When it comes to genocide, which Obama do you believe? The Obama from last night who said that we have a moral obligation to prevent genocide because to “stand idly by, that diminishes us,” or the Obama from the Democratic Primary who said that the risk of genocide in Iraq wasn’t a good enough reason to keep our troops there:
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.
Jeff Jacoby caught Obama’s schizophrenic position on genocide and asks a very serious question on Barack Obama’s character:
What kind of candidate is it whose moral response to genocide – genocide – can reverse itself 180 degrees in a matter of months? Is that the kind of candidate who ought to be the leader of the free world?
Amy Holmes at The Corner picked up on Obama’s massive swing on his views on genocide and asks the very relevant question just when would Barack Obama use military force?
He said that we have a moral responsibility to use force to save innocents. How does that apply to Iraq? Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer and gassed his own people. Obama opposed military intervention. Obama also opposed the surge and advocated withdrawal despite the warnings that it would lead to a bloodbath and possible genocide. And now that the surge is helping to quell violence and save lives, Obama says that he would still oppose that action. What does that mean? What about our moral responsibility to the Iraqis? Obama says he’s against the Holocaust. Well, for goodness sakes, who isn’t? The question is: When would a President Obama order military action? Based on what criteria? Do we know? Does he know?
It’s clear that Senator Obama doesn’t understand a lot of things in this world, but his vacillation on an issue of such depravity as genocide is just plain scary. And it’s only one piece of a puzzle that many of us are finding can’t be put together because the pieces are constantly changing shape. There are many parts of Barack Obama’s character that are so questionable that we can’t take the risk elevating him to leader of the free world.
On top of that Barack Obama is swiftly becoming the poster boy for far leftist moral relativism. Between this casual reversal on genocide, his views on abortion that are so aggressive that they border on on infanticide, his associations and dealings with a convicted felon, his long-time friendship with a pastor that made it a habit of going on nasty, America-is-evil tirades, and his lack of concern that he spent years working with an unrepentant domestic terrorist, does this man have a moral compass at all?