Here is a editorial I wrote recently for school.  It was meant to evoke emotion, which is why it is a bit over the top:

 

Recently there has been a disturbing trend as our newly elected leader shows his inexperience in foreign affairs.  As a part of his policy of changing everything even if it isn’t needed, he has given up on our hard line approach to the world in exchange for a kindler gentler United States.  .  The question is does he make us weaker in the world by doing so, and does he even play into possible future calamities.  Obama as a Christian should know the signs of the bible and the role he could possibly play in the apocalypse as a world leader pressing for peace in the Middle East through treaty.

An article by Human Events explains how the average Muslim seems to enjoy his words and derive hope from them as much as Americans (Babbin 2009).  While this is good for them, it is a baseless hope for people who probably would never think of joining a terrorist organization.  In a CNN article, an interesting factoid is given.  Only one in five Americans has a favorable view of the Muslim world (Steinhauser 2009).  Are we as Americans to continue to listen to our instincts and approach the Muslim world with caution and disdain, especially less than ten years after the 9/11 attacks.  Or do we continue to blindly follow a leader whose foreign policy has previously been based on events that happen outside of Chicago.  This same leader also has added sensitivities towards the Muslim world as his father’s half of the family is of Muslim faith.  These are feelings that most Americans don’t have, but don’t take into account when wildly approving of how the president handles our foreign policy.

The president has taken a stance opposite of the one this country has taken since Israel was re-established.  We have mostly focused on protecting that state and trying to minimize the fighting between Israelites and Muslims by throwing a bone in each direction as necessary, and trying to have Muslims form democracies.  Obama’s plan is to rally around Muslims and get Israelites to stop encroaching on their land that has been given to Palestine.  While a noble idea, we have to wonder what message we send to our allies around the world.  A telegraph article shows that the president wants to side with Muslims, by making Palestine stronger, at the risk of our ally, Israel (Spencer 2009).  He went in front of the world’s media and chastised Israel for what they do wrong, while praising Muslims and speaking their language from their Holy book.  This is surprising for a Christian who’s faith is based on the Jewish biblical leader.  He also wants to work towards peace in the Middle East although the bible speaks of a treaty that will lead to peace in the region followed by the end of the world.  As a true Christian, the president would understand that peace in the region would mean he is helping bring on the end of the world, which is not a good thing.

The president again has noble intentions if you take him for his word.  According to Spencer in the Telegraph Obama says that America is trying to be a role model and lead by example in the Middle East, rather than by force (2009).  The problem is, are the people who have attacked us the kind of people who follow examples or the kind who need to be forced to behave.  Are governments run by terrorist organizations more likely to leave us alone because we are noble, or will they see this as a sign of weakness and continue to advance themselves?  The fact that certain countries are ignoring the stern words and continuing with nuclear weapons programs is a sign.

The scary part about the president’s middle east policy is that if you think about the end of the world, the president’s story and his policy both seem to be signs of our impending doom.  In the bible, Daniel 9:27 King James Version says that a 7 year peace treaty in the Middle East will lead to the tribulation, and the end of the World.  The likely person to inspire the treaty will come from a new empire from either Western Europe or Babylon.  Well, there was no America in biblical times so we could consider America to be a descendant of Western Europe (Britain), and with Babylon rebuilding, technically the US has a big hand in Babylon (Iraq).  With the Mayan calendar ending in 2012, if the worst case scenario happens, the treaty would be signed next year, with the world ending in Obama’s possible final term.  As a Christian, his duty then would be to ensure NO peace in the Middle East, as peace leads to the end of the world.

To hearken on a previous point the president expects us to support his ideas as our own.  According to Human Events, Obama’s policies mean a complete reverse of course from the past administration by trying to find peace by empowering Muslims and expecting them to do their part to fight our enemies at home (Babbin 2009).  The problem is that this peace can only be created through treatise temporarily, while the warring philosophies lead to more war on biblical levels later.  Parties are left unchecked and expected to do the right thing.  To put this into better terms, what we are doing is the equivalent being bullied as a child.  On 9/11, the bully punched us in the face and we’ve been harassing him to stop him from doing so again ever since.  Now we are basically telling the bully’s friends, neighbors and sisters to harass him for us.  That bully is just waiting for the right time to punch us in the face again.

The question then becomes, is it worth it to stabilize Israel if it could lead to the events in Daniel 9:27.  If we support this president’s ideas, then we are doing so with that risk, to support the noble idea of doing the right thing.  To quote the fictional character Jack Bauer from the television series 24, sometimes the ends justify the means.

According to the Telegraph, Obama believes that we have created human rights issues through our efforts to support Israel and not stopping them from treating Palestinians unfairly (Spencer 2009).  Ethics courses will teach that we all take part in terrorist acts no matter the parties involved.  The question again, is are we warranted in violating the rights of a few to protect a nation or do we follow the president’s beliefs that even one person being treated wrong is unwarranted.  Time will tell.  If there are no additional attacks due to the spread up hope in Palestine, then the president will be right.  If he same people we were treating unfairly now take the time that they aren’t being encroached upon to gather themselves and start sending rockets into Israel, then turning a blind eye to the situation will have failed.

Obama is reckless, inexperienced and naïve in his foreign policy.  I hate to tell America that I told you so, but we would have been better served by someone who has been around long enough to see everything that happens, and has served in the military, and knows the rules of the game.  As it is, we have gone back from being a proactive player in the world to a reactive one, which is what happened during the Clinton era, leading us to have to react to 9/11.  Hopefully we don’t suffer from our president’s choices and beliefs.

 

 

 

 

References

Wright, S. (2001, January 25). Curriculum 2000 draws criticism. The Chronicle.
     Retrieved from http://www.chronicle.duke.edu

Babbin (2009, June 5). Obama’s Cairo Speech Will Cost Lives. Human Events. Retrieved from http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32165

Daniel 9:27 King James Version (Note that the APA standard doesn’t require a reference for a citation from the bible, but my reference for finding this out says you should provide one in case the professor desires one anyway).

Desvarieux, J. (2009, June 5). Obama’s Speech to Muslims Well-Received in Egypt. Voice of America. Retrieved from http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-06-05-voa27.cfm

Steinhauser, P. (2009, June 2). Few Americans have favorable view of Muslim world. Cnn.com. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/02/us.muslims.poll/index.html?iref=hpmostpop

Spencer, R. (2009, June 2). Barack Obama to take pragmatic approach to Middle East peace. Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5430741/Barack-Obama-to-take-pragmatic-approach-to-Middle-East-peace.html

Martin, Mike W. (2007).  Ethics Applied to Life.  Mason, OH: Thomson Custom Solutions

admin Politics