Archive

Posts Tagged ‘susan rice’

What Susan Rice Has Been Up To……

December 3, 2012 3 comments

 

What Susan Rice Has Meant for U.S. Policy in Sub-Saharan Africa

How the possible-next Secretary of State helped the U.S. continue a Cold War-style approach to the continent — and aided a new generation of dictators in the process.

Rice South Sudan banner.jpg

Rice, then the assistant secretary of state for African affairs, walks through a market in southern Sudan (now the independent state of South Sudan) on November 19th, 2000. (Boris Grdanoski/AP Photo)

There is another way to think about the prospective nomination of Susan Rice for secretary of state.

It is one that is immeasurably more consequential than the Washington-centered and highly politicized controversy over her role in explaining the September 11 attack on the American diplomatic facility in Benghazi.

It is a way of thinking that looks at what kind of power the United States has been over the last 20 years, and it asks probingly about what kind of role it will play in the thick of this present century.

In any discussion of Susan Rice’s career, there is no escaping Africa. It is the place where she cut her teeth and built her essential record as a diplomat and national security official. Although there has been nary a hint of this in the fuss about Benghazi, I would go further still and say that one would be hard pressed to find anyone in American government who has played a larger and more sustained role in shaping Washington’s diplomacy toward that continent over the last two decades.

If Rice survives the current controversy over Libya and is nominated to replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, understanding the details of her past work in Africa, and drawing her out about Washington’s approach toward the continent in the future, should be a matter of serious national concern.

Right now, Africa is changing with extraordinary speed and in surprising ways, but American policy there remains stale and stuck in the past: unambitious, underinvested and conceptually outdated.

This holds true at a time when the continent is growing demographically and urbanizing faster than any place before in history. Africa is booming economically as well, with an overall growth rate faster than Asia, and an emerging middle class larger than India’s.

China, the United States’ preeminent global rival, clearly gets this, and treats Africa not just as a place from which to extract mineral wealth — which of course it does — but also as a vital source of growth for the world economy going forward. China also views Africa as a geopolitical space of rapidly developing markets and huge business opportunities, including a nearly endless supply of new and underserved consumers.

China is not alone, either. Brazil, India, Turkey and Vietnam, to name just a few of the other fast-growing players, see Africa in much the same way, and are racing to establish a new, mature style of relations with the continent — one driven by promise, and not by the pity and strong paternalism that have characterized so much Western engagement for so long.

The United States, meanwhile, remains mired in an approach whose foundation dates to the Cold War, when we cherry-picked strongmen among Africa’s leaders, autocrats we could “work with,” according to the old diplomatic cliché.

These were men like Zaire’s late dictator, Mobutu Sese Seko, whose anti-democratic politics, systematic human rights violations, and high tolerance for corruption we were willing to overlook so long as they stayed on our side in the great strategic struggles of the day. We counted on them to hold down the fort in their respective countries and regions, and in so doing, as the thinking went, to protect U.S. interests.

The binary jousting of the Cold War that seemed to justify this strategy is long gone, along with our old adversary, the Soviet Union. But the American approach to Africa remains strangely stuck in that mold even now, and this fact owes far more than the public recognizes to the diplomacy of Susan Rice.

When I first encountered Rice in Mali, during a visit there by then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher in 1996, she was a well-connected and high-achieving senior NSC staffer in her early thirties. She was possessed of a quick step and a look of complete self-confidence.

Most unusually for someone her age, she already had a career-defining crisis behind her, one in which she has played an important role: the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.

According to Samantha Power, Rice’s advice to the Clinton White House in the critical early phases of the killing there was to avoid any public recognition that actual genocide was being committed, because to do so would legally require the United States to take action, and this (echoes of Benghazi?) might affect upcoming congressional elections….(Con’t)

 

CONTINUE READING: http://m.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/12/what-susan-rice-has-meant-for-us-policy-in-sub-saharan-africa/265833/

Libyan Massacre…. IT WAS A PRE-PLANNED AL QUEDA TERRORIST ATTACK

September 27, 2012 1 comment

Well, well, well.  The news finally comes out to announce what anyone with an ounce of common sense already knew.  The massacre in Libya was, in fact, a pre-planned al queda terrorist attack, and the obama regime knew about it within 24 hours from when it happened.

The facts in the matter PROVE that clinton, obama, gibbs, carney, rice all LIED about it to the American people.

We know that ambassador Stevens was in Libya in order to assist the obama/clinton klan in toppling that government and installing their al queda terrorist/muslim brotherhood pals there, in Egypt and elsewhere in the middle east.  Ambassador Stevens was raped, sodomized, tortured and murdered by the very terrorists they partnered with and continued to help.

muslims have NO allegiance to anything or anyone but their allah.  It doesn’t matter if you’re a MARXIST, COMMUNIST, SOCIALIST, or any other non-muslim.  In the beady little eyes of muslim terrorists, an infidel is an infidel, and worthy of death.

When the islamics are finished using the marxists to help them build their caliphate, the marxists will be in the same line as the rest of us infidels.  obama himself may be immune in the end, because he will, (if he hasn’t already) bow down and accept islam and allah as his only God.

It wouldn’t be so bad if only the marxists, communists, socialists and obama’s glassy eyed idiots were the only one’s tumbling off the cliff, but they are taking us ALL down with them this time.

The Jewish people who helped hitler probably thought they were immune, too.  Even as they tumbled down the cliff to their own demise, they still adored and defended that beast.  America is repeating history today.

And obama’s glassy eyed idiots couldn’t care less that they’ve been lied to and duped.  Just as a pack of jacked-up heroin addicts don’t care where the heroin comes from as long as they get some.

Who “Built It” In The Middle East?: Four Women – Clinton, Rice, Power, Jarrett

September 17, 2012 2 comments

[TWG:  I highly recommend you take a few moments to read these articles.  It’s jaw dropping to see how this is unfolding today.   Most of us Conservatives who’ve been paying attention are watching this with horror as our Nation commits a slow, painful suicide.  The obama nation is the largest, most diabolical hoax ever perpetrated on global humanity.  Americans aren’t the only people who are going to suffer deeply as a result of the efforts by this horrid regime. These articles are dated. It’s amazing to see how the red flags were raised back in ’08 and how Valerie Jarrett, Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton have reengineered the Middle East, enabling the muslim brotherhood and al queda to take control of governing those nations.  The muslin brotherhood and al queada re NOT allies of the United States of America.  They are allies of the obama regime.]

Hat tip TheConservativeHillbilly for the forward. Thanks, Hillbilly!

 

Three women who brought us the new long war in Libya

March 21, 2011 — bunkerville

A great read over at Right Wing News with the back story regarding the Ladies who brought us the new long war. Ever hear of Samantha Power? Susan Rice? Their background check is well worth sliding over for the full thing:

One thing is clear: The sudden emergence of Obama’s National Security Council Advisor, Samantha Power, and the “new theory” she is using as justification for action in Libya, has very serious implications for future military action against Israel. As John Podhoretz explains in the New York Post, the “reason” behind the Libyan military strike is not the traditional justification of “protecting the national interest.” It is a “new” standard called “R2P” or “right to protect.” This concept is being promulgated by the “one-world” order activists at the United Nations, like Samantha Power.

“R2P is an effort to create a new international moral standard to prevent violence against civilians.

In her career as a genocide expert, Power was an indefatigable proponent of R2P, and now on the National Security Council has been “trying to figure out how the administration could implement R2P and what doing so would require of the White House going forward.” Hillary is her ally in this effort, it appears.”

Who is Samantha Power, Irish Pro-Palestinian Activist (see also Ed Lasky, American Thinker)

 

The Real Reasons Behind Libya Attack: Petrobras, Soros, 3 Women, “New” U.N. Agenda

Three women in the Obama administration lobbied the President hard, over the span of a few hours, to approve the strike in Libya over the advice of his military and defense leaders. (Josh Rogin at the Cable has a full report on the meeting.)

New York Times:

“The change became possible, though, only after [Secretary of State] Mrs. Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, who had been pressing the case for military action, according to senior administration officials speaking only on condition of anonymity. Ms. Power is a former journalist and human rights advocate; Ms. Rice was an Africa adviser to President Clinton when the United States failed to intervene to stop the Rwanda genocide, which Mr. Clinton has called his biggest regret.

Now, the three women were pushing for American intervention to stop a looming humanitarian catastrophe in Libya.

In joining Ms. Rice and Ms. Power, Mrs. Clinton made an unusual break with Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, who, along with the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, and the counterterrorism chief, John O. Brennan, had urged caution. Libya was not vital to American national security interests, the men argued, and Mr. Brennan worried that the Libyan rebels remained largely unknown to American officials, and could have ties to Al Qaeda.”

Samantha Power, Irish activist, Nat’l Security Council advisor to Obama
Samantha Power is virulently anti-Semitic, (here and here) ( having once labeled the Israelis “bastards” in a “scholarly papers) and has years of writings in major publications to show that she is devotedly anti-Israel, pro-Iran, and opposed to any supporter of Israel (See Richard Baehr and Ed Lasky’s article for American Thinker in 2008 on Ms. Power’s background. Please read the entire disturbing documentation.)
A review of her philosophy about when military intervention is or is not needed should cause the allies and the Arab League, and certainly the American public, to question why she is advocating for an attack on Muammar Gaddafi. One must ask, what master is Ms. Power serving and why do we want our military personnel in harm’s way for ANYTHING THAT SHE ADVOCATES?
 

 “Power also advocates that America send armed military forces, “a mammoth protection force” and an “external intervention”, to impose a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. This directly contradicts her criticism of the invasion and “occupation” of Iraq and her call for the removal of American forces from that nation. On the one hand, Power abhors American efforts to remake an Arab nation, but takes the contrary view when it comes to inserting American forces in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to impose a settlement. These troops, if sent, would be seen as occupiers and be sitting targets for Arab extremists. The colonial image of America and charges of imperial overstretch would echo throughout the Arab world.”

 

[]Susan Rice, U.N. Ambassador
This shameful United Nations ambassador,with her most recent anti-Israel tirade, gashed open an already-raw-wound in Obama administration U.S. Israeli relations.Rice, who now purports to be so concerned about the “human rights violations” committed by Muammar Gaddafi in putting down a revolution, is behind the horrific appointment of Iran to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.This despite such facts as Iran is a country whose prison guards rape female inmates before executing them because it is illegal under shariah law to kill a virgin.

And now she is a senior foreign policy adviser to Presidential candidate Barack Obama, as well as occupying the Anna Lindh Professorship of Practice of Global Leadership and Public Policy How appropriate: Anna Lindh, the late Swedish Foreign Minister, was a dedicated opponent of Israel.”

 

Continue Reading & Comments: http://bunkerville.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/three-women-who-brought-us-the-new-long-war-in-libya/#comment-15936

%d bloggers like this: