"Mark my words, it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama," said Obama's running mate Joe Biden this weekend. "Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis."
An erie prediction, if ever there was one. Had Biden stopped his comments there, we could be left to infer he is talking about Al Qaida or Russia possibly testing how Obama would respond as president. But Joe "loose lips" Biden didn't stop there.
"[Obama]'s gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."
"I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us."
"There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision'."
These claims seem to suggest that not only does Senator Biden know exactly what this "international crisis" will be, but that the Obama administrations has already determined how they will respond and that their actions will not sit well with the American people. Not only should we demand Joe Biden explain his comments, but we should be demanding to know what this unpopular response is going to be.
It's hard to imagine an "international crisis" that Biden could be referring to that is more immanent than the Iranian nuclear program and Israel's desire to strike the country before they are capable of developing a nuclear weapon. However, President Bush told the Israeli Prime Minister in a recent visit that the U.S. would not support a preemptive strike on Iran.
Is it possible that Obama approached Israel or vice versa and worked out a deal that would give the Jewish state the green light in exchange for aiding his campaign?
We'll likely never know for sure. But, we do know that Barack Obama worked to delay the Iraqi government from reaching an agreement on troop withdrawals with the Bush administrations until after Obama is sworn in, putting his political ambitions above the safety of U.S. troops and Iraqi citizens, and a clear violation of the Logan Act. So, it is not that big of a leap to imagine Obama approaching Israel in a similar manner. Fortunately, the Iraqi government could not be swayed and U.S. troops may be out of Iraqi cities within six months and out of Iraq totally by 2011.
If Obama did in fact give the go ahead to attack Iran to Israel, it begs the question, why than would the Obama administration's response be so unpopular?
Is it because Obama would commit U.S. troops to a a third Middle East war, one with Iran? Or could it be something far more scary, like backing Iran in the conflict?
Senator Biden closed his statements by saying, "I probably shouldn't have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here."
Is he worried that his statements would become public because he was just bloviating to his far left supporters or is the Obama campaign indeed aware of an impending crisis the rest of us aren't? In either case, the American people must know for certain to what Biden is referring before putting an inexperienced politician from the south side of Chicago in the Oval Office.