that each country has sizable parts of their populations who are ethnic Russians and want to join Russia.

The Secretary claims Putin is "throwing gasoline on an already dangerous fire" in Syria, without even asking if that isn't exactly what the US has done in Iraq, Afghanistan and by creating ISIS! The Secretary attacks China too.

He then critically admits that neither Russia nor China can actually challenge the world order, yet he uses their challenge to the world order as a basis for making this threat:

"We do not seek a cold, let alone a hot, war with Russia. We do not seek to make Russia an enemy. But make no mistake; the United States will defend our interests, our allies, the principled international order, and the positive future it affords us all."

You can't really get a more aggressive statement than that, short of a declaration of war. Indeed, he admits that US policy will be aimed at stopping Russia and China:

"We are adapting our operational posture and contingency plans as we - on our own and with allies - work to deter Russia's aggression, and to help reduce the vulnerability of allies and partners."

This is preparation for war, screams the left! And if you need further proof, here are some of the things the Secretary says are being undertaken as preparations: the U.S. is modernizing its entire nuclear arsenal — not only the submarines, bomber aircraft and land-based missiles that are armed with long-range nuclear weapons, but also the weapons themselves. "We're investing in the technologies that are most relevant to Russia's provocations, such as new unmanned systems, a new long-range bomber, and innovation in technologies like the electromagnetic railgun, lasers and new systems for electronic warfare, space and cyberspace, including a few surprising ones I really can't describe here.

Damn you war monger Ronald Reagan!!! But this isn't Ronald Reagan... this is Obama and it's his Secretary of Defense, and not a single leftist is out there rioting in the streets or trying to bring down the warmonger Obama.

My point in presenting this article is sixfold. First, it is to point out to you why foreign policy always seems more difficult under conservative presidents. Had Reagan or Bush(s)'s Defense Secretary given this exact same speech, there would be leftists whining in the streets about the warmongers in the White House trying to destroy us all, building weapons at the behest of defense contractors, and destabilizing the world with another round of sabre rattling and an arms race. Yet, since it is a leftist administration, the left remains silent... just as they've stopped complaining about every other "war crime" they used to bitch about every single day under Bush/Reagan (the immorality of war itself, the immorality of nuclear missiles, drones, land mines, Gitmo, phosphorus weapons, "aggressive" war, lack of proportionality, fighting for oil, etc.). This silence shows that the left's arguments are not principled, they are opportunistic. They are applied only to hurt the right, not to create some set of genuine values.

Secondly, this shows that Obama has not made the world any better than when he found it. To the contrary, it seems that things have gotten worse. There is an out-of-control war in the Middle East, where there had been an uneasy ending to the wars when Obama took over. Russia and China are rising up and causing problems, with no respect for the US. Ukraine, Georgia and Eastern Europe remain in the same tense state as when Obama took over, if not worse.

Third, this shows that Obama has finally come around to the real world. It has taken him forever during his administration, but he's finally given in to the reality that plastic reset buttons, bowing to terrorists and clowns, and wishing problems away just don't work. Obama is now starting to implement the same doctrines as "evil" people like Reagan and Bush.

Fourth, this shows that Obama indeed has no policy in the Middle East except "hope they all run out of things to kill."

Fifth, it shows that Hillary didn't fix a thing as Secretary of Drunk Texting.

Sixth, it shows that we're in for an interesting period where Russia will try to fix the Middle East by force and by supporting different partners. At the same time, Obama apparently plans to contain China. They even sent an American cruiser to challenge China's territorial claims the other day. That's called gun boat diplomacy, and the left has railed against that since 1945.

What a world!

Thoughts?