ARTICLES - HOT OFF THE FAGGOT

Has Barack Obama's ego endangered lives?


Barack Obama has been trying too hard to paint himself as a tough guy
Barack Obama has been trying too hard to paint himself as a tough guy

By  

Back in 2008, in the aftermath of defeat, Republicans probably banked on the fact that come 2012 they’d be able to attack the effete Harvard law don and community organiser Barack Obama for being weak on national security issues.
As it turns out, Big Bad Bo is a self-appointed, one-man hit squad, raining down righteous retaliation on America’s Islamist enemies from the drone-infested skies above Pakistan, Afghanistan and Somalia.
This week, therefore, senior Republicans have tried a different tack – hammering Mr Obama not for his record on national security, but for the endless leaks trumpeting top-secret successes, most of which seemed designed to paint Mr Obama as the steely tough guy.
First three Republican senators, including Marco Rubio in Florida (a Romney Veep possibility), published a joint Washington Post editorial accusing Mr Obama of authorising leaks that jeopardise informants' lives (or get them sent to jail for 33 years, like the Bin Laden informant Shakil Afridi), and make it harder to build ties with other intelligence agencies who don’t want to be splashed all over The New York Times.
Then today, Sen John McCain blasted the White House for the latest leak – a detailed account of how computer worms had been sent in to cripple the Iranian nuclear programme. The Senate Armed Services Committee will now hold an inquiry into the leaks.
“It makes the president look very decisive,” McCain said, accusing Obama of cynically using national security for political ends, “and it gives very little credit to the other men and women who make these things happen. This puts American lives in danger, revealing our most highly classified operations both in cyberwar and in drones.”
There is, of course, more than drop of electoral humbug in all this, but it is also absolutely true that some of the "leaking" has been eye-poppingly gratuitous – though the White House has the gall to deny this.
In fact, "leaking" is really the wrong word, since it implies that the information has come out in an unauthorised fashion, whereas much of the material appearing the New York Times and other sanctioned organs really amounts to a fly-on-the-wall documentary.
"President Obama, overseeing the regular Tuesday counterterrorism meeting of two dozen security officials in the White House Situation Room, took a moment to study the faces…” we read in a New York Times piece, as if it was the opening of a Tom Clancy novel.
The piece – sourced by “three dozen” current and former advisers, no less – recounts how Mr Obama, brow furrowed and with carefully annotated texts of Aquinas and Augustine in hand, personally reviews every one of his extra-judicial killings.
This is meant to make Mr Obama look admirable – just like all those documentaries about Mr Obama’s lone wolf decision go after Osama bin Laden – but increasingly he sounds, and looks, utterly egomaniacal.
The torrent of leaks is upsetting some people in the US military. In the last month I’ve had two separate conversations with serving US officers who were scathing about the fact that every time Mr Obama finds himself needing to bury bad news domestically, he lays down another national security smokescreen.
If it hasn’t already, this, I suspect, will soon become a turn-off for the public, who love a hero but can’t stand a braggart, particularly when they are trading on the bravery of other people.
Everyone knows that Obama has been surprisingly tough on national security. He should shut up about it already.

No comments: