The President’s strategic priority here is that Westerners, and especially white Westerners, no longer be in the position of Middle Eastern dynasts, namely, statutory rulers of non-Westerners (Muslims for the most part) dwelling with and among the Jews in this case. Furthermore, the scenario that I’m suggesting is entertained by Obama (and key foreign-policy advisors) has two prongs.  In the first, Iran acquires nuclear weapons and the ability to loft them Jerusalem-wards.  Israel, put on notice by the US, does little or nothing about it.  For reasons that I feel no obligation to flesh out here, such an outcome must before long lead to the extinction of the Zionist enterprise known as the State of Israel.

The second prong, obviously, is that Israel will strike Iran to prevent its acquisition of nuclear weapons over the near term.  All the terrible things that have been forecast should Israel attack Iran very probably will occur.  In that case, the Administration will sever all ties to the country, or will at least attempt to do so, and Israel will be abandoned to its fate.  Needless to say, that outcome will not be the end of Israel but the end of American support for Zionism.

Like all leftists, Barack Obama is a leveler.  He will bow enthusiastically to the Emperor of Japan because he is both non-white and non-Western.  He will bow obsequiously to the King of Saudi Arabia because he is non-Western.  On the other hand, he will merely nod to the Queen of England because she is echt white and Western.  Elizabeth II is the literal embodiment of the historical dominance of non-whites and non-Westerners by white, Western “imperialists.”  The Chinese, naturally enough, must be accorded supreme deference in this hierarchical scheme.  In Copenhagen, for example, Obama wasted no time with the Europeans, whom, I suspect, he despises, but went hat in hand to the President of China for approbation.  George Bush and Bill Clinton’s toleration of the political deformity that is present-day “Communist” China was largely pragmatic.  Obama’s is viscerally ideological.  It is a thoroughly depraved ideology, true, but an ideology nonetheless.

To resume, the Iranians, who are white but fanatically anti-Western, currently have a well-wisher in the Oval Office.  Let them get the bomb, and let the Jews, the white, Western canaries in the geopolitical coal mine, tremble.  What more might an anti-Western bigot, whom the West in a spirit of deracinated anti-bigotry nominated as its spokesman, desire?

Oh, sure, he can go to fundraisers (7 since McChrystal’s report), date nights with Michelle, scold edmunds.com and fox and the AP, but, darn it all, Afghanistan is just too tough for a man who got where he is by voting “present”.

Here’s one woman who gave all she could, and doesnt want t hear any more excuses

Now the Arabs are face to face with their own history. Instead of George W. Bush there is Barack Hussein Obama, an American leader pledged to a foreign policy of “realism.” The Arabs express fondness for the new American president. In his fashion (and in the fashion of their world and their leaders, it has to be said) President Obama gave the Arabs a speech in Cairo two months ago. It was a moment of theater and therapy. The speech delivered, the foreign visitor was gone. He had put another marker on the globe, another place to which he had taken his astounding belief in his biography and his conviction that another foreign population had been wooed by his oratory and weaned away from anti-Americanism.

The crowd could tell itself that the new standard-bearer of the Pax Americana was a man who understood its concerns, but the embattled modernists and the critics of autocracy knew better. There is no mistaking the animating drive of the new American policy in that Greater Middle East: realism and benign neglect, the safety of the status quo rather than the risks of liberty.