The Birthers' Bad Geography
Forget clinging to the idea that he might be Kenyan. HItchens wonders on Slate if the milquetoast-in-chief actually might be Swiss:
This has been especially evident in the case of Libya. For weeks, the administration dithered over Egypt and calibrated its actions to the lowest and slowest common denominators, on the grounds that it was difficult to deal with a rancid old friend and ally who had outlived his usefulness. But then it became the turn of Muammar Qaddafi--an all-round stinking nuisance and moreover a long-term enemy--and the dithering began all over again. Until Wednesday Feb. 23, when the president made a few anodyne remarks that condemned "violence" in general but failed to cite Qaddafi in particular--every important statesman and stateswoman in the world had been heard from, with the exception of Obama. And his silence was hardly worth breaking. Echoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who had managed a few words of her own, he stressed only that the need was for a unanimous international opinion, as if in the absence of complete unity nothing could be done, or even attempted. This would hand an automatic veto to any of Qaddafi's remaining allies. It also underscored the impression that the opinion of the United States was no more worth hearing than that of, say, Switzerland. Secretary Clinton was then dispatched to no other destination than Geneva, where she will meet with the U.N. Human Rights Council--an absurd body that is already hopelessly tainted with Qaddafi's membership.
I was no fan of the last occupant of The White House, either, but at least the guy know how to talk tough.
Who was it recently who theorized that the president would not produce an actual birth certificate because of his embarrassing given name Barry Soetero? I forgot where I saw that.
carol at February 27, 2011 3:35 PM
No matter who we support over in the middle east -- it will not be in our best interests. Supporting the "popular" revolt will inevitably lead to the Muslim Brotherhood having power. The Muslim Brotherhood is going to try to create a new caliphate with Sharia law.
The current dictators are a bunch of bastards. Continuing to support them is just putting time on the clock until the explosion inevitably happens.
The thing is that the U.S. government, over many years, has left us dependent on the oil over there. Where if we would have been drilling in the states -- we would be able to have stepped back and let them decide where and what they want to do.
Jim P. at February 27, 2011 6:50 PM
Qaddafi hates the Swiss because they arrested his son for beating up his servant (frowned upon in Switzerland) and then the Geneva Tribune posted pics.
Qaddafi asked the UN to dissolve Switzerland and partition it between Germany, France and Italy.
The Swiss don't much care for him, though do tend to think he is hilarious.
NicoleK at February 28, 2011 12:21 AM
And unlike Obama, the Swiss actually considered taking military action against Qaddafi when he took a Swiss guy hostage as revenge for his son's arrest.
It didn't come to that, though,
NicoleK at February 28, 2011 12:36 AM
I was no fan of the last occupant of The White House, either, but at least the guy know how to talk tough.
I'm curious as to what tough talk might be most likely to change the situation in Libya. Or would Obama, in talking tough, be obliged to back up that talk with our military? And If that's the case, where do our obligations begin and end? Should the president concern himself with American civilians in Libya working in the oil industry escaping the country before engaging in verbal posturing?
Christopher at February 28, 2011 1:05 AM
I don't necessarily disagree with the author's point - namely, that the USA's international diplomacy is incompentent. However, his Swiss comparison reveals him to be ignorant. One might expect journalists to know something of history.
Switzerland has had - and continues to have - a disproportionate impact on international diplomacy. To name two examples: both the Geneva Conventions and the Red Cross owe their existence to Switzerland. The Obama administration would be doing well indeed to be even half as relevant as the Swiss...
bradley13 at February 28, 2011 2:33 AM
It's because Switzerland has a disproportionate amount of moolah.
NicoleK at February 28, 2011 5:19 AM
Ah, no wonder he speaks fluent Austrian.
I R A Darth Aggie at February 28, 2011 9:01 AM
Switzerland has had - and continues to have - a disproportionate impact on international diplomacy. To name two examples: both the Geneva Conventions and the Red Cross owe their existence to Switzerland. Posted by: bradley13
It's because Switzerland has a disproportionate amount of moolah. Posted by: NicoleK
You also need to look at both geographical and historical issues. The reason that fighting the Swiss on their home territory is a loser -- it is all uphill. We gamed attacking a far east country while I in the USAF. We had everything from A-10s, F-16's, B-52's, B-1's to Navy A/C, cruise missiles, to plain old artillery. About the only thing not on the table were nukes, chemical and biological. We could come up with a plan that would wipe out the forces on the plains in a few weeks. When we got to the mountains -- it was how to knock out their main defenses and "starve" them out. (i.e. They ran out of beans and bullets.)
The historical perspective -- There are 20,000 men (and women) trained annually in the Swiss army. And add to it they get to take their equipment home.
The Swiss are nice and friendly -- that is because they are an armed and trained society. Again, an armed society is a polite society.
Jim P. at February 28, 2011 8:38 PM
The gun thing just came up for a vote, actually. There was a referendum to keep the guns in village arsenals rather than in homes. It didn't pass.
The Reduit was good at holding Hitler off, but wouldn't have worked for ever. The Gnomes of Zurich had as much to do with CH staying out of the war as Guisan did.
The Swiss can afford to be nice and friendly because they don't have huge slums full of angry poor people. I think that has more to do with it than the guns at home. Anyone using their home gun to shoot a burglar would be in a LOT of trouble. The Swiss have a lot of benefits for the poor, and tend to scatter them rather than concentrate them. They can afford to have good social programs thanks to the Nazi gold and the Secret Bancaire which is why they should never, ever, ever join the EU.
NicoleK at March 1, 2011 8:41 AM
The Swiss can afford to be nice and friendly because they don't have huge slums full of angry poor people.
Nicole,
I won't disagree with you. Really it boils down to the fact that a large enough percent of population has a grip on reality.
The U.S. has 49% living on O.P.P. If we could disenfranchise them in some fashion -- we would probably have some sanity return.
I'm not encouraging turning them out on the streets. I'm saying that if you can't contribute to a society -- you are a drag. And getting grants from the NEA to draw pictures of fruit is not contributing.
Jim P. at March 1, 2011 11:05 PM
Leave a comment