June 20, 2011
By Burwell Stark
With increasing frequency members of the Obama administration have been turning their backs on America's strongest allies. The administration is forming new partnerships which appear to be based solely on emotion and the desire to appear politically correct rather than on agreements to work together to meet mutual needs in a long-term relationship.
Why are our elected leaders abandoning the ones who have stood by them for years? Why are they pursuing relationships that are inherently unstable and can only result in failure over the course of time?
I am referring to the recent statements by President Obama, and members of his administration, in which he sided against our two greatest allies: Israel and Great Britain.
America has no greater allies than these two countries, and the issues Obama addressed are ones they hold dear.
Concerning Israel, the president said in May that he supports a two-state solution (with Palestine) based on Israel's pre-1967 borders.
Regarding Great Britain, last week the Obama administration sided with Argentina in the ongoing dispute over the Falkland Islands.
Why are these issues so important and why are the statements made by this administration so egregious?
Please allow me to give a brief history.
Prior to 1967, Israel was prone to attack by its neighboring countries.
In June 1967 Israel fought Jordan, Syria, and Egypt in what is known as The Six-Day War. That May, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt had amassed armies on Israel's borders, and Egypt cut off Israel's access to the Straights of Tiran and thereby the Red Sea. Considering the cut-off an act of aggression, Israel launched a surprise attack on the three armies, quickly beating them back. As a result of Israel's use of force, a ceasefire was signed six days after the war began.
After the war, Israel took control of the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank, along with East Jerusalem. Egypt and Syria challenged Israel again in 1973 in what became known as the Yom Kippur War; however, since that time there have been no full-scale military attacks on Israel. This is largely due to Israel's occupation of those territories.
Without them, Israel would be more vulnerable to attack.
The Falkland Islands have a long history of European claim and rule.
However, since 1833, Britain has ruled the islands. It is currently considered a self-governing British Territory. In both World Wars I and II, the islands were prominently used by Britain in several naval victories against Germany.
It must be said that Argentina has disputed British rule since 1833. This came to a head in 1982 when Argentina invaded the islands and took control. The United Nations Security Council denounced the move and called for Argentina to withdraw, which it promptly ignored. Britain fought Argentina, and Argentina surrendered in June of that year.
The dispute over to which nation the islands belong did not go away after the war; Argentina is now pursuing diplomatic means to reassert control. However, the islanders are British citizens and support British sovereignty.
With this brief history in mind, we can return to the question of why the president's recent statements are so egregious.
To put it simply, the president said that his administration does not support Israel's right to self-defense or British right to sovereignty over its territories.
I ask: what greater right does a nation have than to be able to defend itself from attack or rule its territories without dispute?
Yet this is what our president is denying our two greatest allies.
Is this how we treat our friends?
You see, the wonderful thing about allies is that allies are wonderful things.
Unfortunately, our president and his administration seem to have forgotten who are our most steadfast allies and have verbally sided against them in recent weeks.
Does this president really expect our allies to support his administration after he denies their right of sovereignty? Will Argentina and Palestine come to our defense when we need them most?
Oh, bother.
American Thinker
By Burwell Stark
With increasing frequency members of the Obama administration have been turning their backs on America's strongest allies. The administration is forming new partnerships which appear to be based solely on emotion and the desire to appear politically correct rather than on agreements to work together to meet mutual needs in a long-term relationship.
Why are our elected leaders abandoning the ones who have stood by them for years? Why are they pursuing relationships that are inherently unstable and can only result in failure over the course of time?
I am referring to the recent statements by President Obama, and members of his administration, in which he sided against our two greatest allies: Israel and Great Britain.
America has no greater allies than these two countries, and the issues Obama addressed are ones they hold dear.
Concerning Israel, the president said in May that he supports a two-state solution (with Palestine) based on Israel's pre-1967 borders.
Regarding Great Britain, last week the Obama administration sided with Argentina in the ongoing dispute over the Falkland Islands.
Why are these issues so important and why are the statements made by this administration so egregious?
Please allow me to give a brief history.
Prior to 1967, Israel was prone to attack by its neighboring countries.
In June 1967 Israel fought Jordan, Syria, and Egypt in what is known as The Six-Day War. That May, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt had amassed armies on Israel's borders, and Egypt cut off Israel's access to the Straights of Tiran and thereby the Red Sea. Considering the cut-off an act of aggression, Israel launched a surprise attack on the three armies, quickly beating them back. As a result of Israel's use of force, a ceasefire was signed six days after the war began.
After the war, Israel took control of the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank, along with East Jerusalem. Egypt and Syria challenged Israel again in 1973 in what became known as the Yom Kippur War; however, since that time there have been no full-scale military attacks on Israel. This is largely due to Israel's occupation of those territories.
Without them, Israel would be more vulnerable to attack.
The Falkland Islands have a long history of European claim and rule.
However, since 1833, Britain has ruled the islands. It is currently considered a self-governing British Territory. In both World Wars I and II, the islands were prominently used by Britain in several naval victories against Germany.
It must be said that Argentina has disputed British rule since 1833. This came to a head in 1982 when Argentina invaded the islands and took control. The United Nations Security Council denounced the move and called for Argentina to withdraw, which it promptly ignored. Britain fought Argentina, and Argentina surrendered in June of that year.
The dispute over to which nation the islands belong did not go away after the war; Argentina is now pursuing diplomatic means to reassert control. However, the islanders are British citizens and support British sovereignty.
With this brief history in mind, we can return to the question of why the president's recent statements are so egregious.
To put it simply, the president said that his administration does not support Israel's right to self-defense or British right to sovereignty over its territories.
I ask: what greater right does a nation have than to be able to defend itself from attack or rule its territories without dispute?
Yet this is what our president is denying our two greatest allies.
Is this how we treat our friends?
You see, the wonderful thing about allies is that allies are wonderful things.
Unfortunately, our president and his administration seem to have forgotten who are our most steadfast allies and have verbally sided against them in recent weeks.
Does this president really expect our allies to support his administration after he denies their right of sovereignty? Will Argentina and Palestine come to our defense when we need them most?
Oh, bother.
American Thinker
