[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Dear Barack Obama... I am writing to complain about an interruption of my privacy. Recently I sat down to watch "Saturday Night Live." I figured that after a long day of studying I might be able to lay back on my couch and laugh a little bit. There's just one problem: every 10 minutes, the show was interrupted by one of your grandstanding political ads. My free time was disturbed by your babbling about change and your claims about fixing Washington, D.C. A majority of my peers might accept intrusions of this nature, as they are captivated by you like toddlers listening to a Tickle-Me-Elmo. I, however, cannot stand people trying to snow me over. Your advertisements are thread-bare of any concrete examples of policy. I can't help believing that you feel the American people are sheep who will go along with anything a charismatic person says. As an educated member of society, I decided to look past the swill you are forcing upon us, and do some research to find out where you truly stand. My journey of discontent led me to your website, BarackObama.com. Initially I was impressed by its clean and organized appearance. I was greeted by a video of you smiling and telling me that by arriving at your site I had taken the first step toward creating change in America. A side-blurb called your campaign "the largest grassroots campaign in political history." It brought me back to my first day of kindergarten, where my teacher circled up our class on the carpet and told us how special we were. I was almost expecting you to leap out of my computer and hand me a glass of milk and cookies. Fortunately, my critical personality brought me back to consciousness. I found the portion of your website that discusses your stance on the various campaign issues. One of the biggest claims you have recycled throughout your televised speeches is that you will end bi-partisan politics in Washington. You say you will be able to influence Republicans to work with you and create policy that benefits everyone. How will this be possible when your plans for improvement threaten the stability of the entire world? To solve the current fuel crisis you claim that you will promote the creation of alternative fuel methods. Specifically, you cite the use of celluloid ethanol, or fuel that is made from plant matter. You say you will institute a Production Tax Credit that benefits farmers who grow the materials to make bio-fuel. Why should land that grows food for hungry mouths be wasted on fuel production? One of the reasons our country has been so successful is that a majority of our people don't go hungry. We produce so much food that we have a surplus. This surplus of food is largely what is keeping the Third World from starving to death. Of particular significance are our efforts with the North Korean government. The people of North Korea are starving because all of their economy is focused on military power. In exchange for a relaxed stance on their nuclear weapons program, we are sending their country millions of dollars in food assistance. According to the U.S. State Department, the food we send is all that is keeping North Korea from mass starvation. Last week a major cyclone tore through Myanmar. It killed thousands of people, and thousands more are homeless and going hungry. The military junta which rules Myanmar isn't equipped to help its people. According to CNN, there is already a fleet of U.S. ships off the coast of Myanmar that is carrying food relief and medical supplies. If people are starving, the U.S. is able to respond immediately. In short, our food is all that is keeping much of the world from going into massive political unrest. Ethanol production will seriously limit our ability to remain as the world's safety valve. In an article for the New York Times, Celia Dugger reports that food prices are sky-rocketing due to the demand for ethanol made from corn. As a result, this is dramatically affecting the amount of food the government is able to purchase for foreign aid. In addition, the land that would normally be used to grow extra food is being transformed by farmers to grow the corn for ethanol. The combined result is that there is less and less of a food surplus to aid disadvantaged countries, and the government is slowly becoming unable to purchase what food we do have. What is the rest of the world going to do when our government can't afford to feed them? In addition, your policies on the Iraq War will create genocide in the Middle East that will make Darfur look like a tea party. You advocate a withdrawal of all troops within 16 months of the start of your presidency. If the U.S. withdraws all our troops from Iraq, the resulting power vacuum will have the potential to kill millions and possibly compromise the security of the entire Middle East. The dilemma we face in Iraq is a result of tribal tension. The Iraqi people are divided among the Sunni and the Shia tribes. Both tribes are considered Arab, yet they have been fighting with each other for thousands of years. According to the History News Network at George Mason, the reason for this is that the two tribes believe in different descendents of Mohammed as the rightful heirs to the religion of Islam. The Sunni tribe is a minority in Iraq. The Council of Foreign Relations reports that Sunnis take up only 15 to 20 percent of Iraq's population. Saddam Hussein's Baath Party favored the Sunnis, and they gained great influence in the military and the government during his rule. While the Shiia are a majority of the population, the Sunni hold a majority of the power and the weapons. The Sunni are taking advantage of this position and acting out against the Shiia. A London newspaper, The Guardian, reports that the Sunni are using death squads, mortar attacks and bombings to take their hatred out on the Shiia. If our troops leave Iraq, the Sunni will have free reign to massacre the Shiia. One also has to account for Iraq's neighbors. Iran has been aggressive towards Iraq since the mid 1980s, when the two countries engaged in an on and off war. If Iraq succumbs to a civil war, Iran may invade to "stabilize the country." According to the Council on Foreign Relations, Iran has already been implicated in supplying weapons to the Iraqi insurgency. There is no telling to what depths Iran is willing to sink for power in the Middle East. An insurgency in Iraq could turn into a full blown international war. Senator Obama, I know that you are just a politician, and you got to where you are by telling the people what they want to hear. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that your Harvard education has taught you effective foreign policy. Your solutions are a quick fix for problems that are deeper than you possibly realize, and they show that you lack the necessary foreign policy experience to be an acceptable candidate for president.
Poster Comment: The author is a junior studying History at Oregon State University and seems to have a better handle on things than any of the three leading candidates.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#6. To: mirage (#0)
So you avoid creating a power vacuum while you withdraw. The obvious way to do that is to strike a deal with the neighboring powers, notably Iran, on how their clients will divide and share power within Iraq. Nobody, besides parts of the U.S. and Israeli governments, wants a regional war in the area. Obama has said he wants to negotiate with Iran. There have been reports in the press that Iranian leaders are eager to negotiate with him.
#7. To: aristeides (#6)
...which takes time. A lot more time than what people are talking about.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||