This blog post from Max Boot about the trouble with China, which doesn't add anything new to the conversation, and is really just written as something of an aside, but interests me for its last sentence: what happened to the Asia pivot?
The question fits nicely with my thoughts concerning Obama's political machinations being enabled by an idolatrous media and press that he manipulates with great skill for the purposes of making lies sound believable, smoke screens seem like patches of clear blue sky, and speeches filled with sophistry and naive panderings to some sickly, puffed up notion of lofty sound like Dear Leader is channeling Cicero or Seneca - because when the pivot was announced I immediately said: that's bullshit, will never happen. I remember getting into an argument with a fairly well known writer on defense issues about it, saying to him: what has Obama ever said or done that would make you think this is serious? To be serious about an Asia pivot one would have to be open to increasing the military budget and also be a firm believer in the inherent value of American power - where do you see anything like that in Obama's resume? Not only is the man clearly not a devout believer in American power, I actually think he may secretly be quite hostile to it, and not just because of the price tag.
It's amusing how reluctant people can be to think ill of their leaders - people do seem to have a strong desire to believe that the august who rule over them are actually in some way august and not utterly full of shit - authority is a strange drug - but it was always clear to me that the Asia pivot was about nothing more than creating a talking point to counter Romney with in the debates and also as a ruse to make it look like the disengagement from the Mideast was not about 'retreat' but rather a nod to 'thoughtful strategic realignment'. It was never about an actual pivot, merely only the intimations of such - and I don't know how anyone looking with an unclouded eye at Obama's words and actions, not to mention the leftist intellectual swamp out of which he crawled, could ever think otherwise.
The question fits nicely with my thoughts concerning Obama's political machinations being enabled by an idolatrous media and press that he manipulates with great skill for the purposes of making lies sound believable, smoke screens seem like patches of clear blue sky, and speeches filled with sophistry and naive panderings to some sickly, puffed up notion of lofty sound like Dear Leader is channeling Cicero or Seneca - because when the pivot was announced I immediately said: that's bullshit, will never happen. I remember getting into an argument with a fairly well known writer on defense issues about it, saying to him: what has Obama ever said or done that would make you think this is serious? To be serious about an Asia pivot one would have to be open to increasing the military budget and also be a firm believer in the inherent value of American power - where do you see anything like that in Obama's resume? Not only is the man clearly not a devout believer in American power, I actually think he may secretly be quite hostile to it, and not just because of the price tag.
It's amusing how reluctant people can be to think ill of their leaders - people do seem to have a strong desire to believe that the august who rule over them are actually in some way august and not utterly full of shit - authority is a strange drug - but it was always clear to me that the Asia pivot was about nothing more than creating a talking point to counter Romney with in the debates and also as a ruse to make it look like the disengagement from the Mideast was not about 'retreat' but rather a nod to 'thoughtful strategic realignment'. It was never about an actual pivot, merely only the intimations of such - and I don't know how anyone looking with an unclouded eye at Obama's words and actions, not to mention the leftist intellectual swamp out of which he crawled, could ever think otherwise.