published Monday, April 23rd, 2012

America's friends

America has developed "allies" through decades of diplomatic energy, the strength of commerce and trade, the scars and bloodshed of war, and a commitment to shared principles of liberty and freedom.

Typically, in times of war, allies quickly coalesce around a common cause and a common enemy. Over time, the tactics and theaters of war have evolved into smaller, more technical needs, yet the costs of war and the geopolitical interests continue to bring allies together.

Recently, the whispers of President Barack Obama to Russia's current puppet of a president, Dmitri Medvedev, at the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, exposed the politics that jeopardize America's national security and the security of our "allies."

A microphone captured America's president, already perceived to be quick to appease, asking for Medvedev's successor, Vladimir Putin, to "give me space" in relation to the controversial issue of missile defense. President Obama continued to promise, with an extended reach to President Medvedev's knee, that "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."

In context, Obama already has agreed to the reduction of missile defense capabilities and specific strategic nuclear weapons through the new iteration of the START Treaty. Russia is allowed to maintain a 10-to-1 tactical nuclear weapons advantage over the U.S. This same treaty, signed in 2011, abandoned missile defense systems in the Czech Republic and Poland that were to protect the region from threats of Iran.

Justifying the broken agreement to the endangered region, Obama claimed then and now that "the Iranian threat is overstated."

In those same negotiations with Russia in 2010, Obama obtained a bargaining chip by providing nuclear secrets related to Trident missiles in the United Kingdom's arsenal.

Do those nations we typically consider allies have the confidence in watching the American president link nuclear negotiations to an election? Do Americans embrace such raw political actions that hide negotiations behind the cloak of the election calendar rather than prioritizing our nation's security?

2
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.

Do you believe it would be any different regardless of president? Political whims trump genuine solutions all the time.

But hey,if you want a one-term presidency, you can always push for an amendment.

April 23, 2012 at 12:17 a.m.
nucanuck said...

America's allies are, for the most part, bought and paid for. Our payola days are ending. Our worldwide military presence is no longer economically sustainable, nor is it wanted by most of the world. We are living in our glory days of the last century as the sun sets on the neo-colonial empire that we ruled and the world is moving on.

Prattling about missle defenses and presidential leaway to form agreements seems pretty petty as the house is burning down around us. Wars are now economic and all our military might means very little while we are weakly engaged with the emerging economic powerhouses in the developing world.

Missles won't help us compete when we have an under-educated, obese working class. We have to get to the classroom and the gym.

April 23, 2012 at 1:15 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.