At West Point today, President Obama marched out his army of straw men and continued his ungracious habit of taking credit for successful actions attributable to his predecessor. But at bottom, the policy he outlined will be of little comfort to our allies and to the cause of freedom in the world. There were as many straw men as cadets. The president railed against “critics who think military intervention is the only way for America to avoid looking weak” and insisted that “U.S. military action cannot be the only—or even primary—component of leadership.” He kindly informed us that “a strategy that involves invading every country that harbors terrorist networks is naïve and unsustainable.” He thanked himself for the decision “that we should not put American troops into the middle of this increasingly sectarian civil war” in Syria, as if anyone anywhere had suggested doing so. Once again, the president caricatures the views of his critics rather than addressing them fairly—not much of a contribution to a good national debate over foreign policy…Mr. Obama began the speech by reminding us, as he always does, that he inherited two wars and “the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.” If you thought he would also, to be fair, note his predecessor’s achievements, you were wrong. Discussing Africa, Mr. Obama said, “American assistance has made possible the prospect of an AIDS-free generation,” but could not bring himself to say who undertook that effort: George Bush. When it came to Iran, Mr. Obama said, “At the beginning of my presidency, we built a coalition that imposed sanctions on the Iranian economy.” This is not only ungracious but plain wrong: that coalition in the Security Council was built by the Bush administration, which won unanimous votes there repeatedly.
In his address Wednesday to the graduating cadets at West Point, Mr. Obama marshaled a virtual corps of straw men, dismissing those who “say that every problem has a military solution,” who “think military intervention is the only way for America to avoid looking weak,” who favor putting “American troops into the middle of [Syria’s] increasingly sectarian civil war,” who propose “invading every country that harbors terrorist networks” and who think that “working through international institutions . . . or respecting international law is a sign of weakness.” Few, if any, of those who question the president’s record hold such views
He does this in every speech. It’s hilariously predictable now…
“Some say Adam Sandler should be burned at the stake. Others say he should be hand-fed figs on the White House lawn. I reject this false choice.”
“Some think the second Star Wars trilogy was the best one. Others think anyone associated with it should be boiled alive. I reject both views.”
That’s the level of ridiculousness.