President Barack Obama's foreign policy differs little from the policies of George W. Bush.
Barack Obama’s Foreign Policy – 2008 Presidential Campaign
With the political circus producing a whirlwind of insanity in America it can be tough to keep track of things. But it wasn’t so long ago that Senator Barack Obama was campaigning to be President of the United States of America. It was 2008. Just two years ago. At the time President George W. Bush was still in office and the war in Iraq was still prominent in the headlines. President Bush was still stirring up fear with his speeches about the war on “terror”. If you think about it, it was not so long ago.
The election was heating up and Barack Obama was promising the people hope and change. He was promising to end the failed politics of the past (as if there is any other kind). Then there was his promises of improving the warfare state foreign policy of George Bush, Dick Cheney and the neo-cons that helped advise that administration.
Here are some of the things Barack Obama talked about doing differently:
- Close Guantanamo Bay Prison
- Pull troops out of Iraq
- Reduce troop levels in the Middle East
Except for what seems to be a token gesture to appease his base, Guantanamo is still open and will likely remain open.
We still have over 90,000 troops in Iraq. That’s right. 90,000 troops still occupying Iraq. However, what you will probably get from the media is the quick statistic that will appease the headline reader; the quick blurb created to appease the supposed anti-war democrat who cited the wars in the Middle East as one of the reasons they were voting Democrat in the election.
What the media will say is that President Obama has reduced troop levels in Iraq. A simple, clear statement that satisfies most. The thing they won’t tell you is this. The troop levels were reduced in Iraq to just 2,000 less than what is now in Afghanistan.
Wait a second. How did that happen? How are there more troops in Afghanistan than Iraq?
Well, the “peace” candidate, now President Barack Obama, has actually increased troop levels in the Middle East by 40,000 troops. Currently there are somewhere around 94,000 troops in Afghanistan and 92,000 in Iraq.
As you can see, the media can legitimately claim a reduction of troop levels in Iraq and people will generally accept this fact as the whole of the story. That is unfortunately not the case. Here’s the other angle you will get from the media. Barack Obama is allocating troops to the more crucial war, so his increased militarism is justified. Again, not the case.
Why Neo-cons Love Barack Obama’s Foreign Policy (or should)
In reality, President Obama is equally, if not more, hawkish than George W. Bush. He has failed to do any of the things he talked about so fervently in the campaign of 2008. In fact, he has increased our military efforts substantially over George Bush. We still have large amounts of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Guantanamo is still alive and well.
In addition, one can read regularly about the drone attacks and air strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and such. Mostly these are stories of unmanned air craft firing missiles into villages often killing many innocent people and more often missing the intended target. The success rate of killing bad guys is mediocre. The success rate at killing innocents is fantastic. One need not wonder what a reaction to an unmanned aircraft firing missiles over US soil would be. However, people fail to understand that people in other lands might just as upset.
Not only that, President Obama and congress have kept the Patriot Act and the warrant-less wiretapping program.
The Obama foreign policy is nearly identical to that of George W. Bush. So, neo-conservatives should love President Obama’s foreign policy. This begs the question.
What Does the Left Think About Barack Obama’s foreign policy?
Interestingly enough, the left is just fine with it. The left were incredibly critical of Bush foreign policy. There were protests and picket signs. There were people on the left calling Bush a war criminal and chicken hawk. The preemptive war policies of Bush were considered a travesty. Gitmo was deemed a gulag. Warrantless wiretaps were called an outrageous invasion of privacy. What’s more, the media lead the charge. There were daily body counts. There were tirades from Chris Matthews. There was Keith Olbermann frothing at the mouth like a mad dog. The Hannity boys of the left relentlessly attacked George W. Bush for all of his policies relating to foreign policy.
So what about now? Nothing. The left has somehow found peace with the foreign policy of Barack Obama, which differs in almost no manner whatsoever from George Bush. As soon as Barack Obama became president the tone changed on the left side of the aisle. The elaborate rationalizations began. The excuses piled up. It’s different with Obama, you see?
No more outrage regarding unnecessary wars. No concern for innocent people killed at the behest of our government. The rabid tirades of the left’s media attack squad have ceased along with the cries about invasion of privacy.
So, what is going on?
Why Neither Neo-Cons nor Liberals Are Critical of President Obama’s Foreign Policy
At the end of the day, both George Bush and Barack Obama have engaged in a foolish and destructive foreign policy. Decades of intervening with other nation’s affairs (including regime change, occupations, air strikes etc) have created an animosity equal to what Americans would feel if the roles were reversed. This has only increased under Bush and Obama. Then there is the obvious. Americans are dying and getting maimed in large numbers.
On top of that, we are wasting trillions of dollars in foreign militarism in the midst of an economic meltdown. Add to that to the liberties that are being infringed upon from wire tapping policies and other related activity. These policies are destructive to the lives of our soldiers, the lives of innocent people, our foreign relations, trade, our national economy, taxpayer’s personal economic standing, our rights and our liberty.
However, neither neo-cons nor progressive liberals are critical of these policies.
On one hand, the neo-cons favor these aggressive and foolish policies wholeheartedly. They believe or are convinced to believe that these wars are good. They want a large military presence in countries all over the world. They love the military intervening and occupying. They want to build democracy world wide one bomb at a time. They believe we have the right to nation build and police the planet because we are “the lone superpower”.
On the other hand, you have progressive liberals. There game is acting like the wars, militarism and infringement on American’s rights are somehow holier and better under Barack Obama. But if any of their criticism, anger or outrage were legitimate they would sound exactly the same as they did while Bush was in office.
The lesson to learn is this. Both the neo-cons and the progressive liberals (and the left & right in general) have something in common. There are by and large statists. That is one of the problems with the left and the right. No matter which side you are on, you are in favor of impeding on and controlling how others live through the state. Both the left and the right are always eager to grow government in order to use that force of government to control others.
It is this unfortunate attachment to government that explains why neither the left nor the right are critical of President Obama’s foreign policy. To the modern left and right, big government is always good as long as it seems government is doing their bidding. In either case we get bigger government and smaller liberty.
