Barack Obama's Foreign Policy Blunder!

1. US-Armenian Relations really necessary?
2. Tax-Payer Money Going to a War-Mongering Nation?
3. This is the nation that the aid is going to
4. Barack Obama thinks he's a historian
5. Double-Faced Barack Obama
6. Obama Lost Significant Support
7. Barack Obama flip-flops!
8. Warning to American Voters
9. Barack Obama's Voting Record and Facts
1. Abortion issues
2. National Security

Barack Obama has distanced himself from Turkey (a NATO ally since 1952, that the United States still has many bases in), Azerbaijan, Israel, and even the Iranian-Diaspora. He lost the Turkish, Azerbaijan, and Israeli votes when he tried to claim there was a U.S.-Armenian relationship and pledged to recognize a genocide that many world renowned historians such as Dr. Bernard Lewis, Dr. Stanford Shaw, Dr. Justin McCarthy, Dr. Norman Stone, Guenter Lewy and many other Western scholars dispute.

The following is a letter to the ANCA (Armenian National Committee of America) by Barack Obama and his team of incompetent foreign policy advisers that have no historical knowledge of the Middle East except what they Google'd on the internet.

They will do anything to get Armenian voter bloc (approximately 500,000 voters in California) and donations. In fact, recently some non-partisan organizations such as Judicial-Watch have reported Obama as being #8 of the top 10 most corrupt politicians, taking in bribes from organizations like the ANCA as well as AAA (Armenian Assembly of America) and being involved in some suspicious activities. <1>

Here is the letter from BarackObama.com:
Barack Obama wrote:

I am proud of my strong record on issues of concern to the one and a half million Americans of Armenian heritage in the United States. I warmly welcome the support of this vibrant and politically active community as we change how our government works here at home, and restore American leadership abroad.

I am a strong supporter of a U.S.-Armenian relationship that advances our common security and strengthens Armenian democracy. As President, I will maintain our assistance to Armenia, which has been a reliable partner in the fight against terrorism and extremism. I will promote Armenian security by seeking an end to the Turkish and Azerbaijani blockades, and by working for a lasting and durable settlement of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict that is agreeable to all parties, and based upon America's founding commitment to the principles of democracy and self determination. And my Administration will help foster Armenia's growth and development through expanded trade and targeted aid, and by strengthening the commercial, political, military, developmental, and cultural relationships between the U.S. and Armenian governments.

I also share with Armenian Americans – so many of whom are descended from genocide survivors - a principled commitment to commemorating and ending genocide. That starts with acknowledging the tragic instances of genocide in world history. As a U.S. Senator, I have stood with the Armenian American community in calling for Turkey's acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide. Two years ago, I criticized the Secretary of State for the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, after he properly used the term "genocide" to describe Turkey's slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915. I shared with Secretary Rice my firmly held conviction that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable. An official policy that calls on diplomats to distort the historical facts is an untenable policy. As a senator, I strongly support passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution (H.Res.106 and S.Res.106), and as President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide.

Genocide, sadly, persists to this day, and threatens our common security and common humanity. Tragically, we are witnessing in Sudan many of the same brutal tactics - displacement, starvation, and mass slaughter - that were used by the Ottoman authorities against defenseless Armenians back in 1915. I have visited Darfurian refugee camps, pushed for the deployment of a robust multinational force for Darfur, and urged divestment from companies doing business in Sudan. America deserves a leader who speaks truthfully about the Armenian Genocide and responds forcefully to all genocides. I intend to be that President.

I look forward, as President, to continuing my active engagement with Armenian American leaders on the full range of issues of concern to the Armenian American community. Together, we will build, in new and exciting ways, upon the enduring ties and shared values that have bound together the American and Armenian peoples for more than a century.

<2>
US-Armenian Relations really necessary?

Barack Obama says there is a U.S.-Armenian relationship. Let's analyze that, Armenia is geographically isolated country with a war-mongering attitude. They are in cease-fire with Azerbaijan since they conquered about 20% of their land called Nagorno-Karabakh in 1994 (some scholars have labeled the event the Khojaley Genocide, others call it Khojaley Massacre).

One of the key issues for Armenian-Americans seems to be the recognition of an Armenian Genocide. In fact, one of their Christian neighbors, Georgia does not recognize the Armenian Genocide.

Turkey and Azerbaijan have established a trade embargoes as well as no-fly zones around Armenia. The poverty in Armenia is worse than most African nations. In fact, there are about 70,000 or so illegal Armenian immigrants in Turkey. They currently receive aid from the United States, France, and Russia, most likely because they have huge voting blocs in those nations. Their closest regional ally is Iran.

There is no excuse for Armenian Armed Forces to conquer Nagorno-Karabakh, and the international organizations have condemned the illegal invasion and subsequent massacres. So why does Barack Obama, Adam Schiff, and Nancy Pelosi support Armenia? This is because California has a huge Armenian voting bloc--Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi both have many good relations with Armenian-Americans and they are their constituents.
Tax-Payer Money Going to a War-Mongering Nation?

Barack Obama then says "and targeted aid", hmm, now why are we giving aid to an aggressive conquering country who still does not recognize certain treaties that even the United States has signed (such as Lausanne Treaty)?

A country that has been under Soviet Rule for 70+ years, and STILL has Russian bases controlling and protecting Armenia and its politics. Now with great relationships with Iran, it bewilders many people as to why America is giving them aid!

If they want aid and help, why don't they repair their relationships with Turkey and Azerbaijan?
This is the nation that the aid is going to

Armenian President Iranian President
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan after making enemies with countries like Turkey and Azerbaijan and distancing themselves from Georgia, they now side with their only peaceful and cordial neighbors, Iran! We give millions of dollars of aid to Armenia for being with the Soviet Union for 70+ years, massacring and invading Middle Eastern nations, and now siding with extremists and terrorists. What a great investment, or is it because Armenian voters are controlling some of our senators?
Armenian Iranian Press conference
One of the many meetings between allies Iran and Armenia! A nation (Armenia) that is suspected of funding terrorism against Turkey (a NATO ally since 1952) and Azerbaijan and a nation (Iran) that funds terrorism against Israel, United States, and Iraq--- together!
Armenia Iran
Barack Obama thinks he's a historian

Barack Obama then says "I criticized the Secretary of State for the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, after he properly used the term 'genocide' to describe Turkey's slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915". Well of course, Obama assumes the term genocide was properly used, but Obama hasn't studied the complex Ottoman-Armenian history that historians debate to this day.

Obama claims that the "slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915" should be attributed to Turkey. However, Turkey didn't exist until 1923, apparently Obama confuses the difference between Turkey and the Ottoman Empire.

Perhaps he's hoping to impress the Anti-Turkist Armenians among the Armenian voters.

This foreign-policy blunder is much like when Obama thought he visited 57 states in the United States.

This blunder is also similar to when Obama thought that meeting with dictators of the world would be beneficial for America (even Iranian-Americans disagreed with Obama meeting with Ahmadinejad).

He dares to say something like
Barack Obama wrote:
The Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable.
Really? Since when did widely disputed historical events that world-renowned historians have debated become a fact?

There are no facts that prove the suffering of Armenians was part of a genocide. The proof of intent of the Ottoman government has not been revealed by the Armenian scholars for 93 years.

Even the British who captured the Ottoman archives in Istanbul after the Versailles Treaty of World War I could not find a single shred of evidence to convict the Ottoman leaders they held captive for 2 years on the island of Malta.

There were Armenian massacres (not even the Turkish government denies this), which was perpetrated by Muslim (mostly Kurdish) bandits seeking vulnerable travelers (the Armenians who were being relocated) to rob. The Armenians also suffered losses because of Muslim villagers seeking revenge for Turkish massacres by Armenian rebels (General Antranik massacred thousands of Turkish villages, and he's regarded as a national hero in Armenia). This is a complex history and you cannot sum it up under one word like "genocide", otherwise you can say ANY EVENT with civilians killed is genocide (In fact, some Armenian-Americans attribute about FIVE genocides to the United States: Philippines, Japanese-Americans in WWII, Native Indians, Iraq War, and Vietnam War).

Even The NY Times newspaper talked about the aggression and horrors of the Armenian rebels against the rural Turkish population, all the way back in 1890s way before the supposed genocide of 1915. Barack Obama probably hasn't read NYTimes articles from 1895, so it is safe to assume that he doesn't know the history. However, if he's not a historian, a scholar, or someone regarded as an expert on the issue, why is he allowed to judge history as a politician?

The point is the Ottoman government was never involved in massacres, and took extra precautions to prevent massacres from taking place, including relocating suspected villages and cities where Armenian rebel committees took refuge in to stop the violent ethnic conflict. The Armenians in Istanbul and Izmir and other major cities were not relocated--Could you imagine Hitler sparing the Jews of Berlin?
Double-Faced Barack Obama

Barack Obama then says "As a senator, I strongly support passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution (H.Res.106 and S.Res.106), and as President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide." Is that why Obama hasn't signed the Armenian Genocide Resolution? Perhaps it's because Obama is a politician that likes to play both sides to every issue, a flip-flopper like his buddy John Kerry. Remember when Democrats questioned why John Kerry voted to go to the Iraq War in 2003, Barack Obama sided with Kerry and defended his record saying that his position and "George Bush's position" on the Iraq war is no different.
Obama Lost Significant Support

Barack Obama lost the support of Turkic people numbering approximately 120 million people world-wide, which in turn will convince the hundreds of thousands of Turkish-Americans and Azeri-Americans who will be voting in the United States. Israeli-Americans as well find that Barack Obama trying to decide on genocide history without studying the issue, and making such outrageous claims against their Turkish allies also have lost confidence in Barack Obama.

His discussion about being friendly with Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has caused him to loose the support of Iranian-Americans and Israeli-Americans as well.
Barack Obama flip-flops!

Barack Obama flip-flops, but he is careful to avoid public flip-flopping like John Kerry had done. The difference is, Barack Obama says one thing, and his staff and advisers say another thing. That way if someone complains about Barack Obama's opinion on one thing, his supporters can say "But Barack Obama's foreign policy adviser said this, so Barack Obama does not take that position."

He had done something like this with the NAFTA subject as well, where his advisers said something completely opposite to the Canadian government, by claiming that what Barack Obama says on the campaign trail "is just political rhetoric."
Warning to American Voters

Be careful with Barack Obama, he looks like a charismatic young man on the outside, but once you do the research, it seems that he will tell you what you want to hear rather than what he believes in. He based his campaign on ideologies of "change", "New politics", and that he would not support lobbyists. Yet some of his greatest supporters are lobbyists and his top supporter is political activist and billionaire George Soros, who is anti-Israel.

His idea that he will not play the old political game, is a bluff that needs to be called, because he does the same dirty tricks that politicians have been doing for ages, there is nothing new or different about Barack Obama's campaign.

Many people seem to compare his campaign to Jimmy Carter's campaign.
Barack Obama's Voting Record and Facts

Many voters and students in college say that Barack Obama will be the candidate they vote for. Some of them have watched his speeches and have become convinced that Barack Obama will bring a "fresh new change" for America. Well let's examine some of his votes, it seems that they are mostly Liberal votes with expensive government spending being supported.

Let's review some facts about him and make an informed decision:
Barack Obama was elected to the Senate on 11/02/2004, this is his only time as a senator, he has voted "present" for 131 votes (avoiding controversial bills) and has successfully supported only 27 bills. Much of his years in the Senate has been used to prepare for his eventual Presidential campaign.

Let's review his voting record, these are indisputable facts, and they show clearly what kind of person Obama is or who his constituents are.
Abortion issues

It seems as thought Barack Obama does not care too much about abortion, or perhaps he wants to avoid being attacked by Pro-Choice OR Pro-Life supporters.

10/18/2007 Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions Barack Obama did not Vote
This bill is about stopping funding to groups that perform abortions.
09/06/2007 Prohibiting U.S. Assistance for Groups that Support Coercive Abortion Barack Obama did not Vote
Similar vote.
03/17/2005 Unintended Pregnancy Amendment Barack Obama voted Yes
100 million dollars, to reduce abortions and unintended pregnancies.
National Security

12/21/2005 Defense Department FY2006 Appropriations bill Barack Obama voted No
Very odd, Barack Obama voted no to a bill that would help fund Hurricane Katrina victims? Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan?

06/06/2007 Denying Legal Status for Immigrants Convicted of Certain Crimes Barack Obama voted No
So he doesn't mind if immigrants commit crimes, that they still should have the chance to become citizens.

03/07/2005 Minimum Wage Amendment Barack Obama voted No
Voted no to increase minimum wage from $5.15 to $6.25 in 18 month period.
03/07/2005 Minimum Wage Amendment Barack Obama voted Yes
Voted yes to increase minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 in 2 year period.
I thought that Barack Obama's platform is to increase wages, why is he denying some, and accepting others?
Perhaps he is playing both sides of his constituents.

Welfare and Poverty votes: Barack Obama wasn't there for 90% of them.<3>

You can see more of his votes by simply searching the Barack Obama voting record on your search engine. So decide on each issue yourself, and don't think for one minute that Barack Obama is not paid by lobbyists and does not vote for his constituents.

He isn't the "fresh new change" America needs, because we don't really know what he stands for or who he really is. In a sociological perspective, the only reason why Barack Obama has gotten so many votes is because he is a young male with a good toned voice.

Do you really think Obama could run such a massive campaign without lobbyists and rich supporters?

Sources
1. Top Ten Most Corrupt Politicians - http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2007
2. BarackObama.com - http://www.barackobama.com/2008/01/19/barack_obama_on_the_importance.php
3. Vote Smart - http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490