After receiving a halfhearted welcome by graduates – punctuated by less than one in four giving him a standing ovation – at West Point, Barack Obama used much of his time as commencement speaker shilling for the ostensible need for climate activism.
“Keep in mind, not all international norms relate directly to armed conflict,” he told the Army personnel in attendance.
He went on to extol the virtues of “international law,” citing how partnership among nations could help further his partisan policies of global warming alarmism.
“That spirit of cooperation needs to energize the global effort to combat climate change – a creeping national security crisis that will help shape your time in uniform – as we are called on to respond to refugee flows and natural disasters and conflicts over water and food,” he stated, “which is why next year I intend to make sure America is out front in putting together a global framework to preserve our planet.”
He concluded that the U.S. should take the first steps in designing a program to deal with a meteorological phenomenon that has yet to be proven by science. Nevertheless, he has asserted that the science is settled regarding man-caused climate change and is calling on America’s armed forces to focus their attention on battling weather.
“You see,” he continued, “American influence is always stronger when we lead by example. We can’t exempt ourselves from the rules that apply to everybody else.”
Obama then used the opportunity to criticize his political foes.
“We can’t call on others to make commitments to combat climate change if a whole lot of our political leaders deny that it’s taking place,” he reasoned.
In portions of his speech that did relate to legitimate military action, Obama was somewhat nebulous in his plans for war-torn regions like Syria.
“We will step up our efforts to support Syria’s neighbors,” he confirmed, noting the U.S. must ensure they are “contributing their fair share of support to the Syrian people.”
He stuck to the idea that acting unilaterally should be avoided, once again calling out those who disagree.
“For them, working through international institutions, or respecting international law, is a sign of weakness,” he said. “I think they’re wrong.”
This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom