Obama Identifies “No. 1 National Security Threat”
HINT: IT’S NOT “RUSSIAN AGGRESSION” IN UKRAINE
U.S. President Barack Obama told a Dutch crowd this week that Russian military action in Ukraine isn’t the “No. 1 national security” threat to the United States.
Umm … really?
No sh*t, Sherlock. Just ask T-Rav …
“They don’t pose the No. 1 national security threat to the United States,” Obama said of Russia’s reaction to a U.S.-led coup in Ukraine. “I continue to be much more concerned when it comes to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in Manhattan – which is part of the reason why the United States, showing its continued international leadership, has organized a forum over the last several years that’s been able to help eliminate that threat in a consistent way.”
Wait … the threat of a nuclear attack on Manhattan has been eliminated?
And yet Obama still deems it the “No. 1 national security threat” to our nation?
How exactly does that work?
This website has consistently argued against American meddling in Ukraine.
“Policing the world (or attempting to) is one of the reasons current and future generations of American taxpayers are staring down a $17 trillion debt,” we wrote recently. “America must resist the urge to intervene militarily in the Ukraine. We cannot afford to get involved – but even if we could, there is simply no compelling national interest to justify such involvement.”
Obama’s statements in Holland would seem to concur – at least on that latter point. For example, he downplayed Russia as a “regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neighbors.”
Hmmmm … Russia is obviously a legitimate global power – one responding to American intervention in the sovereign affairs of one of its immediate neighbors. But either way, wouldn’t Obama’s characterization lend credence to a U.S. policy of non-interventionism (like the one outlined this week by former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul)?
Of course it would …
So why, then, are our country’s leaders contemplating multi-billion dollar bailouts of Ukraine? And ratcheting up the Cold War-era rhetoric against Russia?
It makes no sense …