The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Craig Roberts Archive
Has Obama Come to His Senses?
Obama Shows Strength By Recognizing The Failure Of The Neoconservative Policy
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge and others are misinterpreting Steve Kroft’s “60 Minutes” interview with President Obama. They see weakness and confusion in Obama’s responses and conclude that Kroft shredded Obama.

What I see is entirely different. Steve Kroft is either a neoconservative or he is inculcated into the neocon mind-set that the US must prevail everywhere. Kroft’s view is that weakness and indecision on Obama’s part is the reason the US is not prevailing in Syria. Kroft’s purpose is to embarrass Obama and push him into escalating the situation.

However, Obama is too strong for him. I read the interview as Obama saying that the neocon program has turned out not to be in America’s national interest. At the end of the Syria section of the interview, Obama says: “If in fact the only measure [of US strength] is for us to send another 100,000 or 200,000 troops into Syria or back into Iraq or perhaps into Libya, or perhaps into Yemen, and our goal somehow is that we are now going to be, not just the police, but the governors of this region, that would be a bad strategy. If we make that mistake again, then shame on us.”

The interview shows me Obama’s strength in recognizing and stating the failure of the neocon program to which his administration was hitched by policymakers in the government. There is hope in this demonstration of strength that in his final year as President he will pull back from the crazed, insane neoconservative agenda of US world hegemony.

Those who dislike Obama, and those inculcated by years of propaganda into the neocon view that America must always and everywhere prevail, will see what they want to see. They will not see the hope.

To prevent the neocon policymakers and the neocon press from squashing this hope, we must do what we can to support Obama. It is the neocon policy that has failed. In recognizing this failure, Obama is trying to take America off the neocon road to failure and more war. This is a very lonely and dangerous position for Obama to take in Washington.

Here is the part of the interview that is about Syria:

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Barack Obama, Neocons 
Hide 11 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. J Yan says:

    If we make that mistake again

    I think Obama is disparaging only occupation (and by inference his predecessor), not proxy wars or bombing campaigns.

  2. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website

    No, no, no.

    Obama is a scumbag, and he is essentially saying MISSION ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT SENDING IN TROOPS.

    And even though neocons gripe publicly, they are happy and celebrating what has happened under Obama.

    Neocons and other Jews wanted the total destruction of Libya, Syria, and Iraq. They got it.
    All three are total disasters.
    Ukraine is also a disaster. And Obama realized this dream for Jews. He used direct and indirect means to turn Middle East into hell.
    Middle East got much worse under Obama than under Bush II.
    With Bush, it was just Iraq. With Obama, it was Libya and Syria. And Ukraine and Iraq made much worse.

    Of course, neocons are never satisfied and always bitching. But as they watch the state of affairs in the Middle East with all those nations so broken and burning, they are happy happy happy.

    Obama has been their boy. And neocons know that American people don’t want to send in more troops.
    So, the ONLY way to destroy the Middle East was to make everyone fight everyone in places like Libya and Syria.
    So, without sending in US troops, it was MISSION ACCOMPLISHED by having ‘barbarians fight barbarians’.
    Look at Syria. Over 250,000 dead, cities bombed out.
    Assad power crippled for good even if he survives.

    Obama has followed the Neocon plan and he delivered.

    But as Neocons are officially with the GOP, they must make customary noises when they really wanna send roses to their boy Obama.

    Israel is just about the only nation standing in the Middle East now.

    Jews are nasty. As Mel Gibson said, they start all these wars, directly or indirectly.
    Without US/EU interference, Gaddafi would still be in power, and Libya would be at peace.
    Without US green-lighting and funneling of arms, Syria would now be at peace.

    Jews frame the debate in terms of what must the ‘West’ do in order to confront Russia, Syria, and Iran.

    But what do they mean by the ‘West’? The term gives the false impression that WE are part of the West and that it’s in our interest to confront those nations.
    But OUR non-Jewish interest has nothing to do with Russia, Syria, and Iran and Libya. WE could have gotten along just fine with them.

    It was the Jews who had issues with those nations. It was the Jews who framed Jewish interests as ‘western interests’ and fooled us into thinking that those were OUR interests.
    I don’t hate or fear Russia. I have no beef with Putin. It’s the Jews who do. It’s not ‘western interests’ but ‘Jewish interests’.

    In truth, good decent Americans share more common interest with Russians and Iranians than with globalist Jews.
    Russians say ‘we are here, you are there, so let’s have peace and do business.’
    Iranians say ‘we are here, you are there, so let’s have peace and do business.’

    But Jews feel, ‘we are everywhere and we must make sure that whites in Europe and America never wake up to nationalist consciousness like people of Iran and Russia.’

    It is Jews who don’t want white Americans to become friendly with Russians and Iranians because if white Americans finally opened their eyes and took an honest look at Russia and Iran, they would realize that those are nations ruled by their own people. Russia is ruled by Russians, and Iran is ruled by Iranians.
    White Americans would realize that US is the freak nation because its gentiles are ruled by globalist Jews who make everyone fight everyone for Jewish interests.

    • Replies: @Junior
  3. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website

    Putin on the Blitz

  4. Mr. Roberts, you’re simply seeing what you want to see in that interview. Obama has projected weakness in the region through his laziness and incompetence. I have no trouble whatsoever saying that we have no interests threatened there and simply abstaining from doing something about the regional problem. The way the moron in the WH is conducting himself is just the opposite. When you get involved, you go whole hog. If you aren’t going to go whole hog, you stay home. Obama refuses to either one.

  5. tbraton says:

    I saw the interview on 60 Minutes, and I came away with a different impression. When Croft cited Obama’s own words back to him about how he had strong reservations from the gitgo about the program to arm the Syrian rebels, Obama agreed, as if to say, see how smart I was. Croft got impatient with that response and asked, rightly so imo, why, if Obama had such strong reservations, he decided to go ahead with the program anyway. Obama seemed impatient with such impertinence and answered, much like the defenders of Richard Nixon’s imposition of wage and price controls back in 1971, that he had to go through with the program just to show it wouldn’t work. Huh? Wouldn’t the natural reaction of an intelligent man be to decide not to pursue a course of action once he has thought it through and concluded that such a course of action would be sure to fail. But poor Obama apparently believes his own press clippings and thinks he’s the smartest guy in the room and refuses to admit he makes mistakes. I think it was Obama’s utter refusal that he had made a mistake by arming the rebels and his insistence that he was right all along about the folly of arming them that so frustrated Steve Croft, who simply couldn’t believe what he was hearing. Obama throughout his Presidency has shown an arrogance not befitting a man so lacking in intelligence. He always insists he was right even when the facts show he was wrong.

    This is a man who has shown, time and time again, that he lacks the intelligence and competence to be President. We saw the same thing right off the bat in Afghanistan where he decided within weeks of becoming President to send in twice the number of troops than he campaigned on and later in the year sent in an additional 30,000 troops as part of the “Surge” in Afghanistan. I believe we heard expressions of doubt from Obama then that the expansion of the war in Afghanistan wouldn’t work. (I don’t know what we have gained by extending the war in Afghanistan by an additional 7 years under Obama. BTW one remark Obama made about Afghanistan shows that he can’t do simple math. He corrected Croft when he said the war had lasted 14 years. No, corrected Obama, just 13 years. If you subtract 2001 from 2015, I believe you get 14 years, not 13 years.) We saw the same thing in Libya where he ignored the advice of SOD Gates and followed the bum advice of his “three harpies” to launch an air attack, but insisting we would not put boots on the ground in Libya under any circumstances. Years later, when asked whether he had any regrets about Libya, which had produced an unmitigated disaster, he said his only regret was not sending in ground troops once Qaddafi was overthrown. Huh? We have seen the same thing in Ukraine. The one exception is the deal with Iran, where I have to give him great credit for resisting the pressure and arriving at what looks to be a pretty good deal.

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
  6. PCR wrote this essay before Obama’s C17’s dropped 50 tons of weapons and ammo to the Sunni terrorists in Syria. And the US/NATO airpower buildup at Incirlik continues. Sorry, Paul. Wish you were right but it doesn’t look that way. Obama/globalists/neo-conz think they’ve got Putin out in a limb in Syria, and they can cut it off. We’ll see…

  7. It seems Obama wants to stop short of nuclear winter. He did buck the warmongers on the Iran deal. I guess I should give him credit for not destroying the human race. Yet.

    But he is a murdering scum bag in the mold of Clinton and Bush. If he indeed has a soul and seeks redemption he could go on TV and tell us all the plain truth about who he answers to and what is their agenda. He could then beg our forgiveness for the evil he has facilitated as overseer for the Anglo/Zio Empire.

    I’m not holding my breath.

  8. attonn says:

    Obama is not taking a “lonely” road. He is taking the only road available to a sclerotic country that is loaded with debt up to its eyeballs. Obama may want to confront Russia, but the reality says he can’t.

  9. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:

    Theory #1 :

    Obama HAS come to his senses in terms of him not going all-in on the Neo-Con agenda and still being a puppet for their all-out wars. Obama’s mistake was trusting the Neo-Con in disguise Hillary Clinton. All of the foreign policy bullshit that occurred during his Presidency happened while SHE was Secretary of State.

    Obama was without a doubt nothing more than a Neo-Con puppet during his first term. But looking at his second term makes one question whether he still IS controlled by the Neo-Cons, and that it actually was HILLARY who was the one that was fomenting all the Neo-Con chaos behind the scenes during his first term. Obama is NO doubt complicit because ultimately the buck stops with him, but Hillary is THE reason for the Obama administrations chaos in the Middle East which is just a hidden continuation of Cheney’s chaos before it. Bush was a puppet (sell-out shill, or mislead idiot, or more than likely both) of the Neo-Con MilitaryIndustrialComplex den of thieves that he surrounded himself with. Obama was a puppet of the same that has either finally grown a conscious or finally smartened up during his second term. He should have never trusted the Crypto-Neo-Con-Zionist-MIC Shill-Hillary. It’s no coincidence that all of Obama’s major foreign policy catastrophes occurred while SHE was Secretary of State and that all the consequences can be attributed to her actions.

    Hillary and Petraeus schemed behind the scenes to get Gaddafi killed to throw Libya into chaos. Hillary and Petraeus were running guns from Libya into Syria arming the “Moderate” terrorists. I believe that this gun-running scheme gave them an opportunity at trying to pull an October-Surprise on Obama which they attempted with the death of Ambassador Stevens at a CIA building. The Neo-Cons wanted to try to make Obama lose the election because they didn’t trust him to do their bidding and fight their wars as Romney would without a doubt have done. Romney with his talk of Russia being America’s biggest enemy when in ACTUALITY it is Zionisms biggest enemy because of the Russia-Iran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas alliance. I believe that Obama recognized this October-Surprise betrayal and attempted to clear house by forcing Petraeus to leave in shame and having Hillary step down. But he didn’t get ALL of the Hillary-cancer out as is evidenced by his failure to route out Victoria Nuland who was the one that ended up fomenting the uprising in Ukraine. And Nuland was brought into the State Department by who? That’s right, Hillary Clinton. Thankfully Obama hasn’t gone along with their madness of trying to get us deeper involved in THAT mess which the Neo-Cons and Nuland created. I believe that this betrayal by Hillary and Petraeus at Benghazi is the reason why Obama is going after Hillary now. It’s a tale of two terms and Hillary is the reason for it.

    He should be ashamed of himself and despised for being such a fool as to trust the Crypto-Neo-Con Hillary during his first term, BUT he should also be acknowledged for attempting to make up for it by trying to stem the tide of Zionist bullshit by either finally coming to his senses or finally growing a conscious during his second term. Signs that Obama came to his senses during his second term:

    During his run for the second term he had the Democrats drop the Jerusalem Pledge from the party platform.

    During his second term he did NOT go along with Neo-Con aspirations for sending ground troops into Syria and bombing Assad as he EASILY could have done.

    During his second term he went against the Neo-Con tidal wave of bullshit by negotiating with Iran.

    During his second term he has not gone along with the utter and complete madness of the lunatic Neo-Con plans of a no-fly-zone over Syria.

    Theory #2:

    Obama has NOT come to his senses because although he is not completely following the Neo-Con agenda anymore, that Hillary played out for him which I think he was aware that he was following, he IS following the Globalist agenda. It seems that during his second term he has rebuffed the MIC, Netanyahu, and Neo-Con-Zionists plans at ALMOST every turn in foreign policy BUT as is evidenced by his Globalist TPP trade agreement and Immigration policies, he STILL follows the Elitist Agenda domestically. It makes me think that this is all some kind of twisted political kabuki theater designed for setting us up to accept the TPP trade deal NOW, while also setting the stage up for us to accept some kind of false flag operation resulting in war in the FUTURE.

    Sort of a “Trust me I’m a Democrat and we’re the party that’s for Working-Class People and Unions, and I’m rational about foreign policy” but meanwhile he royally screws us domestically by sending all our jobs and technology overseas and fills remaining US jobs with foreign labor while handing our sovereignty over to an International Court. And then later if a false-flag operation in the future were to occur that resulted in him taking us to war would say, “Trust me I’m the guy that’s rational about foreign policy”. Much in the same way that the GOP say, “Trust me I’m a Republican and we’re the party that would only take us to war to protect the nation, and I’m fiscally conservative” but meanwhile sends our American soldiers to die for the benefit of some other country in a bankrupting war that fattens the pockets of themselves and their donors. Both sides usually start these wars by false-flag operations as history has shown time and time again. The Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, and of course using made up threats like WMDs just to name a few of the more obvious ones. The threat of a false-flag headed our way is definitely something to watch out for in this war weary country. No better way to get people thinking irrationally and to accept whatever bullshit is sent their way.

    Globalists and Neo-Cons are just separate fingers on the same hand that like to pretend that they hate each other but have the same goals in mind whether they know it or not because the same Elitist which control both use them as nothing more than tools in their quest for power and complete control. Globalists pretend that they want to end Zionist expansion meanwhile the International Corporations and Banking Cartels that they want to give control to are Zionist and Elitist controlled, and the Neo-Cons pretend that they are Nationalists that don’t care about domestic affairs meanwhile they seek to fight wars for Zionist expansion and Elitist MIC money coffers. Separate fingers, same hand , same goals. One gives power to Zionism and Elitists through financial control and makes sure the agenda is followed domestically, while the other gives power to Zionism and Elitists through military control and makes sure that the agenda is followed abroad.

    Obama may no longer be a Neo-Con puppet but he is still a Globalist puppet who’s job was to further decimate our middle class at home with the TPP while giving free reign to the Banks to bleed us dry with no prosecution for their crimes because they’re “too big to fail”. Same as Bill Clinton did before him with NAFTA and repealing Glass-Steagall, while they both set up future Neo-Con wars for the next Puppet in line.

    They say that Insanity is doing the same things over and over but expecting different results. Republican Bush Sr. started this wheel of insanity rolling when he gave us the first Neo-Con war, then next up was Democrat Clinton with a Globalist trade deal, then Republican Bush Jr. with yet another Neo-Con war, now Democrat Obama with yet another Globalist trade deal, and what’s up next on the wheel of insanity? As long as Obama succeeds in getting the trade deal through, Neo-Con war is next if the Elite Establishment has it’s way. And Clinton is trying to prove that she’s the Neo-Con that they need to give them that war. I think that there is some kind of bizarre civil war going on in the Democratic Party between Globalists like Obama and Biden versus Crypto-Neo-Cons in disguise like Hillary. It’s a fight over which bankrupting path to ruin, domestically or abroad in foreign entanglements, they’re going to lead us down next and who’s going to lead it for the Democrats. I think that this Democratic Establishment Civil War between Globalists and Crypto-Neo-Cons was started by Petraeus and Clinton’s attempted October-Surprise betrayal of Obama with Benghazi. The GOP Establishment has already been firmly in the Neo-Cons hands for quite a while now.The status quo of alternating between bankrupting wars and bankrupting trade deals must be stopped. We need a Populist like either Trump or Bernie to be elected to have a chance at breaking this cycle of insanity.

    My choice of theories:

    I believe #2 to be true. Obama knew exactly what Hillary was doing and changed course because of circumstance and handlers. And even though, in a micro-analysis, he came to his senses in that he may no longer be a Neo-Con puppet, he is a Globalist puppet. He participated in setting up future wars along with his support of Globalist goals which are NOT in the best interests of America. Neo-Con goals and Globalists goals are ultimately the same because they are in the end both only tools used by the elite for the sole benefit of achieving the Elite’s goal. In terms of a macro-analysis, Obama has NOT come to his senses… he’s just getting better at hiding his marionette strings.

    Were my theories a little jumpy in some places to anyone that had the unbelievable patience to read through the ridiculously long thing? Quite obviously so 🙂

    But is the final choice of theory on whether or not Obama came to his senses a reasonable one? I think so.

  10. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:
    @Priss Factor

    You make incredibly compelling rational arguments, but then you go and ruin them with idiotic anti-semitism and racism. Your blatant hatred shown with statements like your “Jews are nasty” comment and your references to “White Americans” are completely disgusting.

    As is shown by your more than rational comments, I believe that you KNOW better than to blame the Jewish religion instead of Zionism and that you KNOW that your racist comments referring to “White Americans” instead of just saying “Americans” only make people not take your comments as anything more than hate being spewed by a lunatic. And because of you’re obvious intelligence, I also believe that you clearly know that the most powerful defense that the Zionists use is the false narrative that ALL people who are against political Zionism are anti-semitic and racist, so why do you choose to make that false narrative become a true one?

    People will automatically associate your anti-semitism and racism with the truths that you weave in between. They will automatically tune out anytime they hear others talking about the truths because most rational people don’t want to be associated in any way with your blatant hatred. It serves no purpose and in fact hinders any positive changes from occurring. Unless, of course, that is your intent from the start…

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Paul Craig Roberts Comments via RSS