| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Obama's 'Leading from Behind' has U.S in full retreat |
| 2015-01-30 |
| 'Leading from behind.' A White House official coined that phrase in 2011 to describe President Obama's Libyan policy. His political opponents quickly seized on that characterization as an apt metaphor for how the president conducts foreign policy. While the Administration pushed back, liberal pundits embraced the phrase--at least initially. 'If leading from behind brings the success of the Libyan intervention... 'lead me from behind, Mr. President,' cheered New York Times columnist Roger Cohen. The Daily Beastâ's Michael Tomasky purred, '...this Libya operation is, so far, not only a big success, but also a historic accomplishment in American history.' That was then. Libya today is a hell hole. No serious observer of foreign policy regards that operation as a success. Indeed, the world today is littered with spectacular U.S. foreign policy failures. Remember the Russian 'reset'? Dialog and a nuclear arms treaty that let Moscow stand pat while we reduced our arsenal were going to lead to a new era of understanding. Instead, Croatia's [sic!] been annexed; Ukraine is under attack, and relations between Washington and the Kremlin are worse than any time since the Cold War. Pulling out of Iraq according to a timetable rather than the situation on the ground? That opened the door for ISIS to get a strong foothold. Today, it controls a third of Iraq and much of Syria. |
| Posted by:Hupineger Glomomp0029 |
| #5 Champ was in charge. Therefore there can be no failure. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2015-01-30 13:06 |
| #4 Maybe the state department does not see Libya as a failure. |
| Posted by: Airandee 2015-01-30 07:02 |
| #3 In the military, and in aircraft safety, every defeat or accident is studied, so that it can be avoided in the future. The army conducts courts martial to do this. If you fail, you are replaced. Somehow, this is not true in the State Department. The abject failure of Libyan policy has led to no public discussion, and no change of policy or of leadership, or even public acknowledgement of failure. This is a prescription for disaster. |
| Posted by: Grins Snese4215 2015-01-30 01:27 |
| #2 See WASHINGTON FREE BEACON > OBAMA WON'T ARM UKRAINE AS PUTIN SEIZES [more] GROUND. The Bammer doing a "Red Line" = Libya, Mubarak, Syria, Crimea = "Ukraine I", + Iraq on "Ukraine II"??? SOUTH CHINA SEA = GUAM-CNMI-WESTPAC, or at least the CNMI, aka Soviet-era attacking "Where the US/US-NATO are NOT"??? The CNMI is not Guam's = WORLDNEWS.com's "Camel Rock", but it means the same iff one lives here. * TOPIX, DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > PENTAGON WARNS OF CHINESE ARMS DOMINANCE | WASHINGTON FREE BEACON. * TOPIX, WORLD NEWS > [American Thinker] MORE EVIDENCE CHINA IS PREPARING TO ATTACK JAPAN | MORE SIGNS CHINA IS PREPARING TO ATTACK JAPAN. On-going PLA-centric buildup, construction on Nanji Isles near Taiwan can only be for purposes of war agz Japan andor Taiwan??? * TOPIX > [Stars-n-Stripes] CHINA'S MAN-MADE ISLANDS HEIGHTEN CONCERNS OF TERRITORIAL CONTROL. * DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > [Reuters] US WOULD WELCOME JAPAN AIR PATROLS IN SOUTH CHINA SEA. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2015-01-30 01:18 |
| #1 As I've said times before, ITS "GOOD OWG GLOBALISM". Unfortunately, it remains highly dubious or questionable iff the US can effec maintain or protect its "Sole" Superpower credibility by "leading from behind" - THE "GREAT GAME" WOULD ARGUE SUCH IS A VERY DANGEROUS FALLACY OR DELUSION, ESPEC WHEN DEALING WID POWERFUL OR POTENT RANKS N-O-T IN THE KNOW. Again, the US = POTUS Obama hasn't even started wid CHINA in East Asia + WESTPAC. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2015-01-30 01:00 |