OSLO, December 10, 2009: Today, President Barack Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in a ceremony in which his speech was like a long commercial message promoting continued war. Obama gestured politely toward advocates of non-violence like Albert Schweitzer, Dr. Martin Luther King and Gandhi, but clearly stated that his intention for America is to be the policeman for the globe.
Here is an excerpt that should enlighten all Americans about what the President is thinking.
"Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states; have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today’s wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sewn, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed, and children scarred.
I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.
We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified."
Obamanomics: How Barac... Best Price: $0.10 Buy New $3.59 (as of 09:20 EST - Details)
It is not any secessionist movements anywhere on this globe that have trapped civilians in unending chaos. That is entirely the purview of the nation-state. Confiscatory taxation, unending regulation of every facet of human life, and the destruction of our economic system and currency through central planning is the source of unending chaos, both at home and abroad.
And the "Just War theory?" The only just war I know of is the war in which you are defending your own borders against invasion. Invading another country is unjust, and used to be unlawful.
Obama praised pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, Zimbabweans who voted despite election violence, and pro-democracy protesters in Iran.
“It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any nation,” Obama said.
I wonder if Obama and the Mobocracy Looter Minions of Washington will still feel the same way when one of the United States serves him with a Secession Document.
President Obama, with his own words, shows the world that he is not familiar with the job description for President clearly stated in the US Constitution. He said:
"I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago — “Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones.” As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King’s life’s work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak — nothing passive — nothing naïve — in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.
War is a Racket: The A... Best Price: $2.87 Buy New $3.50 (as of 02:45 EST - Details)
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people."
What a shameful statement of ignorance.
A president is required by the Constitution (Article II, Section 1) to take the following oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
That oath says NOTHING about swearing to "protect and defend my nation."
Most of the things Obama has done since taking office have been grossly, criminally unconstitutional. Mr. Obama would have a full plate of activities if he would just protect and defend our Constitution. If past presidents had stayed within the strictures of the Constitution, the USA would not have any threats today.
If America ever finds and elects a man or woman who will simply be true to the oath of office they take, America may have a chance of survival. However, no President since before Lincoln has been serious about the Oath. If history is any guide for our future, there is no Oath Keeper on our national horizon.