We’re not Obama fans and to be honest, out of fashion as that may be, we aren’t Bush fans, either. But we noted that much of the anti-Bush spiel was hokum and it seems to us, so is much of the current attacks on our President. Both, we believe, have done or failed to do plenty to complain about; these cheap, hypocritical and specious complaints do nothing to advance the welfare of our Republic. Maybe they sell newspaper and sponsor’s products?
An especially annoying example is the fuss now over President Obama’s handling of Syria and Ukraine. The decades-in-office Syrian dictator Bashar Assad is fighting a civil war against a mix of secular rebels and Islamic fundamentalists that attacks Mr. Assad’s regime when they aren’t busy attacking each other. Mr. Assad floats on a flood of Iranian and Russian support that keeps his head above the flood … barely.
Ukraine hasn’t been a country since roughly, the 14th Century; it has passed back and forth among Poland, Russia, Austria and was even Lithuanian for a while. So when the Soviets turned it loose, there was little political tradition upon which to build a nation upon short notice. Full of the same corruption as its long time Communist master Russia, it has struggled to cohere, burdened with a Russified East and a European-aspiring West that speak different languages and live in different cultures.
Does this seem the fault of our President? Or for that matter, of his predecessor? Hardly. The world’s declining economy (that we’re not supposed to notice) roused the Syrians and Ukrainians both; we can blame both Obama and Bush for their share in that, but only for the share. Others are hip-deep in that. Russia needs to distract is folk from its economic inadequacy; rebuilding the Russo-Soviet Empire will serve and is under way in Ukraine. It started in Georgia a couple of years ago and though unremarked in the news, is going on in Moldova and elsewhere as well. No Obama/Bush fingerprints here … though perhaps Mr. Obama sees a need for some distractions, too.
So we ask: What do the folk complaining of the Presidents’ “weakness” suggest that he do? Are we to send troops to Ukraine? Attack Russia? What? We hear that we should supply weapons to Ukraine. The Ukrainian military is disorganized, with some troops favoring Russia and some not. There is no effective government. Who would end up with those weapons? And Ukraine is, like Syria, dead broke and in need of a huge financial bailout. Mr. Putin is picking up a Tar Baby that he may spend a long time regretting. The U.S. is in deficit with excessive debt, how will it finance a Ukraine involvement? Mr. Obama’s critics are silent on these points.
In Syria, our Prez. could have much more effect at a much cheaper cost. Just supplying air support for the “rebels” would make a huge difference. But do we want a Syria sans Assad but fallen into a failed state fought over between murderous Islamicists and secular rebels unable to agree on anything but more killing? Such as Libya? What is there for America in that?
So for us, the question is, what do we want our President to do and our response is: Unfortunately, nothing. We can’t save the world from itself and we as yet, haven’t saved the U.S. from itself. That should be our priority. So let’s get off the Prez on these foreign affairs and complain about American finances; that’s something he can address … and should! His succession of huge deficits with less spending always “tomorrow” doesn’t do what is needed. Here, he shows real weakness, fearing to represent the truth to the American people. Beef up your courage, Mr. President … You find it easy enough to kill your chosen enemies with drones, why can’t you kill some deficits? That would be leadership!