If you listen to the Berlin speeches of JFK, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama, you will notice a massive difference (aside from 2 being presidents and one a senator). Kennedy and Reagan understood the reality, Obama basked in the outcome seemingly oblivious of the costs. Obama literally rewrote history when he claimed the 'world stood as one' and the Berlin Airlift succeeded and the Wall came down (thank you John Bolton). Not really sir, the world was divided (thus the wall) and even then the west was divided.
Listen to JFK's speech" "There are some who say in Europe and elsewhere that we can work with the communists...let them come to Berlin." That is not a uniting message, it is a challenge for the appeasers to see how wrong they are in their assessment of totalitarianism. These same appeasers got their knickers in a knot when Reagan called the USSR an evil empire. Far from unity, the West was deeply divided on the question of communism. Ford and Carter thought the softer line would work and were rewarded with quasi-annexation of Eastern Europe and the invasion of Afghanistan. Even after these aggressive Soviet maneuvers of the 1970's, the mass protests in Europe (much of which was KGB funded) called for a softer line on the USSR and Warsaw Pact. It was tough leadership that tore down the wall. Leadership unafraid to unify around the truth of what the USSR and its allies were all about.
Obama painted a caricature of reality in his Berlin speech. I am sure there are many old-Berliners who were insulted by this lack of homage.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Obama is at the epicenter of a new secular messiahship. Or didn't ya know? Everything he says (er...make that READS!) is brilliant. All hail!
John Bolton is a god! Ok,so that's all I had to add to my previous comment. Sorry to intrude! PS...Your blog is most enlightening.
I also am bothered by Obama's speech. But on the other hand, I think that Bolton's analysis is far too state-centered. When he says, "Tearing down the Berlin Wall was possible because one side - our side - defeated the other," I think he's being both simplistic and triumphalistic. Leadership was important, but I think the leadership and influence of people like John Paul II is all too often overlooked.
El, It is a column in the newspaper so simplistic is expected. I don't mind the triumphalism because it is good to remember the shadow rising from the east needed to be met with courage. Where I do agree is the overlooking of JP 2. He was an integral part to the Warsaw pact dissolving. I like the irony.
Anon, please do not slander my friends. Disagreement is fine.
Post a Comment