President Obama's TV Interview On Al Arabiya

by Walid Phares - February 6th, 2009 - American Thinker

This sophisticated statement, which accurately educates readers and viewers in the U.S as to the web of intertwined connections among all these players, can however go in two different directions with regard to policies. Indeed, as connoisseurs of the region's geopolitics know, Hamas is the stumbling block in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. In Lebanon, Hezbollah is the chief opposition to normalization on the southern borders. Assad [of Syria] supplies both organizations while being an ally to Khamanei [of Iran]. Syria and Iran control war and peace in the Levant and can make things [Obama's planned retreat] hellish in Iraq.

[snip]

Do we believe his assessment is to reaffirm what the previous administration already knew, but never acted on? Or do we read a mental preparation of our public for these "new choices" to come? Unless proven wrong in the near future, I sense our President is preparing us -- not just the Israelis -- for what is to come.

Though the writer does not give specifics of what this may mean, I believe it is indicative of the true direction of Barack Obama's future plans for the middle east. Like Prime Minister Chamberlain in WWII, Obama is looking for the one appeasement that will protect him from the coming nuclear war with the Islamo-fascists. Israel will serve the role of Czechoslovakia as the bribe for peace. The Obama speech on Al Aribiya was preparing America for the sell out of our one true ally in the region.

Chamberlain did not save Europe from Hitler and Obama will not save the world from the Islamo-fascists. Appeasement does not work.