Why Would We Arm Our Racist, Jihadist Enemies?

I have a new article on the Christian Post, which you simply won’t believe.

It should be a basic moral axiom of American foreign policy that we don’t give away advanced weapons to racist, radical, and unstable foreign governments.

In fact, that’s not just morality; it’s common sense.

Yet that’s exactly what we’re doing. The Obama administration is in the process of delivering 20 advanced F-16 fighter jets and 200 M1 Abrams tanks to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood-led government. Four jets have been delivered, and the rest of the equipment will be delivered within months. To be clear, Egypt did not purchase these weapons. They’re a gift from you, the American taxpayer, to the Muslim Brotherhood.

That’s right, at exactly the same time that 77 percent of American taxpayers face tax increases as a result of the most recent fiscal cliff deal, a radical jihadist government gets more than $200 million worth of American arms – for free.

Just how radical is the Muslim Brotherhood? The motto of the Muslim Brotherhood is plain enough:

Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

And lest anyone think this motto refers to the peaceful “inner struggle” version of Jihad, we can’t forget that the current leader of al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, got his start in the Muslim Brotherhood, and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood founded the terrorist organization Hamas (which rains down rockets on Israeli civilians).

The current leader of Egypt, Mohammed Morsi, has called Jews “bloodsuckers” and “descendants of apes and pigs.” He even declared that Egyptian children should be “nursed on hatred” against Jews. When called on that comment by a delegation of U.S. Senators, he lamely declared that his words were taken out of context and blamed – you guessed it – the allegedly Jewish-controlled media.

Read the whole article here.

Follow David on Facebook and Twitter and read more of the French Revolution Blog.

How Political Correctness Improved My Life
Hugh Grant’s “The Re-Write” Delves into Love, Failure, and Family
Nelson Searcy’s New Book: Do Words Really Still Matter in a Social Media Saturated World?
Patricia Arquette, It’s Time to Admit: It’s a Great Time to Be a Girl
  • Dogbreath

    Unfortunately, this type of thing has been going on for many decades. Foreign aid to everybody and anybody pretty much has gone unquestioned, and both the Bush and Obama administrations are guilty as charged.

    Fortunately, Rand Paul, if he runs in 2016, can restore some sanity to American foreign policy, jettisoning both the disastrous neoconservatism of the Bush years and the liberal internationalism of Obama and Clinton in favor of a realistic foreign policy that is based solely on the Constitutional doctrine of providing for the common defense. I must say I’m quite impressed by what he’s been saying recently on this topic.

  • Brantley Gasaway

    I’m surprised at your surprise, David. The United States has long armed all kinds of dictatorial and murderous regimes or revolutionary forces–as long as it was in the economic and political interests of America. I seem to remember a Republican president…oh, what was his name?…back in the 1980s who was rather notorious for this in Central America. And, sadly, most evangelicals gladly backed those policies.